Chopsaw

Sure. You likely want to make a copy for each variation though.

Yes and No. This is not an option with the tools chief provides for plot lines. However you can have a text box that references the plot line with a leader line. If you are not worried about keeping your layout live this works fine. To keep it live such that things can be rotated or adjusted and it will update then you need a significant amount of Ruby know how. Relevant attributes available for a line are limited to %length% and %angle%. Length is relatively easy to work with but when it comes to providing Quadrant Bearing formatting for the angle then it gets exponentially complicated. Not impossible by any means just really time consuming or very expensive.

I would check with your truss supplier in your area. In my area they will ship trusses up to 77' without special permits so even longer can be done but it raises the shipping expense so should be avoided if it is not necessary. I am not sure they actually need to be broken. You will need less material and achieve more strength if you just specify where the bearing points are so that can be designed for. Certainly 48-50' should be an option without using any specialized equipment.

These are floor trusses ? It sounds like they are behaving like roof trusses but likely they are programmed the same way. Is there some advantage to breaking them ? If so you will most likely need to do it manually. Not usually any need to lap I joists either but they are programmed like regular joists so you have that option. What kind of spans are you dealing with ?

A few things come to mind... A - I think the trough needs to run through even though it is not horizontal through that section it looks like it will still drip and the profile of the trough will help it connect. B - The flat section needs definition (yellow) as a vertical wall with siding to match the house or a sloped roof section with shingles on it that would tuck back in with a soffit above, or some combination of the two but preferably one or the other so it has definition but does not appear too busy.

Maybe a few more details would be helpful like what driver version you were using and what you updated to. I am definitely having the text typing issue you describe but have not noticed it in Chief. It has been showing up in Outlook for me. I would test the dashed line .jpg issue if I knew exactly what version and update of chief you are using along with the line style/weight and .jpg resolution and viewer etc.... Lots of others that have either the same video card or are running the same driver in a similar card that can test different scenario's. I am actually suspicious that I might have a display cable issue so I swapped that out the other day and am currently testing the new one.

Pretty sure that you can have a referenced 3D view that uses its own rendering technique. I just have not had the situation to try it out but yours sounds like a good one. https://www.chiefarchitect.com/videos/watch/10211/remodeling-how-to-generate-as-built-overlays-in-2d-3d.html?playlist=120

Assuming your .jpg does not include a repeating pattern you will need to set your Pattern scale ( that controls vector views ) the same as your Texture scale ( that controls standard views ). So it appears that your example might be something like 1200 mm x 1200 mm and your current Pattern setting is approximately 600 mm x 600 mm and you don't seem to have any visible sizing scale in your Texture. That may also be due to a lack of any thing that resembles a grout line in the border of your .jpg so that my require some photo shop work. Or perhaps it would be ok to just use "Stretch to Fit" since the grout line is quite fine anyway. If that does not work maybe post your original .jpg and one of the material gurus may spot the problem or be able to help.

You are likely overthinking this one. Decide what size the step is going to be and place a dash ahead of it for your floor level of the deck so it is a negative value. Done.

I think you will need to edit that manually or turn "Automatically regenerate deck framing" back on in the Room > Deck DBX Not sure what happened to the fascia though ?

You many want to post the plan file and let us know what version of the software you are using. I think I can see two base lines in your plan view screen capture so perhaps your ceiling plane is too low creating the impression of a roof structure that is thicker than the existing. I think the room should be able to provide the flat part of the ceiling and the roof should provide the sloped part maybe.

The setting is in plan scale rather than paper space but you can set it as a default for each of your Dimension Defaults for your Automatic Dimensions if that helps.

Not exactly sure what may have caused the eval error unless you did not set it to evaluate and Owner Object with a room selected in plan. Always best to go with simple when simple works. That other macro is old and much more complex than necessary for this specific task.

I am not sure what was wrong with the answer you got yesterday that was quite simple. Something like this if I remember correctly ? "CLG:" + (ceiling_elevation-floor_elevation).to_ft.round .to_s + "'" However if you absolutely need to work with the old code you could try this but no guarantee it does not throw an error at some point. arr = (ceiling_elevation-floor_elevation).to_f.divmod(12) inch_frac = ((arr[1]-arr[1].floor)*16).round.quo(16) result = case inch_frac when Rational(1.0) "#{arr[0]}'-#{arr[1].ceil}\"" when Rational(0.0) "#{arr[0]}'-#{arr[1].floor}\"" else "#{arr[0].floor}'"#"-#{arr[1].floor} #{inch_frac}\"" end "CLG:" + result

No problem. It works on the other side and I can't find any significant difference that would cause it to behave different.

Good call Rob. Did you accomplish that in X14 or X15 ? I tried in X14 and yes it does reframe but no birdsmouth ?

Ok I get it, but that is the same logic that presumably CA programmers used in thinking we would not need base NVP's, which leaves a lack of flexibility when you want that information displayed in the label.

Do you have a secret you are not sharing Joe ? If you really need to you can get the height if you have the area and volume, but how do you propose getting the rest of the dimensions assuming they are not the same ? The OP needs area, volume and three dimensions.

Yes I don't think that is possible. You mentioned using Joe's Object Properties macro. That shows you what is available for each object you apply it to. So for the "General Framing Member" you are working with width, length and depth rather than width, depth and height for the symbol. We are limited to what is available and if you are dealing with any significant quantity of these items you will want to use the simplest item that serves your purpose.

It sounds like maybe you are trying to use the 2D people. They are primarily meant to be used in elevation views. Try these or do a search on the forum for 3D People. https://www.chiefarchitect.com/3d-library/index.php?r=site/detail/1222

Sorry my comment continues on from what you have shown in your screen shot. Create in plan view then edit the Z components in elevation view.

You need to create an elevation view to work in the Z axis.

Yikes ! Now there is a challenge. Unfortunately I am not a mathematician but I think that would only work if you had a perfect cube and you took the cube root of the Volume and that would give you the width x depth x height. Same with the Area. Take the square root of the Area to get the width x depth, but only for a perfect square or it is magic not math. I would suggest that you use a general framing member and stick with the same methodology as the symbol, since your example is not a perfect cube.

It looks to me that what you are building would most suitably be a symbol so just do the math....

Chief will almost do that with regular settings. I would need to tinker a bit to see if there was a way to clean it up with spaces and an extra dash though.