VHampton

Thank you Michael. Agreed w/ Twin Motion being a wonderful resource. Regarding the curb, I guess that's just what we happen to call them. Technically they would indeed qualify as extremely low parapet walls. The design intent is to make them not so obvious. ...That said, the parapet method is going to be looked into! Appreciate the video. ...and thank you. Back to the original post... Chief Architect can build just about anything.

Thank you for posting that Michael. For years I've been using "gutters" to create the curb. We don't use parapets, but rather let the EPDM ride over a 4-6" tall curb. and then it gets flashed. The roof is pitched in real world (towards internal drains) but for the sake of the 2D elevations, the roof is specified as flat. The pitch board detail is shown with CAD lines in the details. ...regarding furnishing etc... the 3d warehouse has some helpful .skp models, but you have to be pretty careful in selecting low surface count furnishing. CA will get there though. They've come a very long way since the Victorian arm chairs!

Thank you Larry. Much appreciated. That said, it's really great to have a software which can adapt to any style of architecture. Chief can perform alongside any software in the industry, and with what appears to be a much lower learning curve. To the original post, Europe is a bit further ahead of the US housing market with modernism. The demand here is growing however. That said, the Chief Architect marketing department has never quite showcased much beyond traditional dwellings, but perhaps they should. For example, in So Cal the houses are literally over the top... Chief could draw this no problem.

Agreed. There are absolutely no limits with what Chief can do. Like a piano or a violin, the instrument will sound according to whomever is playing it.

The fascia and roof edge(s) of gable end return and primary gable appear to be at the same elevation. The attached may or may not be the desired look, but it works. The primary roof can be "broken" along the rake boards so that a hip roof section can be created with the gable end return. Note: Per Rob and Mick, you should probably post the plan file. In X-14 what your plan file is showing has been a bit of an anomaly. The fascia on the gable end return should exist, even if it doesn't merge with the rakes on the main gable.

For future reference, there may be a time saver in exporting the newer X-14 plan to CAD. The CAD import can then be brought to life in a previous version w/ the "CAD to Walls" tool. It's not perfect, but it works fairly well. There's a dated tutorial on the web by a fellow user which helps explain...

Thank you for starting the thread Gene. When I've attempted to make varying roof planes merge at a common roof edge height, the fascia will often behave as you are describing. Meaning that roof edges won't always line up, even when the top of fascia input is a perfect match. The gutters don't always line up as well. A 3D molding (for fascias and gutters) has been my work-around for many years. That said, Robert appears to have described the optimal method. Thank you. ...It's great to learn more about making Chief work as it should.

Bummer. Layout files and plan files sometimes get placed in different folders. Usually a quick check of the Archived folders may shed light. In some instances, I've found numerous plan folders there w/o realizing that there had been so many saves. Chief Architect Premier X12 Data > Archives

The floors and glass walls are all Chief. The vertical columns and angled steel is either solids or molding poly lines. It's a valid choice either way. Just out of curiosity, the real world image sheds a lot of light on what the end result would be. That entire building can be done with Chief and a combination of solids no problem. https://visitnordlys.com/cabin/metallark-tower/

Totally agree Kb. Thank you for making that distinction. (I only use 24 x 26 sized layout, and thus the unconventional fit to paper method) My response was to describe how a larger layout can fit more snug (onto an 11 x 17 sheet) - which are typically for 'show and tell purposes' only. There's also a slight benefit in making a reduced scale PDF (before sending to printer) in that it reduces the file size for emailing. But just to recap... In the event that someone wants a "scale-able" 11 x 17 tabloid print, then a 22 x 34 layout is the way to go when using "Check Plot at" [1/2 scale]. 24 x 36 sheets can be 'check plotted' at exactly 1/2 scale onto 12 x 18 paper.

In the preview pane, try setting the scale (fit to paper input) to 95% when printing to a 11 x 17 PDF (Tabloid size). This works quite well for layouts which are set up for 24 x 36 formatted sheets. The 95% however may need to be fine tuned for 22" x 34" ...meaning a few % less. ...like 92 or 93.

Agreed. The looks like some kind of grid (in CAD) which can be deleted.

Agree with Gene. The beige bleeding through (Sheetrock) is indicative of a wayward roof section. Looks like the ceiling is poking out When weird stuff like that happens, it's often because the roof has a slightly uneven edge. It could be the ridge, or any one of the 3 remaining sides. Opening up an archived plan, and tinkering with a new roof is a relatively easy and helpful exploration process without messing up the original plan file. To add to that... if the beige can be clicked on in 3D view, the roof may very likely 'highlight'. Then you'll know for sure where the issue lies.

If I recall correctly, one can make symbols in X-8. In a new plan, per DB, one could presumably make a "panel" by drawing poly-lines with the appropriate spacing. Create a symbol while in 3D mode. Then utilize the new railing 'panel' per DJP's example.

So agree. It's amazing to see the generosity. ...and that's very good advise about posting image files - and if need be, a plan.

Welcome Jim. ...you may note (in asking general questions) that it's helpful to have a signature w/ the hardware specs. Lots of times folks will say that they have such and such going on, and many here will go above and beyond to get to the bottom of the issue. This often happens quite a bit with renderings for example. You could liken it to someone saying that they can't cut down a certain sized tree when it's not known if they're swinging an axe, or have a Magnum Stihl chainsaw at their disposal. So all this to say, welcome - and at some point, don't be surprised if you get asked for the hardware info. All the best - and have a great journey with Chief. It's the absolute best drawing software in the industry.

From having browsed the forums since X-14 was released, there is excellent information available on how to gain some speed. Just a few things to add... On any given perspective camera (saved in layout) - make sure it's set to update manually - never automatically. Any busy patterns... things like sand, stucco, concrete, and intricate stone patterns... they are known to slow down 2D generation in layout. If there are any large 3D objects in the plan - try to switch them out for smaller ones - meaning with lower surface counts. Even with massive memory on your new computer... set the default undo/redo to about 2 at the most. And as posted in this thread... any framing which is set to be automatically updated can bog things down. Eliminate that option too. While CA keeps making vast improvements, all of the above features work quite well for a modest home. ...meaning that the software should operate with relative ease when the program isn't pulling a heavy load so to speak. Any large projects or plan files however, will certainly benefit from making these minor adjustments. ...looking forward to more user comments.

3D solid as "patio.... The benefit to this method (albeit unconventional) is that you can create a hefty stone edge, and get the stone to project past the newels. Concrete foundation walls were created for the masonry slab support.

There is no need for a "deck" definition. The attached was done with the deck as a "balcony". Just make certain that the stairs are twins (of each other) - meaning the exact same specs. Get them to touch ever so slightly (at the corner of the 'deck') and presto - they will join and miter. Raised slabs... you could always make a poly line - convert it to whatever the stone patio material is - and elevate the height. There are many ways. I prefer the poly line solid method personally. Untitled 1.plan

Thanks for noting Mick. Usually I start w/ the textures. ...When I went back to show John what was meant by "calibrating" the spacing, the screen capture showed the patterns being offset, not the textures. Doh. Either way, it's quite a handy feature. -meaning that when the sync box is checked, both will rendered and 2D views will align (texture and pattern)

You're quite welcome John. Again, all of the suggestions (mine) are a bit unconventional, as Chief can auto-build just about everything. Unless the house is more straight forward (meaning traditional) sometimes a manual override helps achieve the result, even if coloring outside of the lines is often referred to as a "hack" by some users. @solver (Eric) is an expert at explaining how to get things spot on. I greatly enjoy viewing his posts even after 20 plus years of using this program. He provides excellent information on how everything gets perfectly auto-generated simply by using the correct inputs, To answer your question, again some minor adjusting is required. The wall appears too high, and the roof may want to move outwards another 1/2" to 1". It's a relatively easy fix, but requires a bit of fitness and patience. Regarding the texture having various spacing... the "repeat" is technical term for the distance (on center) of the material file. By way of example, the wall texture on the rendered views has several vertical surfaces with misalignments. This is common in instances when the roof and sidewalls want to match up as per your project. Changing the horizontal space (by using a varying material type) allows the wall spacing to align with the roof. (see attached). That's what I meant by 'calibrating'. Interestingly, as you are probably aware, Twin Motion offers that handy offset tool where you can toggle the spacing to get it just right. In CA however, the way it can be done (unless someone has a better idea) is to simply take a 3d view. With the 'rainbow tool" click on the wall, and copy the material pattern. Now you've got a new surface which can be "toggled" by spacing the horizontal offset a little bit differently each time. (see the attached). 2D line drawing views don't appear to experience this issue. It's primarily an occurrence in "rendered" views". Glad to be of help.

It's definitely achievable. The trick is in manually lifting the walls to meet the roof edge. The gable ends require manual adjustment too. One thing which is required is the creation of various wall types once everything gets merged together. The "repeat' of the siding will not always align with the roof. Making a series of walls will allow you to set different offsets (for the texture and pattern) which will force the "repeat" to align with seams on the roof. Attached is an X-13 plan file. You can always open it with a trial version to see what's going on. I played around with the textures only... The pattern files still would need their respective settings for 2D line drawing views. All the best. SamplePlan2_MHD.plan

Thanks for making that clarification Mark. I should have placed that in the response. A molding poly-line is entirely different species of molding than a room generated molding. On exterior frieze boards (with a square cut rafter), the roof slope option is a really great tool. One would have to make a manual molding to get the same rotation result on the interiors. BTW... that's a pretty neat method.

Open the dialogue box for the molding, and look for the rotate option. The crown can be set to follow the roof pitch.

Greetings John. The file can't be opened by X-12 since it was made w/ the latest version. But that said, there is good information in this thread. Per the initial direction, the minimalist roof was made with a 1" thick roof surface. Fascias and Rakes were set to 0" - even though the program will default to 1/16th of an inch when you do that. (Overhangs were adjusted manually, and so were the walls). As per Robert's reply, a bit of "dragging" will result in the desired the effect. Lastly, a minimalist roof won't generate a gutter, but as kB has noted, the molding tool serves this purpose quite nicely. All the best.