Minimum space requirement

agroni

Hi,
I am trying to figure out a way to calculate the minimum space requirement around an object. It has to do with a waste container, that has specific distances to other containers or walls.

The biggest obstacle is to define the sides: what is front, left/right and back to define those 3 different values.
Is something like this possible in Solibri? Has anyone experience with such space requirements?

I have many other scenarios where such a rule could be applied such as HVAC appliances or even electrical and IT devices.

? Offline

@agroni Perhaps you can figure something out with Rule SOL/226/3.0

agroni

@cminde
I already tried that. It works best for doors and windows, but for such bulky components as I have, it does not fit the criteria.
It checks space requirement on the front, based on the parameters. On the back it is the same thing, just mirrored. And the sides can be checked only inwards of the componend and not outwards.

I have also thought about SOL/234/1.2, but also again here I am limited to some sides and not all 4 horizontal.

any other ideas?

? Offline

hmm I have no idea.

i have checked the library of rules if you can use some of the rules, but I don’t see anything actually.

perhaps you have to create yourself 4 spaces in with their dimensions and use the general intersection rule.

agroni

@cminde
If I can model something physical for a space requirement, I don’t actually need solibri to check for collision. I could also do it directly in Archicad or even visually control in 3d if everything sits correctly.
The advantage of such a rule would be of actually checking it automatically by solibri.

Another case where such a scenario might be implemented is in server racks, where there is a space requirement in front, back and one side to approach it. Three sides with two up to three different space requirements.

Can the @Solibrians throw a helping hand here?

JSN

@agroni

You could probably use the Accessible Route Rule which checks for minimum Width/Obstruction Depth. Although it might be not specific enough … after reading your post a second time it sounds more and more like an optimization task for a script.

agroni

scripts are nice but in my opinion second hand craftsmanship. You could check this probably also with Galapagos, but that is not the point. The point is we should focus on Solibri as our main choice of a weapon

We already have SOL/234/1.2. If Solibri can actually check distances with this rule from obejcts in specific directions, it seems to me legit to create a new possibility to check specific values for all 4 sides (and upwards) as you can see in my first sketch. So my suggestions could be a new rule or an extension to the 234/1.2.

JSN

@agroni said in Minimum space requirement:

We already have SOL/234/1.2. If Solibri can actually check distances with this rule from obejcts in specific directions, it seems to me legit to create a new possibility to check specific values for all 4 sides (and upwards) as you can see in my first sketch. So my suggestions could be a new rule or an extension to the 234/1.2.

You mean adding an alternative version of the rule which specifies the sides further into North, East, South and West (vulgo Front, Left, Right, …) direction?

Well I think this, should be possible within the API, but what from your sketch and description it looks like you want to use the local coordinate system of the rotated object, …

The biggest obstacle is to define the sides: what is front, left/right and back to define those 3 different values.

… which somehow is a totally different story in terms of specifying the concept for such a rule I guess. Moreover, you wrote you want to calculate, optimize and not only checking it.

scripts are nice but in my opinion second hand craftsmanship. You could check this probably also with Galapagos, but that is not the point. The point is we should focus on Solibri as our main choice of a weapon

Sure it would be nice to have an all-in-one software suitable for every purpose, but this comes at a cost and expecially here I don’t see anything wrong in using an optimization tool for an optimization task. I mean in another context, you are also using the hammer for driving the nails and not to drill the holes for your screws, aren’t you?

agroni

Hi @jsn

An alternative could be a solution to leave 234/1.2 as it is and no confusion arises.
You misunderstood me because I did not speak about optimizing the space. That would be a totally different task force for Solibri. That’s why I meant that those things could be done with other programs such as Galapagos.

What I am not sure is how to detect the element orientation. As I wrote previously, what is the front, side and rear?!? In my opinion, this information should come from the IFC structure. So far I was not able to find any entity or relation of space requirements and objects.

agroni

After doing some research about this topic, I found out that the entity IfcSpatialZone can be appended to objects. There are two main problems:

It has been added in IFC4, therefore for IFC2x3 it is not available
I am not aware of any BIM authoring tool that has an object with two instantiations. The first would be the objects itself (ex. IfcBeam) and the second the IfcSpatialZone.

JSN

@agroni said in Minimum space requirement:

You misunderstood me because I did not speak about optimizing the space.

Well, probably because you described the task like the following in the first post, without giving much details.

I am trying to figure out a way to calculate the minimum space requirement around an object. (…)

So, from your other posts now I better know what you want to achieve

If I can model something physical for a space requirement, I don’t actually need solibri to check for collision. I could also do it directly in Archicad or even visually control in 3d if everything sits correctly.

To sum this up simplified,
// you want to check your containers
// they have four sides
// 3 are equal distance x, and on the e.g. front they need more space, so x+y

An idea. Would it eventually be a possibility to use #226 with some modelling support?
You could use it 2x
// first to check for distance x on all four sides
// secondly, which checks for the extra distancy x+y, just on the front side - wasn’t there a possibility to do so?

Edit: Ok, this was just possible for walls and I think there is no other rule where you can just specify the fron, isn’t it?

So in my eyes it would be actually the best approach if #226 gets a remake where you can specify the checked sides of the component a bit better - it needs a new look anyhow as the description is very poor as discussed elsewhere …