DRAWZILLA Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 Why would anyone want to show posts on the foundation plan that are 2 floors up that probably set on beams ,that have their own posts below. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RL-inc Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 Agree with Perry- I like to chase point loads as they relate from floor to floor. Point loads that land on floor beams or headers on upper floors will then be transferred to the ends of those members and those loads chased down again. When i get to the foundation i only show the loads that are relevant to that floor and the associated footings. Additional references to loads farther up the path would be clumsy and confusing IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DRAWZILLA Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 For me it would be useful to be able to show all roofs for the roof and site plans on 3 story plans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RL-inc Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 Agreed again- I use the display on floor above or floor below tool for site plans but i have to create a cad detail of the footprint and then go back and display the roofs on the floors i need them on in plan view. Maybe a "display on all floors" option for roof planes This somewhat relates to another issue i posted on regarding plan footprints and the wall layer that they snap or dimension to. It would be better if we could control the wall layer that the plan footprint generates from- main framing layer would be my choice. Then the main floor plan on most projects could be used as the plan footprint with the dimensions going to the main wall layer and also being able to show the roof planes from all levels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJohnson Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 Ok, I'm starting to sneak up on understanding how chief works... Just barely! What I'm seeing is that objects belong to a level, and the only way to display things from a different level is to use reference sets. Please let me know if this is correct. And if so, is there any exceptions to the rule? What I'm getting at is this.. I do a lot of very complex homes where walls don't stack and posts and hold downs sometimes go to the foundation, and sometimes get headed off and new posts carry the loads down, etc. sometimes I will have a steel post that starts at the foundation and is continuous thru various floors all the way up to the roof framing. What I absolutely NEED out of a drafting program is a way to see how posts and hold downs stack compared to each level of the house. When I frame a house I always start at the roof, drop in posts where I can for roof beams, then I go down a level and if a post is over an open area I head it off with a beam and add new lower posts, if it's in a wall I consider the post continuous and go down to the next level, etc until I get to the foundation. So, all that being said, what are my options in chief? So far what I'm coming up with is using the 0 level for grids and use it as my ref set so I can show the same grids on each level to help make sure nothing is out of wack. If I was drawing in 2d I could put the posts on the ref set also and handle continuous vs discontinuous with different post layers. But I don't think that will work because the posts need to interact. So there's my issue. What do you guys think, and how do you handle posts that go across multiple levels? In 2014, I constructed a five level hillside house. There were lots of stacking posts that called for 60" MSTs connecting floor to floor, plus window and door openings to align. I took wall elevations showing framing, and stacked then in layout view to figure it out. Not sure where my final drawing is now, but this one shows how it was working. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tahoebrian5 Posted December 18, 2015 Author Share Posted December 18, 2015 Additional references to loads farther up the path would be clumsy and confusing IMO. I see what you're saying but the assumption is that none of your posts are continuous. I deal with physically continuous posts a lot of times either steel or what I call out as CVG (continuous vertical grain) the axial compression strength of wood is much stronger in the vertical axis as it is in the horizontal so sometimes when a post load is high enough I cannot have it framed onto the bottom plate like trimmers and King studs. It actually cuts thru the plates and floors and is either continuous or has a splice detail at the center of the floor joist space. Another scenario, I have a deck in the top story of a three story home. The exterior posts originate at floor 3 and continue down to the foundation. They can't be shown unles we use floor 3 as the ref set, and then we don't get to see floor 1 posts. my point is that chief is holding itself back by not allowing us to display what we want to. We should be able to turn on anything we want in any view imo. Corner Windows and 3D mouse options are all good and all but this seems like a huge functional drawback and I really hope it's being taken seriously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe_Carrick Posted December 18, 2015 Share Posted December 18, 2015 Brian, I think the only way Chief could do this would be to have a "toggle" to "Show on all Floors". But that wouldn't work either if you wanted it to show only on specific floors. Here's how I would handle it: 1. Place the Post on Floor 1. 2. Open it's dbx and lock the Bottom. 3. Set the Top Height as needed 4. Close the dbx 5. Copy (Ctrl_C) 6. Go to each of the other Floors and "Paste Hold Position" (Ctrl_Alt_V) There will actually be multiple Posts but it will look the way you want - all of them will be at the exact same location in the model but will be visible on all floors. It's not perfect, but the only real downside is that the material list (and maybe the "X8 Framing Schedule") would be wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tahoebrian5 Posted December 19, 2015 Author Share Posted December 19, 2015 Thanks Joe, I figured as much. I'm just whining at this point! Is there anyway to group or block things that are on more than one floor? Like maybe add a post on each floor and then group them so you can copy them or move them around? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KevinWaldron Posted December 19, 2015 Share Posted December 19, 2015 If we were able to control where items where and what they were called on say a wall then we could do many things if CA allowed for sub-layer sets upon sub-layer sets......... Enclosing a Rhinoceros window of the layers board........ Note how I have added Walls as the Major layer, Then I have placed Basement, Crawl Space, Floor 1, etc......... all at the next layer level and beyond..... From Floor 1 I have made a Sub-layer Called Outside, Inside etc...... Note how you can turn any level off or lock that level. Click Walls and all the lower levels hide, Hide Floor 1 only and everything under this layer is hidden from on screen....... other layers still show........ Look closely at what we could do with Layer Sets then... Kevin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glennw Posted December 19, 2015 Share Posted December 19, 2015 Is there anyway to group or block things that are on more than one floor? Like maybe add a post on each floor and then group them so you can copy them or move them around? This is what I do in this situation. I forgot to move the post, but you can see that if you move it in plan, it will move on all floors that it spans. I think this is a better way than having separate posts on each floor - it is a lot easier to control the objects over multiple floors - especially if they need to be moved. http://screencast.com/t/EbtGY6RFV Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tahoebrian5 Posted December 19, 2015 Author Share Posted December 19, 2015 This is what I do in this situation. I forgot to move the post, but you can see that if you move it in plan, it will move on all floors that it spans. I think this is a better way than having separate posts on each floor - it is a lot easier to control the objects over multiple floors - especially if they need to be moved. http://screencast.com/t/EbtGY6RFV I'm highly intrigued.. Unfortunately I'm unable to watch videos on screencast. My iPad is my normal web browser and that's no good, but my main Windows ten computer also will not let me view them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DRAWZILLA Posted December 19, 2015 Share Posted December 19, 2015 I'm highly intrigued.. Unfortunately I'm unable to watch videos on screencast. My iPad is my normal web browser and that's no good, but my main Windows ten computer also will not let me view them. Brian, screencast says that anyone can view the video's and I know Apple users can view them. Windows 10 also. Not sure what your problem is though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dshall Posted December 19, 2015 Share Posted December 19, 2015 Brian, screencast says that anyone can view the video's and I know Apple users can view them. Windows 10 also. Not sure what your problem is though. I am in the same boat, I cannot see Glenn's screencasts on my IPAD. I have to wait to get to the office to view on my OFFICE IMAC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dshall Posted December 19, 2015 Share Posted December 19, 2015 BTW Glenn, on my computer, half of your screen is cut off, I forgot what the fix for this issue was. Do you remember? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tahoebrian5 Posted December 19, 2015 Author Share Posted December 19, 2015 Okay, screencast worked today. Im not sure what my problem last time was either. Another day another problem. The cad cross box is likely what I will do for now as there does not seem to be any better options. It's a travesty though to have to draw cad objects in such a great 3d modeling program. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dshall Posted December 19, 2015 Share Posted December 19, 2015 ..... It's a travesty though to have to draw cad objects in such a great 3d modeling program. I don't get what you do not understand. I thought you understood the ref sets. I do not use Glenn's method. i use ref sets. I think Perry uses ref sets. If you use ref sets, there is no CAD involved. Learn the power of ref sets..... it can be improved...... it can be improved if CA gives us the ability to use the MMRLS, which is the ability to use multiple ref sets for any view sent to layout, but until they give us the MMRLS, the MRLS works very well. I have read that others want to modify the ref sets because they think it will be more intuitive.... I don't get that..... ref sets work very well the way they are set up if you understand them..... One more side note, if you use Glenn's method, that will mess up your MATERIAL LIST. I don't use material lists yet because I think they are too difficult to use in the present set up, but eventually, the material lists will be super. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glennw Posted December 19, 2015 Share Posted December 19, 2015 BTW Glenn, on my computer, half of your screen is cut off, I forgot what the fix for this issue was. Do you remember? I am not sure on a mac, but on a PC you can go View...Zoom...and set it to a smaller zoom value. One more side note, if you use Glenn's method, that will mess up your MATERIAL LIST. I don't use material lists yet because I think they are too difficult to use in the present set up, but eventually, the material lists will be super. This assumes that the post is not one piece spanning the 2 floors. I was also demonstrating the fact that you can place an object on one floor in plan and have it display on another floor in 3D. I don't use reference sets to do tis sort of thing because I couldn't be bothered changing reference sets or redefining reference sets to display these types of objects. I place the cad box once and it is there permanently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe_Carrick Posted December 20, 2015 Share Posted December 20, 2015 Glenn, Here's the problem: My method places a full height post on each floor (1,2,3,4,5....) and it appears correct in 3D as well as on each Floor Plan - but there's more than one in the materials list or framing schedule. Your method shows correctly in 3D and is correct in the materials list and framing schedule but can only show on 2 Floor Plans using a Reference Set. With more than 2 Floors the Reference Set will not show the post on all Floors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glennw Posted December 20, 2015 Share Posted December 20, 2015 Your method shows correctly in 3D and is correct in the materials list and framing schedule but can only show on 2 Floor Plans using a Reference Set. With more than 2 Floors the Reference Set will not show the post on all Floors. Joe, I think that you missed what I was doing. I was not using reference sets to display the post on other floors in plan. I was using the reference set temporarily to locate the post so that I can draw a cad box on the other floors. And what you say is exactly why I do not use reference sets to indicate the posts on other floors. I do not like using individual posts on different floors because they are too hard to keep synchronised if they need to be moved. And I don't care about the material list. Each to his own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 I would turn on only the posts, do a cad detail from view, block it, copy it, paste in place on any floor and put on specific layer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tahoebrian5 Posted December 21, 2015 Author Share Posted December 21, 2015 I think the main point we all agree upon is that Chief has a weakness and we are all using various work arounds to deal with it. So far based on my about 20 hours of use, this and the heights in the structures dbx are the two hardest parts to swallow about chief. To be honest if it wasn't so very good at some other things it would be a deal breaker. It just seems to not be very versatile in the way it allows you to do things. I do realize it's called chief architect and not chief structural engineer but I do wish they spent a little more time with structural issues in mind. One of the biggest strengths in cad based engineering Imo is the ability to create reference drawings that can be shared across multiple drawings and disciplines and the way chief is setup is not very powerful in that aspect. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 It will not do it all. It is best for fast plan layout, massing, quick 3D renders and client visualization. One has to shift gears to then go into a 2D based aspect of the program to generate the working drawings. A lot of these guys have years with this program and I doubt they would stick with it if it did not deliver. Maybe a little more time is required to get the feel for the program. I figure I am at about 26,000 hours on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich_Winsor Posted December 22, 2015 Share Posted December 22, 2015 ... Maybe a little more time is required to get the feel for the program. I figure I am at about 26,000 hours on it. Coincidentally that's about what I have in to Microsoft Solitaire. Hey! Maybe that would explain my lack of productivity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now