BenPalmer

I agree with the general premise that there are too many places for different settings and often the 'default' and what is being build conflict and it isn't obvious. Yes, it is what we are telling chief to do, but the work flow and dbx that Chief employ don't always make it easy to figure that out sometimes. Sure, once we figure it out, we know for next time. But, if it was better organized, we wouldn't need to remember, it would be fairly intuitive. For example: The other day I was adding exposed custom rafter tails (which I admit I don't do a lot). Went into the roof framing tab to set up the sizes I wanted and built the framing. Well, the framing didn't build at all to the numbers I just input. Come to find out the roof framing is actually following each roof planes setting instead of the framing dialogue settings. If that is the case, why do I even have the option to change framing settings in the general framing dbx when it won't even use it. There should be a note or warning or whatever telling me that I need to adjust the roof planes and that changing these numbers will do nothing. I kept opening the framing dbx and the numbers wouldn't change after closing and reopening the dbx. So I used the 'edit all roof planes' and changed the framing/structure etc. in there and it all worked and that changed the framing dbx numbers as well. So those numbers should be greyed out or explained what they are doing. Of course if I did the framing right from the beginning when building the roof, it wouldn't have been an issue, but I changed the style later on. This may be more obvious to those who do those a lot, but it was not intuitive at all and there are different numbers in different places and it gets hard to figure things out. I eventually wrote my self a procedure on how to do it so the next time I need to I can follow those steps. Just some thoughts. PS: I commented on Larry's original post on my issues with foundations that is similar to this, didn't feel necessary to post it again here.

I have this problem A LOT when I bring an old plan forward. Never have the problem with new plans either. No matter what the defaults say, the foundation doesn't follow them. Even after I click the checkmark to 'default' they go all crazy. Sometimes checking default on and off will fix it (even thought that doesn't make sense). I've sent it into support and they haven't been able to give me an answer that I've been satisfied with. There method was deleting and starting over with a rebuild. But that didn't always work, and I'd rather not delete the foundation when the work is done even if I can copy to a temp plan, etc. Older Chief versions were more tolerant then newer versions. I can typically narrow it down to a single offending room. Using the 'match properties' tool is the best tool to fix things to make sure all rooms match, but when I can't get even one room to be correct, then can't really use the 'match properties' tool. Through trial and error and lots of time I can usually get it to work, but there is no consistency on how to fix it. I use thick walls a lot, and the way X8 treats them and there connections seems to be a big problem with room definitions when it translates to the foundation. But it's different each time. Such an annoyance.

Thank you for fixing this in the latest update!!! Very much appreciated.

Yep, 30 seconds into that video and knew where they were going. I eluded to it in my previous post that I could workaround it with symbols, but was hoping to avoid this method. I may even work around this with segmented walls on layers and CAD lines for representation etc. so that I can have them live. Haven't decided yet. Just surprising to me that we used to be able to do this in an older version of Chief, then lost it with newer versions. Never understood loosing functionality with an 'upgrade'. It's interesting that they had to dedicate a couple videos to this. Tells me that it is requested enough that they had to address it. In short for anyone reviewing this. Currently this can not be done. I will add this lost feature to the suggestion section. Thanks again Chopsaw.

Thanks for taking to the time to research and post, I'll take a look at that when I get a moment and report back.

Will get it reported when I get a moment. I'm sure it is something funny I have in my template. Thanks for the reminder on the other tools. I use those as well. In this particular case the callout is at a footing, so it is a couple drags to adjust. Probably same speed as drawing new. However, the advantage of drawing it as you suggest, is that it will be on the layer I want. Which brings up a sticking point for me that the revision cloud should automatically assume the layer that it is devised from. I've created a list of things like this, just been too busy to sharpen the saw and report them. I know, won't get fixed unless I do. Stretched to thin right now. Appreciate the added input to help me run Chief as efficiently as possible.

The problem is a wall on a different plane then the other and therefore an intersection. Curved or not curved wall. Much like a 45 degree wall meeting with it would naturally make an intersection and therefore couldn't span the gap with a window in the software or in real life. However a curved wall in tangent with a straight should allow for this interaction. I opened up Chief 9.5 and I was able to make it work with no problem using Ctrl to override. But no such luck in X8 latest. However, I don't see how making the radius bigger helped. that just makes the wall more flat and therefore a harder intersection to bridge. Perhaps you are meaning to concentrically span things further making the tangent softer? Either way, this is the radius and center of radius I need on a project I'm working on. Thanks for taking a look at this. I can think of a couple workarounds from using symbols to multiple walls, but would like to get it to work normally. Keep the ideas coming.

How do I get a window to span a wall intersection? In the past I've would hold the Ctrl Key in elevation view, but that no longer does it. Figuring there is a trick, just not sure what it is. Attaching a quick sample plan for further clarification. Window.plan

OK, so tried this out on my Android phone. Works pretty good. However, unless I missed something, if I send to a client to view, they have to create a chief log in, and enter a code. Entering a code is fine, but why do they have to create a log in? They should be able to enter the code only and be off and running. It's an extra step that slows things down and I don't see the need for them to have any chief credentials. I realize if I log in with my Chief credentials it's all there without the code and that is great. But needs to be easier for the client to access. Let me know if I'm missing something or did something wrong, or if you disagree with me?

Even though I don't use live elevations, I'm sure you are right and it has something to do with my profile plan. I'll send it in when I get a chance and hopefully they can fix something on there end so I don't have to redo the template. No other problems, just that, so it doesn't hold me back. I'll just use some near by object to create the cloud and adjust. Thanks

I think I started over in X7, I don't recall, but probably. So brought forward from X7. I hate that they 'recommend' that we start over each time, takes a ton of time to redo it. Should be an immigration tool that brings everything forward.

Thanks for the feedback. I opened up the original Chief profile plan and tried it in there and it works fine with no problems. So some conflict with my settings. I'll send it in and see what they come up with. Thanks again.

If I select a callout, then select to put a revision cloud around it. It crashes every single time. Even if I start with a blank plan, put in a callout, then revision cloud. Can anyone confirm or deny that.

You can download the Simpson Catalog from Chief (can't remember if it comes standard or if you have to download it separate). In 2d, not 3d. https://3dlibrary.chiefarchitect.com/index.php?r=site/library&reset=true (under CAD)

Let me know if you figure it out. This plan is in the initial rough design phase. [removed attachment]

In AutoCAD use 'Zoom Extents'. It is there, it's just not on the screen. The zoom extents will bring it into view. Has to do with the origin location in Chief Architect. I believe AutoCAD opens to 0,0 at the bottom left corner. So if your Chief export isn't in that X,Y area, it will be offscreen. Zoom Extents will center on the file, then you can save, and next time it opens it will be on screen. Hope that helps.

Per my post, there are no other levels. The attic level has no walls on it. So there is nothing to align or misalign with. Reference display shows blank since there are no walls on the other floors. This is a single level house. No foundation yet. No upper floor. Only the attic floor. see my previous post for more information.

Definitely a bug here. I don't think I've ever seen this message before and today opened a plan and got that message, and, as a bonus, all the text is wrapped and messed up as well. For text: only thing I can think of is I worked on it on my laptop on a different screen size last time. Once I open it up and refresh, the text goes back to normal, but still get the wall alignment message each time. All I have is an attic floor. I completely deleted the attic floor, and saved and reopened Chief, and still get that message even though there are only walls on the main floor. No foundation plan yet. The attic is recreated, but since there is no roof yet, no walls are there. I even turned on 'all on' layer to verify. Nothing there. Something going on. Can still work on the plan, but it is a nuisance. Don't get that message on the previous drafts I have saved. Just the latest one. Weird.

As mentioned, exporting the layout will not be 1:1 scale like exporting the plan. There is not a way to export the entire file from chief and it show up in paper space and layout space to AutoCAD. I've requested this feature in the past, but not sure how possible it is. Exporting the layout will be to the scale you sent it. They will have to resize it when they receive it. One of my guys is proficient in AutoCAD so if a layout is needed, then I will have him scale it to 1:1 before sending it on. However, exporting the plan file is preferable since the scale is correct. No one has ever had a problem working off that file because they have there own title block info that they use. DXF or DWG should come in no problem. I've found when ever there is a problem with the exported DWG file, that often times the DXF will come in cleaner. Hope that helps.

I like PDF-XChange Editor http://www.tracker-software.com

Yes, but then, I need to add a larger profile for the sill. Basically I have set up my profile plan with the apron suppressed, and a larger profile for the sill so it shows as other images previously posted. It was more of a comment for the OP so he knew the options. You're post should help clarify that even more. Thanks for bringing that up.

Nice tip Dave.

Yeah, as mentioned, this can easily be done with the window or door casing, lintels and sills. However, I would like the sills to work like lintels. We don't use aprons around my parts and it doesn't make it easy to look like your pic without changing the profile of the sill. However, I have my profile plan set to have it that way so makes it easy to work with.

Used it for the same thing as well.

Printing dialogue is taking longer to come up. I hit print icon, then there is a delay waiting for it to do anything.