View Depth HUH?

[ron.sanpedro]

In the included plan, we are on the 3rd floor, looking down at the stair on the right that goes from the 2nd to the 3rd floor, and the stair on the left, that goes from the 1st to the 2nd floor. This is shown again in the Section. Now, in that 3rd floor plan, the View Depth is Associated Level (Level 3) with no offset. It seems to me that I should NOT see the stair between the 1st and 2nd floors unless I push my View Depth down that far. Is this not the entire intent? I added a desk down on the second floor, and indeed I look all the way down to it on the 3rd floor, even when my View Depth doesn't go past the 3rd floor.

Am I just barking stars today, or does this seem to not be what one would expect?

Thanks,
Gordon

[davidcobi]

hmmm.. and no underlays?

[SkiSouth]

my guess too, underlays.

[iru69]

I might be misunderstanding the uniqueness of this particular problem relative to the more general "stair below is visible even though my view range is set correctly". If it's the latter, than it's an issue that's been around for ages.

See Jeddafish's post here for an "explanation" from the Factory:
http://forums.augi.com/showthread.php?t=30048

[aaronrumple]

That's not the issue here as the stair is well below 4' from the bottom of the view range. In this case - it is an underlay of the second floor. The halftone appearance tells us this....


Note that the 4' from bottom of view range also applies to floor slabs.

[ron.sanpedro]

That's not the issue here as the stair is well below 4' from the bottom of the view range. In this case - it is an underlay of the second floor. The halftone appearance tells us this....


Note that the 4' from bottom of view range also applies to floor slabs.

And the lesson learned is, just because you fixed the template to not default to an underlay, that doesn't mean it STAYED fixed! ;) And the second lesson is to not try and really understand something while sleep deprived.

That 4' rule is very interesting, and bring up the question:
When the manual says, under Additional View Range Rules, that other items (floors, stairs and ramps, components mounted to the floor) are shown even when SLIGHTLY (emphasis mine) below the visible range, can we assume the same 4'?

And why on earth would a software manual say "slightly"? If someone thinks slightly below means 6", this could drive them crazy. I am sure there is a hard coded value there, not the software making a value judgment. ;)

Best all,
Gordon

[ron.sanpedro]

Well, a little sleep and a lot of coffee improves the situation, but still my brain cramps at times. So...

If a window is partially within the Upper bound of the Primary Range, my understanding is that it will show up and be presented in Projection as if seen from above. However, I am not seeing that in an example where I have a small window above. Are there some more specific rules about how this works and when this happens?
And does anyone know of a definitive list of what categories behave this way, and which don't?

My reading of a number of posts is that in RCP something that is below the cut plane but above the bottom clip will show up in plan projection. Thus, the invisible line in your switch. The invisible line comes up past the bottom clip and brings your switch into your RCP. Cool! But it seems not to work with items above in plan. Specifically, I would like to create a ceiling mounted Exit Sign fixture with the invisible line trick, and in my Fire Life Safety view, I would push the Top Clip up to catch the invisible line. Now my ceiling mounted Exit sign shows up in my FLS sheets. But alas. It doesn’t work. Anyone know why this was done for RCPs but not plans?

Best,
Gordon

[aaronrumple]

Well, a little sleep and a lot of coffee improves the situation, but still my brain cramps at times. So...

If a window is partially within the Upper bound of the Primary Range, my understanding is that it will show up and be presented in Projection as if seen from above.


This is a little misleading...
ONLY if the component was designed with projection linework by the author. Not by default....

[ron.sanpedro]

This is a little misleading...
ONLY if the component was designed with projection linework by the author. Not by default....

Thanks Aaron, I was starting to think I was going nuts. I wonder if there is a place to report iffy or incomplete documentation? And it does beg the question, why is it that only certain categories can behave this way, even when specifically designed to behave this way? Why not allow all categories the option? You still don't have to exercise the option.
Ah well, at least I can offer some explanation for our recent weirdness.

Thanks,
Gordon

[dbaldacchino]

One of the things I would like control over is overhangs (floors, roofs, fascias above). I want that stuff to show by default and have the option to turn it off if I want. I know that it's easy to turn on an underlay, use the linework tool to set the edges to Overhead and then turn off the underlay. But still, it's extra work and tends to frustrate a lot of people.