Archnot-Boltz

I never understood the need for getting a new Dongle with every version upgrade. As Chief is doing currently, why couldn't they upgrade your hardware lock thru the computer the same as they do with the software check. Would only have to be done at each version upgrade and would allow that dongle to open and operate all previous versions. As it currently stands, I could give all of my old dongles to other people along with my manuals and program disks and they could be simultaneously using v7, 8, 9, 9.5, 10, x1-x5 while I plug away on x9. If the dongles were made backward compatible, it would be a whole lot easier to reference and bring drawings forward to the new version when needed. Personally, I would like to see a tool that would automatically bring all previous versions forward at each version upgrade. Kind of like migrating libraries. But what do I know? Just a thought and maybe not doable or valid.-bB

Still no relief thus far (X9) for these inadequate dimension tool snaps. Even with Grid turned off, Chief's dims will locate phantom points before snapping (if you're lucky) to relevant points in an elevation or section view (also note the PITA in that I can only make a CAD line parallel to a roof plane in a section view where the roof plane is cut but not in a regular elevation view that does not cut the roof plane). In my attached image example, I was not able to get a dimension to snap to my 9.25" beam (which is a framing item and I have my dims set to locate framing sides & centers). The image shows the proper 9 1/4" value only because I snapped the dim to the text arrow leader tip and then snapped the arrow leader to the bottom corner of the beam (how's that for a forkin' convoluted work-a-round time waster?). All other attempts to locate the bottom corner of said beam resulted in the dim locating the carriage bolts or the text arrow leader lines (and I have locate text- turned off in my dim settings) or just shooting off into space. Please fix this, Chief. This brings up the other ongoing issue with dimensions and the way Chief puts text and associated leader line arrows on the same layer but the text leader lines behave as CAD lines and cause all kinds of jumping around when moving nearby objects or CAD items. Same for the Bearing Line tool which I've had jump out of parallel because they followed some other item and went from xy ortho to some random diagonal relating to a moved object that it followed. -thanks for your consideration.-bB

Or simply divide by 100 = 51.69 Sq and round up to 52 squares of roofing. I wouldn't personally take the time to create a new unit but kind of cool to know you can and how to do it.

Was basically pointing out what I think is an inconsistent behavior in the program. I certainly appreciate the feedback. Drawing is of As-is-Conditions.-bb

Thanks Michael, I do indeed know how to get around the issue by either raising my roof planes to match the other three correct ones and or temporarily changing the invisible walls to normal then changing back, which is what I've done since my posting. I need to try your "Gap Material" method when I get a chance. That's a cleaver solution and use of the wall layers attributes. Probably a "Work-a-round" but still a cool one that won't cause me to ***** and actually one I should use when creating "Frameless Glass" shower enclosures. I still think that the behavior of the invisible walls is something that Chief should fix and I guess I should send it to Tech support as an issue. I can't imagine that it hasn't already been a requested fix but redundant requests only reinforce the issues. Thanks, again-Brad

I just drew some 4/12 pitch Truss designated Roof Planes on an open front pole building with a relative rough ceiling height of 17'4". The front of the building is open, so I'm using Invisible Walls to demarcate the open front (this is an existing conditions drawing). In the attached 3d Image (see also the attached plan file), the roof planes generate correctly on the 3 roof planes that bear on Regular Walls (17'4" clg hgt- Roof Baseline generates at 223.625"). The one roof plane that was drawn over the Invisible Wall, generates at a Roof Baseline Hgt of 104.75". When I change that wall from Invisible to Regular wall, the Roof Baseline will generate at the expected height of 223.625". Why would there be such a discrepancy? One would expect the ceiling height of the room that's determining the Roof Baseline on the other 3 roof planes to cause the Baseline over the Invisible Wall to be the same. If this is user error, then Chief's logic for drawing roofs is wrong. As a user since Chief'97, I don't understand why I would have such an unexpected result drawing such a simple roof. For me, this shows the need for Chief to allow the User to "Set a bearing height for roof planes, independent of ceiling or room heights which is limiting and has been an issue since before the X-Versions. thanks for any comments or feedback. Brad Boltz InvisibleWallsRoofBearingDiscrepancyDrawing.zip

It does in the Mastic library but the only one that has texture and patterns is the Grey (see attached). Too bad, because it displays better in both vector and standard views.The others have color but no pattern. Chief's Wood Bd & Batten has both but the battens are Iny's , more like a T-111. As far as Certainteed's (in the Bonus Cats, I missed seeing them for some reason, my bad.). Thanks for pointing it out Eric, I had found the Chief B&B and forgot about it too. Just call me Senior Momento's.

Good Point on the 3d, I hadn't thought of that.Thanks-BB

and maybe someday, Chief will update the siding libraries or get the siding mfrs to give us comprehensive "bim information" on their entire available product line. I don't understand the omission of CertainTeed's Board & Batten Siding from our library. At the very least, Chief could give us a Generic board and batten with color match capabilities. Please add the attached siding product line to our siding libraries.-thanks, Brad They give us such a huge amount of great library "usefull" stuff (counter top paper towel holders and floor mounted TP holders?) but grab bars and towel holders don't come with dimension friendly or accurate centerlines for proper placement and sizing (a continuing beef for moi). and I appologize to the great programmers who are doing a job that is way beyond my knowledge or capabilities when I couldn't even grasp Basic Fortran's 1's and 0's enough to create punch card's to do a simple 1+1=2 program in 1975! Just once in awhile I wish they would give CAD dummies like me, a month or year to draw live in front of you so that y'all could see how many of us "real world dummies" use and abuse your excellent program.-cheers and beers from Up Over to the Right(East Coast, not political ideology).-bB

Already have that setting. It's the second leader line( Options/Add Arrow) that doesn't have the 2(two) segments and requires using the break tool or the "Diamond" Grab Point. The "Diamond" Grab Handle causes the arrow to point back onto itself per my attached screenshot.

I'm sorry Joe, I used the wrong name for the tool. It is "Leader Line" text which to my way of thinking is a Text with a Leader Line (Capital "T" with and Arrow Icon). Typically in the past, I used the "break" tool to create the bend but recently (in X8), I started using the "diamond" grab handle which saves a mouse click. Why should I have to use the "break" tool when it's easier to grab the "diamond" handle & pull it to whatever object I'm pointing to? I just don't understand the need for the behavior of the arrow pointing back to itself and would like Chief to fix it. Thanks for examining the issue and corroborating the behavior when drawing a new "Text Arrow". -BB

First thing I look for. Always have on except when modifying a cad polyline. See attached Screen Shot attempting to explain sequence in which it occurs. I wish I knew how to do a vid to better describe the behavior. May have to bug phone support this morning.

Thanks Bill, I recently upgraded from 8 to 9 and I guess my snap settings migrated from 8? I'm thinking that maybe in X8 I must have changed it to 5 pixels to try and stop my dimensions from snapping off of "Ortho" when pulling a string across a busy drawing. Who knows. Looks like another case of "User Error".-bB

This morning, I was having major issues with the Point to Point tool when moving a floor ceiling beam to a cad intersection (two perpendicular cad lines) while in framing annotations mode. It appeared that the library item, a bonus library millwork (8" column) seemed to be interfering(blocking) the snap point intersection. I called phone tech support and was getting help from MIchael but with no resolution on this issue. After punting and relegating to send my plan file to tech support I brought up another issue I was having with driveways not cutting the curb at a street intersection .During discussion of this terrain issue, I found out that his snap distance setting was "12 pixels" and mine (which was the default X9 setting) was set at "5 pixels". After ending my tech support call, I reset my snap distance to 12 pixels and my point to point issue went away and my snapping behavior is way more acceptable from what it's been (also discovered that my default setting in X8 has been 5 pixels for the snapping distance, which explains a lot of my previous issues and frustrations while using x8. Why would Chief set the snap distance at 5 pixels by default? Or did I somehow do it and not remember......? What is the default setting from Chief for the snap distance setting? Regardless, I would like to thank Michael in phone support for helping me discover and fix my snapping issues.-Brad

I've been having/noticing issues (X8 & x9) when I use the "Text with Leader Line" function. See attached images. When I create a piece of text with leader line and then select the leader line end to pull the leader arrow on a hinged angle, the arrow reverses and points back at the original leader end point. Why and for what reason would Chief give us this "Feature"? The leader lines behave "properly" if you delete the leader arrow and then select Option/Add Arrow. If it's not a "feature" then my suggestion would be to please fix this behavior. thanks, Brad

MIke, I've been having this issue intermittently with X8 for quite awhile and just figured it out while on the phone with my SSA technical support. Apparently it's not a known issue with them either. In this most recent incident, I couldn't find any snap points (in plan view) when using the Point to Point Move tool. So I closed Chief and reopened-No Luck. Then I exited Chief and rebooted my computer-No Luck. I then opened another job folder and had No Problem. I reopened the offending job file to plan view (1st floor level) and still had no snaps. I then changed floors to the foundation level and had all snaps, same for the second floor level. Went back to 1st floor level, No Snaps. Finally, I selected the "Display Points" icon on my pull down menu, selected "Delete Temp Points", selected and placed a "Point Marker"- inserted the point marker in the drawing and was able to move it using the "Point to Point" tool. I now have all off my snap points working normally again. I relayed this to Tech Support and now they know about it. Not sure if this matters, but recently, when I start a new drawing, I place a "Point" and then relocate it to absolute Zero x & y and start my first wall from the 0,0 point. Let me know if this works for you next time it occurs. Thanks, Brad

My home CPU is a stock Dell XPS 8300 that's over 5 yrs old, i7, 2 gb Nvidia graphics, 16 mb ram, 1-T 7200 rpm hard drive and it still does Chief fine (I don't use Ray-Trace). My work cpu was built by our IT guy and he screwed up and bought a mother board that wouldn't accept an i7, so I only have an i5 with a 4 gb graphics card, 1-Terrabite 7200 Hard drive and this unit is 3 yrs old and running X8 fine (again, no ray-tracing). Both units are over 3 ghz and chugging along just fine, so future proofing with Chief ain't that big a deal if you start out with a modern machine.-BB

A belated thank you for this post. BB

Nice. Thanks also.-BB

Doi!! Thanks for pointing that out. I didn't think about it. But instead of making a suggestion, he's looking for one. Hence the confusion. -bb

I recently saw that Intel was coming out with a new i-9? processor to compete with AMD's new offerings.I don't know when or how pricey that new generation processor will be. I would make sure to stick with NVIDIA graphics cards as I noticed your first link was using an AMD graphics card. Other than that, I know nothing and there are others who may offer more and better info.-BB

I still don't understand the "1-Vertical Panel" thing. There aren't too many single panel garage doors (my grandfather's was and it had upper lites) used today so I don't understand why a door with more than one panel needs to be designated as 1-vertical panel in order to show the upper panel with glass? In older versions, I could put glass in the upper panels of plain garage doors (before we had the fancy carriage house style door library). Seems like Chief takes away some good basic stuff when they add fluff on a regular basis.-bb

As a designer, it would be nice to be able to design and properly detail a set of stairs. If I have to draw it with pencil on vellum (which is sometimes relaxing) then what good is Chief? Even at your level of required detail, a poor illustration or representation could lead to mistakes from your vendor. What about stairs for decks and the various simple ways to attach your newel posts? I can't be creative with a bad set of design tools (unless I learn and use a program like Sketchup). Look at the time that Problem Solver just invested and can't get it quite correct. That should be a wake up for Chief to give us better stair (and deck tools). I just had a freelance designer that we've contracted with to pick up some design work when I'm swamped interview with my employer. She's using Softplan and her 3d rendered images were a lot more realistic than mine ( I don't have time to wait for Raytrace images). Going to see if she has more control over her stairs when she does some drawing for us. -BB

I

I don't think it's user error when Chief doesn't give you(us) the proper tools. I'm sure that Glenn or one of those guys that do genius things with the program that even the programmers hadn't thought of can come up with a complex solution/work-a-round that works but is no way intuitive or easy (or fast!). Your original stair looked great except for the inability to offset your railing independently of the "wall/railing" that controls it's location. They gave us a "newel offset" tool for deck and room railings but no offset for the railing, which is equally frustrating. Sorry I can't play with your plan until I get around to upgrading from X8 when I get time. Also at your mid-landing, I don't know why your lower section hand railing terminates into the fluted section of the mid-landing's newel.