Existing, Demolition, and New Construction Phases

[scottkendall]

Hello Everyone,

 

A few years ago I was interviewing for a job and the company uses Chief Architect, So I spent a weekend using all the online instructional videos and basically crash coursed myself.  After the weekend I looked into replacing Revit and using Chief due to it running natively on the MacOS.  I ended up staying with Revit because of one nuance that I just could not live without and that was project phasing. If you do not use Revit you might ask what Project Phasing is?   Project Phasing is where you have the ability to make walls, windows, doors, roofs, etc. fall into categorizes.  So if you demo a part of a wall to make a hallway on the existing plan it will show the wall like normal, on the demo plan it will show it as being demolished and on the proposed it just simply will be open.   By the same token if you have a door and you demo it, it will show the door on the existing, it will show it to be demolished on the demo, and on the proposed the door will be gone and it will automatically fill the space where the door is.   This helps to maintain accuracy across all drawings.   That all said I am once again looking for a new job and the company I am interviewing with uses Chief and they are predominantly a company that does remodels.  Has Chief implemented some kind of tools for this kind of work flow or is the demo plan still some kind of line drawing imported as like a CAD detail?  I have downloaded a trial to refresh myself on the software and will likely watch some kind of training videos. 

 

Also, have there been any advances made on the site tools in the past 3 years as I remember them being a little more cumbersome to use.  Autodesk after 17 years has finally revamped their site tools and I have to say it was a huge step I the right direction.   

 

Please do not think that this is a post to slam Chief Architect I think it is a great piece of software and it has some really cool features that are really cumbersome to do in Revit like Base and Crown Moldings, or Cabinetry that you have to model from scratch.  Even the realistic rendering view mode on Chief runs more smoothly.   There are trade offs with every software... 

 

 

[Steve_Nyhof]

https://www.chiefarchitect.com/search/?default_tab=video&q=remodel

 

I've looked into Revit several times and Chief is way more user friendly in my mind. Restricted in areas because of it's automation, but there are always work-arounds. I used AutoCAD for several decades, and moving to Chief was the best thing I did. Mind you I did not like a number of things because my paradigm was from AutoCAD. But once you get past that and understand Chiefs approach, you will not look back. I draw about 120 plans a year with Chief and 60% of them are Remodels. Once you get the overlays setup in your template it is super easy to see the As-Built plan in your Remodel plan.

[scottkendall]

On 3/21/2025 at 12:58 PM, Steve_Nyhof said:

https://www.chiefarchitect.com/search/?default_tab=video&q=remodel

 

I've looked into Revit several times and Chief is way more user friendly in my mind. Restricted in areas because of it's automation, but there are always work-arounds. I used AutoCAD for several decades, and moving to Chief was the best thing I did. Mind you I did not like a number of things because my paradigm was from AutoCAD. But once you get past that and understand Chiefs approach, you will not look back. I draw about 120 plans a year with Chief and 60% of them are Remodels. Once you get the overlays setup in your template it is super easy to see the As-Built plan in your Remodel plan.

 

Sure it is more user friendly at first and the learning curve is most straight up from zero.   That said I can honestly teach someone who is computer savvy with modeling software and architecture Revit very quickly.  The thing about Revit's Phasing is that if I made a change to the proposed that puts a wall back or a door or what ever and demos something else all phases of the project will reflect that.  The phasing is fully parametric with the entire model. I would gather if you are doing 120 plans a year maybe with 20 pages you not providing the detail I do, I do 30 plans a year with a 90-120 pages. My plans are generally super high end residential construction in the realm of 10 - 20 million dollar homes.  As I said there are parts of Chief Architect that are really nice that Revit lacks for sure.  

 

Let me ask you a few things:

Do you have an existing, demo, and proposed model all rolled into one? Not just plan views a 3D Model? 

Can you cut a section, elevation plan view and show what ever phase you want in seconds? Any view you desire? 

Can you Build complex hillsides? with multiple tiered retaining walls with different slopes?

Can you once modifying that complex hillside show the existing hillside as being graded and utilize the existing topo model in your Sections/Elevations/Etc. to generate grading and civil cross sections? (I design a lot of hillside)

 

Do I have to model every single cabinet I ever put into a project in Revit?  Yes though at this point I have so many cabinets in roughly the same time it takes you in Chief to modify the look I can modify the look and the cabinet will be parametric.

 

Does Revit have Automation? For somethings yes other no not natively but yes if you get plug-in like Automatically Dims, and Framing. There is even an AI adding that will auto convert your Revit plan from Sketchup into Revit and back... And I do not just mean an import/export I mean a complete rebuild of the model it is crazy.   

 

I do understand that once you start using a 3D modeling software you will never use a 2D cad software again.  What I can tell you is I spent time using Chief even pushed a few projects threw it so roughly 3 months about 4 years ago and in the time I missed my freedom, I missed the ability to make crazy roofs, or even complex roofs with ease. Someone made a post here the other day about roof dormers but in Revit the roofs would have been very straight forward as you said the automations can get in the way.  Honestly I was only back on these forums because I was looking at a company that uses Chief so I had to refamiliarize myself with it but that has passed they were not conformable with how far I was going to have to drive so I will not really need to worry about chief.   But Phasing tool is the tool you do not know you need for remodels till you use it and then it like moving from 2D autocad to 3D BIM software  you never want to look back. 

 

Once again please do not think I am trying to bad mouth Chief Architect it is a good tool, it is the only one that has ever made me consider stoping using Revit.  Trust me I have tried to devorce Windows for 15 years Revit is the only string I have been unable to cut.  I have used Archicad, Vectorworks, and Chief.   One day Autodesk will make Revit's Successor and it will have a client that connects to a server side application like Autodesk Fusion and I will be able to complete the divorce from windows that I started in 2010. 

 

 

 

 

[Steve_Nyhof]

If you are drawing giant homes that require a hundred pages, by all means use Revit. I do know that Revit can do anything you want it to. It sounded like you were going to work for someone who used Chief for remodeling, so I was just suggesting that it does, I believe everything you need it to do to draw and document remodeling documents. Make the documents as extensive as you like.

 

As far as slamming Chief, we do it all the time. However, I don't know of anyone who walks away from it.

 

I know of others that would love to get into a long conversation with you about the intimate details of Cad software. I'm just saying that Chief offers what a designer needs to do very complex models and detailed construction docs.

[Steve_Nyhof]

I would suggest asking your questions in the General Q & A - you will get more interaction from those who watch that space more closely.

https://chieftalk.chiefarchitect.com/forum/7-general-q-a/

[mtldesigns]

@scottkendall

@Steve_Nyhof

 

Hey Scott.  Just like Steve, I've used AutoCAD for decades, still do actually for my day job everyday, then switch to the right side of the brain in the evenings to work Chief.  As mentioned, there are nuisances on every software.  I love them both honestly, however I've never used Revit so will put that out there now.  As far as my remodel projects using Chief, I always model the AS-BUILT first, as much as I possible can do that will be relevant to that project.  In this model, I know what walls (doors, windows, etc..) will be kept and which will be demo'd and I create layers and wall definitions (to turn off and change fill types for ease identifications) as such too.  I believe OTOB Chief has a wall definition of a demo'd wall.  I removed that from my template to create my own.  Once the AB is complete, I "save as" for the new model.  This model is the completed version showing all new walls, doors, windows, etc..  I reference them both on my layout sheets.  Basically I work both models at the same time.  I do not do the amount of work you and Steve do nor the sheet count.. but it does get the job done.  

 

For the record, It would be great if we could XREF a model into another model in Chief.  With that overlay, we can show the new and the old in one view.  

 

As far as the hillside with homes built into them, I def. wished Chief was easier. 

 

My $0.05 (was $0.02 but two pennies cost a dime to make)

[scottkendall]

8 hours ago, Steve_Nyhof said:

If you are drawing giant homes that require a hundred pages, by all means use Revit. I do know that Revit can do anything you want it to. It sounded like you were going to work for someone who used Chief for remodeling, so I was just suggesting that it does, I believe everything you need it to do to draw and document remodeling documents. Make the documents as extensive as you like.

Oh If they had hired me I had every intention of trying to get them to work in Revit, or some kind of hybrid workflow.   Chief def does interior cabinets super quick by comparison unless you need something super custom.   

 

 

8 hours ago, Steve_Nyhof said:

As far as slamming Chief, we do it all the time. However, I don't know of anyone who walks away from it.

 

Fair enough but I did not want my post to be taken as a Chief bashing post I wanted to understand the remodel work flow better and if improvements had been made in the last 4 years. 

 

8 hours ago, Steve_Nyhof said:

 

I know of others that would love to get into a long conversation with you about the intimate details of Cad software. I'm just saying that Chief offers what a designer needs to do very complex models and detailed construction docs.

 

It looks like my post was moved to General Q & A so that probably will automatically generate that discussion.  When I use chief it I see that it has a lot of tools to do a lot of detailing, while Revit you have to model everything.   For example Chief has a Corner Bead tool for corner trims while Revit I would have to literally make it. Good thing about Revit is once you realize that modeling is a bunch of parts/masses rather then cut from a solid it becomes immensely easier.   Outside of the lack of Phasing my main issue with Chief was the automation though that seems to me from your comments is a main issue.   The thing with Revit is once you learn the fundamentals of the software you can extrapolate those fundamentals across everything in the software.  I likely could teach someone such as yourself how to do floor plans, elevations, sections and detail them onto the sheet with schedules in about 25 mins.   I could likely teach you how to create drawings that rival the detail you get in Chief in 6-8/hrs.... 

 

[scottkendall]

2 minutes ago, mtldesigns said:

@scottkendall

@Steve_Nyhof

 

Hey Scott.  Just like Steve, I've used AutoCAD for decades, still do actually for my day job everyday, then switch to the right side of the brain in the evenings to work Chief.  As mentioned, there are nuisances on every software.  I love them both honestly, however I've never used Revit so will put that out there now.  As far as my remodel projects using Chief, I always model the AS-BUILT first, as much as I possible can do that will be relevant to that project.  In this model, I know what walls (doors, windows, etc..) will be kept and which will be demo'd and I create layers and wall definitions (to turn off and change fill types for ease identifications) as such too.  I believe OTOB Chief has a wall definition of a demo'd wall.  I removed that from my template to create my own.  Once the AB is complete, I "save as" for the new model.  This model is the completed version showing all new walls, doors, windows, etc..  I reference them both on my layout sheets.  Basically I work both models at the same time.  I do not do the amount of work you and Steve do nor the sheet count.. but it does get the job done.  

 

For the record, It would be great if we could XREF a model into another model in Chief.  With that overlay, we can show the new and the old in one view.  

 

As far as the hillside with homes built into them, I def. wished Chief was easier. 

 

My $0.05 (was $0.02 but two pennies cost a dime to make)

 

See what I am understanding is that you have to work two different models to create your asbuilt/Demo and your proposed.   With Revit, asbuilt/demo/proposed is one and the same with toggles in the properties.  This allows you to phase the views for your needs, maybe in one view you want to see demo with proposed, but in another view you want to see only new.  It is hard to fully articulate the phasing but Revit did not always have it and I used to do very similar to what I think you all do in Chief... Then one day they had added phasing and I started using it and I realized it was the Tool that I never knew I needed.  Now I do not think I would ever want to live without it.... 

 

[mtldesigns]

 

1 hour ago, scottkendall said:

different models to create your asbuilt/Demo and your proposed

That's how I do it, not saying that's the best way in Chief..  But only about 10% of my work is remodels, so...

 

I can comprehend the phasing, I really can..  def something I could use at the day job too, since 99% of the projects are constantly updating the plant.  But we use Autodesk Plant 3D: the buildings, steel, equipment, piping and all..  so pretty much locked with what I got.  

[JiAngelo]

2 hours ago, mtldesigns said:

For the record, It would be great if we could XREF a model into another model in Chief.  With that overlay, we can show the new and the old in one view.  

We can XREF a plan into another plan.

 

What I mean is look up "Reference Display" and scroll down to this.

[JiAngelo]

3 hours ago, scottkendall said:

See what I am understanding is that you have to work two different models to create your asbuilt/Demo and your proposed.   With Revit, asbuilt/demo/proposed is one and the same with toggles in the properties.  

 

In Chief you simply toggle it differently.  Here's a crude example.  First, draw your as-built.

Isolate your demo objects to their own layers.  We use "D-" to distinguish. 

Then create your own layer sets "only demo objects on"  and "all objects on but demo".

Next create your proposed remodel.

And reference display your demo plan as a glass house.

To eliminate the glass over existing to remain - use Layer set "only demo objects on" for reference plan.

Or show the reverse by switching to asbuilt/demo plan and import the proposed as glass house.

Or reverse the views.

 

 

 

[scottkendall]

2 hours ago, JiAngelo said:

 

In Chief you simply toggle it differently.  Here's a crude example.  First, draw your as-built.

See Below I did not see your post till after I started responding but similar answers.

 

14 minutes ago, ValleyGuy said:

I've never experienced Revit at all, but with a little effort Chief produces an acceptable enough single plan option for me to get 95% of my construction document from. I use a similar 'As-Built', 'Completed', and 'New' three plan approach as everyone above explained but only for a few of the 3D pictures. All of my plan views, elevations, cross sections, and specific detail info come from the same single plan - existing / demo / new items are all on one plan, similar to what you are suggesting I think.

My work flow is fairly straight forward; 

Plan 1: once drawn, the 'As-Built' will always be the same regardless of any revisions and will be used only for a few 3D pictures as shown above. Save and make a second copy.

All revisions to the as-built will be done to the as-built but when you change the phase the as-built will morph to the phase.

 

 

14 minutes ago, ValleyGuy said:

Plan 2: This new plan is labeled 'Completed' and is the completed project. It has all the existing, demo, and new items all contained and ready to toggle on and off as needed. All client interaction and revisions are made on this one plan. Upon everything being finalized, I make a copy of this plan.

But is this still one Model or is it two models with parts turned on and off?

 

14 minutes ago, ValleyGuy said:

Plan 3: This plan is labelled 'New' and I delete all of the 'As-built' items and it will be used only for a few 3D pictures as shown above.

If any post finalized revisions happen, I just delete Plan 3, make all adjustments to Plan 2, then make a new Plan 3 for the 3D pics.

No matter what I am not deleting anything at all. If later something changes I just change it. 

 

14 minutes ago, ValleyGuy said:

 

Here are a couple Scope of Work pages, everything you see comes from the one plan.

Do you mean one model? or do you have more then one model? Revit functions very much like how you would do things when you build it in the real world.   Now sure because it is a 3D environment you could actually build the floor for the second level without walls to support it and it would be floating in nowhere land... 

 

How does this affect schedule creation does the schedule require extra work to make extra stuff go away?  For example in Revit the schedules are affected by the phasing as well so you can set the schedule to show existing, demoed, proposed, or everything. 

 

Here is the Screenshot in plan view and a 3D view but keep in mind that since it is the Model this can be done for anything and everything, Elevations, sections, plans, schedules. also the changes will dynamically update everything in the entire project with a change:

 

   

 

It does seem like there are some improvements overall since 4 years ago in this regard because I tried to do as you are showing 4 years ago and I was told that the Demo plan was just a cad file imported as a Cad Detail.   

 

It also seems that my secondary question got lost and since the subject of the post did not include it but have the site tools been made better?  When I used it 4 years ago it seemed like while you could generate stuff is was very basic over all... Here is something I done in Revit. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[JiAngelo]

Scott,

The site tools are better, but still woefully inadequate.  There is no wireframe 3D view of topography. Cross sections do not show the topography well enough to snap to and create an existing slope line, for instance.  Last project I had to extrapolate that using a series of z=1' boxes that I then aligned in 2D to match the 1' contour separations on a 50' ravine in the rear yard.  This determined my failure plane and minimum setback & footer depths from the hillside to comply with code.

 

Chief is not perfect.  I just wasted a day updating my walls/doors/windows/floors/ceilings with the correct energy information to export to REScheck.  Chief still included my unconditioned non-living area porch ceilings in the insulated trussed areas - but not the garage ceilings, go figure.  Basement walls still export as above ground walls - this despite my X8 2016 tech support request to fix this.  Luckily I found the original complaint and therein I spelled out how to manually fix the xml within the *.rxl file.  You'd think in 8 years a group of programmers would have automated this fix with a below grade wall toggle (or subtract grade from TOF and compare to wall height).  Rather than file my complaint again, I simply manually fixed it in the 3 jobs I'm currently working on and the *.rxl's imported fine.  

 

With regards to your asbuilt/demo and proposed, I'm not seeing the toggle hang-up.  We draw the asbuilt first (V1).  We decide which objects to demo second (V2). Then we create our proposed (V3, V4, V5.....)  You can reference display V2 in any version, and vice-versa.  If you ever update V2, it will update within each proposed version automatically.  If you updated V2 to V2.1 then you rename the reference display plan to pull in V2.1 instead of V2.  Technically the proposed should only represent the new objects, and your asbuilt/demo (V2) references the rest of the building and demolition objects on separate layer sets.  But Chief is a room container program.  You can't resize/redefine a kitchen/dinette/greatroom arrangement without the container walls.  You would need to invest time excluding existing items from schedules if you only want schedules to address the remodeling work.  Probably less time than you'd have us invest to learn Revit.  One layout file would then show views of the V0, highlighting V1's what to demo, then outlining how to build proposed V#.

 

The real problem here is you know Revit and the only people currently hiring want you to use Chief.  Do you want the job or not?  I would discourage you from hiring on as a covert operator on a mission to change everyone into Reviteers.  I would embrace Chief and give the employer what they want in a format they themselves can update or change if I'm on vacation, taking a day off, or have moved on to greener pastures. I would use Revit to augment my production for them whenever it makes more sense.  Make the work you produce undeniable and they may come to embrace Revit of their own volition. 

[kylejmarsh]

17 hours ago, mtldesigns said:

For the record, It would be great if we could XREF a model into another model in Chief.  With that overlay, we can show the new and the old in one view.  

 

I think you can actually do that - check it out. The place you can see it is in the 'layout box specification' and you can select a different file - here I am showing the existing and the concept both on one layout box view:

 

 

As far as model organization, the guys are describing a similar process to what I use. First build a rough model based on the simple/basic dimensions you took at the meeting. I don't go overboard with this because I don't even know how good a project this is and the concept phase only pays so much. So I just get the important stuff - namely wall locations for the areas we are working on, the outside footprint (at this point the county/township tax records work fine) and the height of the roof eaves and ridges. This becomes the 'rough existing' model, witch which I use to make the concept options.

 

Once we get further down the line and decide on a concept and I get ready to do 'real' drawings, then I go back sometimes with my computer sometimes with a basic print-out and I get all the remaining dimensions to get the model dialed in. I actually fine-tune the current model and usually discard the 'rough existing' at this point, because later on I'll go back and use my final model, duplicate it, and delete out the stuff that's new, fix up the existing by adding the demo notes, and that one becomes the 'Demo' model that goes in to the print set. It's all pretty straightforward.

 

Chief is kinda like a mini bike - it ain't perfect but it's got just enough horsepower to do what you need, and it's a fun ride. And kind of like a minibike it's not considered a 'real' motorcycle by guys who use really expensive bikes that are really fussy and broken down all the time, meanwhile you're riding laps around them on your Chief Architect minibke. Or something like that.

 

Kyle

[scottkendall]

4 hours ago, JiAngelo said:

Scott,

The site tools are better, but still woefully inadequate.  There is no wireframe 3D view of topography. Cross sections do not show the topography well enough to snap to and create an existing slope line, for instance.  Last project I had to extrapolate that using a series of z=1' boxes that I then aligned in 2D to match the 1' contour separations on a 50' ravine in the rear yard.  This determined my failure plane and minimum setback & footer depths from the hillside to comply with code.

That existing slope was not a snap it was the Existing Slope Phased to be demolished.

 

4 hours ago, JiAngelo said:

 

Chief is not perfect.  I just wasted a day updating my walls/doors/windows/floors/ceilings with the correct energy information to export to REScheck.  Chief still included my unconditioned non-living area porch ceilings in the insulated trussed areas - but not the garage ceilings, go figure.  Basement walls still export as above ground walls - this despite my X8 2016 tech support request to fix this.  Luckily I found the original complaint and therein I spelled out how to manually fix the xml within the *.rxl file.  You'd think in 8 years a group of programmers would have automated this fix with a below grade wall toggle (or subtract grade from TOF and compare to wall height).  Rather than file my complaint again, I simply manually fixed it in the 3 jobs I'm currently working on and the *.rxl's imported fine.  

Never really messed with the Energey compliance in Revit California is kind of strict in what they accept and requires a third party to verify and certify energy reports I am not sure that Revit can Export to a format that Cal Certs or HERS rating will take. 

 

4 hours ago, JiAngelo said:

 

With regards to your asbuilt/demo and proposed, I'm not seeing the toggle hang-up.  We draw the asbuilt first (V1).  We decide which objects to demo second (V2). Then we create our proposed (V3, V4, V5.....)  You can reference display V2 in any version, and vice-versa.  If you ever update V2, it will update within each proposed version automatically.  If you updated V2 to V2.1 then you rename the reference display plan to pull in V2.1 instead of V2.  Technically the proposed should only represent the new objects, and your asbuilt/demo (V2) references the rest of the building and demolition objects on separate layer sets.  But Chief is a room container program.  You can't resize/redefine a kitchen/dinette/greatroom arrangement without the container walls.  You would need to invest time excluding existing items from schedules if you only want schedules to address the remodeling work.  Probably less time than you'd have us invest to learn Revit.  One layout file would then show views of the V0, highlighting V1's what to demo, then outlining how to build proposed V#.

That is just it I have no V1,V2,V3,V4, Etc I have just Project Model.   I hear that you are saying if you update V2 it will update all the views where you edit V2 but what I am trying to say is that If I update the proposed by adding a door in a wall that is existing it will automatically reflect that section of wall demolished on the demo plan.   Or if I have a proposed door already in an existing wall and I remove or even move that door it will adjust the demo plan.   Existing/Demo/Proposed are all interlinking what is done to one is done to the other. 

 

4 hours ago, JiAngelo said:

 

The real problem here is you know Revit and the only people currently hiring want you to use Chief.  Do you want the job or not?  I would discourage you from hiring on as a covert operator on a mission to change everyone into Reviteers.  I would embrace Chief and give the employer what they want in a format they themselves can update or change if I'm on vacation, taking a day off, or have moved on to greener pastures. I would use Revit to augment my production for them whenever it makes more sense.  Make the work you produce undeniable and they may come to embrace Revit of their own volition. 

 

You are correct the real problem is that I use Revit and they use Chief... Do I want the job maybe! But if you are hiring me to lead your company into the future and take the department from a self taught contractor using Chief,  full blown design division Revit convert is kind of really the way to go. See you would use Revit to augment your production but I would use Revit to do all the architectural work and leave the interior designers to using Chief with an imported Model object.  That said If you can learn Chief on your own I can teach you Revit, and I would say that 98% of all Architectual and Drafting courses in California use Revit, the pool of users is just larger.  

 

That said even without the issue of the Phasing the site tools in Revit are undeniable and hillside projects are my bag so to speak.  

 

 

 

[Alaskan_Son]

Have you actually talked to the new company about their drafting standards and needs yet?  Are you sure some of the things you're concerned with are even going to be an issue?  Maybe they already have an easy system in place for their as-built/demo. plans.  And maybe they don't even do site plans...or maybe those are done by someone else?  I don't know, I could easily see a situation though where you're concerned with the ability to do something that they already have figured out and under control, and that perhaps you can just adopt their system.  I mean they're getting jobs done right?

 

Just a thought.

[scottkendall]

16 minutes ago, kylejmarsh said:

As far as model organization, the guys are describing a similar process to what I use. First build a rough model based on the simple/basic dimensions you took at the meeting. I don't go overboard with this because I don't even know how good a project this is and the concept phase only pays so much. So I just get the important stuff - namely wall locations for the areas we are working on, the outside footprint (at this point the county/township tax records work fine) and the height of the roof eaves and ridges. This becomes the 'rough existing' model, witch which I use to make the concept options.

 

My contracts are signed long before I ever do an As-Built so rough is does not exist in my work flow I know not everyone is so lucky.

 

16 minutes ago, kylejmarsh said:

Once we get further down the line and decide on a concept and I get ready to do 'real' drawings, then I go back sometimes with my computer sometimes with a basic print-out and I get all the remaining dimensions to get the model dialed in. I actually fine-tune the current model and usually discard the 'rough existing' at this point, because later on I'll go back and use my final model, duplicate it, and delete out the stuff that's new, fix up the existing by adding the demo notes, and that one becomes the 'Demo' model that goes in to the print set. It's all pretty straightforward.

See this is my issue I do not like deleting, or fixing up I want to move the door on the proposed in an existing wall and have the demo plan updated automatically at the same time.   When you clients that make changes when they feel like it you are left reviewing lots of stuff where with phasing making the change is fairly organic. 

 

16 minutes ago, kylejmarsh said:

 

Chief is kinda like a mini bike - it ain't perfect but it's got just enough horsepower to do what you need, and it's a fun ride. And kind of like a minibike it's not considered a 'real' motorcycle by guys who use really expensive bikes that are really fussy and broken down all the time, meanwhile you're riding laps around them on your Chief Architect minibke. Or something like that.

That is a funny comparison for sure Never known Revit to ever brake down and never known it to leave me without the ability to do something anything.... Does it frame the building automatically?  No not natively, but with a plug in yes because Revit allows full API access to the software.  Just like with Measurements there is not a built in Auto tool but with a plug in you can. 

[scottkendall]

8 minutes ago, Alaskan_Son said:

Have you actually talked to the new company about their drafting standards and needs yet?  Are you sure some of the things you're concerned with are even going to be an issue?  Maybe they already have an easy system in place for their as-built/demo. plans.  And maybe they don't even do site plans...or maybe those are done by someone else?  I don't know, I could easily see a situation though where you're concerned with the ability to do something that they already have figured out and under control, and that perhaps you an just adopt their system. 

I have seen their plans and they are sub par IMO.   They do not take the jobs that I am concerned with because they do not have a "ME" to handle the jobs. They do have a system in place but as far as I can tell it has a lot of room for errors.  They do not take on the kind of jobs where the site tools would be important because they do not have the ability to design them. I would be enabling them to take on those kind of jobs because of my extensive experience with that type of work.  

 

8 minutes ago, Alaskan_Son said:

I mean they're getting jobs done right?

My job would not be to just get jobs done, but to make the process better more streamlined with reduced errors.   IF your job is to carry a company into the future and the software you are using is lacking the abilities that the industry standard has and you are not brining the company up to speed then you are not doing your job.    I am a computer hardware/software before I was an architect I was a network engineer in an IT department and just happened to land in Architecture.  I have Alpha, Beta, Tested 100's of softwares, every time a new BIM software comes out be it on windows or Mac or universal I test it.  Archicad is about the closest to Revit there is when it comes to the Robustness of the software... Chief is the closest in the way Revit feels, maybe that is because it is a very process based work flow.   AI tools are coming soon the drafter is not really going to be needed any more, we are just going to design a pretty building give it, it's soul and an AI is going to take over and generate the construction documents.

 

Maybe even push it through plan check!   Is Chief Ready for that future is the question you must be asking yourself... Unless you are old and you do not expect to be apart of that future! 

 

 

 

[SHCanada2]

@scottkendall

 

Curious about this phasing feature. I see that for walls it is relatively straight forward (and I assume you just specify a wall as only in that phase), but what does it show for roofs? Roofs can be over built or replaced with rafters, or retrussed. Are you building that all manually and then specifying for each piece of lumber what is part of what phase?

 

The advantage I see in the phasing feature vs the 2 model approach in CA, is if I want to do two sections, and fiddle with things or do details, I have to do it twice(or ensure it is all perfect in the as built). Where the phasing I could presumably control what is off, on, and shows up for both sections. 

 

I will be the first to admit the site tools look very good in revit.

1 hour ago, scottkendall said:

AI tools are coming soon the drafter is not really going to be needed any more, we are just going to design a pretty building give it, it's soul and an AI is going to take over and generate the construction documents

Isn't AI going to generate the pretty building? Customers will just point AI to buildings and features they like and the parcel they own (similar to what they do today when they meet an architect). AI can then generate 100s of variations in minutes which meet the local ordinances, building codes and parcel constraints. Customer will pick, and then it will generate construction docs too.

 

 

[Steve_Nyhof]

1 hour ago, scottkendall said:

Is Chief Ready for that future is the question you must be asking yourself... Unless you are old and you do not expect to be apart of that future! 

After reading enough, I'm exhausted and too old to have to think this much. Four decades ago I was complaining about what I should do, already designing homes for 10 years on the side. My oldest brother, a contractor, just told me... Just get to work! So I did using whatever tools were available, and adjusted my tools as technology changed. Pick something.

 

I do not think there is enough that could be said here that could move you one way or the other. Sounds to me like you just need to get to work, do something.

[scottkendall]

4 hours ago, SHCanada2 said:

@scottkendall

 

Curious about this phasing feature. I see that for walls it is relatively straight forward (and I assume you just specify a wall as only in that phase), but what does it show for roofs? Roofs can be over built or replaced with rafters, or retrussed. Are you building that all manually and then specifying for each piece of lumber what is part of what phase?

Revit uses sold modeling while chief uses 3 faces, that said roofs are a totally different animal in Revit than in Chief.   But in Revit you would build your 3D solid model by using the roof tool, you can generate the entire roof as one large part or in individual parts. But it is not roof faces like Chief.    You can then select the parts and set them to Existing, Demo, New, or what ever.   The Rafters are done with a tool called beam system and you would select the beam system for the area that you are demoing and it will get all the rafters. But the roof would work very similar to walls. 

 

 

4 hours ago, SHCanada2 said:

 

The advantage I see in the phasing feature vs the 2 model approach in CA, is if I want to do two sections, and fiddle with things or do details, I have to do it twice(or ensure it is all perfect in the as built). Where the phasing I could presumably control what is off, on, and shows up for both sections. 

This is one advantage but also that everything works backwards and forwards changes to existing items on the proposed plan will affect the demo plan. Maybe because of the way I learned architecture and jumping right into Revit after a few short years in Autocad I never developed the back and forth required to make sure things are reflected in all views... Maybe I am a spoiled brat   if we got hit with an EMP tomorrow and I had to go and start manually drawing oh man I would be in trouble.    My drafting skills are exceptional, but my updating all views when a change is made are well below terrible. 

 

4 hours ago, SHCanada2 said:

 

I will be the first to admit the site tools look very good in revit.

They recently updated them and I had to spend sometime relearning them.  While the old ones were just a robust they were much different and much harder to use IMO. 

4 hours ago, SHCanada2 said:

Isn't AI going to generate the pretty building? Customers will just point AI to buildings and features they like and the parcel they own (similar to what they do today when they meet an architect). AI can then generate 100s of variations in minutes which meet the local ordinances, building codes and parcel constraints. Customer will pick, and then it will generate construction docs too.

This heresy you speak of!  Maybe I am wrong but I think everyone alive today will be dead before AI reaches that point... It still draws extra arms and missing fingers.  In logo generation it still leave letters out of words and the likes.    I have used some AI rendering tools but they give you some kind of idea they still do some super wonky stuff.  They still have a fairly long way to go before the reach replacing us for the pretty building part... 

[scottkendall]

4 hours ago, Steve_Nyhof said:

After reading enough, I'm exhausted and too old to have to think this much.  Four decades ago I was complaining about what I should do, already designing homes for 10 years on the side. My oldest brother, a contractor, just told me... Just get to work! So I did using whatever tools were available, and adjusted my tools as technology changed. Pick something.

Maybe you should take a nap  I love taking naps.   Honestly I am not complaining I am researching I am acquiring information and assessing the software though others experiences.   Contractors that just get to work generally end up with lots of change orders and when your flooring in the master bathroom cost $800 a S/F that's a big mistake.   I have picked something it is Revit but I am always on the look out for something that is the new hottie.   

 

4 hours ago, Steve_Nyhof said:

 

I do not think there is enough that could be said here that could move you one way or the other. Sounds to me like you just need to get to work, do something.

IF you all would have said Chief had phasing now there is a good chance I would have moved into that direction.   I am always working my man, I type really fast so these responses really do not take very long... 

[mtldesigns]

4 hours ago, Steve_Nyhof said:

Just get to work! So I did using whatever tools were available, and adjusted my tools as technology changed. Pick something

AMEN BROTHER

[Steve_Nyhof]

I was a bit mean spirited. Sorry. I missed my nap today and that was most likely my problem 

[Steve_Nyhof]

59 minutes ago, scottkendall said:

IF you all would have said Chief had phasing now there is a good chance I would have moved into that direction.

 

Chief does have phasing, we just call it Reference Display and it functions a little differently but does pretty much the same thing. If I was an avid Revit user, and know what I know today about Chief, I would just purchase Chief also. While there are a few systems like Chief out there, non of them hold a candle light to its automation and power. Why not own both and up your services? 

 

I started out with AutoCAD while it was still a DOS software. I learned the LISP language and others to make dialog boxes, etc. and made systems that sold all over the world. Even got a Highly Recommended from the Catalyst magazine who did a review. As time went on Autodesk continued to develop new and more amazing software, mainly aiming at commercial and industrial, leaving the little guy in the dust. Chief came along about the same time, but it looked cumbersome and every time I tested it, I could not get it to do what I wanted. So I walked away from it over and over and stayed with AutoCAD.

 

About 5 years ago I purchased Chief, and because my mind was so wrapped around AutoCAD and how it functioned, I almost gave up, but kept learning, and the good people here would kick my butt time and time again as I complained. Over the years I was still using AutoCAD because I had projects running, or clients wanted to purchase a plan with changes. But I was slowly forgetting the commands and some of my programs were failing because of Window updates, and I was tired of maintaining them. Today I use Chief and love it. Yes of course there are issues and things we all want to see get fine tuned or added. But Chief is designing for the little guy, or the common residential or light commercial Architect, Designer and/or Builder. I'm not just another spec in a monster company who doesn't care about me nor know who I am. 

 

So. When I say just pick something, or get to work, I know I am talking to a hard working and very talented person. I don't think you need anyone of us to tell you what you need to do next. But if you're asking, I would suggest you pick up a copy of Chief and become an avid user. Again, it sounds like you are running into job situations that are using Chief, why not add it to your list of skills?