Larry_Sweeney

I'm sure that not long ago there was a thread that mentioned the work around on how to set a newel post on each side of a deck corner, but I haven't been able to locate it. If anyone could steer me to that thread or explain the work around it would be much appreciated.

I guess I could copy the roof plane and wall off to the side and change the pitch to zero. I'm trying real hard to think why that won't work , but in this situation it would work (not ideal) but it would. I know if I take time to think on this subject a little more I could come up with reasons why it would not in some circumstances, but your idea is a fair work around, which is what I asked for. I appreciate your advice and taking the time to get back to me. Maybe I should put forth the idea of using the "back clipped cross section" in a cross section view and being able to rotate is worth a "Suggestion" thread. With knowing all the other items that need to/should be fixed or made available, this would be WAY BACK on the list. Well, it's now time for a coffee. Be safe and have a great day.

I "suppose" that could be called a work around, but it seems like it could also be a PITA.

Many of my projects are duplicating 18th and 19th early American homes. With these projects come many interior and exterior details. one of my "pet peeves" is not being able to do a back clipped cross section on a gable end overhang at the same angle as the roof (attachment). Many times I might use 6 or more moldings in building the frieze, soffit & fascia and it would be nice to easily show this detail. Is there a work around for this or is it worth suggesting? Not only showing this detail in the construction docs., but being able to look at the placement of profiles as I'm designing it.

To All...…………………...Thank you for explaining what was really right in front of my face. I have no excuse other than the day just started out on the wrong side. I always appreciate any and all advice/knowledge/time taken of you all. Be safe and have a great day.

As the title says------------Is there a work around to show a pocket door fully open in a render view or this just another case where CA gives us a new "option" but only goes 75%?

Joe...…………...Yes, that's true, but it attaches to the flat face of the window frame instead of replacing the bottom part of the flat frame. If using "sill profile" it should be able to go back under the lower sash. Now whenever you attach a "sill profile" to the frame it also always shows a reveal no matter what the casing reveal is set too. I think it may even be attaching it to the lower outside face of the frame. Like I said earlier, they're 75% there. They either don't have an understanding of how a window is built and how it should look or is it that they just don't care. Knowing it has been like this since at least V10 it's probably both. Be safe and have a great day.

Glenn...……………..When I'm talking about a sill, I mean the sloped piece on the exterior bottom of a double/single hung window frame. This angled sill is usually thicker (1 1/4"-2") than the sides and top frame and is usually sloped from 8 to 12 degrees. It's on the entire bottom area of the window frame. CA makes a frame all the way around the window that is flat on the bottom, which is fine for awning or casement windows. CA does let you "attach" your own sill profile to the face of the flat window frame that always show a reveal. This is far from correct. The sill should be sloped and extend back under the sash like I show in the attachment. I do this now by attaching a piece of "millwork" to each window when the occasion arises (a real PITA). What would be nice is if CA could let you add our own "sill profile" molding to replace the bottom part of the window frame. This is just another item in CA where they get the programing 75% correct and say that's good enough and never look back no matter how much something is asked to be fixed. Like I mentioned in an earlier thread, the basic window programing hasn't changed since at least V10. Yes they have added on a few minor items, but the items that really count ---------------? The same discussion could go for the inside window stool, which some refer as a sill, but that's a whole other story. Be safe and have a great day.

Thanks Glenn. I'll definitely remember that. The real problem is that it should be done automatically in the programing or at least I don't understand why it's not adjusted using "built-in" programing. Now if you can figure out how to add a correct sloped sill to a double hung window I'll be totally amazed. Thanks again for taking the time to "calm" me. Be safe and have a great day.

I'm sure some will say I'm nit picking, but come on CA this is just another reason the window building needs a major overhaul. Build a normal double hung with 2" top rail, 1 1/4" meeting rail and a 2 3/4" bottom rail and install it in a wall. Take an elevation shot and measure the height of the glass "daylight openings" of the top and bottom sash. They are different heights. Make the bottom rail 10" high just for the heck of it and you will really see a difference in the openings between the top and bottom one. This is not the way it works! ANYONE with any knowledge of windows would know both daylight openings should be equal no matter what the height of the bottom rail is. Unless I'm missing a dbx. somewhere in the window specification this is another flaw in building CA windows. Since I started with Version 10 I've been screaming to fix the frigging WINDOWS! (exterior sloped sills----another major area) CA is so darn concerned about making pretty renderings and such. If you want them to look "pretty" then please make them look right! Just for once give us a fix for something we've been asking for forever. Sorry for the rant. It's been one of those days. I'm not going to get into all the flaws of CA's windows. I think most of you know what they are. Now that I got that off my shoulders I think I'll get a coffee. All you out there--------Be safe and have a great day.

Chopsaw………….....Strange. My first search in 3D warehouse came up empty when I did a search for "pulley, wooden pulley, block & tackle". After reading your thread and noticing your spelling 3D warehouse has a whole slew of examples under that spelling. I think my spelling was correct. After finding all those examples under "pully" I went back to search and entered "pulley" and got a whole bunch more examples. I'm not sure what was going on or what I did wrong the first time searching, but either way, thanks for your time and help----much appreciated. Be safe and have a great day

This is probably like looking for a "needle in a haystack", but does anyone have or has seen a symbol of either a wooden pulley or a wooden block and tackle? I've looked in 3D warehouse and have done searches on the internet to no avail. I think I'm "correctly" asking for the item in my searching, but sometimes I get surprised as what I should be asking when searching. Any and all help is always much appreciated. Thank you.

Can you show us in a Cad or hand drawing of the plan view of what you are trying to accomplish, or even a picture. This way we might have a better understanding of exactly what you're after.

Everyone...…………………..Thanks for taking your time to ponder this problem. I'm going to seen it into tech today and see what they say. Once I get their answer I'll post it here. Be safe and have a great day.

I'm working on a project where I have stone veneer on my first floor block walls and the same stone veneer setup on the stud walls above. I have some sort of Z- fighting at the top of the block wall and the bottom of the floor joist. (first attachment) It looks like to me it's the ceiling in a cross section. When the Main layers of the two walls on the different floor levels are lined up I don't think the z-fighting is there, but when I line up the stone veneer between the two levels it shows. I'm puzzled why and I haven't figured a way to eliminate it. I'm probably missing something pretty simple, but I made a mock up plan of two rooms above each other using the same walls I have in my project plan and the same thing occurs. (see attachment 2). I'm also sending the simple two room mockup plan. Appreciate your time and advice. Thanks P.S. Any ideas why this simple plan is so large? There seems to be a large amount of textures attached to the plan for some reason. simple plan.zip

Stephen...………….…….Thank you! That's exactly what I was looking for. I'll have to study that area of the window dbx. I've never used that before. Please tell me that it is something fairly new in CA. Maybe I shouldn't ask that question. Anyway--your time and knowledge is much appreciated. Have a great day.

I'm showing a "fake" door" on the exterior wall with a furred wall set on the inside. (see attachment) To do this I made an exterior fixture symbol of an early looking bead board door with a large wood sill. In the plan I made a "pass-thru" in the exterior wall the size of my door symbol. On the inside I have an additional furred wall but I don't want the "pass-thru" opening showing on this wall. Is there a setting I'm missing to accomplish this. I've tried changing the interior wall to "frame through" or "split framing", but that didn't work. I tried moving the wall a little distance away from the exterior wall, but that didn't help either. I would like to keep this interior wall next to the exterior, but I'm having no luck finding a way not to have the "pass thru" in the exterior wall kept from extending through into the interior wall. As always your time and knowledge is much appreciated.

I've seen that look on some renderings over the years (started with V10) and never figured out how to do it other than the way Chopsaw mentions. I'm all eyes (and ears) if this can be done (and it should) automatically.

Alan and Joe...………...Thank you both for your time and advice. Alan---the code description seems like I'm in the "clear", but Joe, your advice to contact the local building department is probably the best choice here. I've found over the years that "logical" and "code enforcement" aren't always down the same path. Thanks again. Be safe and have a great day.

Alan...…..Thanks for getting back to my question. I could not find any requirements for permanent stairs to an attic in my searching up to this point. I did find the min. requirements for fold down stairs and I could easily fit them into the design, but since I have the room for the permanent stairs I was hoping to build the one I have dimensioned. In the area where I could install permanent stairs to the attic area my risers would be 7 3/4" and my treads would be 8 1/2", but I wouldn't have a 3' area at the base of the stairs before the attic door. The door opens to a 4' wide hallway and headroom is not a problem. In my thinking these permanent stairs should be okay, but will the code (if any) permit them?

Are there certain requirements/codes for attic stairs in a commercial setting? The access is only needed for air handler maintenance and minimal storage.

Perry...……………….That may work at the eaves, but if you want the shingle to overhang up the gable, which it should also, it looks like the shadow board work around is the way to go.

To me, it seems fairly easy if done on the initial roof setup. I think it would also be something fairly easy to program into the roof defaults. Along with making it the same material as the roofing material.

Chopsaw……………..Thank you for the tidbit. That's definitely worth a point. It's what I call "thinking outside of the box!" I'll file that upstairs above my eyes.

I suppose this is too far over the "top", but it might give you some ideas. It's a project I did a number of years ago for an 1890's Victorian home,