GeneDavis

Thanks, Glenn. I have learned to edit the storypole elevation markers and names to do what I want, which is to show top of foundation wall (not mudsill), but only in a section view. I cannot find a way to pick it up in elevation. Pics show my section and my elevation. I only want the elevation in the con docs.

Am I missing this in the default settings for auto story pole? I'd like my extension line to be picking up top of stemwall. I know that the mudsill is considered part of the stemwall in Chief modeling, but is there a workaround for this?

If I am going to do interior or exterior 3D camera views close enough to window or patio doors, to see the details of sash, frame, extensions (or returns), I use 3D moldings for them. You used the term "reveal," for what most call jamb extensions, if doing it as millwork, or returns, if doing it in drywall. In the attached image rendered with Chief real time raytracing, an Andersen Series 100 window with transom is shown on left, and a Series 100 gliding patio door with transom is shown on right. Using Andersen's excellent CAD downloads as a resource, I set all the specs in Chief for frame widths, frame depths, sash frame size, door panel frame size, positions within frame for sash, door, exterior projection, etc., so as to get as real as possible. The gaps between interior casings and frames is then measured in a Chief section view, and the 3D moldings created and positioned. I modeled them 3/4" thick by whatever depth needed. Just as the contractor would size them to install. Once such a 3D molding for the jamb extension is done, it can be copied and pasted into position for other like openings in a job. The 3D render image shows the 3/16" reveals where casings overlap the front faces of the extensions. I call it out in the section views shown attached.

Thanks! I had no idea there was a Materials List Layer Set. I though the way what was reported to the ML was via that dialog that has categories.

The framing was built auto, then edited. All the rims got changed because Chief built them a 1.125 engineered lumber. I edited the joist layout and added the blocking for the railing post anchors. That's all.

The layer is on. Any of the framing members can be selected and opened for spec. Here is how the material list is reporting. Up higher in the material list, every single framing member in floors, walls, and roofs is reporting.

OK I'm a dummy when it comes to this. I changed the file in Google Drive so "anyone" can access it. https://drive.google.com/file/d/13xxAp8cihYuspqJNhKZkoWCjn6cmb8Xh/view?usp=sharing

My file? You get the 4x4, the 4x8, the 2x8 framing all to report? Show me a screen cap.

In X15, what would prevent the framing, the joists, rims, beams, and posts, from reporting to the material list? The plan file is over 100 Mb, so let's see if this works. https://drive.google.com/file/d/13xxAp8cihYuspqJNhKZkoWCjn6cmb8Xh/view?usp=drive_link

I found the culprit. Me. It was me just being sloppy. Did not link the newly saved-as layout to the saved-as plan file, and the schedule was not in synch.

Renumber? How? I thought a new schedule would renumber. Can't find in plan if there's no W04 in the schedule.

Why would this be? I delete the schedule, generate another, get the same thing.

Chief has no "automatic" gusset plates. Take a section, do a CAD detail from view, draw your gusset polylines, copy them, paste in place back in the live section, select each and make a 3D solid with whatever thickness you do for the gussets, then mirror around the rafter bent, and copy down the line. Then ask your building inspector whether he'll permit you to build this without an engineer seal on the prints.

I try for 7.5 or a little less, and go with tread depth of 10.5. Using an old standard from memory rise plus run equals 18, I'm right on with that config. Using Joe's 2R + T = 24 to 26, my numbers come to 25.5, not ideal, but OK. When there is plenty of space I like to go down to 7.25 with 10.75 treads. There is a huge diff in comfort ascending a stair that is 7.25 x 10.75 versus a 7.75 x 10. The problem with the treads wider than a 10" run, if it's for a hardwood staircase, typically 1" oak treads, is that the stair parts suppliers make the treads for the 10" run size, and not wider. The builder has to get treads from a local millwork shop custom sized to the 10+ inch run.

Nice patch, Steve. @JLHomeCo Hi, Lauren! I've a question as re the roof plan you show with a couple of handwritten notes, the photo of the paper plan page in your opening post. The plan says it's a roof truss plan, but only shows roof planes and bearing walls. Is that part of a complete plan set with elevations for all four sides of the model? We'd like to see those elevations if available. As Steve said in his post above this, his model of a roof with the planes all joining and "working" won't win any awards for roof design. Maybe whoever designed the plan that resulted in the paper prints that include that roof view can show us something, some way to place that 6-pitch roof plane facing the front, so those walls look better. When a designer works with 2D software, or draws by hand, and a plan footprint has the complexities of this project, it often happens that they draw either impossible roofs, or roofs that really don't "work right" when you flesh them out in 3D. That's maybe what is happening here. So post those elevations if you have them, please. We may be missing something.

I'm not gonna download it to see. Four others already have and I'd bet you'll get some feedback. I see you are new here with only a few posts. There have been discussions, a number of them here on Chieftalk, the subject being something like "how do I roof this?" They always result in experienced users saying the same thing. Auto roof the thing, then manually edit as needed. Many more complex than your builder client might build, and they get auto-roofed. As I said earlier, the whole thing begins with the floor plan and ALL room heights defined, then all walls on which roof bears getting the right roof spec. Have you seen this video? One of the first that pops up on YouTube when searching Roofs Chief Architect.

Post the plan, please. If it seems to big, strip it of everything you've added beyond just basic structure of walls, floors, and roofs. Delete cabinets, take out that fireplace, etc. Then it ought to zip and attach at less than the 14MB max. Someone will roof it all for you, I'm sure. But you really ought to learn how to do it yourself. All it takes is two clicks to join two intersecting planes. But the beginning of it all, is the setup before saying AUTO ROOF THIS. Room heights, overhangs, pitches, gable or not, etc., etc.

Pro tip: the valleys and hips of two meeting differently-pitched roof planes do not cross the corners, and those roofs have different heel-stand heights, when common roof overhangs are specified. Those hips and valleys are called irregular, and old-school roof-cutters have a vulgar name for them.

Asphalt shingles are a no-go for a 2/12 pitch. Metal panel roofing or membrane or torchdown is going to be needed. Any window can be changed out for a shorter one. Happens every day in remodeling. Just be aware of egress for bedrooms. A large DH that meets egress size minimum can be replaced with a smaller casement window.

Well, I successfully changed the plan so as to have an 11.875" depth floor frame in this one story house over walkout basement. I thought I would describe the steps to see what others that needed to do this can offer as a critique. First, I needed to do it this way because I had built and edited and annotated the floor framing and the wall framing in the lower walkout basement level. I needed to retain this. Selected a main floor room, edited its floor structure depth from 9.5" framing depth to 11.875". Copied this floor structure to all the other rooms on floor 1. Switch floor to level 0, select a room, lower floor elevation by 2-3/8", copy this to all other rooms in floor In elevation/section view, edit all foundation wall bottoms to lower them 2-3/8". Do this by editing the FOOTINGS. In plan view level 0, use all levels OFF and select mudsill, then joists, then beams, then rimboard, and edit all to be deeper (mud sills move down 2-3/8") Use same level 0 view and level control to select and move all wall framing down 2-3/8" That's it. Done.

Isn't this BASELINE HEIGHT minus TOP OF PLATE HEIGHT? Those two elevations are in the the roof dialog. Have you explored a macro to produce the heel height number you seek? And where on con docs do you want it reported?

You need to dig into Chief so as to understand what walls do. Have you tried making a plan as a way of learning how the program works? Watched any training videos? As for concrete-panel-wall buildings, are you up to speed on construction details? Bearings? Roof structures? Roof structure bearings?

It's a roof framing spec thing. Reduce the height of the eave subfascia by 2.25"

I'd determined the floor could be framed using span tables in TJI's Specifier's Guide doc. The tables are built around code minimums. The builder told the client floors would be bouncy. So I dug into improving, going up in series but at same 9.5 depth, topping out at the costly series 230 TJIs. That's where others suggested the job go. It turns out that the Series 110 11.875" do far better at a much lower cost premium. i know I could just change the text callouts on the con docs, but wanted to see what it takes to true the 3D. Hardly any work if you haven't framed, but there's some detail if you have and need to retain all the arrangements and details like plumbing boxouts.

The problem is with the way Chief does floor-level 3D. I now have Chief on and can see. Changing the floorframe depth from 9.5 to 11.875 moves the floor zero ceiling below down 2-3/8", but the floor level for floor zero remains unchanged. Since I have all the floor zero wall framing built, and with some of it edited in bearing wall openings, I'll want to lock all the wall framing, edit the floor zero floor down 2.375", then using all layers off but wall framing and mudsills, move that down as required. Then I'll have to make sure the foundation gets edited to ensure the footings are where they should be, and the manually edited frostwalls and stepdowns are all tweaked. Whew! What a mess. The stairs will auto adjust to the additional 2.375" of rise, but I may want to add a tread to get the step rise more comfortable.