General Discussion

See here
https://society.solibri.com/topic/814/visualization-flickers-when-model-is-georeferenced
but also here
https://society.solibri.com/topic/2252/wish-for-ifc4-georeferencing

@Mats_Knutsson
Never tried to do it in the shortcut, I think you can only arrange layouts in the role settings.

@fwassmann Then it must be bugging cuz of an old SMC file… ;/, thanks

@twosk Can you show the full parameterization of the rule?

You may need to limit the checks per system. Do the components in different models have some information that can be used to limit the checking to only those that actually need to connect? I assume that the “narrow brown pipes” should connect. You could have the filters to focus only on those pipes and have different rule instances for different systems. Also what do you have as the Minimum Number in the Target Component? I believe it should be two, since both ends of the pipes should connect.
6c55fdf9-8200-4a5d-8686-1a8043687fc9-image.png

You could just add the list of values (enumerations) to a classification in the column that points to the locations you have specified i.e. psetx. This way the classification checks that the components that you are checking have the right value in that property. If it doesn’t exist or match the criterial set then it will be undefined.

image.png

The Unclassified tab shows the items that are not classified and their values for that field.
image.png

The Classified tab shows the sucessfull classifcations i.e. the component with a matching value.
image.png

You can then follow this up with a rule #230 Property Template with Component filters that checks the classification.

image.png
In this case checking the components that are defined in the COBie Assets filter and then the classification to check for Uniclass values.

image.png

This method has the benefit of being able to import your required values to the classification and also extend its criteria if required using additional columns in the classification.

You could add another row into the requirements for the rule #230 that checked the particular field or keep this a separate rule. This would then also indicate components that did not have the value i.e. no psetx along with the ones that are not classified.

This is how we work with the Uniclass values in the COBie Extension.

Hello,
Thank you, @Matti-Kannala Matti Kannala, for your reply.
I have performed tests with SOL 223, SOL 224 and SOL 234.

You wrote:
“Note: This does not test the horizontal difference (the opening is too wide compared to the provision for nullity).”
That’s why I focused on the SOL 223 provision.
But maybe there is a reason why you suggested rule 234.

And thank you very much, @simon-gilbert. I’ll take a look at your suggestion as well, because I’m not sure I can get by an extension.

So now to my findings.
I noticed that it shouldn’t matter how far the geometry of the IfcOpeningElement sticks out,
because the rule only sees the volume that has been cut out of the element (e.g. wall, slab).
So far so good, which means that the rules SOL 223, SOL 224 and SOL 234 should be sufficient to check the
openings against the geometries of the IfcBuildingElementsProxy.PROVISIONFORVOID class supplied by MEP.

BUT,
Somehow the SOL 223 rule does not seem to work properly.
The screenshots I provided show that despite the presence of a PROVISIONFORVOID,
is not linked to the corresponding opening. I am sure I have not made a mistake in the classification.
Does anyone know anything about the limitations of this rule?

I will try SOL 234 now and keep you posted.
I also share my .smc File.
Thanks for reading my message.

Best wishes,
Oliver!Support2.PNG Support3.PNG Modellkoordination_Bauangaben.smc

@Claudia-0 One possibility is that you export the issues from Solibri in BCF-XML format and dig the info you need from there.

Hi,
yes, Solibri needs Rosetta on non-intel Mac. We use native libraries for rendering and other features, and those are provided as x86 binaries.

Cant remember exactly what the message was but the message was like check the file in row 52. Since my models contain around 130 different IFC files, I could not tell which file this was right away. You can probably find the file since its marked red, but why reference to a number when it`s not there.

A way to sort all the red (missing) files on top, or/and sort the IFC files by name would make working in the update files folder a little easier.

Just a suggestion.

Regards Sverre

@twosk I’ve created an issue regarding this.

I agree. Thanks for the feedback!

Hi @jakub-rusin

That worked! Thank you so much for your help 🙂

@vigneshraj Please use rule 230 (Property Rule Template with Component Filters). It should give you what you want.

image.png

@corndobr
Please try this report:

image.png

There is a similar solution I just posted for clash using a Property Reference Parameter in the UI: https://society.solibri.com/topic/2529/compairing-certian-parameter-of-clashed-components/5

You can use the same idea using a component distance check based on max distance visualization example, but modifying it to minimum distance in the code:
https://solibri.github.io/Developer-Platform/latest/distanceVisualizationExample.html

The DistanceVisualizationExample above is included in the rule examples on github: https://github.com/Solibri/api-examples