VHampton

Lol. So true. Modern houses are waterproofed to such a degree where they may as well be wearing a wetsuit. The products that they use under the rain screen is pretty incredible - yet VERY expensive.

For the rain screen siding and roof merge: Build a (1)" thick "roof" skin with no structure other than the framing and roof sheathing. Meaning no fascias, sub fascias, friezes, or ridge caps. Set the overhang so that it lines up with the siding. This can be adjusted in case your roof is poking out. With a bit of finesse, the exterior siding can be merged perfectly with the roof. (like in references images below). There may be a slight chance that you'll have to 'drag' the walls up - manually. Likewise the same with the roof overhang. It can be pulled in tighter to ensure the correct "look". This goes against the 'auto-build' nature of the program, but custom houses will often require a bit of manual adjusting. Chief has no limits in expressing the design intent.

Making piers (with varying walls thicknesses) is pretty handy indeed. I've never read any of the CA manuals, so creative solutions are invariably a by-product of necessity. BTW... kBird is correct. This method results in the four sided pier becoming a small "room'. 'No definition' on any one of the walls solves any foreseeable issues. The pier will still build at the default foundation height. ...and agreed Doug... PC 'piers' and 'buttresses' are the masonry terminology for sure. Pilasters are primarily millwork related, but we all got the gist of what the OP was looking for. '') Thanks all for the positive feedback.

The pier can be made with thinner poured concrete walls. As a result, the footings will join together. Cover the gap (inside the pier) with a CAD poly-line or CAD box. Don't use a line property on the CAD object in order to create the camouflage.

Hi Gene... I would venture to say that the answer is yes. When the initial fascia line is drawn in 2D elevation view (and curved to your liking) ...both the roof and the soffit will curve (when converted to a 3d molding) - just as per the real world images. The rafters tails on the underside of the roof "hump" can be made with 3d solids, and placed manually. My observation is this... There will be (3) moldings required. (1) for the initial fascia (1) for the roof skin - a replica of the fascia - set one inch higher (1) for the soffit - another replica of the fascia - set one inch lower and probably one inch inward The 3d solid rafters can be manipulated to follow the radius of the curve. Note: Radial moldings required some finesse so that they're a bit more fluid in appearance. The optimal way to make that curve look spot on, will be to make sure that the initial fascia has many facets - otherwise it'll look sloppy and choppy like in my quick example. Hope this is a help.

That's a really creative solution. Probably the best yet. ...another option could be to build the roof. Then draw a molding poly-line in cross section with a slightly lower pitch - basically to create a rafter "molding". Then - in 2d view - a head on elevation allows one to draw the fascia (in the soft arch). This gets converted to the "rafter molding" which will have shingles. It'll create the slight hump on the actual roof surface. A 2d molding needs to be created (and lowered by 1") so that it will serve as the fascia. It has potential to appear as the eyebrow effect per the image. Not too time consumptive at all.

You're quite welcome. The Simpson site has wide variety of clips which meet the codes, but that one is pretty standard for high wind zones. A quick search will show pretty much all of the options. "seismic ties" or "hurricanes strapping" yields helpful results.

TJI's typically require a squash block in order for the ties to be able to fasten. The clip in the screen capture is fairly common even though the rafter is shown on the lower plate. (Same thing happens on the upper). ...and you're welcome Gene. It's always good practice to leave nothing to chance when it comes to water infiltration. But from the aesthetic standpoint, usually exposed flashing always comes up in conversation at a later date, ...and since drip edge typically comes only white or brown aluminum, (or lead coated copper) there's always the chance for hemming and hawing in case they have to paint it to match the fascia. I could be wrong, but that type of roof flashing usually has a special riglet so that the top course of shingles gets tucked into a small notch.

Agreed. That's a nice way to cover a large structural member w/ a layer cake of fascia. For good measure, it's always helpful to call out flashing, even if it's just a simple drip edge. That type of roof condition is prone to allow for capillary action below the top course of shingles. Even if the builder may have an excellent roofer, simple stuff like making a general note will make sure that you're covered for any unwanted dribbles.

The 3d warehouse has some good boulders. (see attached) Otherwise you could fake that by using poly-line solid tools for the wall, and adding that very same boulder image as the assigned texture.

Exporting a layout sheet is going to skew the scale. You will also lose every single jpeg. Unfortunately, they don't convert to CAD format. Regarding the most important thing (exporting your information) there is a solution - irrespective of whatever version. What could (should) work is to make a CAD detail of the layout page. Then create a block of the postage sized drawing. Resize the block as necessary and export. I can't tell what'll happen on 24 x 24 sized sheets... but on 24 x 36, the resize factor is 48. Just to be sure, when you export the enlarged layout drawing, do a quick test. Reimport the block and check the dimensions. they should be in line w/ the desired scale. Per the example below (on a 24 x 36 sized layout page) all exporting was done in inches, and the import likewise is done in inches. 48 is the resize factor. Hope it helps.

Mr. Rabbit is a genius.

That would be pretty neat Lew. ...maybe one day soon. The software engineers read the forums, even if there is a suggestion box. Just like cabinets can be added onto with moldings and custom tops, they could do the same with chimneys. Even porch columns. Adding courses (for a build-out) is always something which has to be done with solids. I have found creative work-arounds though... and the soffit tool can be shaped tall and skinny (like a chimney) w/ moldings on top ...Same for columns (if they're square). A custom cap and base can be added.

Great video Adam. Like DJP explained, usually solids are a good tool- when the shape is simple. The OP's chimney is flat on 2 sides which means that the taper doesn't have to occur on all sides, but the way your video explains how to create a "battered" chimney is superb. Nice work. For simple shapes... and for the OP (in learning how to work w/ solids)... just as Mr. Potter explained... Draw a rectangle in 2D view, and use the break tools to angle the (2) upper sides. Convert the shape into a poly-line solid. or "3d solid" as they're now called in X-14. The chimney appears to be at least 40 - 42 inches thick. You can "break" the upper section (to have the side walls) even after the solid is created. A chimney cap can be made using solids as well.

That's exactly the way I've made these in the past Eric. Glass walls and glass roof planes. ...It appears that you may have used default framing. Again, depending on the design intent, poly line solids can help customize the look.

The glass portions can simply be made with a glass roof. ...meaning that one can use the roof tools, but for the glass areas, delete all of the structure and just leave a "skin" ( the roof surface) made out of entirely glass. The rafters (framing) can be constructed using the poly line solid tools. I had a similar project. Chief can pretty much build anything that you can think of.

Agreed w/ the OP about this being irksome. Usually the vector view would run through the option asking you to update it before closing. Now it does nothing. Close the camera view and Shazam... you're back to layout. The update all view option has been great from day one (many versions ago), but why they took the other feature out of the program is curious.

For what it's worth... That's a very interesting work of art!!

Yes - saved cameras in layout will make a pdf size huge - which is an understatement. A full size rendered view can increase the file size exponentially. An image file in layout is best practice, unless the PDF print can be reduced. Custom pdf formats can be made with 4" x 6" as the output for example.

As a brief observation... Are you printing straight to a printer? It appears that the source is blank. So it's kind of hard to say what's going on there. By way of example, printer memory can be iffy at times, and starting off with a pdf will usually avoid a memory overload. Saving as a PDF w/ the built-in Chief printer @300dpi-600dpi is usually step one. Then... off to the ink jet printer. Hope this helps. Chopsaw is on the right path though... end the printer task, and try purging the printer of all previous jobs.

X-14 misbehaves on occasion. It's got bugs for sure, as is common with many new releases. In the past, everyone ran Windows only though, so in recent years it could be a Mac related thing. Where on the other hand, sometimes the quirks are PC related only. It can be hard to tell. Your select issue has happened to me with shift selecting. Functionality comes and goes, but thankfully it's rare. A quick close and a restart often fixes... but per my observations... please be sure to report whatever weirdness arises. The folks at CA would sure appreciate, and in the long run, everything gets smoothed out with the latest patches. Cheers.

As a general observation in your first post Mick, it was mentioned that this typically happens w/ the start of a Layout. Does loading the wayward font into system folder resolve the issue (of the program from asking for it)? Abadi may never be used (by you) but what happens if it gets dropped into operating system's font inventory? Again the only time I've encountered this is in importing other people's work, like a surveyor, designer of engineer. Sorry for stating the obvious, but usually a shift select of their text - (to convert everything to a default) will eliminate the inconsistency. I tend to agree Graeme and Rene that the font(s) could be hidden in a CAD detail somewhere. What's curious though, is why this only recently started happening w/ X-14...

I get this when working w/ imported surveys on occasion. After changing to an alternate font, the program appears to recognize the replacement. Maybe it's going to the first available font? (in alphabetical order) Abadi comes before Arial for example. Edit: 100% agree with the next response. If the font is locked up in a block, that could be why it's not possible to shift select it (to make a universal font change) Not sure if the below helps for future viewers of this thread. It's fairly recent (dating from last year): The information in this article applies to: QUESTION When I open my plan in Chief Architect, I receive the following message: "The following fonts are not available on this system. Missing fonts can lead to unpredictable text sizes." ANSWER Chief Architect uses the fonts that are located in your Windows Fonts folder or in the System/Library/Fonts/ folder location on a Mac. This message appears when Chief Architect is unable to find a font that is being referenced in the plan or layout. You can choose to replace the font with another font that you do have installed. If you are working with another Chief Architect user, we recommend installing the missing font so that there are no discrepancies between saved versions of plans. Installing Fonts on Windows: https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/314960/how-to-install-or-remove-a-font-in-windows Installing Fonts on macOS: https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT201749Please be aware that the Windows and macOS operating systems render fonts differently on-screen, using different row and character spacing. Even when all fonts are present, therefore, the text in a given file may look different on different systems.

possible solution... Build (copy and paste) the same set of stairs in a new plan file. Turn off the stringers and risers. Delete every tread. There should be nothing left except for the railings. Convert the remaining railings to a symbol. import the new symbol (3 rail sections) into the active plan file. Raise or lower the imported railing symbol to create the equal spacing as necessary. ...It's pretty close to what you're aiming for. Edit... sorry. Just noticed that you're working in X-13. Either way this method will be the same in any of the latest versions. stairs.plan

That's a neat cottage Eric. Nice choice of colors and stone. ...on the roof oddity, it's hard to explain why curved roof planes will often "ghost" out in plan view and elevation. The key to avoiding strange behavior appears to be in making sure that the breaks are nice and clean on the valleys and ridges. Any edges which aren't 100% parallel have a tendency to go haywire as soon as they get joined. Regarding the joinery, the option to lock the radius to the surface edge appears to be the correct one. (see attached) Lauren... if you can upload your file, then maybe it's possible to take a look. I had a similar project with a lower swept roof which merged into a straight upper. Sure enough it was behaving badly at times, but with careful shape shifting, the strange behavior can be controlled.