GeneDavis

How's it look with the lights dimmed way down?

And here's a guy showing how it is done with engineered trusses and site-cut fillets made from 3/4" CDX. This works when the fillet size is such that the parts can be cut from 4x8 sheets. It's a little more tedious with longer curved sections.

Here are a couple images of a roof profile begun as a 14/12 with a 12' span, rafters cut from 2x10s with one intermediate purlin beam, made with a pair of 2x10s. You can get a feel for the curve from the skewed view. I think it is something like what you have in your Chief model. One continuous curve eave to ridge. The house photo you show seems to have that roof section done with the curve in only its lower half, the curve more pronounced. That is the way I would design it.

I've done it with a bandsaw and regular framing lumber, and sheathing done with two layers of 3/8 OSB. For your curve, you will likely need a couple flush beams at the third-points of the curve, so your sliced rafters have OK depth at their skinniest middles. Laying out and cutting pattern parts for use in marking the cut lines on the lumber is the careful part. When the framer ******* about not having a bandsaw, tell him to buy a 14-inch one and Craigslist it when done. You can sell one in a day. I sold one to a timber framer who dismounted it from the stand and rigged it to a CNC-controlled arm for cutting curves in timber parts.

Who is determining the look? Is this a builder doing spec-builds? Has he a client, that is wanting this basic craftsman style? Your image shows no extensions for the lintel crown, or the sill. Is this what your client wants? It does not meet the basic standards of "craftsman" to do it that way. I suggest your client spend some time at this web page, and decide on the details, print some images and hand-annotate them, so you can then proceed to do something for him. https://windsorone.com/idea-gallery/category/craftsman-style/ I've included these pics on drawings in the past to show trim details. Pics include some stock molding numbers, but I made sure the builder had easy access to supply of them from his preferred supplier. First pic is of exterior window trim. I don't dimension extensions, because I trust a trim carpenter can execute things right if seeing the pics first.

Are the trim elements all simple flat board stock? Or are profiled moldings being used? I'd ask the builder for on-paper examples of what he wants. Doesn't seem normal to me. One reason is that profiled moldings differ in width from one molding manufacturer to the next.

Here is what came to my mind.

Here is just one of the training videos Chief has on this topic. https://www.chiefarchitect.com/videos/watch/30/cost-estimating-using-structural-member-reporting.html?playlist=104

i'm old fashioned. 2D CAD on structural plans. 2D CAD details for most, 3D for anything out of ordinary. If somebody's gonna DIY a housebuilding project, structural hardware's just one of several dozen things he's gonna need to learn about. Manufacturer installation instructions are where that detail resides. i don't want to bog down a house model with thousands of unnecessary surfaces.

Thanks, Mark! I had a feeling the Cabinet Wizard would weigh in, and I have downloaded your trays. When doing actual cabinet build prep, which I do for some of the kitchen and bath work, I'll use either spacer blocks to create the side clearance, or no blocks, and zero protrusion hinges. See the Blum catalog cut, attached. Use of these hinges puts the doors, when opened 90 degrees, just like Chief depicts open doors.

Here is a workaround that gives what's needed. I rebuilt a drawer-tray with an element around its sides and back that fakes the clearances. In the symbol dialog, I made the material for the wrap element "insulation air gap." I use Sketchup for this, but it could be built in Chief (I think.) As can be seen in the Chief render, it works. This, in PBR. If you render in something that has edge lines, you'll see the edges of the air-gap wrap though.

I did not try that, Mick. I'll fool with it and see. See my suggestion for better control of this, just posted now.

Rev A Shelf and other makers have lots of things that work with pullout doors besides trashbin racks. So how to we specify such that the doors aren't hinge but move out? See image.

Thanks, Eric. I was posting mine when you posted yours. Looks as if I did not have to model my own rollout drawer!

I did search HELP in Chief. I see going to shelf manual spec, and for help I get "click the LIBRARY button to select a shelf, storage, or organizational object from the Library Browser." The library browser has nothing for rollout shelf drawers. I built a rollout shelf drawer and imported the SU model into my Chief Library. See the pic below. I specified it (this was a mistake) as a door/drawer. I deleted it and imported again as a fixture and things work now as expected. But not quite. See the section view I included. I built the SU model to a width 10mm less than the inside opening of the tall pantry cabinet, which when the unit is centered, yields the required 5mm clearance for the intended Blum Tandem slides. Chief takes a shelf and refits it to fill the entire cabinet inside width, as if it is a fixed shelf. I now see that if I had done appropriate stretch planes in the rollout door symbol, it will allow me to have the same "handle scoop" cutout width, no matter the width of a cabinet into which my symbol is placed. That's kinda nice, but how could one do the side space? And note in the section view how Chief places the rollout trays tight to the inside BACK of the cabinet. I built the symbol with 22" depth to match the intended drawerslide length, and the cabs into which these rollouts went are 24 and 26.5 deep, so they are inset and not 1/4" back from the carcase front where I would prefer. How to make that happen? Any advice?

I searched the forum and could not find. I looked hard at the cabinet spec dialog and cannot see it.

My neighbor is a realtor working with a developer doing a 12-floor condo building, which has underground parking (ramp complexities), boat slips, the street level all commercial, a level of parking above that, and 8 levels of condo flats above all that. I know Chief can do 12 floors, but is it a stretch with all the ramping for the 3 parking levels? What the have is paper prints and their .pdf files for the whole thing, but the designer that did it all (likely ACAD) is dead, and they need it all recreated live again so ad to be able to revise as needed for clients. Somebody quoted them 1.5 million fee for the work.

My neighbor the real estate developer has a need for an architect/designer with experience in a project like the one at hand. This one has been designed, but for whatever reasons, the original plans developer is not available to do what is needed. It is a waterfront condo thing, twelve stories, two floors of underground parking under grade, retail and restaurants on level 3 at grade, another level above that for more parking, then residence flats from 4 to the top. If you have something of this scale in your portfolio I'd like to connect you with him. He and his partner got a quote for 1.5 million to essentially redraw the plans from the .pdfs that exist now. He thought that was kinda high. They've a registered FL engineer on board so are able to get your work appropriately sealed as required by city of Marco Island. PM me here. Thanks.

I build the frameless cabinets in Chief X13 as "framed," separation default set to 3/4", full overlay amount set to 11/16". Double-door cabs show doors tight. Do I have to fake this with a vertical split to get the 1/8" margin between doors?

Unless the client is totally tuned, spatially, and can imagine each of the options in 3D, why do this in 2D floor plan? I think your need is best served by 3D, and so take the time to show the client how to use the 3D viewer and walk through the spaces. Two plan files, A and B, and each in the Chief 3D Viewer Cloud. If you have already done a B after an A, you are just a few clicks away.

In Chief one does not "draw" elevations. The user "builds" the house in 3D, and the program generates elevation views. "Generates" is the key word. If you have never used a package like this, and have always drawn in 2D, you are going to have to dive into Chief 3D yourself, and experience it. I live in a production-built house, in an area of many gated communities like mine, all of them full of production-built houses from names like Lennar, Pulte, Toll Brothers, Taylor Morrison, and D.R. Horton. Every different model seen in all these communities is or was offered in multiple elevations. From what I have seen, the differences in elevations are always a result of roofs and trim and siding features, plus windows. I have a set of the plans used by the builder for my house, and I know they are a product of 2D AutoCad because I have spoken to the drafting firm that did them. I used them to create a Chief plan of my house. My neighbor, across the street, with same plan as mine but different elevation, is building a garage bay addition from the remodel plan I did for him. It took me less than 30 minutes to change my plan to his plan, a third of the time changing the roof (his has more gables), a third redoing the faux stone cladding to match his, the rest changing some windows and the shutter treatments. From that point, I had an as-built of his, and added the new garage bay. But what I now have is two plan files, each of which generates the elevations unique to the plan. In Chief, you don't "draw" elevations. Chief "generates" them, and all you do is annotate the elevations.

It's Zip-R that you are describing, Joey. Huber's OSB with foamboard glued on and then the air/water membrane on the foam. And it is offered with different foam thicknesses. I do it with one layer.

Our contract was for the tract builder, a big national firm building in many states, to build the home. The roofer (this is a cement tile finish) was a sub. It is that sub that fixed the first incident of leaking. A rep from that roofing outfit that did the job and the fix came out and inspected, and I pointed out the no-cricket condition, which I had not noted before, never having gone on the roof. See the pic, the black roof plane is the 2:12 cricket I modeled into place where there is none now. The roofing rep said that they simply roof what gets built, that to have done a cricket at build-new time would have required the framing sub, ahead of the roof work, to have built the cricket structure. IMHO, the drawings should have called for the cricket, which they did not, and there should have been details to show how to kick the mini-valley's discharge away from the wall at the valley's end. But nothing was shown on the poor set of prints provided. Ours was the first of 24 houses with this condition in this community, 12 of which are still under warranty. I am sorely tempted to raise a ruckus with those 12 at the same time I raise a ruckus with the builder.

My tract house has a roof plane coming to a "dead" valley, a situation any of us knows, if we pay attention, required a cricket. It's in Florida, and the state's code mandates a cricket when the abutting penetration wall length is 30 inches or more. My condition is 56 inches. The house is a year out of warranty, and builder says he bears no responsibility to fix it. He repaired a leak in the area when the house was approaching the end of its 2 year warranty. The leak is back. The builder says too bad. The county's building department says it is not their responsibility to catch this in plans review. They say if the plan comes to them, as all plans must do, bearing the seal of the state-licensed pro, the signoff means the design meets code in every respect. So the building department sends me to the firm who designed the house, saying it's their fault. And they send me to an independent engineer, the guy with the license and stamp, and the designers say it's his job to catch it. The engineer won't return my call, but I just left the message earlier today. I said nothing about code or a problem in my message, only that I needed some information only he would have, for a plan he reviewed and signed. How would this go in the jurisdictions in which you work?

Does it miter the 90 degree ones? Some might call that a miter.