rlackore

23 hours ago, architect said:

 

Was this an imported symbol from the manufacturers web site ?

Yes, the head began as a download from Lithonia, was cleaned up in SketchUp, then imported into Chief. Not all Lithonia products have an available download, but many do.

8 minutes ago, pgjacob said:

I agree looks great.  I downloaded but can't find it in my user catalog...

They should import - don't know why they wouldn't. Here are their names:

Here is my HardiePanel stuff: HardiePanel.calibz

Smooth - Stucco - Cedarmill

The diffuse maps are grayscale, so you can easily apply colors. The 4x8 panel is created with a bump map, and the texture with a normal map. Not perfect, but not horrible.

I don't believe that CA has a suitable automated tool. I suggest either a Polyline Solid, or a Custom Countertop. There are many ways to create what you want. You can look them up in the X9 Reference Manual available here.

Firstly, the view is flat - shot straight on to the front elevation - so it can be difficult to stage. The color palette is also challenging. Here's my brief attempt:

Most of my changes were focused on getting light and shadow to work for you:

1. I added accent bands to the stucco (what I assume is stucco).

2. I fattened the stucco thickness by 1/2" and carried the wall materials around to the side walls.

3. Lots of material adjustments.

4. 3D shrubbery and trees.

5. I made the wall caps wider.

6. Selected garage door panels that have a realistic profile.

7. Select a background and adjust the camera and site materials appropriately.

8. Raytrace with ambient occlusion, environment light, photons, and focal blur.

Good luck.

I'm still on X9, but maybe X10 still has the Merge button in the Plan Materials dbx?

8 minutes ago, Alaskan_Son said:

 

I guess yours must have been missing 4 then...or maybe I miscounted.  

I think the relevant point is that my 12 line pattern file isn't missing anything - it functions perfectly in AutoDesk products, and AutoDesk developed the format. I have several pattern files that work fine in AutoDesk applications but fail in Chief. Whether CA farmed out the "pattern interpreter" work, or licensed a snippet of code, I don't know - but the problem is clearly on their end.

;
; French Limestone by rlansing
;
*FRALIME, French Limestone
0, 0,0, 0,48, -16,24,8
0, 0,8, 0,48, 16,-24,8
0, 0,16, 0,48, -8,32,-8
0, 0,24, 0,48, 8,-16,24
0, 0,32, 0,48, -8,24,-16
0, 0,40, 0,48, 16,-32
90, 0,0, 0,48, 8,-16,24
90, 8,0, 0,48, -8,32,-8
90, 16,0, 0,48, 16,-16,16
90, 24,0, 0,48, -16,16,-16
90, 32,0, 0,48, -24,24
90, 40,0, 0,48, 24,-24

8 hours ago, Alaskan_Son said:

 

It actually DOES only take 16 lines.  It looks like your original pattern file was just missing 3 of them which seemed to have triggered an odd repetition problem in Chief.  Here's a 16 line version of the same pattern that does work in Chief...

Awesome, though it should only take 12 lines. When I submitted a tech ticket with this issue I was told that nobody at Chief understands how pattern files are written, so I guess we can't expect them to troubleshoot or fix the issue.

Does Drawing Sheet Setup allow you to revert to the previous settings?

My preferred method (as a long time AutoDesk operator):

1. In Plan, turn on the Layerset for the view you'd like to export. Make sure it's displaying everything you want to export.

2. Select File>Export>Export Current View (DWG,DXF)...

3. In the Export Drawing dialog box, you have important choices:

    a. Compatible Version. Make sure you select a version that the architect can import (ask him what version/flavor of AutoDesk software they are using).

    b. Layer Options.

        - Select the Layer Set you've tweaked to display what you want to export (this was step 1).

        - DO NOT select Split Wall Assemblies Into Layers. This option creates an unholy mess for the CAD operator.

        - Select Export Only Displayed Layers.

    c. Other Options.

        - Scaling Unit should be inches for sharing with an architect.

        - Select Create Associative Dimensions.

        - DO NOT select Export Pattern Lines. This is another unholy mess.

        - DO NOT select Export Filled Areas. Yet another mess.

        - Select Export AutoCAD Index Colors. This is probably the single most important option. Absolutely do not forget to select this option.

4. Click on Export, etc.

Done.

15 hours ago, Alaskan_Son said:

Or you could also use Wall Coverings.

According to the OP's first post, Wall Coverings is what she is trying. If you use a Wall Covering for each individual element (including the mosaic strips), you have to create a separate material for each element to control the pattern/texture origin (making sure to account for the thickness of the finish floor) - and that's a lot of work. But, if it's important enough, it can be done, and works well with openings:

12 minutes ago, SNestor said:

If you takes Eric's profile and make the bottom flat...change the pitch to 15 degrees if you prefer...save this profile in your library and attach it as a sill it fills the gap.  I don't think it's worth the time or trouble to use molding PL to create a "perfect" brick sill...to time consuming.  

 

attached is the revised plan with the new sill.  Yea...it's not perfect but if you have to draw a section of a standard typical brick sill in exact detail for a brick mason...maybe you need new mason?

 

Erics modified b-sill X9.plan

 

Yes, sure. And there are more important issues Chief needs to fix, but in the quest for an accurate model, a window sill should be modeled with reasonable accuracy. The wall opening that is cut should be based off the cross-section of the sill profile - not the sill profile's bounding box. (There are several instances where Chief gets lazy and uses bounding boxes to determine things instead of the actual geometry of the object).

I'm not running interiors, but it should be there?

Otherwise, shoot an elevation, draw the shape with a polyline rectangle or CAD box, then select the shape and use Convert Polyline>Convert To>Material Region.

IF you don't have any openings to deal with (windows, niches, doors), using a molding polyline can work:

The advantages: 1) each tile section is a separate molding, and the tile pattern will behave; 2) it's easy to control the height and placement of each molding; 3) molding polylines can sometimes be easier to work with than material regions; 4) it's easy to wrap around corners and to copy/paste between rooms.

The disadvantages: 2) it's more difficult to make work with openings.

Eric, thanks for posting an X9 plan.  Your less aggressive sill slope (7 degrees) and fatter wall (4" masonry cavity) results in a less noticeable bottom gap in the wall opening. For the OP's wall - an IRL brick sill slope of 15 degrees and a 1" to 2" EIFS thickness - I believe a molding polyline is a better solution if accuracy in Cross-Section and Ortho/3D views are important.

Just now, solver said:

I placed the profile I chose in the plan for others to see, just in front of the window.

Oh, placed in plan. Obviously, that's what confused me about your post. Since I can't open X10, I can't see the profile.

Can you clarify?

1. You can change the materials in the dialog boxes, but the changes you make don't appear in an 3D view, or

2. The program won't open the Select Material dialog box.

In other words, is the program not providing you the opportunity to make material selections, or are the material selections you are making not appearing/applying?

8 minutes ago, Ridge_Runner said:

Do you have "apron" unchecked in dbx? That is what usually gives me the gap below. When I uncheck apron it goes away.

 

This is how I do my sills also; seems to work much better. I also use my own profiles for the lintels when needed. I never could get CA's to look right when using brick.

Yes,. apron is unchecked.

1 minute ago, solver said:

 

It's one I made, but don't think it is anything special.

 

Here is the plan. I placed the profile just in front of the window.

 

b-sill.zip

 

 

Eric, I can't open X10. But, I'm confused - in this post:

1 hour ago, solver said:

This a sill from the library, not a molding polyline.

 

Post a simple plan showing the problem please. 

 

you imply that you're not using a molding polyline, but in your second post you state "I placed the profile just in front of the window". Which is it: a molding polyline with a profile, or a profile specified in the window dbx?

1 hour ago, solver said:

This a sill from the library, not a molding polyline.

 

Post a simple plan showing the problem please. 

 

Eric, that doesn't look like any sill I have in my default Library:

The problem I can't solve with Chief's sill is that if I use a profile for a brick sill as built IRL (15 degree angle), I get a gap in the wall beneath the sill (presumably because Chief uses the profile's bounding box to calculate the opening, not the actual cross-section depth of the profile where it intersects the wall):

Have you found a way to overcome this?

Chief won't do this for you - their window sill functionality is woefully inadequate for cases like this. If it's important enough, you can use a Molding Polyline. The added difficulty with an angled sill is that as you raise it into position you have to account for the bottom edge of the wall opening poking through:

...and when you raise it enough to obscure the wall edge, it will intrude on the bottom of the window jamb, so if you really want it to look nice, you need to thicken the bottom jamb so everything appears even all the way around the window:

Good luck.

I think the best solution is for Chief to modify the Wall Definition dbx to allow us to define multiple sheathing layers, then we can have both the osb and the rigid treated identically. Also, the soffit should stop at the sheathing layer, not the main layer.

In X9 I get the sheathing stopping at the soffit:

...but, maybe there's a checkbox or other setting I'm missing.

This isn't a fancy fuselage shape like Michael gives you, but it is a cylinder, and it does give you a floor to set things on: submarine.plan

The fuselage is made of curved roofs. The room is defined with invisible walls. There are several compromises with this approach (I can't get the floor to show up so I drew in a polyline solid), but there are advantages also (a floor to set things on, for example).

I used to define it in my wall layers as a gap, like this:

Now I don't bother with separate exterior wall layers; instead I define a single-thickness exterior wall layer (includes sheathing, cladding, etc.) and use a "wall key" with details to illustrate the various exterior assemblies. This keeps my floor plans a bit more readable, and I've found it easier to change the detail when the project conditions change rather than mess with changing the wall definitions.