rlackore

No plan is attached. The X6 reference manual is available here: http://cloud.chiefarchitect.com/1/pdf/documentation/chief-architect-x6-reference-manual.pdf

Wall material is both sides - standard view shows up fine - just vector that doesn't give pattern lines on interior side. Here's a plan of just the wall:Curved Wall.zip

The vector view pattern on my curved wall shows on the exterior: ...but not on the interior: This is very annoying when shooting elevations and sending to layout. Has anyone else experienced this problem, or know of a solution?

I completely agree. The default coordinate system shouldn't change between views. Ideally, Chief would give us the ability to change the origin and orientation of the coordinate system as we please - this has been suggested several times before.

Agree.

Post the plan.

Joe, we can put this issue to bed. I now know that door symbols don't want stretch planes or zones defined. The symbol name is Commercial Steel Door.

I know it's up to the user to define the zones and planes; what I saying is that when I define stretch zones for a door symbol, I get weird re-sizing results as I illustrated in my first post. IOW, door symbols behave differently than other symbols.

Joe, I understand the difference. What I think is interesting is that door symbols, when created, don't require either zone or plane to be defined. Doesn't this seem strange?

Brilliant. An online warehouse for Chief symbols would be fantastic.

The door symbol was created with Chief polyline solids - very basic - no stray artifacts. What led me astray was that I failed to follow Chief's tutorial instructions TO THE LETTER - nowhere in the tutorial does it mention assigning stretch zones when creating a custom door symbol. In my defense, I think it is very logical to assume that a door symbol should have stretch zones. This another case of Chief's quirkiness - some of the software's means and methods run counter to each other.

Another thing I learned today. Thank you.

Maybe it would be helpful if library items could be tagged with metadata to aid in searching.

You wouldn't be forced - object snapping/tracking can be turned on or off easily - you know this. There's nothing wrong with adding additional functionality to object tracking when it doesn't affect how you already work, and enhances how others may prefer to work.

Oh, heck, never mind. It appears that defining the stretch zones was a mistake.

I've created a custom door symbol - my first attempt - but it doesn't re-size properly when I change the width to anything other than the original width. The door has stretch zones defined; it was created as a 36inx84in size. Here are some pictures of it re-sized to 24" wide: ... and 48" wide: Any clues are appreciated. Here is the symbol: Door Symbol.calibz

Just when I think I'm smart, Chief shows me I'm more stupider than I thought.

Rotated layout box:

Is it rotating the layout box that isn't giving you what you want? ...or is it the portrait orientation of the layout page that is giving you problems?

Chief can't do what you want. You have to place the wall, then adjust. Chief does feature tracking, but doesn't allow dynamic input of distance or angle during tracking.

I doubt it's your CMOS battery - it should last longer than 5 years. And if you're computer is never turned off, the CMOS battery isn't required - it's only for holding info when the computer is completely powered off. AFAIK, the only way to check your CMOS battery is to crack your case, remove it, and put a voltmeter across the poles.

Yeah, I typically throw up an exterior room molding polyline to model the frieze when the auto molding is giving me problems.

I have constant problems with frieze boards at changes of pitch - I've never found a way to remedy it, so I generally edit the elevation.

This is an extremely intriguing possibility. I just tried it out on a test plan, and the only downside I see is having to cut the material regions into the door thresholds - a rather tedious process. I think you may be addressing this issue with your suggestion: https://chieftalk.chiefarchitect.com/index.php?/topic/3973-floor-finish-boundary/.

I'll bet there are a lot of people who would use CA's ruby implementation if it was well documented and easier to use. I have no experience with ruby, but coming from AutoCAD I can attest to the tremendous value in providing a scripting language with access to the internal variables and commands; with AutoCAD it created a huge third-party industry to create and sell AutoLISP and ARX routines to extend AutoCAD functionality. I invested hundreds of hours in developing scripts and menus to "customize" how we used AutoCAD. If Chief would give us something usable, I think it would be an extremely valuable tool.