MarkMc

I"ve also seen that in this class MSI have good heat dissipation. Note that similar prices on these can be had at HIDevolution with the added benefit of more extensive customization-change RAM, SSD, thermal options and more models. (FWIW they still list Back Friday deals that were to expire yesterday-and sing up to the forums at notebook review they offer a discount for the forum last I knew-though that could have been on the EVoc series only?)

Did you save the section view camera?

Paste into a new plan and convert to symbol- save the plan for editing in the future- won't show in material list or framing schedule but can cheat having both in plan- I see Eric had the same idea.

attached- interior doors- moved up 1/16", exterior doors- no solution-add stair or landing which hides it. Mulled doors.plan

Depends on -is it primary machine for all day use= as much power as you can afford. (3yr old Sager listed in signature-desktop proecessor- new would be 9700k with a 1080 and as much else as I could afford) Secondary for client visits = lighter, little less power and heat dissipation good enough for 2 hrs of moderate use-(8750H with a 1060) I usually take the Sager but have used the Spectre if work is light weight but rely more on ready done drawings/pdf/images with that. Secondary for site work only = light and portable suitable for just roughing in plans ( I use the Spectre for this often running X9) Doing lots of renderings? ray trace = more processor, or PBR = more video card or just standard views? In most cases the first thing I try to find out is how well a machine handles heat, the better ti does the longer it can be used without throttling. I'm also a fan of SSDs but prefer to have checked and see no advantage of having really big ones for storage but have found that having two smaller ones in Raid 0 appears to speed up undo (but that is only available in upper end machines) I've gotten fond of a couple of dealers that specialize in gaming machines- the current Sager was from Xoticpc, my next one will come from Hidevolution. Both have people you can talk with though neither knows much about Chief. Being on my second Sager and third laptop using Chief I have a bit of a base line to talk with them about. I also research machines on NotebookReview.com. forums. Lot of gamers so some information is not relevant, but a little digging finds heat issues and oddities not in typical reviews.

I deal with this in a variety of ways. Most often I'm converting the pdf to dwg if at all possible-easier to scale and lower impact on performance. Sometimes I convert pdf to PNG so I can use the maintain aspect ratio-again lower impact on performance than a pdf. The last option is to measure a known distance in the pdf prior to import which give me a ratio to work with. I do this in Bluebeam but think there are other programs that can do that? And yes having aspect ration available for PDFs would be nice

Guessing that you might mean extended stiles? Cabinet hacks-clips, stiles, sides and interiors

What I don't understand is having a filler on a drawer? On a door do you mean a center batten?

To make it work auto as you have you need to turn off automatic fillers. Honest I'd be doing it some other way. What depends on how you want to deal with schedules and how you want them shown in plan. Attached zip file has your plan with autofillers turned off-gables show up immediately. Thing is that gets awfully fussy -I personally never use auto filler (I don't use much auto anything on cabinets to tell the truth-but I'm a bit of a PIA). Attached zip has a second plan with some options to get panels without using auto panels. I'd be using a cabinet to make the gables myself-they could be included in schedule, show up in floor plan, can block those to a cabinet and store block in library then use replace from (reflect as needed) then unblock and resize the actual cabinet. With any YMMV. Need an image or plan of what you mean by that- I have not run into that naming but it's likely I have done that modification along the way. panel options.zip

Your default side is set to Auto Finished It needs to be set to Auto paneled. cabinet auto panel plan.plan

Are your cabinet sides set to "auto panel" in defaults or the DBX? Other than that post the plan, screen shot does not solve issue

What is selected for the panel type? only thing I can think of. Post the plan and I'll take a look- the only glitch I know of with that is that sometimes they show up when they should not.

I recently got a BenQ 27" QHD- I was after flicker free and did not want to go full 4K. In your price range, decent response time for an IPS. I'm happy. https://www.benq.com/en-us/monitor/designer/pd2700q.html Larger - a few folks are using 4K TVs -saw mention of TCL brand, price is right, so I went and got one to use for TV .

I stand corrected, thought that there was a simpler way but had been messing with it the other day and didn't find it so spit out an old hack. Specify in accessories for default to be full size and full overlay, then for any cabinet with a gable specify the side to be auto paneled. You still have to do it for any cabinet that needs it so no there is no fully automatic way to do it. Edit strike that last part-all I can say is I'd just woken up.

Custom door symbol- set width to what you need, set stretch planes outside the width, offset origin, make default for side panels in DBX. If I remember correctly you will need a left and a right in which case it's a bit easier to add one or the other to the library to use replace from. Oh and the left and right tend to be opposite of how they appear in the symbol dbx.

Textures use an image file, in the case of tiles the grout lines are part of the image so they can't be removed. If you alter the size of the texture ALL of it will resize so grout lines will change in proportion. Borders also present the issue of texture direction which is set based on Cartesian coordinates of the plan-you would need the border texture to change direction on two sides. The best ways I've found to deal with borders are either using polyline solids (often converted to a symbol) or material regions. Then us multiple copy or transform replicate. Attached is a plan with both-floor done with material region and borders done with multiple material regions that were copied to be 1/32 apart (change number style to decimal when doing that). The floor is set to be just a tad thinner than the border. The other is made of symbols that were created from psolids blocked together (happens to be one I'm working on for someone now) I eventually converted that one to a single symbol to place on a wall, Borders.plan

While I don't really know my hunch is that the problem with that symbol is stretch plane and size were altered in plan and layout was added to the library from there. I've run into issues when doing that instead of using convert to new symbol.

I see that and on this computer I get the same thing as you do. Now with that placed in plan- copy it in the X direction, select the second one and generate a block. It will no longer match the first one. Odd thing-only difference on the other computer I copied the entire partition folder to my user folder-don't think that I changed anything bounding boxes or blocks but they were different. Will check that machine again later or tomorrow but duty calls once again.

There may be another way since I don't do a lot of framing in Chief and I don't know for sure if this works in X7 but.. this was done with a single floor so beam was placed on same floor as ceiling framing- after placing lock depth and move beam to correct height set joists to butt in default or in framing DBX, build framing, draw line along beam and extend it out past on each side, select line and then the trim tool-use fence and sticky mode likely helps (also helps to lock the beam layer first) then trim joists on one side, add second line or move the first one and repeat trim on second run of joists.

Figured it out- was not pahying enough attention. The problem is the depth of the bounding box does not take the open door into account. Oddly when I made a new symbol from the old one it still set the box dimension incorrectly. Attached is ADA right symbols that work- dropped the CAD block into a plan, measured that and used that dimension for the Y of the bounding box, Just before I posted this I added stretch planes to one copied it to the far left and reszied all planes, then generated block. It will resize correctly on the hinge side now if you want that panel wider (I'd still add a leg though) That one isn't in the images. Ignore the pic that has no stretch planes-oops Change bounding box.plan

Well there is something with ADA sumbol- I'd been using the standard, which is the one that has the problem with hinges you mentioned. The ADA appears to have been made in an odd way-since if I change the stretch plane to 36" it automatically resizes. If the stretch plane were defined when the symbol was made it should not change the size of the object. It doesn't behave in a way I'm familiar with- I set guidelines on plan and then some moldings for 3D views to judge what is going on. Also added the ones I worked with earlier-those resize correctly with the OOB stretch plane. Don't know but being called away now. It may need stretch planes, or I might try setting it without stretch planes in a new blank plan, save as symbol and set with a single stretch plane. Gotta go or I'm on the couch... adjusted.zip

Nothing wrong with the symbol really, the hinge tabs are as wide as the panel the door is attached to. I'd guess that's how they'd be IRL and that a wider panel would require a leg to the floor.

did you re generate the 2D block? I found that if I messed with it much the blocks did not generate correctly OTOH the OOB setting of '-36" works.

Deeper or taller were not a problem for me, only wider on hinge side. Which one(s) are a problem?

The hinges on the hinge side extend so that there is not a way to avoid having them within a stretch plain. The only way to resize those would be on the non hinge side. The only alternative would be to customize the symbol or create a new one which I think is easier in this case.