johnny

I'll try some of these ideas and report back - thank you guys for the responses.

Here is a vid to explain.

If you see my example of the same wall sections, notice all the extra lines that show through the window trim etc (which is a "cross section")....on the clip section its exactly correct. Is there a way to control this at all? All those extra lines in places they shouldn't be on the cross section is frustrating to deal with constantly.

Here is a quick example. The first version is a "section line" (red arrows what lines shouldn't be there) and the second is a "back-clip". Is there a way to get the clean line-work the back-clip offers? This is just one 1/2 of a window section, and having all those extra lines to clean is a real PITA.

The problem when I do that I no longer get the "clean" lines....it reverts to being just like a cross section...meaning a bunch of extra lines crossing over each other.

When you are in 3D view can you see everything "on"....that is what I would double-check....perhaps when you go to the 3d view some of the layers are turning off?

Not sure about anyone else, but I like different features between these two tools. I like the "back/clipped sections" for their clean line/fill production at the wall intersection but I would like to see items past the cut as we do in the "cross section". Does anyone know a way to get both?

Does anyone have the problem when you hit undo it reverts to another annoset? If no one knows what I am talking about ill do a video to show this happening.

English - I wish this was a feature like in every other CAD/3D app....i find this a major pain.

I could very well be incorrect, but you may need to lower your roof planes for the size rafter you have. Id select the roof planes and lower by the calculation correct to get your birds-mouth dimensions you want. Essentially your baselines need to be lower for that (2x8?) to seat correctly on the top plate. Someone is going to ask you post the plan....as there may be a better way to do what you want.

Thanks Joe!

There is a glitch that happens in layout with angle dimensions.

This thread is exactly why we need instancing. In commercial its a big deal.

You can move the roof line up and down by floors....if I understand your question. You seem to have a 2nd question about "walls to just go to bottom of plate line of existing roof joists"....that part I dont fully understand.

I think we may be asking for something that really can't be done. If you think about it, we need a wall to be generated through a dbx for stairs and quickly get into the whole "wall/room" paradigm...not to mention walls part of stair objects. What we need to ask for (in my opinion) is: 1. Half wall tool being allowed to set angles and rake - very similar to the ramp tool. Not to mention, being able to resize/break like we do other walls. 2. Railings being able to be set without stairs/ramp (angle/rise/run). This would get us there, and something Chief can deliver now.

So i'm going to assume there is no way to make balusters from a 3d molding...?

I agree - for their client base this would be a good addition. However, the biggest problem with doing this in CA is the handrail since there isn't a way to build it without "following" the stairs (or ramp). The wall reshape isn't very difficult, and Bill used the "closed stringer" approach - but you don't get the "skirt boards" correct when you go that route. If we had the ability to use the rail tools and manually enter a rake (angle) manually this condition would be a breeze to build.

Is there a way to build stair (incline) balusters using 3d polylines? I tried to do this but couldn't get the repeat segment to work on an incline. I didn't know if there was some method to control the direction...? I'd really like to find a way to not use railings to finish stairs.

Its really unfortunate how difficult this is to get correct. Getting a pretty picture or two is easy, but actually getting this correct - the way it truly will be built - isn't easy at all. Its so close...

Here is what I face. So you know, I am trying to use the bottom "rail" as the knee wall cap, but since I can't change its material from the top rail I think I will have to place a poly-solid.

Thanks - that worked! However, since we can't set a railings angle manually (which doesn't seem right) how can I have the rail sit over the re-shaped wall? Is there where I will need to go back to the ramp?

I have the walls and stairs exactly as I need them, but trying to get the railing to work is not easy. I was trying to find a way to save the skirt board on the rail side...

I personally run into issues of editing poly points often - while trying to make actual closed polys. The "edit area" really should be more a function of CAD for purposes of line edits. The "edit area" is a great tool for other things I use in CA.

Is there any good reason why symbols can't be controlled in view sequence (view order)? I find it next to insane we don't have that sort of control.

After playing around with it, I do agree re-shape of the wall is a better approach for several reasons....however, control of the rail so it works beyond just that first stair section hasn't been possible for me without a separate, manual, railing - and getting it to "follow" the stairs has been a challenge. Its like both methods have their strengths but neither is optimum.