Chopsaw

7 minutes ago, MN_JohnH said:

I am wondering how you got the lines drawn over your framing drawing to show up on the 3d viewer here?

Pretty sure it is still not possible to show rendering techniques from the software in the 3D viewer as displayed in Chris's second post.  The best you get is what is shown in the first post with the textures visible.   It is a bit more work and requires a couple of 3rd party software programs but edge lines have been available in 3D PDF for a long time now.

49 minutes ago, mthd97 said:

I will have a look and see how I can link them together.

 

Thanks.

Quite likely that is the issue if you overlooked that step.

Tools > Layout > Referenced Plan Files...

Just a guess but did you verify the new layout file is properly linked to the new plan file ?

I think after 24 hours you have your answer.  I would love to be proven wrong though,   Your heart is definitely in the right place but I don't think the technology is quite at the level you were hoping it would be at this point in time.

First I think you can find a few more details and opinions on moasure right here on this forum by searching.  Great tool but not yet to the standards this industry strives for I think would be the general consensus here.  Also most consumer based GPS systems are not there yet either.

If you have a reasonably clear and level site it is likely more economical to use the existing reference points and triangulate your new positions.  If there is a missing component to what I just mentioned then it gets quite a bit more expensive and time consuming unless you are ok with a proportional loss of accuracy.

However if you have surveyor quality data that you have somehow entered in Chief then you can get " surveyor quality " data back out but then you would require a surveyor or competent total station operator to lay that back out for you on the building site.  I have a macro that collects that data from your CA plan file and will create a text file to be used with a total station if you think you would like to go that direction.

Unfortunate situation for sure but way too many variables to troubleshoot.  Sounds like perhaps a rendering issue so maybe start with posting the specifications of the new computer.

We would all assume the new computer would have better specifications that the old one that was working fine but perhaps you chose a different class of machine ?

Also good to know what version  of the software you are using.   Hopefully the .zip file was a backup copy that contains all the materials but even if not defaults should have been substituted.  If all of the above checks out we may need to have a look at your plan file.

It would appear as though the ends of your ramp need to be skewed.  So your ramp can provide the railing or actually two skinny ramps and then a roof plane can be used for the sloped framing and roof purlins for decking all but a few boards that may need to be p-solids if they don't trim properly.

58 minutes ago, KristjanM said:

Chopsaw - Upon further thought, I realized that manipulating a string value, considering the possibilities, was not really a trivial problem. A number formatting approach might be better. So... your post has provided that. Thanks for that. This method works except in the case where the measurement involves 0 inches as in a door 3-0X6-8. The zero does not display. It shows as 3X6-8. Not good. I can't find anything in the number formatter methods to force the display of a zero value. Still a puzzle.

Add a couple lines and I think we have it now ?

I think this might be a better approach since you are using x14.  This uses the Number Formatter function and will round up to the nearest inch.

21 minutes ago, KristjanM said:

Okay, not entirely elegant.   If the door width includes inches of 10 or 11, the insert references the wrong placement for the - insert . EG, 2'10" x 6'8". So for this approach, you would need a macro which would test the second and third member of the automatic_label string and see if they were 10 or 11. Then you could apply appropriate insert numbers to get the proper result. A little more figuring to do.

I thought there may be limitations but did not think of that one.  That may go beyond my current level of expertise.  Although it likely can be accomplished.  If you are not going to be using fractions then that should really help.

Perhaps @solver  could quickly add a few lines and make it work ?  Or a different approach altogether.

There is likely a more elegant way to do this but I think this will work in the mean time.  Post back if it fails.

It would appear that video was made with an earlier build of X15 and they have since decided to adjust the tool icon so it does not look so much like the coplaner tool.  Maybe.   It would be a lot easier to figure out if they would be courteous enough to date or mark their "timeless" video's with the build number.

Any way it would seem the new tool icon is in the same position but looks like this: 

I believe the default location is:  C:\Users\User\Documents\Chief Architect Premier X12 Data\Database Libraries\User_Library.calib    

3 minutes ago, YanezConstInc said:

HOW DO YOU CONVER THE PDF TO PNG? ANOTHER PROGRAM?

I have done that with Gimp before but depending on how the PDF was created you may be able to turn the background off with a PDF editor.

No there are basic object snaps for standard angles and then if you input the additional angles they should work as well on a plan by plan basis.

By the sounds of it you will want to look into using Allowed Additional Angles in General Plan Defaults and that should help smooth things out when dealing with the dreaded "off-angle" walls.

Here is a similar question that you may find helpful.  Sad the you have run into a surveyor withholding what should be considered public information.  I think there is a lot more behind the statement he gave you unfortunately.  

Dimension scaling is possible but is a slippery slope of  mass confusion and potential error.   Is it Transform and Replicate you are looking for perhaps ?  Or just match the drawing sheet scale to your cad block and send to layout at whatever scale is appropriate ?

There are a few special libraries of HVAC items that may be useful :  https://www.chiefarchitect.com/3d-library/index.php?r=site/library&category=Mechanical%2C Electrical%2C Plumbing

As for plumbing and electrical that gets a little more complex but can also be done in 2D and 3D.

@Carudo had posted some examples of commercial electrical layouts that were really well done as well as some library symbols to share :  

Soffits will follow a ceiling and my work for you since they are faux.

9 hours ago, moreauj said:

It seems I would need to externally calculate and then place a large matrix of elevation points to accomplish my goal.

There must be an easier way?

Yes that should work if done properly but the easier way is to place your elevation lines on an angle so they influence both X and Y at the same time.  It seems you are way over thinking this.  Yes if you want delicately curved elevation lines you will need to accurately plot out calculated points but if you just need a rough layout then the angled lines should work fine.

2 hours ago, ericepv said:

Does anyone have any tips on the best way to add a valley to a roof? I seem to recall seeing a post on this awhile back but I haven't been able to find it.

Am I to assume you mean in 3D for accurate renderings ?   If so you will need to remove the shingles from your roof definition and add them along with the flashings manually so they can be adjusted just the way you like in the valleys and or eaves. 

2 hours ago, bdammeyer said:

I dont have a material just called "framing" so i chose "fir framing 1". that didnt work.

There were some changes to X14.  You need to check the box.

Deleting the floor structure is not really the solution even if it worked in you specific situation.

4 minutes ago, bdammeyer said:

Thanks - it was a multi layer railing - I tried to make it a single layer wall (railing) but it wont let me delete the interior layer and it still shows something below the rail itself.

Interior layer looks ok.  That just represents the 2D cad line.  Try making the main layer "framing".

That appears to be a multi layer railing wall definition.  Use a single layer and that should go away.