KristjanM

Even if I apply a non formatted macro (eg. ABOVE GRADE has a value of %area%), I do not get a total. It would seem the custom field is not stored as a number.

I have a number of slabs from which I draw data. I have two custom object fields which have a macro definition. The area column of the schedule provides a total. The custom object fields do not even though they are using the same area number (a formatted version). This would lead me to think that a custom object field cannot be a number (float or integer) but rather is defined as a string. Correct? Can I get a total from a custom object field? Do I need to convert the custom object string to a float?

Not to sidetrack the original post but here's my two cents on the terminology. Carpenter and superintendent for 35 years. Always called them lookouts. Designer for the last 10 years. Always called them lookouts. BC and Ontario building codes call them lookouts. Francis Ching (look him up) calls them lookouts. Good enough for me. The builders I work with know what I'm talking about.

Okay, more good info. My ruby syntax knowledge is rather primitive. I will play around with this. Thanks.

Okay, thanks to all for your help. 1st issue - don't type sqft when you need sqrt. 2nd issue - sqrt doesn't work in a text box but does work in the ruby console. So...need to make a macro. Thanks again.

Sorry, typed sqft not sqrt !!

Tried in the Ruby console (should return 2) - > Math.sqft(4) => Ruby NoMethodError: undefined method `sqft' for Math:Module Stack Trace: from eval:10:in `eval' from eval:10:in `block (2 levels) in <main>' from eval:4:in `loop' from eval:4:in `block in <main>'

Can I use math.sqrt() in the macro? I tried it in the ruby console and it didn't work.

I commonly do a quick calculation for pad footing sizes for estimating purposes. If an engineer is involved, he/she will do the calculations. I've created a text box which gives me the area, loads and footing size in square feet. I would like to get the square root of the footing area and multiply by 12 to give me the footing edge size in inches (assuming the pad is square). I've tried various things such as sqrt() or math.sqrt() both in the text box and in the ruby console but can't generate a correct result. Can you do math functions in a text box? Do I have to call an actual macro. What is the right syntax?

Perfect. That fixed it. Don't know why I didn't see that. Thank you.

As well as drawing work, I also do energy analysis. I have 3D solids which I use to generate information. The solid fills are in different colours to distinguish them. In one instance I have an object completely over another. Since the labels appear to be always in black, the reference is not clear. I've put the 3d solids on their own layer with a specific colour but this colour does not transfer to the label. Is there a way to achieve this or does this question need to go to the suggestion thread?

Okay... Entered 1in = 500in and that worked. Don't know why that never occurred to me. Tunnel vision. Thanks for the suggestions.

I am sending a site plan to layout and can't adjust the box scale smaller than 1/32" = 1'-0". Never come up against this problem before. What I actually need Is to have the scale at 1/42" = 1'-0" which would be the equivalent of 1:500 in metric.

Ryan, That is a good suggestion and certainly gives a good result. My goal really is to reduce the need for manual tweaking for general things. A work in progress.

Yes that works although there is an unwanted leading 0 in numbers above 9. ie. W208,W209, W2010, W2011. Thanks for the tip. I will have to play around some more. As great as the improvements in X15 are, I could do with much better flexibility in schedules for a start..

Just tried something else. I have a custom field - Window #. I defined this as %schedule_number%. For example - window labeled as W205 on the plan view reports as W105 on the schedule. In object properties, schedule number is W205. Just seems like a glitch to me.

I really like to have my window (or door) number represent what floor the object is on. I know I can do this manually but would like to use CA's numbering capabilities. I have seen a number of posts with regard to this but none provide a good solution. I also am aware that I can just add the floor number field to the schedule. So... using floor_number as a macro reference in the Schedule Number Prefix field, I can get the window number to display correctly on a plan view. On floor 1, I get numbers stating with 1. On floor 2, I get numbers starting with 2. However, the window schedule does not display the correct numbers. If I use the ObjectProperties macro, the floor numbers are correct. A glitch or what?? Window Numbering.plan

If the general framing member trick doesn't work for you, this is what I have done. Make 4 textures - 1) oriented horizontal, 2) oriented vertical, 3) oriented at 45 deg, 4) oriented at -45 deg. Apply appropriately to each part of the brace. A little bit of effort but it works.

Back in 1974 when I started as a carpenter, we used 2x4's. At some point the building code changed and we went to 2x6's. It was only to accommodate R20 batts in the walls due to the change in insulation requirements. We could also go to 24" oc for the 2x6's as 16" oc wasn't needed for any structural reason. 2x4's are entirely okay. The only thing you have to satisfy is the insulation requirements.

Can you not use "Edit Wall Layer Intersections" ?

Different energy evaluations require different square footages. Passive house would deduct the interior partition area from the ceiling area. If I'm using Hot 2000 (I'm in Canada), the wall partitions are not deducted. Maybe Chief should allow for options with the calculations.

In Autocad, you use colors to represent line width. Makes sense when you're doing it.

If you indeed get to keep the most current version as per the SSA, that would be great.

Re: The cost To purchase a copy of Chief with SSA for 5 years would give you a cost for 5 years of $5,937. For 5 years of subscription (1 year at 1,995 plus 4 years at 2,375), the cost is $11,495. Something wrong with this scenario.

I think this is a terrible change from Chief. This does nothing for the user and only benefits Chief. I left Revit exactly due to the implementation of the subscription model. With Softplan, if you own a version and pay their version of the SSA, you get the updates as they come out. However you don't own the new version and if you quit the SSA, you only have rights to your original version. So, a possible scenario. You create a project in Version 16 (you own Version 14) and decide that you no longer need the SSA updates. You can no longer use Version 16 and can't open any projects created with it. This is exactly what happens with Softplan. I would like to hear Chief's explanation about what version of the software one is actually going to own.