johnny

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.

Is there a way to control the outside stringer width? What Chief is calling a "stringer" is really a "skirt" in this instance - so I never thought that could control what it does. Although...there is no option for the landing to have a "stringer/skirt", but I suppose a poly-solid would work fine.

Its like the success of their approaches on otherwise difficult modeling aspects (roofs, cabinets, etc) to make those operations easy caused them to make otherwise easy operations hard.

I will do that, but honestly does it seem reasonable that such a basic function doesn't work if: 1. A poly isn't closed, and 2. Only if the poly is completely isolated....? Moving poly points shouldn't be reliant upon those 2 things - we are talking basic function here.

The serious downside to the wall method is the rail no longer has edit-ability, and it doesn't connect to other rails.

I guess I didn't realize the tool considered it such an extreme difference. I may have said closed poly in vid - but I see now if its closed it works. Although..i dont see why it would matter. Shouldn't that tool work regardless?

Sorry...i just can't get it to work

That is the stairs I posted above. I saw your vid on that knee-wall condition but thought a ramp would be more controllable and you don't have to then have the railing converted into a symbol. Therefore the railing can connect to other rails.

I still can't figure this out.