rlackore

I posted a symbol here that may help.

I became tired of positioning loads of lights to simulate LED tape light strips, so I created this symbol: LED Tape Light.calibz The symbol is only 24" long - you need to use a row of several symbols to produce varying lengths. There are 96 lights per symbol at 5 lumens per light, for a total output of 240 lumens/foot. You can easily produce half the output (120 lumens/foot) by simply turning off every-other light. Adjusting the per-light lumen output is straight-forward but exceptionally tedious because the changes can't be made in the Adjust Lights dbx, you must modify each individual light (all 96 of them) within the symbol dbx. The symbols display reasonably well in both raytrace and physically based: Raytrace, 240 lumens (48 lights) / foot Raytrace, 120 lumens (24 lights) / foot Physically based, 240 lumens (48 lights) / foot Physcially based, 120 lumens (24 lights) / foot

The best you can do is create many closely-spaced lights and adjust their illumination properties until you achieve a satisfactory result. You will have to compromise between rendering speed and appearance.

Search these forums - several of us have posted individual symbols and user libraries.

You can raise the large roof to provide a wall against which the small roof can terminate: Or you can slope both roof planes in the same direction and join them along the common edge: Or you could create a hipped intersection: There are other possibilities as well, but what you want is not doable.

Eric has a point - you're plan diagram and your elevation do not match. Regardless, it can't be done as drawn, which is why you're having a difficult time modeling it in Chief.

I use Molding Polylines. They are tedious to place, but once in position they look good.

Place the bed in any open space. Then you can select the bed and rotate/position it however you wish.

This fixes it, but I can't say why it's happening:

There's no quick and easy way to export everything to CAD - you just have to plow through it one view at a time.

I do mezzanines as a second floor level, with the "non-mezzanine" portion as "open to below". Others use the new shelf ceiling feature, but I think a second floor level works best for setting up the stairs and railings.

When I do pre-engineered steel buildings I don't worry about the steel shapes - only the column base locations and dimensions, and the general arrangement of the wall/roof layers (outset girts, inset girts, etc.). My building and wall sections use a lot of CAD. All other aspects of modeling the building are standard Chief techniques.

Loading is slow! I had to use Edge - the Viewer never seems to work for me in Chrome. Anyway, the elevations in your OP fooled me as much as they fooled Rod - I thought the area beneath the funky projection was a deck, but it's just a roof. I still think the best solution for the funky projection is wood frame, clad in TAFS, with a grey-colored TPO membrane for the top, flashed at the perimeter with a color-matched drip edge. GRP would give you more color choices, but maybe GRP isn't readily available in Florida. That said, looking at the model in 3D, I have to agree that Rod has a point - that funky projection seems like a lot of work for nothing. If it was sheltering a deck area it could be justified, but it's not even shading the roof-top a/c units! I'm sure there are other considerations, but maybe you could eliminate the horizontal portion, along with the supports, and keep only the main vertical element that serves to break up the side facade. But, I suppose it's a personal choice - I believe form should have some kind of function.

It's a plaza deck! Why would you enclose it? The loss of a primary outdoor living/entertaining space is probably a non-starter for the client. Sure, there are challenges, but enclosing the space isn't the best answer.

I hate balconies and decks over living spaces, but it happens all the time. I think finding a competent installer is more important than the system. I don't have any experience using a GRP membrane as a traffic wear layer - around here we typically use PVC membranes.

Alan, there has to be some kind of pitch to those flat portions, right? You're preferred method of 18" deep wood trusses could accomplish this easily. I don't see any substantial benefit to CFS over wood, unless the rest of the project is framed in CFS and the contractor doesn't want to mix materials/systems. I'd consider wood frame, excellent flashing details, and a fully-adhered TPO or gel-coat GRP membrane for the low-slope roof piece.

Maybe the Chatroom is a better place for this discussion.

Raquel, maybe you're not longer monitoring this thread, but if you are, I recommend learning Sketchup. It's become a critical part of my Chief workflow, has many available plugins that make things easier, and can create your cabinet piece for import into Chief as a Symbol: caffevero.skp

Even easier: 1. Draw a CAD profile and save it to your library: 2. Draw an arc and convert it to a molding polyline, then add the profile: 3. Position it within the cabinets: This method provides the lovely rounded edges on the curved piece.

Yes, Method 2 with the upper floor using a pony wall with height above floor set to 0":

I've Suggested gradient fills. If anyone else wants to +1 the suggestion, maybe we can get Chief to provide them.

1. Draw a truncated pyramid as so: This will be the curved counter piece. 2. Draw a cylinder in the center of the pyramid. Make it taller than the pyramid. This will be subtracted from the pyramid: 3. Boolean subtract the cylinder from the cone: 4. Draw a box, larger than the pyramid, and do another boolean subtraction: 5. In ortho view, grab the rotate handle and rotate the shape 180 degrees to the proper orientation: 6. Now position the shape relative to the counter: What this technique can't give you are the rounded edges on the curved shape, so a better alternative would be to create the shape in another program, such as Sketchup. That said, someone else on the forum may have a better method.

I agree. When you said "site map", I automatically assumed you meant a site plan, intended to communicate the legal boundaries, building location, etc. I would classify the images you posted as landscape plans. I agree that site plans in Chief are a bit more difficult (IMO) due to the lack of advanced CAD features. And it doesn't take too much additional effort to add colors and patterns: Granted, my example is pretty basic, but it's a start.

You're bearing wood on steel? The easiest method is to attach a wood bearing plate to the top of the steel (I believe you have this shown). The plate-to-steel connection depends on 1) uplift (maybe seismic?), 2) thickness of beam top flange, and 3) thickness of bearing plate. If the top flange isn't too beefy, you may be able to use self-drilling screws; otherwise you're stuck with bolts or stud anchors. Fabricators are used to drilling bolt holes on either side of the web, typically at 24" oc; but, again, you need to verify the size/spacing for the expected forces.I would be just as concerned with the design in regard to thermal bridging at the beam/exterior wall interface - but maybe you've got that covered. FWIW, I sometimes prefer S-shapes (rails) over W-shapes for exterior exposed applications - the aggressive slope on the S-shape flange helps drainage and deters nesting birds. Plus, if you're not familiar with the standards for Architecturally Exposed Structural Steel, check out AESS Code of Standard Practice at AISC.org.

That looks like a good solution - better than mine, I think. Auto-framing, however, is a mess (the left is mine, the right is Joes'):