johnny

...and speed limits and laws dont stop everyone from breaking them while hurting others. Doesn't mean we should abandon laws altogether. It just seems a little nuts to me that home appraisers and realtors have to go through a process to get licensed (with continuing education) and yet the most potential dangerous and impactful aspect of structural home design can be done by anyone with CAD (in many states). A bad designer can effect the value of someone's investment more than a bad appraiser or realtor, not to mention down right dangerous. To be perfectly clear, I don't think every home designer needs to be an architect. However, I do think there should be some requirements and licensing involved.

Just FYI there is a specific forum for your version of Chief. Premier has a specific tool that allows freely placed footings with a post but unsure what your version has. I'd post the same question over there and get a response based on your version. https://hometalk.chiefarchitect.com/

For what it's worth, part of me likes how much detail is being required to pull permits now-a-days. Its a bit of a reality check for those who think the software is going to do all the work. Id even like to see licensing requirements for residential design - perhaps AIBD. I am not saying someone would have to be an architect, but some sort of standard that makes "self-entitlement" a thing of the past for our field.

Great idea... David fixed the issue but your solution would have easier. I didn't see that door, but will look again for future refence.

Hey Glenn - I PM'd you a link to the file. Thanks!

Has anyone run into the shadows doing funny things with siding lines? I've seen this before but didnt bother exploring further - now in prep of some presentation drawings effecting my work. This is an export of an image right from the plan file - not a screen shot.

100% agree - but since a grid tool has little use for a DIY version Chief has said these ideas may not receive the same attention a feature that benefits all its versions would. This is exactly why we get so many updates heavy with eye candy, and will likely continue that way for the foreseeable future. X10 may be my last Chief version (i hope its not)...but I see very clearly whats shaped Chief to this point, and I believe I might be better severed with a "pro" only app. As Richard pointed to that is a decision we all have to make....there is no way to force Chief to change.

Thanks David! Did you get the SU file to work or model a new door? I am curious since I am wondering if next time I should just move on to modeling the door.

I thought id post a problem I am having with a simple garage door I downloaded from Sketchup's Warehouse. There are strange gaps between the panels which are clearly not there in the SU file. I even opened the SU file to verify there weren't issues there, so this appears to be a Chief error perhaps. I've attached all the files. garage_door_issue.plan gar4_1.skp

Perhaps i'm by myself in realization that DIY versions of the app is most likely to blame for holding Chief Premier back (my perspective as a pro-user) from using the majority of the yearly resources to invest in "pro-only" tools (expansion or new). Its not even as if Chief is developing separate products for each market - its generally the SAME product with feature differences. I also recognize Chief has benefited from this development viewpoint, but Id say it feels like they are languishing now. X8 was great, but really this app hasn't had a lot major improvements since I started using it. Lots of eye-candy, which is cool but Chief is really falling behind in the modeling of the structure/details. When I first was viewing Chief 5 years ago they wow-ed me with the details....and now, its actually awful compared to other BIM apps that are getting very detailed in their structure sections.

Chief has found some success by making otherwise complex modeling easy - primary ...since their goal was to have products that severed both DIY and professionals. I believe what is holding CA premier back at this point is the same thing that made it successful before, and Chief is investing too much time now in eye candy that can help sell its DIY packages. That, and the fact they dont have a "Chief" architect in the development team for a product called "Chief Architect". Imagine a company that specilized in medical software not having doctors as part of the decision making? Vectorworks, Archicad, Allplan, Revit, etc etc all have architects as integral development team members and it ends up showing up in their products. I run a group that just added its 8th Chief license (plus more 3rd party support with their own licenses). The owners of the company ask me every so often if we should change to Revit or some other main-stream CAD package and i've resisted the move. However, I will reassess after X10, and if Chief still gets hampered by DIY product offerings then we will need to look at a change. ....but I hope the best for Chief, since we have a lot invested.

I've watched several videos with copy attributes commands but can't exactly see how (if its possible) to apply all the framing settings i've applied to a roof plane to another roof plane made from the default settings. Is there a way to do that, or do I have to change the defaults to have it apply to other planes?

I might be the naysayer here, but id personally recommend someone start by being a draftsman in an operational firm before starting out on their own. There is so much to learn in the way of process its hard for me to imagine someone picking up that all on their own quickly to be a full service operation. Doing a layout in Chief is such a small % of what the job entails - and unless you are dealing with an architect or engineer (review your work) a mistake could be pretty big.

You forgot someone.

So what i've done before is to make a layer system in SU on an object that matches the "material" delineation you want. Even if materials are the same, if you want a different direction than in Chief it has to be a different material listing. If you just isolate the surfaces into different layers before you export it should resolve all of this. I've been able to import files into CA without doing all this, but when i've had issues I revert to the method above to resolve issues.

I've seen some make custom toolbar buttons, but I was curious if it was possible to create "select similar" commands and assign to a custom button? For instance I often select all the roof planes, and there are a couple ways to select all the roof planes at once...but would love a custom button for that. Also, I like to draw profile lines over my elevations and sections and would love a method to quickly select all the lines with a certain thickness (one that i use often). So that I dont cause confusion, I realize I can do a "match properties" operation but some specific things I repeat often and would love to assign that operation (with ore-defined criteria) in a single button.

Very nice!

I have say Chief is a mixed bag. Some otherwise complicated modeling they've made incredibly simple and easy - but the flip side they've also made otherwise very simple things either overly difficult or flat out impossible. I think when comparing Softplan, Chief is superior in many, many ways.

I've seen -1 rep points on certain people's posts which had nothing wrong with them whatsoever, so I am convinced it happens by error occasionally.

There may be some here who will want to show you settings on how to get this done, but I personally just jump in and start manually editing things the way you want. Physically move the rim joist over to the edge of the lower wall, delete the "criples" it placed on the edge, and then extend the joists over to match in with the rim. You dont have to always use the auto-frame-features, you can get in there and just move or create the framing you need.

For anyone looking to go to Softplan over Chief or vice-versa at this stage is somewhat a silly idea at this point IMO. When I bought CA 4-5 years ago it wowed me what the app could do with simplicity over the "big BIM" boys. If I was looking to make a change today, I wouldn't switch to Chief. The other apps have made 2-3x the strides year over year than Chief in the same time period. Though I think that right now Chief still does traditional/standard residential better that other apps, that lead is shrinking very quickly. Going forward if Chief still tries to connect the DIY app with their "pro" version this will hold the app back from implementing the tools we professionals are asking for. I dont see this changing in the years to come, and now all the big BIM applications are getting closer to what Chief is doing while also flying past Chief in many key areas.

I think the OP has a valid point and complaint - and I am afraid there is no good solution with Chief right now. Point-to-point works better than dragging elements around, but there are still countless connection issues that develop depending on the task and number of items.

I was thinking more that I bet you could do this as a roof plane, and probably would be the best solution ...a solid glass plane with poly solids etc for the structure/mullions. Joe modeled an A-frame home in CA that had a roof which extended through to the 1st floor like this and it looked like that might be a solid idea to do this "atrium" curtain wall.

Personally, I would model in Sketchup or other app (i use Vectorworks) and then import the wall as a symbol. You can leave an invisible wall in the Chief file to close your structure. The only other things i can think of would be to use poly solids for the mullions and then thin poly for the glass, or you may be able to make a roof plane from glass and then just use poly solids for the mullions.

Can I adjust the text formatting in Window/Door schedules? Say I want to place a space in the reporting for header sizes so that it doesn't look like: 5 1/2X7 1/2X52 1/2", but rather 5 1/2 X 7 1/2 X 52 1/2". Also, if I set a Glu-lam the sizes only show as nominal and around here we typically show actual sizes. I see I can set to "engineered lumber" to get actual size, but is there a way to get Glu-Lam to show actual?