robdyck

@mtldesigns I have a library of about 120 3d details and I can easily create more. 3d details is almost all I use. I can create them for you on an as-needed basis. I can provide just the detail, or the detail with the plan file. I'll also sell my 3d detail plan files and library for those who are interested. I'm always available to give a bit of a demo and show you what I have and how you can modify it. As a starting point, my 3d detail plans could save you about 200 hours, plus they come with a lot of great materials.

I have my framing set to use a solid fill, layer color, 88% transparent. Simple and it works well for colored working views and b&w printed views.

Poche...useless until it fills an attic.

Unfortunately this won't work because the CSV file isn't using point data. For a CSV file to work, you need x,y,z coordinates for each point. When you only have a pdf there really won't be any super quick way to model the terrain, but I can offer a bit of advice. I'd start by importing the pdf and aligning it. I like to draw a transparent cad mask over top of it to soften it's visual effect. I'd recommend placing elevation points around the perimeter of the property using the pdf as a tracing guide, starting with the 5' increment points only. Then build the terrain and visually compare the generated contour lines. Draw some CAD grid lines to evenly divide the property and repeat that process using elevation points. Don't over do it! Start with a center grid line, and then keep 'halving' those spaces as needed. Using your grid lines as a reference for placing elevation points, compare Chief's contours to the survey plan. Add elevation points on your grid lines to match up with the survey primary contours. Fill in the 'blanks' with more elevation points, on your grid, aligning with the survey secondary contours only where it is clearly needed. Use elevation polylines or splines to replicate the primary contours ONLY in a smaller area around where the buildings are located. Use a CAD polyline around the building so you can cleanly control the start and end of the elevation lines. Experiment by making the CAD polyline around the buildings, say 50' larger all the way around. Increase only there is an obvious need or benefit. There's probably no need for elevation lines for the entire property, plus Chief will slow down to be unusable. Make sure elevation lines do not end too close to your own elevation points, just to avoid conflicting data.

Email sent!

Perhaps it could be as simple as turning off the 3d Patterns layer for the layer set used in the view with the schedule? Just a thought...

Yes, all you need to do is apply some math within that macro. Better yet would be to use the Ruby console in order to find additional data for that specific object.

If you post your plan file, someone will be able to provide you with the specific solution. If posting your plan file publicly doesn't work for you, you could always consider paid consultation where you have the benefit of confidential communication. Either way, you'll get specific solutions in a very timely fashion. Help on the forum is free, but you may be surprised at how much you can learn or how many problems can be addressed in a 30-60 minute consultation.

This might be worth a one-on-one conversation with a consultant. I only use live section views with minimal additions of cad items for section views. This suggests to me that you would probable benefit by sharing your files with an expert and discussing solutions to those issues. It could be as simple as layer management, or more complex relating to the actual model. Feel free to send me a PM if you'd like to explore that. Alternatively, for the purpose of this forum, it would be best if you post your plan or at least good images of your sections views with very clear descriptions of what you don't like and the kind of improvements you'd like to see.

During the Beta, I pointed out this unfortunate complication of something that was otherwise as simple as could be. I requested at least an option to generate the cad items on a single layer as in X15. The short answer is No, you are now stuck with multiple layers to manage for section views that use the Auto Detail tool. It might be a good idea to express your thoughts directly to Chief, perhaps additional voices can bring back an option for one of the few things that was still simple! For section views, I always kept my default cad layer as the color red until all cleanup and adjustment were finished. This gave me a clean and simple visual cue as to where I needed to add or edit cad detailing. After my final review, I simply adjusted the layer color to black, just before printing. Visually this process helped me 'see' where I needed to work as opposed to 'looking' for those same areas.

@westvale @buzzsaw204 The default lighting for your camera is probably the sun, set to follow the camera. Open the 'Adjust Sunlight' dialog. Uncheck 'Sun Follows Camera'. Use the sliders to adjust the sunlight direction until you're happy with the effect. A tilt angle of -90 degrees will move the sunlight high enough that your view will have fairly even lighting without the light spot.

Without seeing one of your finished plan sets or chatting with you about your visual preferences, I'm pretty sure there are other techniques that would achieve what you're after and possibly even add some improvements you might not have thought of. You could always send me a PM if you'd like to discuss this further and aren't interested in posting a plan on the forum.

Yes, that would do it.

If the exterior layers are the same and aligned, the material should blend seamlessly. Have you carefully checked the alignment and materials? I can take a look quickly if you post your plan file or a download link to the plan file. Remember, the file must be closed when sending the file.

Glad to help!

I think the answer to this is going to be unique to each individual. People work differently and projects are unique as well. I frequently need to customize a layer set in order to properly display some unique condition. And the size of a building can change through the design phase, meaning you might not know the drawing scale until design is mostly complete. Not to mention it can change after completion, like when the client asks for a 4-car garage at a 45 degree angle to the house...after the drawings are done. It happens and it's work to deal with it, no matter how you're set up. Combine those issues and that means that the multiplication of layer sets can be very time consuming to maintain. Especially when you consider that you may need to update a template plan annually for each new version of Chief. Personally, I found it simpler to update a layer set on the fly when necessary. If my building grows too big for my paper and I'm forced to move from 1/4" scale to 3/16" scale, I simply adjust. It can be as simple as selecting all the dimensions on a floor plan and changing the dimension default that they use. Or editing a layer set by selecting all layers based on text style and changing the text style to the desired scaled version. Rather than multiple layer sets for each drawing type at each possible scale, I just adjust the layer set. I keep a variety of dimensions and text styles, but I'm not interested in maintaining 40 or 50 SVPS and default sets and layer sets. I choose a quick pivot on an as-needed basis over trying to maintain multiple options that often need to be edited to suit a particular project anyways. The important thing is to find the method that's fastest and most repeatable and reliable for you.

or for bigger ones

You'll need to make quite a few adjustments: Set the clerestory window elevation reference to 'Absolute' reset the dormer walls to use default top & bottom heights set the dormer walls to 'gable' - NOT knee walls Create an 'Open Below' room (exterior walls > not attic walls, uncheck 'No Room Definition, check connections at each end, make dormer walls one continuous wall)

Check out the 'Austin' sample plan.

You won't be able to replace that c-channel in the wall dbx. If you want to model a z-channel, you'll need to add them manually.

There's nothing fun about this but I'd probably consider making a CAD detail out of those wall hatches. The cleanup is pretty quick, although not live.

This is the solution. This 'transparent' edge effect is quite common for some materials with a normal map. A color matched surface underneath is the solution. If you don't want to add a roof underlayment layer, you can make the OSB layer black, but the underlayment makes more sense. This same approach can be used to solve similar display issues for certain board & batten types of materials as well as for some tile textures with normal maps.

Hi Jim, I'm not getting those results UNLESS the bottom of the window is in the space occupied by the finish flooring. 1/8" above the finish flooring should bring it back.

to reproduce the wall layering and configuration, you will need to break a wall and use a different wall type. Friendly reminder to keep in mind that you won't be able to make Chief conform to pre-existing notions based on other software. Sometimes, your methods will need to conform to the functions of Chief Architect