Larry_Sweeney

Since no one answered this thread up to this point I thought I would do the "correct" thing and send a simplified plan of my problem. What I'm attempting to do is over frame roof planes "B" onto "A". I also want to over frame roof plane "C" onto "A", B" and "D". I can't get either of the roof planes to over frame. What am I doing wrong? Can CA do this? Suggestions will be much appreciated. Also, I noticed when I backed up this plan to send it had 70 "referenced files". If possible, can someone explain this to me? Could this somehow be part of my problem? SIMPLIFIED PLAN.zip

I'm adding on an addition and I have a case where I want to do a roof over frame. I've tried everything I can think of and I can't get the "over framing to work. I built the same roof off to the side and attached the second roof that I want to over frame in a "T" type setup and tried the over framing option. It framed correctly. I then erased the framing from the new roofs and tried it again and it would not over frame. I tried this a few more times and I still could not get the over framing to work. Any suggestions before I strip down the model and send it?

Thanks guys. I'm going to be away from my computer for a day or two. When I get back I'll do more follow up with you all.

Chris................"Orientations" are all the same on all three railing walls shown. As for the drywall material, I just "grabbed" the "interior railing" wall type and used it. I've used it many times for exterior decks and up to now the drywall never showed. I have six railing walls making up this deck and the one I show is the only one with drywall showing. I thought maybe I was missing something simple that makes it show or not. There are times when railing walls are a "three coffee cup" ordeal for me. I got the "jitters" now! Thanks for the reply. Have a great day.

I have three railing walls exactly the same. One shows drywall on the framing and the other two don't. What determines if the drywall shows or not? I've looked at all the specifications dbx. on all three walls and everything looks the same. What am I missing? Thanks ahead for taking time for the help.

Thanks Glenn. I guess all I need to do is look! Can I blame my question on this as old age? Thanks again for enlightening me. Have a great day.

Maybe I've been building interior sliding barn doors for interior use wrong for years, but when I built the door, I oversized it. so it covered the casing. Is there a work around so I can do this in X15 other than making a doorway and then adding the track and door as symbols? I know this way works as a work around, but it's a PITA.

Did you use a "railing wall" to make your railing. A plan would help considerably.

You can extend the cabinet face on either side, but is there a way/work around to extend the length of the side of a cabinet? The only way I see is to make the cabinet 3/4" narrower and make just a cabinet face the width desired and attach it next to the cabinet. I'm just wondering if there's a better way to go about attempting to extend the side of a cabinet.

I'm sure I'm "reaching", but is there a "hidden work around" to just change the sash color only and not the sash and frame as a pair?

When adding a frieze under the roof return, what determines the length of the frieze from the end of the return? There should be a way other than changing the molding line manually. It's a real PITA when you have a house with a couple dozen returns. Then at times when you move the frieze molding line the molding ends up anywhere but where you wanted it, which after this happening it takes more than two cups of coffee to settle a person back down.

I guess I approach showing the client their model in a little "thought process". I do a Zoom meeting with them showing their model. I feel like I have the most control/discussion of the project and I can show them almost any aspect of the model and answer any of their questions in "real time". I'm then not leaving the model in their possession. There are times when I might send some .pdf's of certain details, but there aren't many times where they will get "measured floorplans" till the model is decided on and a final cost is agreed upon. This might not always be the best approach for all clients, but for most projects it works out okay.

What you are showing are the eaves. Try changing the sub-eave. If that doesn't work, send a screen shot of the "structure" dbx. for the roof plane.

Glenn...........I think at one point along the way of my "trials & errors" I got those same results, but when I tried to extend the top 5/12 roof so it would have an eave fascia board the "crap hit the fan". Thanks for taking the time to look at my dilemma.

Robert...............I appreciate you taking your time and knowledge in helping me work this "problem" out. I don't know what the answer is as far as CA is concerned. It shouldn't be this difficult. I guess the answer is more/better manual control of framing members.............especially rafters. I sent this into support. If there answer is "ground breaking", I'll put it on this thread. Thank you and have a great day.

Robert...............Do you see any way to get the 36/12 rafter to frame up to the ceiling joist like I show with the CAD drawing? I did send this into support to see what they suggest. It shouldn't be this complicated. If CA would let us have better manual control of the shape of the rafter ends "things" would be much easier. Yes, it would take a lot of time, but at least we could then do the "odd things" that are sometimes run into on modeling as-builts. I've been associated with the home building/home design industry since 1972 and I've seen this type of roof/knee wall setup before a few times. I don't think I would design one quite like this, but since it's an as-built I'm trying to get it modeled how it is before I start designing the "remodel".

Robert...............They are suppose to be on the same plane but there overhangs are different than the larger 5/12 pitch roof. The reason they are showing to be on a little different is because I've been playing around with the roof height in the process of trying to figure out the framing problem.

I've been trying to model this as-built before I start a huge remodel on it and I'm having all kinds of issues with getting CA to model the roof framing as shown on the original prints. Cross Section 9 attachment shows how CA ended up framing it with the needed corrections pointed out in red. To the left of the actual framing is a CAD layout of how it should be as shown on the original prints. The next attachment shows how CA did the exterior. In the third attachment I show the areas on the exterior that need to be corrected with a picture of the area on the original house. I don't know if CA can frame this correctly, but it should. I've worked every scenario I can think of, but I'm starting to lose hair that I can't afford to lose. I'm nowhere near finished with modeling this as-built, but I sure would like to get a handle on this roof framing before I go any further. If someone could help me figure out how to model correctly my problem it will definitely be appreciated. It shouldn't be that difficult. I'm sending along a .zip file of what I have so far with "Backup Plan Files Only" because otherwise the file would be to large, so I'm hoping that will work for anyone willing to look at this. I'm anxious to see the work around to deal with this though I have mixed feelings. If it's something simple I'm going to be very angry with myself, but to be sure I'll also be extremely appreciative to whoever's time, knowledge and effort that it takes to help me out. BUZZINI AS BUILT 1.zip

Rene...............Sorry, my old mind isn't quite following what you are trying to explain to me. This detail may seem quite petty, but I've seen it done many times wrong I try to make it a point to detail it, especially when it comes to restoration work. Right now I don't have time to "ponder" your directions. Hopefully sometime this weekend I'll be able to work it out. Thanks for taking the time. It's always appreciated. Have a great day/weekend!

Glenn.................I thought a couple of years ago I was doing a project where I 45 mitered some moldings. I must have been using a 3D molding line when I did it then. I guess the question now is, why a 3D molding line and not a molding line? At least now I know a few different ways to work out this problem. Thanks to all and have a great day!

Renerabbit..........."Break your molding into two parts, the part that needs to be mitered, and the part that does not." I don't quite follow. I can easily break the molding into two parts, but how do I get the molding to miter on a 45?

TeaTime............................I had thought about something like your suggestion, but I was hoping for something less complicated. Well, at least, there's is a way to get the job done. Thank you all for taking the time to reply----much appreciated. Have a great day.

In the attachment I show a chair rail molding ending next to a window casing. Is there a work around to show the chair rail molding clipped at a 45 where it protrudes past the casing? I thought that by running the molding at a 45 after I drew it to the casing, then making the 45 molding "no molding on this line" would clip the molding at a 45 but it doesn't. It just breaks it at a 90 degree cut. There must be a work around, but I haven't figured it out.

This is what support had to say. SUPPORT..........Thanks for sending this in, Larry. I'll definitely report this to our developers to look into.Pre-X14 we had both "Polyline Solids" and "Solids" - often times Polyline Solids had to be converted to Solids in order for the Boolean operations to complete well. These objects were combined into "3d Solids" in X14 so it makes sense the behavior may have changed at that time.What's happening though--or, at least the cause of the issue--is that the Subtraction is causing problems with the geometry of the curved edge of the 3D Solid. When I slid block A slightly to the left so that it only intersected with the squared section of the bullnose, and not the curved edge, it worked fine. This isn't tremendously surprising to me since doing complex cuts with curved surfaces adds a lot more complexity to the operation.What I would recommend is to try to avoid using Boolean operations on objects that contain Arc segments. Of course, sometimes you need curves, like with a bullnose molding! So, selecting object B by its Side edge, you can select the Arc segment, then in the Edit Toolbar press the Convert to Polyline button, breaking the curve into a segmented polyline of a pre-assigned number of new sides. The default is 6 but that can be pretty chunky depending on the angle of the arc. I bumped it up to 12 to smooth it out.I hope this helps, MY REPLY.........Is this a "temporary" solution and is it going to be corrected in the future or are "us users" just have to deal with it. The object I was working with was quite simple, but something more complicated will, I think, be much more difficult to deal with. SUPPORT.........We tend not to treat any issue as something that users will just have to "deal with." I suppose in my initial reply I should have said "What I recommend *for the time being*--".As for if/when it will be resolved, like many issues the best answer we can give is a diplomatic one; I've submitted this issue to our developers and they will have to look into the cause and prioritize how important it is to fix--that is not to say, "should it be fixed?", but rather "how soon?" Please know that every single issue reported to us are given attention; addressing them, however, is a matter of prioritization and resource allocation. I'd love to be able to say that given the nature of this issue it should make sense to give it higher priority and we'll have it fixed in the next update, however even trying to give you an educated guess may end up being a disservice to you if it circumstantially doesn't get resolved in what either you or I might consider a reasonable timeframe.We'll just have to wait and see when this gets addressed--hopefully it's very soon!

I sent this in to support this morning. I'll put the response on here when I hear back from support. Have a great day.