Archnot-Boltz

Hey Dermot,

I greatly appreciate that information and will avail myself of the information that you've so kindly provided.

Stay safe & healthy,

Brad

Thanks Lew, I'll have to see if I have that on my home computer. Seems like all the older versions should be available on Chief's website for occasions like this. In hindsight I guess I should have left all the old version on my computer and I think Chief should have provided guidance in this regard.-BB

On 3/2/2020 at 6:32 PM, Dermot said:

I believe Joe and others are suggesting that you do a "save as" so that you do not write over the original file.  This does not mean that the new file can be opened in the older version.

 

Just as an FYI, the program will automatically create a copy of the original file and save it in your archives folder when you try to save it in the newer version.  If you ever accidentally open a file from an older version and then hit "save" you should get a message telling you that the program made this copy and where it saved it.  

 

 

Thanks Dermot, I never noticed that nice feature in the Warning.  I always do a save as to preserve the Original but it's nice to know Chief has our back.

Also, I do wish that Chief would give us the ability open an old drawing, especially the pre X-versions with .pl1, .pl2 file extentensions without having to load or keep an old version active in order to bring that drawing file forward. I just got stymied trying to open up and look at an old drawing from 1998. I have all of my old versions in their original boxes back to Chief '97 but I don't think they will load on a windows 7 or 10 computer.

If Chief could give us a utility that would at least allow us to open and save an old plan file as a PDF ( I currently save a pdf copy of all of my projects for archival reference purposes) that would be huge. Of course, a utility that would allow me to open an old file and save as a current and usable file would be better still.

thanks,

BB

48 minutes ago, Ridge_Runner said:

I believe you can only make a custom toolbar and add it to that or an existing one. You can then dock it at the bottom as Mick has done above. You can't add tools to the CA "edit toolbar" as far as I know.

Yes, as I found out when I tried it. No big, as I'm fine with the new tool and icon etc. thanks bB

4 hours ago, Kbird1 said:

 

You can still add it back if you prefer the Icon , you can even make a Custom Copy Toolbar , with CUT and paste Hold etc etc included.

 

M.

 

No, I'm ok since finding the new icon and way that it works. I did locate the old Icon when I went into my customize tool bars, but couldn't figure out how to drag it into the bottom tool bar area.

Thanks Dermot, I was having a conniption seeing that tool absent from my copy toolbar and no place to drag the icon. I didn't see any mention of this feature improvement/change in the "What's New Video".-

bB

16 hours ago, glennw said:

Brad,

You are really making it hard for yourself and looking for reasons (that aren't there) to make it difficult!

Glenn,

not trying to be difficult at all, just a personal observation and take on metric vs imperial. No argument just the perspective of an older school designer about the conversion from imperial to metric that the United States was never able to completely institute or integrate. When I find a product that has metric dimensions I just have to make mental conversions to imperial dimensions or use my Construction Master Pro. (similar to what a semi-bilingual person might do when speaking his non-native language because he thinks in his native language and has to mentally convert into the 2nd language if not fluent in it). I'm done and sorry for detracting from the topic. BB

2 hours ago, Joe_Carrick said:

Brad,

 

I think you'll find that metric countries generally don't use our dimensions for lumber, etc.

Their sizes are rounded to more even mm and the products are manufactured to those sizes.

 

Glenn could give you examples of their standard stud and plywood sizes.

Probably more conducive to modular construction too. Minimum "Going" is 240 MM for normal stairs which is an interesting construction term that I've never heard.

I could see that on Glenn's stair riser chart and obviously, once you become accustomed to something it becomes second nature and I'm sure that the 1/16's, 1/8th increments, 24", 16" centers etc would drive them bonkers. Although, we use decimal feet when doing grades and our engineer's scales on site plans. Fortunately, we drive on the right side of the road and don't pay in pounds and quid for a pound of squid! -Chilly in Philly (actually Reading but it didn't flow).  

Joe,

I was being glib and also justifying why Americans (including myself) were/are resistant to adopting metric, especially for construction. Since an inch = 25.4 MM (2.54 CM), an 8' stud would be 2438.4 MM or 24.384 CM (which I can't wrap my visual head around) for it me would be easier to visualize it physically as approx. 2.5 meters.

I imagine the reverse would be true for those brought up using metric. I can see using it for industrial, machine and product design because of the scale of smaller parts and you don't have to deal with fractions.

But, how do you get your head around a 7" Riser designated as 177.8 MM or a Flr to Flr Dimension of 2720.97 MM (8'-11 1/8")? My dinosaur brain doesn't like going there. Kind of like paying 40 pesos for a cup of java or 382 pesos for a Mr Coffee!

12 hours ago, glennw said:

This is our stair regulations in Oz.

Table 3.9.1.1 Riser and going dimensions (mm)

Stair type	Riser (R)		Going (G)		Slope relationship
	(see Open link in same pageFigure 3.9.1.4 below)		(see Open link in same pageFigure 3.9.1.4 below)		(2R+G)
	Max	Min	Max	Min	Max	Min
Stairs (other than spiral)	190	115	355	240	700	550
Spiral	220	140	370	210	680	590

What language is this in?!!!? Oy!! (as much as they attempted to convert us in school back in the '70's or '80's, I could never wrap my head around metric's larger numbers, eg 1"= 25.4 MM or 2.5 CM.). The most I can handle and relate to is that a meter (39.375") is a bit larger than a yard (36") or from the Virginia Slims' cigarette commercials: "Just a silly millimeter longer 101's!" (so a typ. cig is 100 MM or 4").  

And of course, our government's attempt back then to convert to metric was a complete failure.-bB

3 hours ago, Joe_Carrick said:

I was taught that 2R+T = 25" for best comfort.  Actually a range of 24"-26" is acceptable

• 6" R & 13" T
• 6.5" R & 12" T
• 7" R & 11" T
• 7.5" R & 10" T

This formula pretty much always works.  For metric you would just substitute 600 mm or a range of 575-625 mm

You're right, I couldn't remember that formula from school. Thanks

I remember the 7-11 rule and now the alternate formula of Rise + Run = 17.5 from a builder I worked for in 1976. Good stuff, Joe. bB

PA uses IRC 2015 with PA UCC (Uniform Construction Code) modifications which per Mr Hood, allows 8.25" max risers. PA also repealed Sprinkler requirements for single family and two family detached dwellings (per the various builder's associations lobby). IRC 2015 allows 7.75" max risers.

When I started in the 70's the rule of thumb for comfortable stairs was 7/11 = 18" (I think) so that a stair with 4" risers would work best with 14" treads. 8" Riser would be most comfortable with 10" treads and so forth. Always made sense.

 https://www.designevolutions.com/house-plans-questions/does-my-state-require-house-plans-to-be-stamped-by-a-licensed-architect/ this site gives a state by state list of residential design requirements for architectural stamped drawings. Apparently, New York State is a "prick" in regards to residential design! (sucks to be Lew. -hey Lew!).

In PA you don't need a license for single and two family dwellings not more than 3-stories in hgt plus accessory structures and farm utility structures. We need a professional's stamp on most commercial and apartments etc. I have an engineer (PE) stamp my drawings when necessary which includes any residential details(structrural, electrical or mechanical) that don't fall under the prescriptive code language in the IRC 2015.

Forgot attachment.

17 hours ago, Ins0mnia said:

This is an issue I've been fighting with for a while, maybe someone has an answer.  In chief architect Premier, when moving walls on some plans, the walls never snap to a whole inch.  For instance, The dimension of a room is 10'6 7/16.  I don't want it to be 7/16".  I need it to be 10'6, but it never allows me to move it to the whole inch, every move includes 1/6ths of an inch.  Using Cntrl lets me free move the wall, but I really just need it to snap to whole inches, and not some fraction thereof.  It's one of the more frustrating issues of chief architect.  I like being able to move the wall by fractions of an inch if necessary, but I need it to allow me to snap to a whole number.

My Snap Grid is set at 1" by Default- see attached DBX image. As you can see, it's also Turned Off and maybe mine is snapping to something different?

On 12/2/2019 at 5:23 PM, CapeBuff said:

Hello,

I am contemplating whether or not I should start a residential design business using CA. I do not have a degree, but I do have 30 years of experience estimating for the concrete foundation and flatwork trades. I have generated over 6,000 estimates for both residential (90%) and commercial (10%) projects using Autodesk Design Review (read-only software, but it utilizes commands in much the same way as CA).Do you currently own a Chief License? I learned the initial basics by purchasing a Demo Disk with the Manual for $25 back in 1997 (I think they still have a Free Demo Download?

I have 2-3 hours daily that I could devote to learning CA (Dan Baumann courses...???) for however long it takes to become proficient (I'm in no hurry, but would hope to be at that point within 3 years....realistic?). You could easily be proficient in 6 months depending on your CAD and drafting aptitude. I would go to a 3 day Beginner's sponsored by Chief and then maybe find someone local or via internet (Michael etc) for periodic help per hour. My only concern is calculating design loads (you can learn span tables and there are programs that you could learn: BeamCheck, I-Struct (Weyerhauser-free), I do not have the necessary education to perform that task. So.... I was hoping to get some advice from the experts, do I need to get an architectural degree An architecture degree from an accredited school will take 5 years plus at least 3 years of documented apprenticeship with an architectural firm in order to qualify for testing for your license with(not required for business in my state) so that I can calculate/place loads? Is there software available that will do the calculating (I'm not opposed to getting a degree, I'm just looking at any and all possibilities)? I was told by a few people that they just send it to the lumber yard for calculations, but then wouldn't you be required to redraw/revise once you have that information (that would seem counterproductive to me...)? What do you do?? If you feel deficient regarding your drafting skills, I would recommend a drafting course at a community college or local vo-tech facility and that would give you a good base to add to your work experience.

Any advice would be greatly appreciated!!

Thank you

Otherwise, sounds like something you would be able to do. Good luck. -Brad

+1, +1.

13 hours ago, Chopsaw said:

 

Glenn,  I am currently working on an X10 plan file and could not figure out what you were describing as X10 reports flat measure.

 

This is a new feature in X11 ! 

Dudes, thanks for that valuable tidbit! Very cool. I've been using framing member lengths for a quick rake dimension. -bB

Look up Malcolm Wells, he wrote book called Underground Designs circa 1981. He was a famous proponent of Underground Architecture. What you refused to build was pretty much just a bermed foundation or walk-out basement without the house. I would have suggested designing a one or two bedroom ranch layout and put attic floor trusses for the future upper floor with some strategic dormer(s) or egress skylights. Plenty of  wall in the gable ends for windows and if oriented properly could have created a passive solar design. You can't fault a person for wanting an inexpensive upfront solution for their living situation.-bb

Thanks Bill.-bB

You will have to do just what you would do in the real world- allow for the different wall thickness of the foundation. Chief won't automatically do that for you. BB

The problem with floors is you can't re-frame just one section (unless you re-draw each floor member of that section manually). Chief only allows you to re-frame the entire floor which screws up any customizing that you've done with the framing layout. Makes additions and remodels more difficult. bB

Hey Chief,

thanks for restoring the lost hatch patterns. You have Hatch, Vertical and Hatch (no designation) is for horizontal hatch which is easy enough to remember would be better if labeled Hatch, Horizontal. No big. bB

You guys give me a brain ache! Memory's too short for short cuts. BB