General Discussion

ok thank you for the information!

space 3rd.jpg

@tonigyllenberg thanks for the fast response…i will give it a go the end of the week.

@cburgess as far as I know, the “issue” tab is created when an element is linked to a check - meaning it is connected to a problem.

@shapeless the “component” column determines if the condition is “OR” or “AND”. If you have set it to be the same type of component (also “any component”) the condition is “AND”. That is why the first setup where all the rows have “any component” it tries to match the component to all the conditions. To make it work, you can choose “one of” and multiple classification values on one row:

Include | any component | classification xy | one of | slab, roof, wall

When creating a rule, it helps to first choose the rule under ruleset manager and then open the parameters of this rule under checking layout. There you can test what the filter is returning by pressing “=” to set the components to be visualized by the selection basket. This way you can make sure the filter is working as you’d expect.

I hope this helps,

best,
Lauri

Hello there!
THX for the quick response.

Best Thomas

@Anees-Alomar 👍

The topic is quite old (said Solibri) but still active until today.
While I was performing a check on my model came up with the same problemt that was facing in October. In the meantime I got an advice from @marchi to create Slides not on the category of the problem but directly on the problem, meaning the triangle (underneath the category). Sadly this did not help, since problems are still somehow connected to old components that should not be there anymore.

In my newest example I demonstrate you the case with the height between two components. On the left is the old file where I had created the slide, whereas on the right is the todays check.

699f367d-c34a-4ef1-994b-c0049d10acc9-grafik.png

In the old case, the Decke2.1 and Decke 1.3 where in conflict. In todays model this conflict does not exist anymore but Solibri tends to see a problem here, hence identifying the old slide as a problem (triangle). If you look closely, the Decke1.3 does not exist anymore in the components list, but other slabs are there which do not pose a threat to Decke2.1. I have also checked, the GUIDs for the other slabs is not the same as the old slabs.

In my opinion, Solibri is not able to sort problems here. If a slab has new problems, then the old ones should not be documented. This showcases that old problems still remain active, even though newer components are causing problems with the old ones.
Is this a bug I am facing since the last year, or am I doing something wrong in my workflow?
@Solibrians any thoughts on this?

Thanks so much for this. It looks like this setting was one of those little things that Windows has hidden to gradually streamline the OS (not altogether a bad thing), but this particular set of options has missed my attention until now!

Great @Matti-Kannala! That’s work fine!

I was using the Property Group ‘Relations’, that’s the problem… When i’m using the Property Group ‘Location’ > ‘Nearest Space’ i can check the model on the property ‘Top Elevation’ with the correct value. Fixed! 👍

Thanks for your answer!

“but what if there is no intersection beam in the middle?”

The visualization under the parameter shows a case when there is an connection to other beam.
In case you don’t have it the the allowed area is not having that gap.

@Matti-Kannala Thank you~

ooh now I understand the problem. It worked, Thank you!! 🙂

Thank you! That works 🙂

Hi Matti, thanks for your reply, I use this rule to check if each room has a door, but we have many rooms as open space and don’t have doors. So my question was: is it possible to check “only rooms that are closed with at least 4 walls”?

That sounds good, thanks for the fast responds.

/Henrik