Warped Roofs - By the Numbers

[gteacher]

I thought that some people new to Chief would like to have a better understanding of how warped planes fit together mathematically, in order to get a better understanding of what chief does to match planes. Hopefully, having this understanding will help in making manual adjustments.

Attached is a video which discusses this. It's directed toward new users. Experience users have been through this many times.

Hope this helps someone?

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/30269729/War...ane%20Demo.mp4

[dshall]

Dog gone you Gerry, wonderful job, thanks so much for the video!!!

[billemery]

I had provided a geometric solution to the original poster on this subject.

I just want to point out again that these are problems that are not random, and can quickly and easily be solved with a little geometry.

Attached is a precisely solved plan that Scott and Gerry have been working with.

It's simply a matter of extending or retracting the roof planes to achieve a point on each with the same elevation at the ridge. drawing a roof base line across these points is the basis of the solution. From there it's a matter of snapping the roof planes into place, and matching the heights to the adjacent planes.

[dshall]

I had provided a geometric solution to the original poster on this subject.

....................

strange, I cannot open it.

[Gene Davis]

I'm lazy and not trying this with Chief. I'll just try asking a question, Bill, and hope you respond.

Please explain the steps taken with Chief to produce the two different roof edge moves, the extension of one and the contraction of the other, that produce those necessary end points at the precise and needed elevations.

I understand how Chief delivers the elevation info. Does one construct a flat roof at the target elevations to then find, with Chief, the intersect points?

Short of a video, which would be best, an explanation will do.

[gteacher]

Scott

Attached is plan. This happened a couple of times in my video and in tests, so I assume its something that I'm doing. But I don't know what?

[dshall]

Scott

Attached is plan. This happened a couple of times in my video and in tests, so I assume its something that I'm doing. But I don't know what?

Thanks Gerry, I will check it out in the AM and let you know what I come up with.

[billemery]

Hi Scott,
It should open now.

[dshall]

Hi Scott,
It should open now.

Got it, but I am not sure how how you were able to define the angle of the baseline of the connecting roofs without doing some math. One minute video explaining what I do not understand.

http://chieftutor.com/dscotthall/BIL...20QUESTION.wmv

[billemery]

Scott, In answer to your short video question;

I have simply extended the edge of the roof plane A, so that its elevation at the peak is at the same height as the peak of roof plane B.

A line drawn between these two points is a horizontal (true length) line about which the roof plane can revolve and connect to the point on the far side of the roof.

No math is necessary. And yes, it is that simple.

This is just old fashioned layout geometry, as was once practiced in the drafting room, work shops, and at the job site.

[dshall]

Scott, In answer to your short video question;

I have simply extended the edge of the roof plane A, so that its elevation at the peak is at the same height as the peak of roof plane B.

A line drawn between these two points is a horizontal (true length) line about which the roof plane can revolve and connect to the point on the far side of the roof.

No math is necessary. And yes, it is that simple.

This is just old fashioned layout geometry, as was once practiced in the drafting room, work shops, and at the job site.

Well........... Bill is almost as smart as you know who, nice job Bill, it took me a couple of minutes to figure out what you were talking about, thanks mucho, here is a relatively short video on what Bill is talking about for those of you who are as slow as I........

http://chieftutor.com/dscotthall/BIL...20SOLUTION.wmv

[gteacher]

The difference Between the two methods appears to be just that I choose to use the the roof ridges as the baselines and then cal the inclination based on that.

Bill selected the different heights between ridges as his baseline starting point and allowed chief to calculate and set the inclination by making the baseline parallel to his construct line. His method does not need to set the baseline angle as Chief does that.

To say that Bill's starting point is a better approach would be an understatement.
But the trig remains the same.

[dshall]

The difference Between the two methods appears to be just that I choose to use the the roof ridges as the baselines and then cal the inclination based on that.

Bill selected the different heights between ridges as his baseline starting point and allowed chief to calculate and set the inclination by making the baseline parallel to his construct line. His method does not need to set the baseline angle as Chief does that.

To say that Bill's starting point is a better approach would be an understatement.
But the trig remains the same.

Yep, Billo's method is easy peasy.....

[dshall]

One thing to keep in mind is his method is great assuming that the two initial roof planes ARE THE SAME PITCH, if not, we are dealing with a different ball game.

[Joe Carrick]

Any two points that are at the same height on two separate roof planes can be used as a baseline.