GeneDavis

I thought it may have been because the specs for the roof underwent changes, going from 7.5" heel to 9.5" when Ms Truss Eng ran the loads (we're sprayfoaming the roof to R49 in the cavities), then went back and forth on plumb tails or not, added gutters, put shadowboards one and off and back on, so the truss ends kept getting messed with. So I made a small test plan, same specs for this roof but just one truss wide, and lo, the spike is there and cannot be edited away. It is something that shows in 3D if I leave the truss framing layer on. It shows in 2D sections and has to be CAD-masked to dress the section view for layout. So, yeah, it's annoying. Play with my model if you can and report. If it happens to others, I'll report it to Chief. TrussTest.plan Edit: The truss ends have been edited by me in this plan. Just place a truss alongside and you'll see what Chief produces from the "draw."

I won't post the plan yet unless necessary, but I've a 35 foot span, 7:12 roof, scissors truss with 5:12 ceiling rising up 16" then goes flat, 2x6 top chord, 18" overhang, square not plumb fascia, 2x6 subfascia, 1x8 fascia. No matter what, I get this, and when trying to edit the truss envelope (there is a 9.5" heel) to make it look real, I still get the spike.

But in real life the siding will resolve into a vertical trim board where meeting the brick.

Thanks, Michael. I did not do that, but had solved it before seeing your post. I fiddled with the SU model, generating and then manually deleting the surfaces covering the panel recesses, then grouped the model, and re-imported. All is well now. For anyone wanting this bifold door style, it is here in this revised mini-plan, and it is a match in both detailing and proportions to the Simpson door in the Chief catalog. TestIntDoor.plan

I'm putting this here and not in Symbols and Content because I have a problem to be solved, not a nice symbol to show and offer. I have a craftsman-style interior and doors are from the Simpson catalog and there is no issue with the doors. The style is the high-waisted one panel over two with flat panels and plain sticking, the top panel being about 18" high. A style seen in any images you find when searching craftsman style interiors. There was no bifold version in the Simpson content, and nothing in Chief content would give me the high-waisted two panel look, so I modeled one in Sketchup, and imported it in as a door symbol. My screencap, attached, shows the model in SU and I used the section plane to show its cut-view so you can see the recessed panel. Chief is not modeling it correctly. It seems to be filling the recessed opening plane with a surface. How can I correct this? Plan attached, plus the SU model, and the screencap. TestIntDoor.plan Craftsman III bifold slab 16 wide.skp

And while you're at it, examine your anno sets and set things up, new set or whatever, so your foundation plan and first floor framing plan annotations, CAD, etc., are all separated for display.

Some codes require headers be laterally braced by being plated with flatwise members at both top and bottom. If the header is up tight to the top wall plate, no top plate is required atop the header. This, whether the wall is an exterior one or interior. When Chief builds framing for me, it puts my specified number and sizes of plies of headers above openings, but does not place the required plates. Am I missing something in either wall settings or framing settings or window or door framing settings?

And that's what I did. Right to the roofs in place. A little editing, and done. Thanks for looking and commenting.

I have a number of roof edges in this hipped job to change from plumb eaves to square, and really need to just regenerate the subfascia. I changed the eaves specs of each and tried opening for spec a subfascia, but it did not rotate from plumb to the 7-pitch square orientation. The trussed roof arrangement is all full of manually built overframing and fills, and I don't want to lose that.

Need to go through the Rescheck thing for the latest, and wondering before I start, how accurate the Material List General section is with its thermal envelope numbers. Do any of you use the walls, window, and doors numbers straight from Chief? Interestingly, Chief gives me no figures for floor 0 of this project, one with walkout basement with much of the exterior wall being pony, i.e., framed above ground, frostwall under. I have square footage galore of framed walls and windows and doors, and the material list General section has only the concrete walls where we are fully in the ground. I am certainly not going back and redraw this thing with floor 0 being floor 1 and a 0 being only the stemwalls part, but it may have helped for the Rescheck part, if those Chief area are usable.

Agree with Joey. The problem is the spec for the foundation. You gotta check a box. Wall specification > Foundation > [ ] Sill plate Comes checked out of box. Somebody unchecked it.

IMHO, the line is architecturally correct for planview exterior doors. There's almost always a floor elevation change st these thresholds, maybe small, maybe a full step, and the line is there to represent that. I'd only want that line NOT there, if there was no change in floor elevation, and I'll go further to say no change in floor finish, either. I know a designer who always insists the front entry arrangement for a home have no step up from outside, thus his designs have either deeply canopied entrances, or are under an extension of a porte cochere. The foundations are raised there, the floor framing hung inside, and outside hardscape paving brought up to match the floor level inside.

Thanks!

No, not the spline. I cannot remember how I did it, but when annotating CAD details, instead of doing the straight out then angle down arrow, I could first draw the straight out arrow, then grab it in edit mode to have a tangent curve go from the point to wherever I wanted, and there would be my new point. It is the arrow edit the trainer uses at mark 1:37 in this Chief training video. https://www.chiefarchitect.com/videos/watch/5319/cad-line-editing-leader-line-arrow-heads.html?playlist=97 What are the mouse and keyboard moves to do this in X11?

Thanks for looking, Chop. I fiddled with the wall end using my dimension (3'6" shown in screencap here) and this seems to be the limit of extension past the upper stair flight bottom end. Chief ought to program for a little more extension, and I will suggest it. Having built and trimmed these, I want a little more, maybe 1-1/2", so the skirt top edge is lower when it comes to the wall corner for its wrap and drop. I can model the detail in SU and include images in the con docs to instruct the builder. It is a minor thing, but I like trim schemes to be resolved on paper and not left up to the carpenter. I love detailing stairs.

The safe rooms I've seen in TX and FL houses were interior rooms, master closets, with precast concrete hollowcore decks as ceilings, and really cool vault-type doors with the kind of slide bolts seen on big gun safes.

I have the client's final edits and am cleaning up the model in prep for con docs. There is a stairway wall, the railing wall between the two flights of a u-winder, that I cannot get where I want it. The wall looks where I want it in plan view but in section, the part that enters the landing won't track the stairs in "follow." See the pics and here is the file. The end of the wall, being beyond the stairs it's tracking, isn't tracking, is level, and below the landing. Manual editing doesn't seem to work for me. https://www.dropbox.com/s/01hgiyeqhc1enx3/Irvin Whitney.plan?dl=0

OK I am back with Chief and can say that truss rebuild works fine for an untouched truss after raising the roof (and baselines) 2". The issue was with a truss I had edited the tails on, and maybe had jiggled the top chord somehow to maybe fix it? That truss would not rebuild as expected, so I deleted it, placed a new one and it generated as expected.

Tx, Chop. I'll get back to it tomorrow nite and report.

My action raised the roof planes as expected. Should I not have raised the baselines? Is that my problem? Do baselines even HAVE an elevation?

I've no Chief for a bit, but no, I did not try s new one right alongside.

Unlocked, yes.

Find my earlier thread of 48 hours ago, wall junction edit. That's the plan. i went ALL OFF, turned on all roof planes, baselines, ridge caps, moved all up 2". Then got stumped when force rebuild wouldn't do as expected.

You saw the word "foam," right? Unvented roof, conditioned attic space, 7 inches closed-cell foam against underside of deck.

I have a complex trussed roof arrangement done and worked with the truss builder's engineer to figure out the scheme, then built the scheme into my Chief model. Then he comes back at me after he runs the loads (92 psf ground snow) and says we need two inches more heel height, up to 9.5 inches from the 7.5 we had when I built all the trusses. I know, 7.5 seems light for a place where you have all the snow but we're going to foam the roof. Anyhow, I choose a truss and do a forced rebuild, after I have raised the roof, and the truss top chords don't jump up to the raised roof. Why not? It's going to be a lot of work drawing all new trusses.