Doug_N

I'm assuming that the skirt boards will be fastened to the deck posts. The boards can be created as individual boards using 3d solids. Then you can multi copy the boards vertically or horizontally as required, trimming individual boards as required for the grade.

The feature in the picture is called "corbelling" and is a way for masonry to change the cross-section of a wythe of brick or stone. Most building codes restrict corbels to an offset of 1/3 brick, more or less, unless certified by a structural engineer or architect. Before designing such a structure, my advice is to check what the building code is in your area. This can be done in CA as mentioned, by modelling a 3d solid and then mirroring to match the opposite side.

Thanks Mark, I have sent it in.

Frustrating beyond belief. I have tried so many things to get this right. If you really want a hairy experience, try to get this to do auto-build with trusses!!!

Roof wall problem.zip

How can I find that tool?

It does but the cutout is wrong as my picture shows.

I've never heard of that.

That might just work. It would mean lining up three elements but what the heck. If it works it will be worth it.

I have created a moulded polyline to make a stone surround for windows and doors in a project that looks pretty good. The stone surround is converted to a symbol that has the properties of a passthrough window. So first I place the window assembly, then put the stone surround over the same center. The passthrough creates a void in the wall cutting the masonry to show the stone moulding. The problem is that the project requires some windows and doors to have an arched or vaulted stone surround over a rectangular window or door. If I make a vaulted stone surround symbol it cuts the wall at the height of the arch. That leaves a rectangular opening in the wall. Tearing my hair out with this one. This is view with just a polyline with the stone surround for the right window. This view is the same polyline moulding converted to a window symbol. Any ideas???

Please post the plan file.

Robert, you make a good point about the interior footing requirements. Some jurisdictions also require that the footing for interior load-bearing walls require a curb above the level of the basement slab as well. I have never understood the rationale for this requirement except for the explanation from a senior inspector who told me that this ensures that the basement frame wall will be in the correct location over the footing. That makes sense.

I am only guessing Gene, but I assume that the OP had auto framing on, and then for some reason when changing something clicked on the retain framing option to preserve something. Checking a couple of other rooms that option was not chosen so I would assume that they turned that option on for the deck for some reason.

This is the DBX for the deck in question. Uncheck this box, and voila! Deck will generate!

Hi Gene, Please post the plan file.

sometimes it is hard to explain a problem to someone else when you can so clearly see what is wrong yourself. I get it. Hopefully the answers here helped. One thing that usually helps is to post the actual plan file as well although in this case, I don't think it would have made any difference.

Hi Bruce, It seems that the problem that you are seeing, from what I can figure out from your post, is the handrail changes where there is wall adjacent and where there isn't a wall adjacent.

There are a few issues with this arrangement. The deck beam is not as wide as the stucco wall and the stucco attic wall lines up with the attic wall over the main part of the house. You have a couple of choices to work around the problem. 1) you can make a jog in the attic wall so that the outer surface of the wall lines up with the beam below, then edit the roof to match the wall. 2) you can move the railing wall to make the exterior surface of the beam align with the exterior surface of the attic wall above, and then no roof edit is necessary. 3) you can edit the roof to intersect with the beam and then change to attic roof so that where the roof cuts the wall, below the roof it is drywall and above the roof it is stucco type.

Ok, so the reason for the post was to learn about how to detail wall assemblies where external strapping is required and for some reason including instruction for where the strapping goes is a good idea so that there is no mistake about where things go. If the strapping is vertical, then here are the settings so that the strapping starts at the top of the stem wall. For vertical strapping it seems the default is to start at the top of the stem wall. See the DBX below For horizontal strapping the bottom strap must be specified as the same as the floor thickness. the program automatically starts at the reference floor level (zero absolute) and not the top of the stem wall.

No, you told it to do trusses, and it tried to do that. When CA can't do trusses it fills in spaces with rafters, and that is when the system broke down because it didn't do that completely either.

That is what you asked it to do. So it attempted to follow your directions but failed. Most time CA will post a warning, but my guess is that they didn't program an adequate error trapping routine for this case. I suggest you send the file to CA support so that they can diagnose it. More than likely nothing will be done about patching the current version because this is not a critical error, and a user can work around this fairly easily. At least in my opinion.

The program had a stroke when trying to calculate trusses for a 2" pitch roof with no depth and no flat ceiling over the room. . If you change to conventional framing (rafters,) then the framing will generate. If you make the truss have energy heels and include a flat ceiling in the room then framing will generate properly. The image below is with trusses CA did not generate an unable to generate trusses message, but if you look at a section, it becomes obvious that CA is struggling with a space that is too small in section for trusses to work.

I am with Chopsaw on this. The building code specifies the moisture content when used, so you would need to have a qualified person stamp the lumber with the species, the grade.

It can be done, but you can't mull them together. 1) Make the fixed glass unit 2) Make the hopper units as separate windows. The width of the unit is 1/2 of the sash wider than the fixed glass lower window 3) overlap the hopper sash with the lower window, and overlap the dividing sash of the hopper windows Because of the overlapping, these won't mull, but it looks like what you were after. A bit of a cludge, but heck. Failing that you can do window symbols to create this window in cad and set it to be a window so that it will cut the wall to fit.