GerryT

Your point is well taken and the fact is that it would be EXTREMELY easy for Chief to do. Just include a script file within the SCRIPTS directory containing a number of user methods (defs) which could be used within macros. I pointed this out in another thread. Unfortunately, there are so many other limitations that I expect there would still be limited usage & value. Simply put , this is an area that Chief does not want to open up as I expect that they don't see any way of "marketing" it.

This is the great mystery. Why would Chief invest thousands of man-hours in a project of such boundless potential then cripple it to the extend it becomes impractical to use? I can only guess of a possible “purge” in direction in mid-stream and we lost. The system, as designed, is not difficult to use and is well within the capability of the average designer to understand and use as attested by similar “low key” features in other competing software. Unfortunately, there are so many deliberate roadblocks incorporated so that every possible usage is prevented by some stupid limitation. Creates a tremendous amount of frustration and the impression that it’s not “worth the effort”. I’m not sure this is the impression that Chief (marketing?) wanted in order to kill a feature of this potential – but I agree with this conclusion. At this point, I expect it should be removed & replaced with something else?

GOOD CHOICE !!!

No -- not directly BUT -- You can test via a macro if the room is set by the user to be: conditioned or will use the user conditioned default settings or is to be excluded as set by the user from the conditioned calculations. Chief makes available for each room, a attribute(s) to indicate the rooms conditioned status. -- which are: conditioned & is_set_to_use_default_value. By testing these two attributes which will return true/false you can determine how Chief or you have previously set the "calculation" flags in the DBX. Then you just do your own cals by summing all room areas depending on how the flags are set. To do this - you need to insert one common macro in the room label default field to read the areas (based on the conditioned flag) -- and read either: internal_area or standard_area - and sum and save to a global variable which would then be available within any text block via a second macro. The actual method is a bit more complicated because of how Chief works. You basically have to save all the room areas separately in one variable then add up all the attributes (sums) of that variable.. Works well except Chief has no means to identify deleted rooms so you'll need to detect this and purge your variable based on a time stamp. Last problem -- Chief does not identify floor numbers to Ruby -- So you also need to insert a floor number via a text box and macro if you want conditioned space by floor. IOW - if seems too complicated -- send in a suggestion.

Yes you can but only by using a Ruby macro as a default label. Unfortunately , Chief makes using Ruby so difficult, most never bother, But, at present there is no other solution. -- Perhaps you may want to add it to the suggestion thread as this comes up about every other month now. It's really not difficult and you only need do it once if you add to your template. The steps are: 1. make up a macro to convert ins to ft-in then format width and height by using it. If you prefer, you can do this in one macro. 2. Add that macro to the window or door default label in defaults. 3. the new default label macro will be used only with new windows/doors. If you have existing objects to change, you'll need to delete or add the label macro separately. ft-in.zip label.zip

you may want to review the video's again as you're not even in the same ballpark. The designation %xxxxx% is the name of a macro,not a data variable. These macro can only be used within a Chief text box or label What you are attempting to do is use a macro within a macro, which you can not do. Within a single macro, you use the Ruby data variables designated for that particular object. In your case would be:automatic_label, box_scale, & layer_set. Note the under line. Using a ruby type macro as you are attempting, you must use the ruby language also. In you case, the proper syntax would be: "#{automatic_label}\n#{box_scale}\n#{layer_set}" with evaluate checked and owner object selected. IOW -- To get your macro to work as you are using it uncheck "evaluate" to use only Chief's predefined macros.

Try This. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iFWBkepNW2w

If you need two windows absolutely, make the bump out a balcony. Then raise the balcony floor and lower the ceiling.I suppose you'll also have to manually edit the roofs? There is a problem with the balcony floor connecting into the walls, but I suppose you could cover with a polyline? No good solution -- BL -- another limitation.

Draw first as a polyline. Filet the corners as you need. Then using the convert tool, convert to Road Perimeter.

Take another Look.

you may want to try the free stuff http://youtu.be/L1CEl3glaXs And a tutorial https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-V4KJ9Fjx4

Now your starting to hurt my head. For those algebraically challenged like myself,how about a video? I'll bet it's still easier to do by eye with temp construction lines. One technique I have used - not here- was to draw corner lines and then measure & get the absolute angle between, then use rotate at that angle. Works well in some situations but in this situation, faster just to move and check as the dims are already there and no need to add a angle measurement. I'd like to see your method in action?.

Your surveyor should have given at least a direction of one of the dimensions in the house detail. Since he did not, it's impossible to accurately locate the house, but you can get close. Just draw the three dimension lines parallel to their lot lines at the set distance. Then lock these lines and group select the house. You can then rotate and move the house so that the corners touch the dimension lines. Then delete the temp lines & add dims.Close by eyeball but never exact. Or if you prefer, select & rotate the lines.

Yes, But for a 2x4 @ 1/4 max, the mouth depth is only .875" Also Perry is correct. Most recommend that seats be full depth (3 1/2") rather than the minimum of 1 1/2". This is to resist lateral loads and the reason most Florida authorities require hurricane straps -- based on actual observations after the hurricanes there. Which brings up the point, if you use straps, you don't need a birds mouth. BTW -- it's also generally acknowledged that a full depth seat on a 2x4 is not practical.Should use connectors.

You’re really talking about cutting the bird’s month and I’m afraid there is no answer but lots of opinions. The general rule of thumb is a minimum of 1 ½” of bearing as required by code and no more than ¼ depth cut in the rafter. (used to be 1/3). If you can’t achieve this at the slope you’re at, then you need to change the slope, raise the ridge or use connectors. Strangely ICC has no position on birds mouths – but most inspectors think they do. The end notch rule does not apply as this is not an end notch. But ¼ max is generally considered safe for overhangs less than 2 ft. The reason being that with a notch, the end load is redirected into the side wall and the unnotched portion left in the rafter is in tension not shear

Yet Another approach to Key Notes in Chief http://youtu.be/L2lVMf12kfo Note to TS -- Not a suggestion -- just a comment to those interested!!

OOPs header1.zip

Lew: Gray Area -- But the submittals considered "suggestions" were inquires as of why something did not not work properly in RUBY. At any rate I won't be posting on this topic anymore -- as there is no internal support for RUBY in Chief -- IMNOHO --- so any meaningful future expansion other than some token is doubtful.

To further confuse Jared: attached is a macro to display inch only. joe's method is a little better in that it rounds to the 1/16 " -- without that, you can get some weird fractions. To round to a different fraction change the 16 multiplier to another(8,4-- etc.) For my self - i like to see more participation first from Chief as all the support has been on the customer side to date and mostly ignored. header.zip

FYI I've made doz & doz suggestions in this area and I know others have as well -- not including all the threads in the forum's suggestion area. With my last inquiry, i was told by TS not to submit any more suggestions or to inquiry about extending RUBY as the the program was not designed to be extended into this area. Still scratching my head as to what a suggestion line is for? Bottom Line: if any one at Chief is interested -- you might check your circular archives.

polyline subtraction seems to work. Draw your polyline shape and convert to polyline solid then to road perimeter. draw your circle (hole) where you want and convert it to polyline solid.Leave as polyline but then subtract it from the road. Seems to work on a quick check but may be some bugs? Side roads and sidewalks seem to connect in OK.

One method is to use a couple of road splines and curve them back on them self. If you get the ends close to being lined up, they will connect. Almost impossible to control completely -- so i don't know how practical this is?

Good Point -- Mine also. The real purpose of macros is to allow the user to customize the process to the way it's comfortable with, without tying up programmers with endless requests -- which never end and never satisfy anyone. Any attempt to do so just creates a cumbersome mishmash, to puzzling for anyone to use in the end. Chief has so limited Ruby, that it serves no real advantage, which was what I was trying to point out-badly. Does not have to be that way. Tremendous waste just to save a few programming man-hours.

Two - Three ways to do this automatically One --- Add a sub-column to replace the width or height columns. Write a macro to enter the door width/height info into global memory. Make a second macro & put in sub_column to retrieve from global and write to the component sub-column. Add the sub column to the schedule. Two macros per door. Remember to use Caps. Two - Add the door accessor methods to global then a second macro to retrieve. Then same as above. Three -- IOW -- Just copy the dims into a sub-column manually.

yep - use the IO function - But Ruby can not read RTF files or the latest word version. It can read word 97 as a workaround. It is imported as straight text as formatting is not possible - available buried deep in Chief but not made available to us at this time -- maybe version X56?