joey_martin

This is a collection of notes that were posted on here with settings. I have used these for the very limited times I Raytrace anything and they did very well for me. 

Raytrace Settings-Forum Notes.pdf

I think you need to make the sheathing layer one of the main layers in the wall dbx in order for anything to attach to it. All wall intersections occur at main layers only if I am remembering correctly.

In that picture, I have the BY LAYER boxes checked. That means that the line weight controlled by the layer would be the MAIN LAYER line weight, which you have at 10. With the box checked, all the other line weights will be as you have assigned, except the main layer.

All of my line weights are controlled with layer sets. Each view has a layer set and light weights for that set depending on what scale the view will be sent to layout in.

I am unable to re-create this issue. My wall cabinets have the molding wrapped unless it is up against a wall, invisible or otherwise.

Click on the cabinet and open the dbx. 

Depending on construction type, you won't have much issue. I did a 12,000 sqft church with Chief...2"x6" construction with brick/stone/siding veneer, truss roof system...no issues. As others have said, the steel framed doors can be an issue, but nothing that can't be easily overcome with details and use of the schedules.

I also did a 4,000 sqft fellowship hall...again no issues other than the steel doors. CMU/Frame construction, truss roof system, slab foundation.

7 hours ago, capitaldesigns said:

But when it come to the construction drawings

AutoCAD hands down beats CA.

That is subjective. I'm sure I couldn't put together a set of plans in AC any longer. I moved away from AC 13 years ago, and haven't looked back. You will find yourself falling into the trap we see on this forum week after week. Chief isn't AC, and doesn't pretend to be. Full time users of this product can put together a set of construction docs every bit as fast in Chief as you can in AC. 

You can look through post after post, and a common theme will occur. Those that continually struggle with what we all consider to be easy, very standard practice in other software, are constantly fighting Chief to be something it's not. It's not a "get on board or get out" situation, but stop fighting the program and ensure your template is set up to handle the situations you struggle with.

The suggestion(s) have been made. It's a wait and see now. This is what I turned in as suggested needs for these.

Other than the "bubbles" all the callouts are in the text tools.

Shoot me an email. I love that area of Tennessee. We try to get to Gatlinburg once a year for hiking. I will be happy to send you info.

My email is joeymdp@gmail.com

Good idea. You can also take an overview, and turn off all layers except the floor surface and see the 4'x8' sheets. Do an overhead shot and you get a similar feature.

Mine are in the library under Chief Architect Bonus Catalogs>Water Supply and Drainage

FWIW I chance the door to a drawer and label my interior elevation. You can select to have to drawer match the door properties as well.

Click just outside the exterior and create a polyline. Pull the polyline to the edge it needs to be.

I don't think the macros are set up that way. One of the macro guys may be able to better answer, but even if there is/were a way...I prefer separate. 

Others I don't know. But for my template, the layout page index, and the revision index are separate, live entities that exist on the pages. If I add or subtract a page to my plan set, the index on the cover page updates automatically and I don't have to think about it. The revision index is also live, and per page. I note any revision on the cover page, but also each sheet has a live index of revisions for me to notate as needed.

Change the size in the default text style for labels.

Post #8 has a link to a newer plan set that contains the notes in a different spot.

I have since changed my note placement. I have them on the page the trade would use. The front page notes are the same, and contain all the data the permit looks for.

I believe if you do a search for Architxt.shx you will find it.

I'm not concerned about the liability. I carry E&O that I have never had to use, and well thought out planning and con docs take care of that stuff.

As for Scott, he is using backhanded sarcasm to insinuate that, even though my plans look good, there is no way I have thought through the engineering, or have taken into account the various loads, especially the trusses even though the plans clearly state that the trusses are shown for illustration purposes only, and the truss company is to provide all truss plans and drawings.

As for the builders, I state on the plans that if a change is made they need to contact me, or assume any/all liability for said change.

Selecting the roof plane and unchecking boxed eaves doesn't give you what you want?

You are correct Scott. But again, if there are no girders resting on headers, and the retaining walls are designed and detailed to exceed code based on soil conditions, even without any steel at all (yes..some places build retaining walls up to 96" in height without any steel at all!!! e-gats), then you are golden.

Quote

No need to supply more than they want,

I should state for the record, that this is an issue for me. I rarely...if ever...produce a set of plans based on what the jurisdiction want's to see. The purpose of a good set of home plans, as I see it, is to convey your design ideas to the builder. Of course you need a permit, and there will be items that need to be included in order to obtain that permit, but to suggest that we should do no more than that is a great disservice to everyone involved in the process.