Chrisb222

You need to add some breaks on the edge you want to modify. Imagine the shape of that polygon after it's mended and you'll know how to break it:

Once the framing is built, you will also need to have the Framing layers turned on in your cross-section view. The standard 3D Framing Layer Set might work, or you can customize the layers being displayed to get what you want.

Framing is not built automatically unless you have set the program to do that. You can set that under Build > Framing > Build All Framing... and checking Automatically Rebuild Framing. This setting will constantly build and update your framing as the plan changes, but could result in slower performance. You can also Build Framing Once there, and also build framing manually for rooms and specific framing members. You can also build framing once at Build > Framing > Build All Framing

You have like 17 terrain holes lol. Delete them all, then create a new hole and modify: Edit, 16 terrain holes and 1 terrain feature

The only thing I would add is that I typically use an "All Layers ON" SPV (or just turn on all layers in your current view). Otherwise some things won't reverse if they're not visible. But yeah, you still gotta do cleanup on a reverse.

The notes will need to be created or placed on their own layer. Then that layer is turned on or off for the current Saved Plan View (SPV). For example, the notes in your plan all reside on the Text, Notes layer, which is turned on in both views. Your SPV settings have dedicated Note defaults, but some of the settings for them are incorrect. Basically speaking, everything has to be created for each SPV; dimensions, text, notes, etc, AND each of THESE needs its own dedicated layer. Then you can control the visibility of everything automatically. If you create a Note on say the K&B SPV, then COPY and paste it into the Electrical view, it will carry its association with the K&B view with it. So you'll either need to change its assigned layer, or create notes only on the view where you want them to appear. It's a lot to take in. Some study materials that will help: https://www.chiefarchitect.com/support/article/KB-03185/understanding-saved-plan-views.html https://www.chiefarchitect.com/videos/watch/2421/saved-plan-views.html https://www.chiefarchitect.com/videos/watch/2433/developing-saved-plan-views.html

Update: The line weight scaling issue has been corrected in 28.2.0.62

I didn't reply before but I got the same results you're seeing. Probably time to send it to Support.

Yes. I'm done trying to decipher how to quickly and easily create realistic renderings with the software tools. Ain't worth the time and trouble, and never looks as good as AI. Just watch for changing architectural details.

Yeah I've been doing this for awhile but only after the floor plan is locked in when I'm doing the final con docs. For design iterations, I like using factory room labels because they're automatic, (were) easy, and look ok for that purpose, but the changes to the auto room labels really made that a lot harder. So for me, it's a pretty big downgrade.

I agree, Joe. I also have rich text with macros that I use for final room labels. Easy to go around and plop them in. However, I only do that as part of the final assembly of the con docs. I still use factory room labels for all iterations of design, and it sucks that pretty much all of the changes to room labels makes using them for quick design iterations worse and more cumbersome, and added none of the features I can achieve with rich text. So yeah, I'm pretty salty about the changes to room labels...

Another thing that's changed is you can no longer select two or more room labels in order to align them using the Align/Distribute Tool, which I used to do on every plan. Room labels are also no longer snappable. And issues with the display of labels when the room type is changed, causing extra clicks. Several things changed for the good, some changed for the not good. As usual, Chief giveth and Chief taketh away.

Been going back and forth with tech, had to show them screenshots of their own plan not scaling correctly in X18. Just got this response: Hello Chris,I was finally able to replicate the issue, thank you for your patience. I've gone ahead and bumped this up to our developers, as I can find any reason or otherwise solution for the weird behavior of the Line scaling. Thanks for your understanding, and apologies for the inconvenience. Hopefully we can get a solution to this shortly. This is what I sent them: This reply has a screenshot attached of your GrandView GV2 project that I downloaded. The screenshot is a snippet of the floor plan view on Sheet 4 of the layout, after I rescaled it to 1/32" with Use Layout Line Scaling unchecked. You can see the line weights did not scale like they should, and as they always did in every previous version. Interestingly, it doesn't matter if Use Layout Line Scaling is checked or unchecked, the line weights react the same to down-scaling. You should be able to replicate that yourself, unless it's something in my copy of CA, or something to do with my using MacOS. GrandView project: https://www.chiefarchitect.com/products/samples.html

@PitMan71in my testing I didn't notice dashes, I was having a problem with line weights. I often send floor plan concepts on a file sized for 8.5x11 and happened to open one of my old files in X18 the other day, that's when I noticed the line weights weren't scaling. This is an X17 layout file with a 1/4" scale drawing scaled to 1/10", opened in X17 and then X18, changing nothing, just opening the file: X17: X18: When I was experimenting with it this weekend, the same thing happened when I tried an older plan I downloaded from Chief Architect, their Grandview project. I sent tech support a copy of that file showing the problem. My ticket is still "in progress"

Yeah I believe that would do it. In my testing only a fresh X18 file would scale correctly. I wouldn't think so, since a fresh X18 factory template will scale correctly but a legacy file won't, without changing any settings. I'll report here when tech answers me, status is "In Progress."

You're right the dash style for doorways can't be controlled. But it looks like you're having the same problem I'm having, where scaling a layout view doesn't scale the line weights and dashes like it always did. In my testing, a new X18 plan created from the stock template will scale correctly, but not a legacy file brought into X18. I have a ticket in regarding this issue, waiting for a reply from tech support. As a side note, your plan and layout are using different line weight scales in their respective Drawing Sheet Setup dialogs. It doesn't affect the dashes over the doorways, but it does affect other lines in the layout view.

Do you mean dashed lines? How do your line weights look? Are these legacy files brought into X18?

The spaces look large enough with the exception of the toilet area, unless there is no door between it and the maneuvering area. Are there shower walls, or is this an open wet room? If open, you might shave a little off the space between the shower and the vanity but it's not too oversized as is. Be aware your measurements don't account for wall thicknesses, so 12' overall exterior to exterior would not allow the sizes you have for the divided spaces, if there are walls. Not a big deal, just something to keep in mind. Otherwise I think it should be fine. Sorry for you and your daughter, best of luck.

Turning the railing label layer on and off made no difference for me, super buttery smooth either way.

Foundation Plan: Basement Plan: Basement Plumbing Plan (1/2" scale dimension text): Same! Nah, once the SPVs and LSs are set up it's mostly auto... unless there's a very unusual situation, which I hardly ever run in to. The type of walkouts in my example are super common for me. I'll agree with you here. I try to not include anything on the foundation plan those guys don't need to see.

I've never experienced any restrictions or difficulties keeping the floor levels as intended. Foundation Plan View has its own layer set, dimensions, CAD, text, wall types, etc. Same with Basement Plan View. Once it's set up, it's automatic. Stepped foundations and frost walls are super easy to adjust using wall breaks and dimension moves. Having more than two levels of pony walls would be helpful, but again that's never been a major hurdle. Any gain by putting the basement on Floor 1 would be more than offset from the issues caused by moving Absolute Zero to the basement ... what a nightmare. Hard pass for me.

Same. I never saw the advantage to basement on floor 1 unless it's a holdover workaround from before the advances we've had the past several years. I have all dedicated saved plan views, layer sets, dimensions, text, CAD... basically everything for foundation plan, basement plan, and basement plumbing plan. Everything slots in automatically.

Why not? Just cut the walls and place the extension segments needed for the trim, that you don't want to see, on the Walls, Invisible layer, and turn it off. Or create a custom layer just for them if you want more control.

You're seeing brick because that's the outermost exterior layer of your wall definition. Copy the wall type, give it a new name and change that outer layer to Concrete. In order to maintain your wall thickness and keep everything aligned, simply change the thickness of the outer layer to the same as the total of all the exterior layers (5 7/16) and delete the other layers (see images). That's the "Air Gap" layer in your brick wall settings.

In X18, dishwashers no longer are inserted into a cabinet. They are placed standalone and automatically adopt the countertop of the adjacent cabinet. Just like IRL.