CEC123

Newel Posts on First Tread

Recommended Posts

I have searched the forum for well over an hour looking for a solution to this problem I'm having in CA X6:

Why—when I select the option to have "Newels at First Tread"—does the program draw said newel passing through the tread and resting on the floor instead of stopping at and resting on the first tread?

Any help you can offer would be much appreciated.

 

Russ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What does your stairs look like?  Spec's?  Plan?

 

Welcome to the forum.

 

Tip .... uncheck the stairs railing and then draw your own railing over the stairs and then check it for "following  the stairs" ... then you can move it over as close to the edge as desired and keep it from showing that it goes to the floor surface.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Russ:

 

Here's a quick sample of a stairs with a manually drawn "follow stairs" railing that might be the look you want.

 

post-191-0-18869800-1441329540_thumb.jpg     post-191-0-13430900-1441329664_thumb.jpg     post-191-0-27798700-1441329693_thumb.jpg

 

Hope this helps.  Good luck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In examining the plan view using this method, the Chief programmers should make sure that the railing is drawn "over" the stairs treads such that the tread lines "do not" display on top of the railing.  Please fix this Chief.  Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the welcome, Curt!

Also, thanks for the suggestion, examples, and tip.  I will try your suggestion when I next get a chance to work on my plan.

 

In answer to your question, my stairs are just regular indoor stairs going up to a second floor that hasn't been drawn yet.  There is a room under the stairs, which renders correctly, as does the railing, except for that first newel.

 

I had not thought to draw an independent railing over the stairs since I figured there just had to be something I was missing in trying to set up the railing via the stairs dialogue.

It never occurred to me that the program would have an option to include a newel on the first tread and then draw it incorrectly!  And, to be honest, I had also assumed that if I tried to draw a railing there, it would render underneath the stairs, thereby eliminating the regular wall there already, which encloses the room under the stairs.

 

Russ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Curt,

 

I tried your suggestion for the railing, but it replaces the wall under the stairs.  Then I unchecked the "Open underneath" box so it would draw the fake wall to hide the balusters going all the way through to the floor, but that prevents me from putting a door into the closet under there.

 

So, I guess I will have to live with the screwy first tread newel until I can learn how to work around it, or until the CA folks decide to fix the coding.

 

Thanks for trying to help.  Cheers!

 

Russ

 

newel At first tread error

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Russ, it would be super helpful it you were to attach the plan.  You will usually get a solution or answer pretty quickly and it would eliminate a lot of guesswork.  Chief can be pretty finicky at times and the solution can often vary due to any number of details and dynamics (and those can totally vary from plan to plan). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Curt,

 

I tried your suggestion for the railing, but it replaces the wall under the stairs.  Then I unchecked the "Open underneath" box so it would draw the fake wall to hide the balusters going all the way through to the floor, but that prevents me from putting a door into the closet under there.

 

So, I guess I will have to live with the screwy first tread newel until I can learn how to work around it, or until the CA folks decide to fix the coding.

 

Thanks for trying to help.  Cheers!

 

Russ

Assign the railing wall 'no locate', 'no room definitio'n and draw an other wall on it, that will avoid the replacement and allows both of them to occupy the same space. No need need to live with your user error, so please ask what to do, before............. Again you can put the door in place and undo the 'open underneath' since it works as you wanted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Curt, using your method, how would you get the balusters to sit on the treads? Removing the bottom rail does not seem to work for me.

 

Also, when using the stairway railing in the Staircase Specification, what controls baluster spacing?

 

Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Russ , not sure how you posted your image above but it is locked and I can't view it full size.

 

 

@Mickey2   Curt isn't using the Staircase's railing , ...turn them all off and then using the Railing Tool to draw you Own , then select it and check the box "follow stairs" to stop it falling to the floor.....it must also be placed fully on the staircase for this to work properly or it will "fall" down too.

 

  

 

M.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Mickey2   Curt isn't using the Staircase's railing , ...turn them all off and then using the Railing Tool to draw you Own , then select it and check the box "follow stairs" to stop it falling to the floor.....it must also be placed fully on the staircase for this to work properly or it will "fall" down too.

M.

 

Thanks, Mick, but I have all that.

 

In Curt's post he is showing a railing with a bottom rail so that the balusters do not sit on the treads like they should. When I remove the bottom rail in the dbx, the balusters stay suspended above the treads (where the bottom rail previously was) as in the attached pic. So is it possible to get the balusters to sit properly on the treads using this method, and if so how?

 

Thanks

post-571-0-13096900-1441583911_thumb.jpg

post-571-0-08026900-1441583923_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There may be different ways to do that. One way is to use the ballesters of the stair it self and at the same time use the manual rail to show the newel by entering zero value to the bullester width not to be seen. An other way is to overlap a ramp parallel to the stair so it is exactly at the line between the threads and the waste of stair, so when a railing is set to follow stair, and there are a ramp and stair overlapped THE RAIL WILL ALWAYS FOLLOW THE RAMP, NO MATTER WHICH OF THE TWO IS UPPER OR LOWER. THE RAMP SHOULD BE SET NO RAILS AND WASTE THICKNESS 0, if you choose to use the later. But for this case I think glenn's method of converting the rail to wall and adjusting the top and bottom heights and again making it a rail will work best.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, Mick, but I have all that.

 

In Curt's post he is showing a railing with a bottom rail so that the balusters do not sit on the treads like they should. When I remove the bottom rail in the dbx, the balusters stay suspended above the treads (where the bottom rail previously was) as in the attached pic. So is it possible to get the balusters to sit properly on the treads using this method, and if so how?

 

Thanks

 

You were asking about the baluster spacing in the staircase spec. in post no#9  so I assumed you were using the Auto Railing......  but I don't think you can with the Auto Railing , you get the default (code?) spacing only, another reason to use manual railings

 

as for your other issue .....Not sure as I haven't come across that issue with a manual railing , personally I don't like Balusters sitting on treads look wise, but if I need that look I use the Staircase Auto Rail

 

I am not sure Glenn's method with deck railings works on staircases , at least it hasn't for me , (I may have done it incorrectly) as the railing is over the staircase perhaps? unlike in the deck scenario where the railing is outside the deck ( posts fascia mounted) , perhaps if you altered the manual railing with an air gap layer like the deck railing but in reverse to push the railing in?

 

so perhaps Yusef's ramp method maybe the only way? , may need  Glenn to chip in on this one....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yusuf, Thank you for those suggestions. I will give them a try.

 

 

Mick, My original post contained two questions: one related to Curt's method (using a railing) and one related to the Stair Tool dbx and how to control the spacing and location of balusters.

 

The reason I asked the second question is that I see in the pic that Russ posted that he has three balusters on each tread and on the first step he has both the newel and two balusters. So how did he do that, is my question?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I went back and played with the stairs and non-stair railing and ran into the same issue ... floating baluster ends. Seems like I have got them to go all the way down in the past but can't remember what the solution was. I believe Russ's last image was with a regular stairs railing ... that's why his balusters go all the way to the treads. I haven't tried Yosuf's suggestions yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 I believe Russ's last image was with a regular stairs railing ... that's why his balusters go all the way to the treads.

 

OK. But how do you do that --- adjust the number and spacing of the balusters using just the Stair Tool?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just tried to look at Russ' last image and got a "you don't have permission to view ...." message with no image. What gives with that? I am still logged in as there is a "Sign Out" on the ChiefTalk tool bar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only seems to apply to Russ' image ... not to the rest. Is there a way Russ could have locked that image from any more 'blow up' viewing? I don't think I have ever had this happen before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Curt, that seems to be a problem everyone is having with that image.

 

Maybe Russ could chime in and tell us not only how he adjusted the number and spacing of the balusters, but also how he locked his image!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK. But how do you do that --- adjust the number and spacing of the balusters using just the Stair Tool?

By the way I have posted in earlier thread on how that could be done. Just make the newels to have the size and spacing of your intended size of ballesters, and make the width of the normal ballesters ZERO. THAT is very helpful for various stair problems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Same issue with Russ's image , I think perhaps he put it in his User Gallery and posted a link here instead of the pic itself, but hasn't unlocked his gallery for Public viewing yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all,

 

Sorry for the delay in responding.

 

Yes, I did post that image to my user gallery and inadvertently left that album locked, which has now been rectified.  I couldn't easily decipher how to post the pic directly to the post; everything I tried was unsuccessful.  I have just posted two more pics, one of which is the relevant staircase specification dialog for the stairs, so you can see that I used the auto railing.  Other than changing the newel post diameter several times, I can't think what might account for the "two balusters and one newel" on the the same tread.

 

Still no luck in solving the original problem.

 

newel At first tread error 01

Interior staircase specification dialog

newel At first tread error

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 You can convert your railing into a symbol, and adjust it accordingly from there?...

 

The only other issue is that the baluster draws at an angle as well.  So if you have the turned balusters, they are stretched weirdly (see attached).

post-237-0-83430400-1441810835_thumb.jpg

Untitled 1.plan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Code is reason for 2 balusters on 1st tread, 4" sphere rule here in Michigan. CA is doing it correctly.

 

Take a cross section of stairway, no gap should be wider than 4" ANYWHERE within the hand or guard rail system. Even the narrow taper on spindles must not be wider than 4".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

None of Chief's stair settings allow me to automatically display stairs and railing in the manner that we build locally. Any railings that I need to display in 3D are built manually so that I know the same model can be used to produce a dimensioned detail. It's no help to you CEC123, but that method has saved me many headaches, as well as giving me better layer control. I can assign different elements to different layers for different purposes. One difficulty I find is no control of stringer thickness (that I'm aware of).

Also, in my region, the railing assembly would be built on top of a sloped wall that would be framed to match a closed stair stringer. Chief doesn't do that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

  • Member Statistics

    27474
    Total Members
    6254
    Most Online
    Chieftan08
    Newest Member
    Chieftan08
    Joined