Gadzooks

Sorry - I thought thats where you'd got to. The 'normal' workflow (there are always other ways of achieving similar results) for this would be create your plan using wall styles (I think you already uploaded as a sketch showing what you wanted to achieve on an earlier post) and then use sections through the areas you need to show. The resulting Section Viewport will show the level of detail you require - including the floors/roofs etc. Your Plan, using wall styles, will also enable you to use the framing tool to create the further level of detail you require to show timber stud work . This can provide 2d/3D and worksheet. Hope this helps.

Are the Attributes correct? From the Viewport OIP, select Advanced Properties... (towards the bottom) You'll need to turn on Walls as below The individual components will now be visible.

@Christian Fekete Seems like you may need to change the hatch mapping from the global source that hatches start from and generally use (hence when you move objects with hatches the hatch stays static) to locally mapped. (If I've misunderstood your query, come back) This is for both hatches and tile hatches btw. For example.. Use the Attribute Mapping Tool.. Which provides you with the adjustment you need to (say) aline the bottom 'course' of the brick hatch. So.. You will see the hatch changes from black description.. to Blue..to show the change in status. and is also shown on the Fill Hatch Settings. Which you can deselect if it all goes awry. You also have the ability to set the hatch settings numerically from this panel. Theres also the option save your new hatch if you want - from the contextual menu. Best bet is to try it out to see the results you get. There's an old 'tube' that covers this in similar detail. https://youtu.be/F0xa9rQP6U4

Are there parts of the lower layer you still need to see in the VP @khumenny ? If you want the lower layer(s) turned off completely use the layers option in the VP to control visibility. If its more complicated than that and you want just a few objects 'missing' from the image you could subclass the items and have them with an added layer description. So ALL doors, but doors on layer 1 and 2 as subclasses. Bit of a pita, but you can then control doors by layer 1 , layer 2 or ALL in class visibilities. Then there's the rough and ready way! - place a white filled object (no line obviously) over the offending parts. This will then hide on printing. Works for me.

Man - you're brave!

Apologies guys - was having to finish something urgent. Yes, I think the 'fix' and, lets face it, a wall tool weakness - but perhaps more reasonably described as a tool limitation - is that it 'likes' 90º junctions when contending with (pitched) roofs over. Other angles do highlight the problems when seen in 3D, but you could say this is a 'feature' and brings your attention to an area that will need some consideration/further detail during the build. In terms of the software, I think that this is reasonable, as pitches covering odd junctions is rarer and the boffins (even if they wanted to) surely can't cover every eventuallity (no harm in wish-listing it @Phileas !!). The 2D component join works well for the occasional 'design detour' and the detail of the junction can be better provided in (say) a 1:10 call-out using additional detailed 3D work. Do you still need this? Happy to provide if you're not having luck with it. But then you seem to have moved to a more complex (100º-120º?) junction. Looks like a totally workable solution.

Biplab will be pleased. Now if only he could find the time to restore (gratis) the features I thought I bought in 2017 and don't actually live up to the 'sales pitch', together with those that did work and were broken by the boffins in 2018. Oh well....at least I didn't fall for 2019.

Not what you're used to in 'Z', but there is an align/distribute 3D

Wouldn't sheet layers be a preferable workflow and provide better control over print areas for you?

Haha - Thats not what we want to hear!! There is a way to make this work towards a more accurate model. As already discussed, the best way to create 3D is to build your model as you would build the real thing. If VW will allow. A criticism I usually have is that the boffins don't follow through with the tools to let you do the job. On this issue, I believe they've done a really good job. You've raised an issue with joining walls and your image shows (I believe) walls with the default mitre join. (As already discussed) The walls and their components struggle to resolve the two planes coinciding at their junction. One wall wants to remain level and the other needs to achieve a slope. So - using the Wall end cap tool... Modify the 'level' wall as shown... (also try the sloping wall to see the alternative options and results - there's never 'only one way' to do these things) If you'd rather not rely on the roof shrouding the inconsistencies, remaining height differences can be tweaked by setting components at differing top offsets so that timber wall plates etc. can be placed accurately. Additionally, small infills (say just the brick skin) can be provided to sit on top of the main walls to raise to the level required to fit the joisting/framing material for the roof. Which, once again, is just as it would be built. Hope this helps.

Best Wishes from Gadzooks!

I think the answer hangs on Pat's question and to what end the result you need. If you want to use roll-over as described, then.. However, if you want to create simple interactive annotation within VW, or pdf's for clients to use themselves you could use VW built-in Hyperlink Tool from the Dims/Notes toolset. This will allow you to add links for simple operations (within the document) like navigation ('next', 'previous', 'details here'...etc), together with external links to manufacturers product information webpages. I'll warn you though - don't set your expectations too high. The hyperlink tool could be a lot better. For a more robust presentation and depending on your objective, I think I would steer you towards preparing design pdfs exported to (say) Powerpoint and add the required 'hot spots' to allow your additional information (internal/external) links. I've created more intensive presentations using FileMaker Pro. These allow me to add the 'hot spots' to link to external webpages/pricing info/'pop up' items/ etc. and then distribute 'kiosk mode' to clients as part of our pitch assets. Hope this might help.

@Scott61 Try this for very useful explanation.... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d_VJkYTVf00 Come back if thats not helped.

Does this help Mathias? Maybe better to have a reference to hand with more detail of each feature? Taken from 2017 Help , as your signature states 2017.

NNA fanfares that VW is a solid modelling environment with the obvious benefits this brings to manipulation/change such as highlighted here. Yet simple stair (and custom stair) is now 'legacy' and is tucked away in preference to (all singing, all dancing????) Stair Tool, which as Kevin illustrates, clearly does not provide the promised/expected geometry. Nor (as discussed widely) does it offer anything close to a simple, user friendly, robust design tool for professional use - as it ought.

This isn't the first time this has been asked. Custom stair tool may be your answer See file - Haven't set specific riser/going or handrail, but standard 13UP is possible House Type Stair Test GADZOOKS.vwx

Not an answer to your specific 'creep' question, but have you purged the file? On the face of it, if you're not adding anything, it won't help, but at least you'll have rid the file of 'excess baggage'. Edit: Just a thought. File size increase maybe a symptom of the file becoming fragmented over multiple saves especially on a nearly full drive? Tech support might be able to confirm Mac or Win OS will behave like this and that the increases are TBE ('to be expected' in tech speak). You can check this by copying to a different drive and checking file size in its new location.

Yes I see it has the same 'cell ceiling' problem. I'm not on 2019. It might be a new fault with 2019. A test for this would be to open in 2018 and see for yourselves. Are you able to do that or could you 'export as 2018' and post here please.

I can't replicate this atm. Maybe your version? Or type face chosen (unlikely). Could you let us know what version you are using.

I think both mac Mac and Windows OS fonts are already chosen for being 'easy on the eyes', and are bound in to their systems pretty tightly in all sorts of ways, so to consider changing will bring moderate benefits at best. And could set you back quite massively. If you google 'change OS font', or other variations, there's a variety of suggestions - mostly 'don't do it!'. I think you'd run the risk of untoward problems. Just searching for 'mono spaced' fonts, or similar key words, produces some quite good variations on your theme and it's plain that others are keen to adopt this. Try these as an example (this was just the first in the list of suggestions). https://wesbos.com/programming-fonts/

I think the doors on the one you'd downloaded look for placement purposes only - the door would need to be replaced with a correct choice. (so possibly unfair of me to describe as rubbish) You'll do better to draw you own styles then you'll have everything as you want.

You misunderstand The file you've downloaded is rubbish. It doesn't look like IKEA product and is composed of 3D objects without thickness. Yeh - bin in it and find better quality stuff if you want to start with existing assets. The door Ive shown you above is a single door from a file I downloaded ages ago. It has better detail and correct spec parts. They are out there if you look.

18mm

That doesn't even look like IKEA Have a better look - there's better ones out there. With much better detail...

Thats the only part of your post I saw! Its your call, so use what you can of others suggestions - bin as appropriate! Yes - but whatever suits your planned workflow. Probably better (in my view) to keep things together and class them down to the last bracket - if you are confident you and your colleagues can manage the visibilities. Symbols can be used within symbols if you wish