Numbers

Members
  • Content Count

    11
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Numbers

  • Rank
    Member
  1. Kat, Thank you for your thoughts. But nothing I am doing now is even close to be call frustrating. What I am doing now is, building confidence in software program I just got done spending a bunch of money on. In addition, I am trying to assess how intuitive things are, where buttons are, and what I need to learn. And yes, while I have been studying the User Guide and watching the various videos, none of that would of help me with discovering the thing i did find. It was because I did things the way i did that uncovered this issue. And at least according to the tech folks, if their response is to be believe, does in fact need a fix. Understand, I am new to this software, I don't claim to understand what those limitations are. I must unlearn what I have learned, if I wish to one day employ this software program to its full capability. Thank you.
  2. Kat, Thank you for your input on this matter. I took the information that you offered and I re-looked at my model. I like to started off by saying, you are correct to point out the differences between the model that I had created and the article that was written in the Knowledge Base Center. It was because of that point, that I thought you were on to something. I thought maybe the fact that my model had floors and the article was stretching a window across an open area that didn't have a floor butting up against a "Window Object", that maybe that was having an impact on the results that I was getting. So, I tested your theory, I took the same model and remove all the floors, by making them "Open Below" space. The result unfortunately, did not change. I deleted the window objects, I refresh the camera view and I reinserted new "Window Objects" and there was no change to the end results. As for your point about a real world scenario, well that is a different matter. The fact that I may or may not every have a need to create a window that stretches across multiple floors was not the point of why I was asking the question. The point of asking the question was to understand what I can and cannot do with the software I just bought. Also, I want to know how much of my creativity I will be able to employ and how much of it will be limited. But I do acknowledge your statement as a valid point to consider in the creation process. Thank you.
  3. Eric, Thank you for your feedback. I am glad that I was able to provide you with the information you were looking for. In accordance with your suggestion, I shall submit a ticket for assistance with the tech support folks regarding this matter. Thank you.
  4. Eric, I think this is what you were looking for in terms of a plan. Please let me know. Thank you Test Drawing3.plan
  5. Mr. Potter, Thank you for your feedback. The walls at the intersection are not suppose to represent anything. They are not suppose to be there. It should be two intersecting perpendicular channels, whereby the walls at the intersection get, either automatically or manually removed the view. As for the material that were used to color each wall, that to had no meaning, other than to give each channel wall its own contrast. Another way to think the problem is, imagine there is a line that is 10 ft long, place a cut at 4 ft and a cut at 7ft, from one of the edges. Remove all the line between 4 and 7 feet. What should be left, is what gets displayed. Similarity to this example, that 4 to 7 foot line is not automatically being removed when using two overlapping terrain features are added. Attached are two images in a 2D view, one show the intersection with 4 walls crossing in the middle. The second, shows what it is supposed to look like, without the 4 walls. The concept of drawing an "X" shape layout using lines, and then converting the overall shape into a polyline, does work. The shape can be define as a Terrain feature and the whole shape can be sunk into the ground, just as before. There are no intersecting walls in the middle as before, and the material can be change to whatever material is needed. The problem with doing this that way is, if there was a need to change some selection of the wall, in terms of material, you can't just change that particular section, without change the whole outline. For instance, if there was a need to change all the north side facing walls to a different material, or change material for all the channels that run east west, than you can't do that; not without effect the other walls. The last image is what is produced when using the "line to polyline" method. Right basic result, but material adjustments ability becomes a problem. Thank you.
  6. Eric, Thank you again for responds. I am still new, so I will have to look into and figuring out how to get a plan and attach said plan to said post. This may take me a try or two. As for your point about the little things making a big difference, you are absolutely right. The small things do matter. And in the future, I hope to be able to recognize those little things myself. But because this exercise was a trial and error exercise, I do not know enough to recognize if something is the cause of my problem. Lastly, to your point of being able to offer up more information when posting, I like this suggestion, and will have to apply this approach to the next post. For now, I am running Pro 2016, with the build 17.3.2.2x64, dated September 14, 2015. Thank you.
  7. To whom it may concern, The following post is meant to understand the characteristics of how Home Designer Software product handles intersecting rectangular features associated within the "Terrain" feature menu, in any of the 3D views. Background: During a learning exercise, there was an attempted to understanding how "Terrain Features" interacted with one another. In an exercise, two 50ft long by 4ft wide rectangular feature were added and placed within a 100 ft by 100ft terrain perimeter. Each feature, which for the purposes of this posting will be referred to as a channel, was placed perpendicular to one another. Additionally, each channel overlapped the other. So, that when it was looked at, it would look like a giant "X". Then each channel was sunk below ground by 8 ft. Afterward each channel material selection was changed to give so contracts to the imagine. After reviewing the results, a strange thing was observed. At the end of one of the two channel, a camera view was placed. Looking at the intersection, the wall farthest away, and left and right of the channel that was being look down at, was still there. If the camera view was re-position along the other channel, the same phenomena would occurred. Reference: Attached are 2 images. Question: Is this as design, or is this a limitation of the program, a bug within the software, a quark of how the software functions, or some other issue? Additionally, is it possible to remove those three walls where the intersection occur? Problem: The 3 walls at the intersection are blocking the user's ability to look down the channel to the other side. Also, if the view is rotated left or right a little, one wall drops off while another takes the place of the location that was just viewed. Solution Objective: To obtain a method for looking at each terrain feature without seeing the walls or floor of the other terrain feature, interfering with the image. Suggestion: To-Be-Determine (TBD), awaiting feedback, based on response to posting. Thank you.
  8. Eric, Thank you for your feedback. As I do not have any true plan, I do however have is some screen shots. Please reference my posting at 4:59 PM. It is my hope that these images are sufficient enough for you and Mr. Potter to see what I was attempting to do. If you referring to some type of specific illustration, I would need a little more information on what kind exactly. Thank you.
  9. Mr. Potter, Thank you for your feedback. In reference to the first part of your posting, I did use the control key button; as I had mention in my original post and sited in reference link. Unfortunately, using the control button did not produced the expectation. To help illustrate what I attempted to do in words, I took a couple of screen shots to show you what I am referring to. Attached are 3 images of the issue I am seeing. If you have any questions, please let me know. Thank you.
  10. To whom it may concern, The following post is meant to understand the characteristics of how Home Designer Software product handles "Window Objects" in any of the 3D views. Background: During a learning exercise, there was an attempt to understanding how "Window Objects" work with respect to wall objects. In a exercise that was conducted, a building with 4 floors was created using the floor plan mode. Each floor was aligned to the floor below it using the "Below Floor Alignment" button. Several views of this building were taken using various 3D camera perspectives. Once that was accomplish, the decision to incorporate a "Window Object was made. A "Window Object" was selected from the menu and applied to the wall of the building, for the 1st floor. This process was than repeated, and one "Window Object" was place on each of the three remaining floors. For a total of four "Window Objects", all facing one side of the building having been added. For this exploration, a "Pass-Through" type "Window Object" was used. Of all of the "Window Objects" that where placed, each "Window Object" were place in such a way as to not be stacked either above or below any of the other "Window Objects" on any of the other floors. Meaning, each "Window Object" had its own column of wall that it could be move up or down in, or be stretch to occupy. It was than at this point the decision to expand each "Window Object" across the different floors was looked into. Not knowing exactly how to do this, there was a recollection to a recent article, dated July 16, 2015, that had be written and posted within the "Knowledge Base" center of Chief Architect website, that explain how to do this very thing. After reviewing the article and applying the techniques for each of the four "Window Objects" a strange thing was observed. When the "Window Object" on the first floor was stretched vertically, both up or down, passed the height of the ceiling and floor, the "Window Object" would only display, in addition to the floor itself, one floor of interior space above and one floor below that placement location; including the foundation. So, only the 3rd floor and foundation interior space could be view, but nothing of the floors above the 2nd. Regardless of how far the handles, even when using the ctrl button, were pulled into the higher floors. This manifestation continued for the other "Window Objects" but with slightly different results. If a "Window Object" was placed on the 2nd floor and stretched vertically, in-addition too the floor itself, would only displayed the 1st and 3rd floors. Regardless if the handles were stretched above and into the 4th floor or below and into the foundation floor. If a "Window Object" was placed on the 3rd floor and stretched vertically, in-addition too the floor itself, would only displayed the 2nd and 4th floors. Regardless if the handles were stretched below and into the 1st floor or below and into the foundation floor. If a "Window Object" was placed on the 4th floor and stretched vertically, in-addition too the floor itself, would only displayed the 2nd and 3rd floors. Regardless if the handles were stretched below and into the 1st floor or below and into the foundation floor. Lastly, regardless of there physical placement location, neither of any of the "Window Objects" allowed for the expansion of that "Window Object" in any one direction beyond one floor. Reference: https://www.homedesignersoftware.com/support/article/KB-00205/allowing-windows-to-span-across-multiple-floors.html Question: Is this as design, or is this a limitation of the program, a bug within the software, a quark of how the software functions, or some other issue? Problem: Assuming this result is not due to operator error, this limitation limits the user's ability to create "Window Objects" that can be stretched beyond a total of three floors. It also limits the user's ability to adjust said "Window Object" based on its placement location beyond one floor in either direction. Solution Objective: To obtain a functional and/or primary method for displaying "Window Objects" beyond three total floors, and higher and lower than one floor based on its placement location in any of the 3D views. or Obtain a secondary alternative means for accomplishing the same net result. Suggestion: To-Be-Determine (TBD), awaiting feedback, based on response to posting. Thank You.