Unique corner posts?

Comments

8 comments

  • Omar Calderon

    It is possible. For your intermediate posts uncheck the corner placement for both left and right junctions.

    -1
    Comment actions Permalink
  • David Coon

    I tried that, but the left/right junction buttons (as well as the two end post buttons) are greyed-out and disabled unless I first un-check the repetitive post button.  There must be something simple I'm missing here.

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Dale

    What if you had a large junction setback to the intermediate posts approximately equal to the typical spacing between intermediate posts?  This will ensure that these posts are not placed at the corners.

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • David Coon

    Dale, thanks for the suggestion.  I tried it and it does suppress the intermediate posts at the corners (allowing my unique corner posts to appear by themselves), but it causes unpredictable results elsewhere in a railing run.  In some cases it will result in single panels that far exceed the maximum intermediate post spacing or a pair of closely-spaced posts at the end of a run.  So it seems to me like a clumsy workaround.

    It seems to me that a more elegant solution would be to allow the four component placement options (2 end post and 2 junction check-boxes) to remain enabled so that they could be selectively un-checked even with the repetitive post option selected.  That way, I could separately define an intermediate post, a unique corner post and even (if necessary) a unique end post and have each of them appear in their correct places without any doubling-up.  That would be the ultimate in flexibility.  Is that a possible software tweak that could be implemented?

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Dale

    Hi David - I understand the issue.  This could be potentially be implemented in the future as long as it's not too confusing to the user.  Thanks for the suggestion.  I have made note of it.

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • David Coon

    Dale, thanks for considering this.  Let me put it this way: if you could possibly make this software refinement, we would be happy to spend extra money.  Maybe you could develop a "Pro" version of PB - that might be a good way to go if you don't want to sacrifice simplicity for the general public.  I do engineering consulting for an aluminum railing supplier/fabricator and we are strongly considering using SketchUp with Profile Builder for production drawings (and maybe Quantifier Pro to generate a bill of materials for fabrication).  The idea would be to use PB to accurately model the railing layouts and then have the resulting model drive the production of the appropriate 2D plan and elevation views in Layout.  As you can appreciate, the more we're able to tweak the railing layout within PB, the less need there is to exit PB and customize the model directly.  (I think I'm correct that once we make a customization to a railing model, we lose the parametric nature of the model and we can't go back and tweak it through PB anymore.)

    Anyway, I have been very impressed with PB so far.  We entered all the extrusions and it models the railings beautifully.  Suffice it to say that PB gets us so close to what we want that I can almost taste it.  However, the inability to suppress the intermediate posts at the corners (and ends) is likely a deal-breaker.  Practically every railing layout we do has at least one corner so if we have to exit PB and swap out posts every time, then we might as well just stick with 2D CAD.  But I'm really hoping that you would be able to make the requested change.

    If you're interested, I have a few other minor items on my wish list - mainly some other controllable parameters that would be of interest for a "Pro" version.  Just let me know if you're interested in discussing this further.  Thanks.

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Dale

    I appreciate your comments, David.  This is something we run into a lot with Profile Builder.  Many users just want PB to do 'one more little thing' and it will be perfect for them.  It's tough because we can't fulfill everyone's request if we want to keep the program relatively simple an accessible. 

    If you have other items in your wish list, please also share.  I make note of every request and if it is something could benefit our user base as a whole, there is a good chance I would implement it at some point.

    I'm glad you are liking PB and I hope you will be able to find a use for it even if it doesn't quite have all of the features you need.

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • David Coon

    Okay fair enough.  However, a couple quick thoughts:

    1. In my opinion, the issue that I'm describing isn't such a little thing.  By enabling the user to specify unique components that can appear at a junction or at the end of a run (which is great), it seems like a bug if the user is then unable to suppress the intermediate components in these locations.
    2. What about my suggestion for a higher priced "Pro" version?  We would be willing to pay good money for that because it would enable us to do railing drawings much more efficiently (and profitably).

    Regarding my other suggestions, should I share them in this forum?  Or would you prefer an email?

    0
    Comment actions Permalink

Please sign in to leave a comment.