Problem with library balusters used in railings in V10 metric plans

[Barton Brown]

Problem with library balusters used in railings in V10 metric plans

I submitted the following problem to tech support but want to confirm that others experience the same (abnormal) behavior of library balusters when used in railings in metric plans.

The problem: library balusters in railings do not center properly when the plan is metric units but they do when the plan is created for English units. See image below.

This problem is consistent on both my desktop and notebook PCs and can be reproduced in a plan containing nothing more than one wall.

Would someone else please try this simple experiment to confirm/deny my conclusion that it is a bug in CA V10.01?

Thanks,
Barton

[Tim O'Donnell]

which balusteer specifically?

this has to do with the origin setting in the symbol, which can be corrected by editting it...

[Barton Brown]

The baluster shown in the image is V-03 from the Classic section of Balusters, Newels & Posts.

This particular problem seems to be systematic, at least on my PCs. By this I mean the offset occurs for ALL balusters in the Balusters, Newels & Posts library. After I open a new metric plan (using the default metric template) and create a single wall, I try to convert the wall to a railing wall and to specify a baluster from the library. When I do this, the offset is clearly visible in the railing dialog box and occurs with ALL the balusters in the library that I tried (a random sample of ten or so).

I can agree that the problem probably has to do with correctly setting the origin for the symbol, it is just that CA has a conversion error when this origin calculation is done for balusters used in metric plans. The offset does NOT appear when I open a new plan using the default english units template.

Thank you for your response.

Barton

[Barton Brown]

Just upgraded to V10.01A - didn't fix the problem.

Barton

[Barton Brown]

Just upgraded to V10.02 - problem still exists.

I have twice submitted this problem to tech support but have received no response as to whether this is a bug or a user problem.

Therefore, I am again asking someone to do a very simple test to help verify if it is a bug in V10.00 -> V10.02.

- Open a new plan using the supplied default metric plan template.
- Draw one wall.
- Open the wall and change it to a railing wall. I have been using a post to beam type railing wall.
- In the Newels/baluster tab area. select a baluster from the library (all I have tried demonstrated the same wrong behavior). The baluster I use is the Classic V-03.
- observe the graphic when the library baluster is selected for an offset of the balusters to the left.

I have performed these steps using both Imperial and metric plan templates - the Imperial railings work correctly, the metric ones don't.

Is any one else seeing this? Is any one else creating metric plans?

Thanks,
Barton

[Tim O'Donnell]

it does work different in metric than imperial....as you wait for a fix, there is an easy way to get it to display correctly in metric...

open the dbx for the rail>newel/baluster tab. click the library button for balusters to open the select library object dbx

right click on the baluster you want to use(i.e. classic>v-03), select copy from the drop down, go to your "-My Millwork" library and paste (or you can use drag & drop and/or create other custom libraries as well)

once you have the newel in a new custom library, right click on its name and select open from the drop down.

in the 3d tab of the symbol spec dbx, check "specify origin"...in the y value add a minus sign in front of the value that is there to make it negative...close out and use this copy as your baluster...

[Barton Brown]

Tim, thanks once again

Based upon your first reply I had looked at the origin values and did "hand calculations" to convert the imperial origins to metric - my calculations matched what was shown for the metric origins. I stopped at that point not realizing the conversion bug could be as simple as a minus sign.

I did what you suggested and the renders are now correct.

THANK YOU.

Barton

[Barton Brown]

Just checked V10.03a - PROBLEM FIXED!!

Thanks ART!

Barton