Sync issues between Solibri/ACC
-
Hi!
I’m working with a Solibri federated model hosted in ACC, along with all the individual IFC files that make up the federated model.I’ve been generating issues from the checking results in Solibri and synchronizing them to ACC using the BCF Live Connector. While the issues appear in ACC with snapshots, they aren’t linked to any of the models shown in the snapshot (and hosted in ACC).
Has anyone encountered this issue before? If so, could you share a solution or best practice for effectively linking issues from Solibri to ACC?
Cheers!
-
Hello Maria!
Indeed, Autodesk does not support BCF standard and the issues connection is currently a completely custom setup. There are limitations, specifically related to viewpoint support, for which we are awaiting the publication of the Autodesk pushpin API. Latest news from Autodesk is that this will come in July, however we cannot make promises on their behalf. More info on ACC as well as the limitations are available here:
https://society.solibri.com/topic/3268/solibri-25-3-0-has-been-released/6
Kind regards,
Toni
-
Hello Tony,
I’ve reviewed the two most recent Solibri updates (25.6.1 and 25.6.0) and haven’t seen any mention of the issues from my previous post. Could you please provide an update on the progress regarding the connection of issues created in Solibri and uploaded to ACC via the BCF Live Connector?
Cheers! -
Hello @Maria-Martinez,
Unfortunately there is not yet much news to share. Autodesk has still not made the pushpin API public, meaning that we do not have a way to properly sync the information from Solibri. There are many common customers waiting for this solution, and as soon as it is available, we’ll let everyone know.
Kind regards,
Toni
-
Hi,
Any updates about this topic? -
Hello! We are working on a common project with Autodesk for this. Currently the plan is to have the pushpin support in our June release, though we still have things to resolve. I’ll keep you updated when we have a version for testing.
-
Hello all!
The next beta version is set to go out tomorrow, and will include the latest update for Forma Issues support. The update brings bidirectional pushpin support, however as the connection is custom and not BCF compliant, there are some things to configure as well as some minor limitations. All in all it is a big step forward, and we’re looking forward to hearing your feedback.
In case you are not yet a beta tester, now is a good time to join! Beta is open to current customers, and you can join by sending an email to [email protected]
Please include your name, company name, as well as Society user ID.
-
Beta is now available! Happy testing!
https://society.solibri.com/topic/3591/solibri-26-6-0-is-available-for-beta-testing
-
When synchronising issues with ACC, all selected components/objects are lost during the first synchronisation. When the issue is present in ACC, ACC only contains an image and is still unable to locate the issues in the 3D model.
Once the issue has been located using the pin in ACC, the screenshot is updated and the original image is deleted from Solibri. When resynchronising with Solibri, the issue does find the location but displays everything in the model, as no objects are assigned to the issue. -
@BIM-GI said in Sync issues between Solibri/ACC:
When synchronising issues with ACC, all selected components/objects are lost during the first synchronisation. When the issue is present in ACC, ACC only contains an image and is still unable to locate the issues in the 3D model.
Once the issue has been located using the pin in ACC, the screenshot is updated and the original image is deleted from Solibri. When resynchronising with Solibri, the issue does find the location but displays everything in the model, as no objects are assigned to the issue.Hello!
Are you creating issues manually in Solibri or importing existing checking results? For manual import, currently a few things are still in progress like Hiding components (though for example using show only selected does provide the same result).
Importing checking results which have linked components is working well based on our tests, and with Manual issues if you have not yet, you could try explicitly adding components to the issue in question (though this also should not be required).
Would you be able to maybe record a video of what is actually happening? And have you configured the project correctly according to the instructions:
https://society.solibri.com/topic/3592/autodesk-forma-issues-project-setup -
It is also important to note that you do need to have access to Forma Files in order to be able to first setup the Solibri issues file, as well as synchronize issues properly.
I noticed now that in one of my test projects I no longer have Files access, and I am experiencing the same issues you are: Viewpoints (3D camera settings) are not persisted, and only the thumbnail shows up.
In another test project where I do have Files access, the issues are synchronized correctly. @BIM-GI I imagine this may be the cause in your case as well.
-
@tonigyllenberg I am not getting able to have acess to the link you sent.
-
Hello everyone,
The connection is now working and the issues are being transferred successfully to the correct model.
However, the issue location within the model does not seem to be transferred correctly. While the issue is created in the correct model, it is placed at a significantly different position than expected.
In the attached example, the relevant element and the expected issue location are highlighted by the red circle. However, the generated issue appears far away from that location (orange marker).
The models are georeferenced, so we would expect the transmitted coordinates to be interpreted correctly and the issue to be placed at its actual position within the model. At the moment, there appears to be a discrepancy in how the positional data is being processed.
Could you please investigate whether the coordinates and location data are being handled correctly, and whether there are any known limitations or special considerations related to georeferenced models?
Thank you in advance.
-
@s-helfer said in Sync issues between Solibri/ACC:
Could you please investigate whether the coordinates and location data are being handled correctly, and whether there are any known limitations or special considerations related to georeferenced models?
Thank you in advance.
Hello!
Thanks for your feedback. Does this occur often with many issues?
For some background, the AutoDesk connection is not BCF compliant, and while we’ve worked to implement support as close to BCF as possible there are still some differences, like:
- Camera angle and overall 3D view: In BCF this relies directly on camera angle, components, etc. With the Forma connection, we try to mimic the pushpin location this by shooting a ray directly to where the camera is pointing. This means that in some cases, the pushpin will unfortunately not be exactly where intended. The workaround is to make sure the view is zoomed in enough to create the pushpin in the best possible location.
Kind regards,
Toni
-
Hello,
thank you for the explanation.
We were able to confirm that the issue placement works correctly when we are very close to the affected elements before creating the issue. If we create issues while being further away, the offset occurs consistently.
So far, we have only tested manually created issues. We have not yet had the opportunity to test automatically generated issues from clash detection.
Do you have any recommendation regarding the maximum distance from an object when creating an issue to ensure accurate placement?
In addition, we have identified another topic that appears to require follow-up on the Autodesk side, specifically regarding the Issues Add-in.
With Revit 2025, we can currently only load issues that originate from a Revit model. Issues created in Solibri and associated with an IFC model cannot be loaded in Revit through the add-in.
Could you please confirm whether this is a known limitation or if there is a workaround available?
-
@s-helfer said in Sync issues between Solibri/ACC:
Hello,
Do you have any recommendation regarding the maximum distance from an object when creating an issue to ensure accurate placement?
The most important thing is that the area or components in quesiton would be close enough that the camera angle (or ray shot from the agle) ends at the components. I know it’s not ideal, but this is currently the way to identify a pushpin through Solibri. Once the next BCF standard is complete, pushpins will be supported there as well, but that will take some time as the standard is not yet complete.
In addition, we have identified another topic that appears to require follow-up on the Autodesk side, specifically regarding the Issues Add-in.
With Revit 2025, we can currently only load issues that originate from a Revit model. Issues created in Solibri and associated with an IFC model cannot be loaded in Revit through the add-in.
Could you please confirm whether this is a known limitation or if there is a workaround available?
I will check with the AutoDesk colleagues and get back to you on this one.
-
Hi @tonigyllenberg,
I am also experiencing some difficulties with pushpins in the latest beta, especially when saving issues directly from Solibri checking results to Forma.
The issue is uploaded correctly, but it is not placed on any IFC model. If I then try to manually add the reference IFC model in Forma, I also need to add the pushpin manually. When doing so, the main image attached to the issue is replaced by the new pushpin view.
This makes the workflow quite difficult, especially when many issues are created from checking results and sent to Forma in bulk. Each issue then needs to be placed manually, and the original Solibri snapshot is no longer kept as the main image.
I have also noticed another behaviour: in Solibri, before saving the issue, the Issue Details window correctly shows the related components in the component table. However, after the issue is uploaded to Forma, the linked components section is mostly empty.
I have already checked the all the setups in Forma as project folders, and the required configuration before uploading the issues, and everything seems to be correctly set up.Do you have any suggestion on how this workflow could be improved?
Copyright © 2025 Solibri Inc. | Powered by NodeBB