GeneDavis

Have you watched the video of the Chiefer, a professional that only does as-builts, do one. His clients are other Chief users and he is doing them every day, fast and efficient. In the video, he shows his methods, tools, order of work, and results. This, on a typical job. He uses a laser tape but no lidar. Has laptop and Chiefs it out right on site. Great biz, lotsa work, cranking them out every day. Do you have that kind of need, volume-wise?

What's the top surface of the barged gables? What are your con docs going to specify?

Isolated, that walkout lower wall is looking like a 3-story house built on grade, no cellar or crawlspace under. i'd be surprised to find there's only an 8" deep footing under it. A lot of the Pacific NW has houses on piers and beam foundations.

To achieve this, walkout wall is modeled as a pony wall. Framed wall up, poured concrete foundation wall under. Set the junction height at the appropriate elevation. But yours is an as built. Could be anything going on down in the dirt.

He's up to 11 posts and no signature. Does he know what kind of trojans and viruses will enter his computer if he posts a 12th time and still no sig?

Isn't it a "standard" in the real estate biz to count the stairs once? Thus a simple staircase 3 wide x 12 long is 36 sf attributed to the floor on which it lands (starts "up"), and zero on the floor to which it ascends. So what do you have when a finished basement is accessed by a stairs directly under the one going from 1 to 2? Does that basement include the 36 sf or not? I think it does. My logic is that the stairs, the treads upon which one walks, is habitable space and should be counted, but only once for each run of stairs. Stacked stairs in my example are 36 plus 36. But only that. Where you put the footage, which floor, is up to you? Or does the "standard" say? As for Scott's dilemma, one can sort of understand a building jurisdiction wanting to have numbers that are verifiable by field measurements, taken from the outside of the house, thus the inclusion of finish. Hey Scott! Draw up a suggestion that allows one to set this all up in preferences or somewhere.

Your photo shows parallel chord trusses sitting atop walls. Not bearing on top chord. Your can build either way, but for insulation details, I prefer it like the photo. To get the trusses to sit that way, re-spec your roof at the depth of the trusses. Something like 16, not the 5.5 you did. Specify the 5.5 top chord before drawing trusses, and edit the first truss placed to have the required o'hang of just the top 2x6. Chief won't do that for you. In a PM I just sent, I provide more detail.

Sit under? It looks like from where you put the ceiling plane and the roof you have the wall plates where they are specified in the roof structure dialog. You have roof structure at 5.5 inches. Did the truss guy say they can span with top chord bearing as you show?

Do a shadowboard that's invisible.

You can edit trusses two ways. Do you know how to edit the truss envelope in section view? How about editing them member by member in the truss detail? I don't care about those little spits that happen to them, since I am not designing the trusses. I am only interested in an accurate 2D planview layout and a CAD section view to show the truss guy the heels and overhangs.

Wedge-shaped? Looks like you are describing the side walls pitched on two different axes? Wider at top than at bottom? And when we get to the outer wall, there is more wall reveal at top than at bottom? Gotta be unless the walls are warped, in which case we have an even more complex modeling task.

I'm with that on a garage door if present doing terrain autoset at its bottom, but how do you want it when there's no garage door? It sets the elevation 8" below slab top for a simple one-level (by that I mean the main floor is all at zero) plan when mono slab is the foundation. When it is a stemwall foundation, and of course a framed floor structure, it sets the elevation 6" under stemwall top. The concrete stemwall top, not the top elevation of the mudsill.

I get to specify windows sometimes, and do mostly Pella when this happens, because the products are good and the local sales guy is very responsive when we go back and forth about what is possible, specs for special glass, etc. So when I mull-join Pellas, I do what they do when joining, that is to space the windows by 1/8", because that's what their joiner-part does. And because I like to have the windows look more true in 3D, I edit the frame depths to match what the maker has, and then have to edit the "mullion," which is that little 1/8" thick piece Chief puts there. I do the math to make that piece flush up to the sash both inside and outside. So Chief leaves a gap where that mullion used to be before edit. See the images attached. And Chief must consider the mullion part of the inside of the window, because you cannot make its outside face match the outside material spec. This is a tiny thing, with the Pella 1/8" joiner, but must be annoying to some who mull with wider joins. So why bother with that 1/8"? I guess the reason I do it is to have the window parts, before they get blocked, be true factory-width or height. I call out in the comments in the window schedule, for each mull-joined unit, the sizes of the units that make up the ganged biggie. It helps when reviewing quotes. But the gap. Is it something I can make go away? And the color, shouldn't be be able to control interior and exterior materials?

I tried that and no work-y.

Did you examine the plan with all layers on in the view that was exported?

I can bring into Chief anything that has a Collada (.dae) format, which is a lot, but I cannot edit the model like I can if I can bring it into my SU app. So for example, one of the Weber grilles I brought into Chief has a 2D image of a man in it and I don't know how to edit him out.

A year ago or more, Google changed the 3D Warehouse access to be subscription only. Before that, my Sketchup Make 2017 Free could download anything up at the Warehouse. It is greatly limited now. They disabled the Warehouse access that is in the SU 2017. A subscription is quite a bit more annually than SSA. So until they figure out how to disable my on-board SU 2017, I'm not going there just to be able to access the warehouse. From the Components panel, I can browse it, but is not a rich a search as going to the main site. And while a very few items can import, most cannot. Why some very few models can import, and not others, is a mystery.

I use Sketchup 2017, the free one, and have no access to most all of the 3D Warehouse. If you've access and are willing, will you please get and post these three Weber grilles? Weber Summit Gas Grille BBQ Grille Weber Genesis Simple Charcoal Grille I used the exact title of each so search should bring them up. Thanks.

That's a very pretty skirt!

What's an Azek post skirt? Is it something continuous along the deck fascia? Chief won't generate that with a newel. I played with Chief symbol-making for newels and balusters, about 5 or 6 releases ago. Maybe more. Took a Sketchup model of a Winchester model 94 30-30 carbine, imported it in as a millwork item, and made some fancy balustrades. Did it also with a Donald Duck model. Blew out my poly counts, but it was cool.

Do a SaveAs, strip the SaveAs of everything not walls windows doors and roofs. Zip the SaveAs and post it here. And fill our your signature. Just looks like a shed roof modern to me. Stripped, can't be that big.

Think about what kind of objects can log to schedules in Chief. They are all 3D objects. So consider using cabinets as piles.

Nice presentation and discussion, Eric. I think the OP has a situation where the new structure is going to be built atop the asbuilt slab, and its wall lines will be inside those slab edges. Like maybe a foot. So he may just want to make his slab, the one Chief builds for him under his porch, invisible material, and let the asbuilt slab show. Or put it on its own layer, and turn off the layer display.

That's thinking inside the box, innit? You can place one out in the yard and do the same thing.

Nice, @rlacklore !! The steel stairs structure, was that all done in solids? And are those stringers single-plate 1/4" steel or are they something like 8 x 2 x .188 tubing?