robdyck

You may already know this but I'll mention it anyway. Have you created a new material list after removing the foundation? If I remember correctly, in X15, a material list is a snapshot in time...it can't update itself with changes to the model. I don't use X15 anymore, but here's the output I get for the Flooring category:

No, not really. You can update a single layer set in your template from any plan file. For example, if the plan I'm currently working on has some modifications to just one layer set that I'd like to implement across multiple plans, I could: Open my template plan and import this layer set and then save it as my template plan Open any existing (legacy) plan file and import just this new layer set from the template plan or from the plan file that was modified. If keeping track of this newly modified plan is difficult to remember, simply save it to wherever I keep my Chief default files and give it an obvious name for simple identification.

Oh just you wait! There will be more!

The export options for various settings is gone. Think of it like this: A plan file contains the settings and instead of using the old export function, you could just save a copy of a plan file for the purpose of using to pull settings from for other plans...using the Import tools. So instead of looking for the plan file you'd like to pull settings from, just copy your preferred plan file and if it's only use is for pulling layer sets, then name it something specific. For universal changes, the best practice would be to constantly keep your template plan up to date. Then, when opening Legacy plans, you could pull settings from your template plan.

Not using an auto frame function. You can frame walls on a per wall basis, but not openings. Some crafty work with copy / paste-in-place of the existing framing combined with a rebuild and deletion operations may work, but by that time it's probably easier to make manual adjustments.

No trick...labels can be set to show or hide on a per camera basis. In a section or elevation view, just select the windows that you do NOT want to have their label showing. In the Label tab, check 'Hide in this View'. This assumes the labels layer is on. So you have an override to hide labels as needed. The inverse function does not work (that is 'show label' while the layer is off).

Glad to help Keith!

The same principle applies to appliances added to cabinets. If you want things separated for simpler control, place them as standalone items. Headscratcher...a sink gets 'locked' but a faucet doesn't. I've always wondered: Who does this make sense to? Around here the cabinet companies don't provide the sink, they just need to know what type of sink will be installed. But I digress...

The label control issue is because when a sink is placed into a cabinet, you immediately lose some control. If you single-click the cabinet and move the label you will see that the cabinet label and sink label are locked together despite being on separate layers and generated from separate schedules. If you turn off the cabinet labels layer, the fixture label relocates to the cabinet label position and can only be moved by the cabinet. This is one (of many) drawbacks of Chief's method of combining items that are placed into cabinets. It would be much better if Chief allowed auto placement of these items but treated them more like an architectural block than a semi-single component. The solution for more control is to add the sink as a standalone fixture. You could edit the existing sink to remove it from being included in the schedule while still keeping it in the cabinet. Then place the sink as a stand alone fixture and let it be buried or move it into the correct position manually. This will give you separate label control.

That sounds like a layer that is locked. But you've probably checked that. It may be a good idea to post the plan for this one. If you don't want to post it here, you can share a link with me by using a personal message. I'll take a look and try to help.

You may some useful help in this topic:

For the foundation wall, you'd need to use a pony wall (4" concrete wall on 8" concrete wall). If that is a walkout foundation that is already using a pony wall (2x6 wall on concrete wall), then you're in a bit of a pickle as you can't stack 3 wall types in a single pony wall. But...you still have a couple of options: Use the 4" concrete wall and make the corrections manually using CAD tools (plan views, section views, details,etc) use the 8" concrete wall and add a wall cap (4"x8") that splits the pony wall. This can represent the upper portion of the foundation wall. Some CAD cleanup will be needed in section views and maybe in elevation views.

I'd suggest using the lites for the mullions and drawing the grilles in manually using the molding tool (in section or elevation view of course). I would then make an architectural block of those moldings. Don't try to load them as custom muntins...probably won't work well and will end up being a waste of time.

The loose bricks are a bit more difficult to model as Chief doesn't have an earthquake feature! For those, you'd need to place them manually.

A pony wall and wall cap would work for the central stub wall portion. For the post and cap, a couple of 3d solids are the fastest, although I'd convert the 2 objects to a symbol with stretch planes so that it can be used for any height and width of column. It's pretty easy to figure out the width and depth by counting bricks.

I did a plan the other day with phone jacks. For real! I like your general note idea.

@JAWRIGHT Are these close? https://3dwarehouse.sketchup.com/by/FineHouse#models https://3dwarehouse.sketchup.com/model/d370f1c43d77c976e79d181dec16bca/B-Tuscan-Columns-Round-Smooth As far as creating HB&G posts, that's pretty simple on an as needed basis. Simply trace the product drawing at the correct scale and use it as a molding profile on a circle or square polyline converted to a molding. Obviously this wouldn't work for carved capitals.

Changing the Options>Options to Other did the trick. Thanks! Good question! I don't like it because what is produced is wrong for what I need and can't be adjusted. I have my own architectural blocks with a dishwasher cabinet and a dishwasher that includes a top 3/4" panel directly under the countertop. This can help simplify dishwasher installation on site when using quartz countertops. So in other words, what Chief produced was wrong before and it's still wrong now. I also have blocks that include DW cabinets designed to be at the end of a run. If I want a different dishwasher, that's a simple replacement...with the exception of adjusting the label to read 'DW' of course. But I digress...and I could go on about the ridiculous default labelling of appliances and fixtures. And the lack of a space at the back of dishwashers making it more difficult to place them. Maybe everywhere else they slam a dishwasher back until it hits drywall. We don't do that around here.

Is there any setting in X17 to turn off the automatic generation of a countertop over a dishwasher?

Hi Michael, the tool you're looking for is actually an import tool. Go to File>Import>Import Settings From Plan/Layout. This tool has plenty of options and allows you to select only what you need. It's a very handy tool!

This is a problem and I wouldn't be surprised if Chief has NOT received very many request for adjustment. Let's blitz them with bug reports!

This is somewhat dependent on a couple of variables: are you just looking for a seamless transition at the roof eave to wall junction as it relates to modelling these surfaces in Chief Architect? are you questioning how the transition will be constructed in real life and would like your Chief Architect model to at least be reasonably representative of that? are you designing a cladding transition or will you be following the installation specifications of any specific material? Are your specifying material or is the builder going to specify material? In other words are your plans going to be very specific or more general in nature? This is a simple example of a method I've used, simply following a snap lock metal roofing installation manual. No wall cladding is shown in their detail...it can be assumed. As you can see, this method is not 'seamless', but is minimal.

Aside from different editing capabilities and other properties, the main difference is that it is...different than standard text. Specifically when it comes to the text box size issue, this is a Rich Text problem, not a standard text problem.