TurboCAD Forums

The Ultimate Resource for TurboCAD Knowledge

Register
 
Interested in some really terrific mobile apps? Visit www.turboapps.com for details.

saving component walls In the IFC file format
Read 1535 times
* November 23, 2018, 12:49:13 AM
Has this been fixed in the 2018 version?
When saving a wall that has components  as an IFC file type the components get lost.

Logged
Nikki
TC20 platinum
TC 2015 platinum
TC 2017 with lightworks


* November 23, 2018, 02:13:59 AM
#1
It show if we open a IFC made in TC, i dont have any example from other software, in TC i get all the info from the original tcw
What i do is to write a name and thickness for each component inside the Wall Style, that name and thickness will show in the description of the wall in an IFC viewer and the total thickness of course, that way others can know what kind of wall it is and how it's build up.
It deepend of the viewer for what info we get from them, at least in the free version :)
Bim Vision is very nice, but Tekla give more info so ...

Torfinn

Logged
V20, V21, 2015/ 16/ 17/ 18/ 19 Pro. Platinum
Deluxe 2015/ 16/ 19
RedSDK enabled
Windows 10 Home Premium 64 bit, 32 GB
NVIDIA Geforce GTX 780m, 1 GB


* November 23, 2018, 02:36:26 AM
#2
Is it possible to check my example - created in TC? I haven't added any technical BIM data - at this stage I only want a model which looks the same as it does is in a TC file and a 3d PDF.
 I was trying to create a shop front type wall using wall components for the horizontal rails and blocks for the vertical rails.

Logged
Nikki
TC20 platinum
TC 2015 platinum
TC 2017 with lightworks


* November 23, 2018, 03:05:11 AM
#3
I do not know if we talk about the same thing.
But until version 2017 (included) in the ifc file some of the wall component is disappeared. Not only information about.
This was most often the case with walls with different heights of individual wall components.

Logged


* November 23, 2018, 04:03:00 AM
#4
Attached how it look like in BIM Vision
I also tested it in Tekla and there it say the wall is 600 with an offset of -185 (600-2x185 = 230)
But none of them show the footer on foundationwall, that is info that could be written in the style and it would show in the list.

Torfinn

Logged
V20, V21, 2015/ 16/ 17/ 18/ 19 Pro. Platinum
Deluxe 2015/ 16/ 19
RedSDK enabled
Windows 10 Home Premium 64 bit, 32 GB
NVIDIA Geforce GTX 780m, 1 GB


* November 23, 2018, 04:05:34 AM
#5
I do not know if we talk about the same thing.
But until version 2017 (included) in the ifc file some of the wall component is disappeared. Not only information about.
This was most often the case with walls with different heights of individual wall components.

Hi mpavelek

That is still the case, it dont care about uplift's etc, maybe because TC give us "Simple BIM"

Torfinn

Logged
V20, V21, 2015/ 16/ 17/ 18/ 19 Pro. Platinum
Deluxe 2015/ 16/ 19
RedSDK enabled
Windows 10 Home Premium 64 bit, 32 GB
NVIDIA Geforce GTX 780m, 1 GB


* November 23, 2018, 04:14:42 AM
#6
Thanks Torfinn
I don't think it is right the footing is 600 wide it is shown as 3m tall and the wall has disappeared.
when I open the file in TC the style names have been changed to meaningless names. Wall style 1 etc.
With the curtain walls - glass walls the component widths have changed ?? all the components are full length. some have been renamed to "airgap". It's crazy.

Logged
Nikki
TC20 platinum
TC 2015 platinum
TC 2017 with lightworks


* November 23, 2018, 05:19:08 AM
#7
Hi Nikki

Maybe meaningless for us, but not for the viewer/ system i guess.
The footer is 600 in your tcw drawing, but it takes the info from the wall Thickness and that is 230, if they was seperate i'm sure it would have shown as a 600 and a 230 wall and 230 wall start elevetion was 200 like the thickness of footer, it do show correct heigth at 3400.

The Block stud's in Curtainwall is set like airgap because it cut true the total heigt of wall i believe, so we see the Bottom rail, airgap, Glass 1 etc etc and the block stud's is shown as Solids.

In TC your IFC file is wrong as it show the wall as 600 with an offset of -185 (looks like a componentwall :)
I tested with your tcw drawing, save as .ifc and it looks ok, but close and reopen the drawing i got the same fault like your's. so will make one similar in v 2018 and see if i get same result, a bug in TC in case as it looks correct in the ifc viewers

Torfinn

Logged
V20, V21, 2015/ 16/ 17/ 18/ 19 Pro. Platinum
Deluxe 2015/ 16/ 19
RedSDK enabled
Windows 10 Home Premium 64 bit, 32 GB
NVIDIA Geforce GTX 780m, 1 GB


* November 23, 2018, 05:36:57 AM
#8
"That is still the case, it dont care about uplift's etc, maybe because TC give us "Simple BIM""

I was under the impression that the IFC file format was opensource . Even sketch up can save as IFC and there is guidance how to make sketch up models "BIM"  in sketchup.
We have all the tools to make TC fully BIM.
We can almost make a completely parametric model.
We have some "BIM" limitations but I think they could be solved
- we  can't constrain different types of objects to each other. specifically walls and slabs
- we cant extract data from custom objects (we possibly could but we don't know how too)
- we can classify some things using property sets and label them in plan view (views are an issue). It would be nice if we could label in DP and viewports too.
-If we go the xref route we can use the draft palette to create views that will update when the model changes. - pen settings and hatching is a problem though.

- we can extract data to make schedules
- we can hyperlink to data

For me the biggest problem is that we cant reliably save to IFC. This makes sharing data with other disciplines an issue.

Logged
Nikki
TC20 platinum
TC 2015 platinum
TC 2017 with lightworks


* November 23, 2018, 05:43:30 AM
#9
If you have the ability to tell the style to ignore the wall width.
Then that information should carry through. The main wall is 230 wide and its footing is 600 wide.
The airgap thing is nonsense. It cant make things up  a component that was 40mm wide gets changed to -17mm and called an air gap. Why? it was labelled a rail. We need to be able to map the data ourselves so that it translates correctly.

How would you define the footing? -185 makes sense to me because  600-230 Is 370 and 165 is half of 370.  I can then draw the wall from the edge of the wall not the edge of the footing which doesn't make sense.
 Drawing a centre aligned wall doesn't make sense either.
Drawing the footing separately is more work then necessary - although I normally do so that I can step it.
« Last Edit: November 23, 2018, 06:05:14 AM by nikkipollard »

Logged
Nikki
TC20 platinum
TC 2015 platinum
TC 2017 with lightworks


* November 23, 2018, 06:36:55 AM
#10
Nikki,
" I was under the impression that the IFC file format was opensource"

I do not know, but IFC is primarily a gradually emerging transnational, global standard, the norm.
It's great to be supported in TurboCAD, but ... Again, but ….  it does not work at 100%.
Look at: http://www.buildingsmart-tech.org/certification/ifc-certification-2.0/ifc2x3-cv-v2.0-certification/participants
TurboCAD does not have ifc certification. That's why we can not be surprised that it does not work at 100%

Logged


* November 23, 2018, 07:03:33 AM
#11
Torfinn,

Simple BIM?  What is a simple BIM? :-) :-)
It's either BIM or not. If it does, then it must always be proclaimed without any problems. This is my opinion.
I do not say that TurboCAD is bad, on the contrary. TurboCAD has been excellent, but has been "standing in place" for several years, not developing. It is a "tax" for its versatility. I would only like when it changed. No more.

Look at the attachment. Part of the wall is missing.
I am a user. I want to save the file so it's all. I do not want anything extra.
PS.: As in ppm. I want the closed polyline to be really closed. And so on

Logged


* November 23, 2018, 07:10:02 AM
#12
It seems to not care/ being able to handle Bottom and Top elevation in the style.
I tested with standard wall's, 1 at 600x 200 and 1 at the top off the first one 230 x 3200, and it show/ reported correct in IFC

Open Solibri and find the -17, in the curtainwall you have glass and they stand -17 in from edge of wall, that is what give you an 17 air gap in the wall, not what i believed the cut outs from studs 20x80

I tested with an old wallstyle that not have anything in it where the ventilation for cladding was and it is reported as a air gap, the total thickness of the wall is correct 263 mm.
On this i dont have all info in the style, so it's difficult for others to know the correct dimensions for the different Component
( correction, in Solibri i got all info about the air gap )

Torfinn

Logged
V20, V21, 2015/ 16/ 17/ 18/ 19 Pro. Platinum
Deluxe 2015/ 16/ 19
RedSDK enabled
Windows 10 Home Premium 64 bit, 32 GB
NVIDIA Geforce GTX 780m, 1 GB


* November 23, 2018, 07:30:35 AM
#13
"That is still the case, it dont care about uplift's etc, maybe because TC give us "Simple BIM""

I was under the impression that the IFC file format was opensource . Even sketch up can save as IFC and there is guidance how to make sketch up models "BIM"  in sketchup.
We have all the tools to make TC fully BIM.
We can almost make a completely parametric model.
We have some "BIM" limitations but I think they could be solved
- we  can't constrain different types of objects to each other. specifically walls and slabs
- we cant extract data from custom objects (we possibly could but we don't know how too)
- we can classify some things using property sets and label them in plan view (views are an issue). It would be nice if we could label in DP and viewports too.
-If we go the xref route we can use the draft palette to create views that will update when the model changes. - pen settings and hatching is a problem though.

- we can extract data to make schedules
- we can hyperlink to data

For me the biggest problem is that we cant reliably save to IFC. This makes sharing data with other disciplines an issue.

I guess they have put in some basic functions, hence Simple BIM, they call it that themselves.
Takes time and money to implement it fully, we have a small part of it for "free" in TC.
It's sort of pay for Lada and expect a Benz :) if we compare with prize for ArchiCad in example.

And the Database tool in TC is OLD and they dont want to do to much with it as it's written in a very backward way, aka a lot of work if i have understand it correct

Torfinn


Logged
V20, V21, 2015/ 16/ 17/ 18/ 19 Pro. Platinum
Deluxe 2015/ 16/ 19
RedSDK enabled
Windows 10 Home Premium 64 bit, 32 GB
NVIDIA Geforce GTX 780m, 1 GB


* November 23, 2018, 07:37:07 AM
#14
If it left the style name intact instead of renaming it would have been obvious to the observer that the objects were rails in the curtain wall. In most other programs there is a curtainwall tool that works like a wall. If we cant have a curtain wall tool we should be able to use the wall tool - which works well until you save it as an IFC file.
In archicad they use slabs to make furniture and just change the category.
It needs to be that simple. We need to be in control. In archicad you map objects to IFC categories  ie tell the program how you want to save the those objects. The program should never be allowed to guess what your intentions are without there being an option for you to overwrite a bad assumption.

Logged
Nikki
TC20 platinum
TC 2015 platinum
TC 2017 with lightworks


* November 23, 2018, 08:02:16 AM
#15
""
Look at the attachment. Part of the wall is missing.
I am a user. I want to save the file so it's all. I do not want anything extra.
PS.: As in ppm. I want the closed polyline to be really closed. And so on

For me that magenta wall seems to be linked to a different wall on a different layer, maybe ??
It have the V shape for a linked wall, but there are no "tracemark" in the wall we see it going nearly in to.
About PPM, there are some issues with it, in your example a bug that have been there all the time maybe, for sure for a very long time and will not be fixed before we hopefully one day get ppm v2 in TC

Torfinn

Logged
V20, V21, 2015/ 16/ 17/ 18/ 19 Pro. Platinum
Deluxe 2015/ 16/ 19
RedSDK enabled
Windows 10 Home Premium 64 bit, 32 GB
NVIDIA Geforce GTX 780m, 1 GB


* November 23, 2018, 08:04:24 AM
#16
I am happy with the old data base tools
It's the newer property set tools that could/should be improved.
 We should be able to assign property sets to any item. Why were acis solids and sweeps left off of the list?
We should be able to link to parameters in ppm files (both types) via property sets. So that we can use the info in reports etc.
We should be able to use the database connect tool with property sets , the same way we can connect with attributes and custom properties.


Perhaps I shouldn't be comparing Turbocad to archicad, There is a huge price difference but what about Bricscad or freecad and sketchup? all horrible to draw in but they have BIM capabilities although they are cad programs. Turbocad is awesome to draw with!
 It has most concepts  in place someone just needs to bring it all together.

Logged
Nikki
TC20 platinum
TC 2015 platinum
TC 2017 with lightworks


* November 23, 2018, 08:13:04 AM
#17
""
In archicad they use slabs to make furniture and just change the category.
It needs to be that simple. We need to be in control. In archicad you map objects to IFC categories  ie tell the program how you want to save the those objects. The program should never be allowed to guess what your intentions are without there being an option for you to overwrite a bad assumption.

In TC 2018 we also can set Pset to an Object, i have not used it yet, so dont know much about it

Edit;
I did add a link, but noticed it was not Public so deleted it.

Torfinn
« Last Edit: November 23, 2018, 08:25:21 AM by Torfinn »

Logged
V20, V21, 2015/ 16/ 17/ 18/ 19 Pro. Platinum
Deluxe 2015/ 16/ 19
RedSDK enabled
Windows 10 Home Premium 64 bit, 32 GB
NVIDIA Geforce GTX 780m, 1 GB


* November 23, 2018, 12:11:07 PM
#18
"Takes time and money to implement it fully, we have a small part of it for "free" in TC.
It's sort of pay for Lada and expect a Benz  if we compare with prize for ArchiCad in example."


Torfinn,
do you really mean that?
TurboCAD has been cost-effective many years ago. But now certainly not.

Example: You use building design software not for general drawing

TurboCAD - purchase 1.440 €, annual upgrade 312 €
Revit LT - standard price, rent of year € 513 (for members of the Chamber of Architects and Engineers each year is a 30% discount.Now is 30% discount for all shoppers until 27.11). So Revit LT is for € 359 per year.

Price comparison :
First year: TC 1.440 €, R 359 €,
second year TC 1.440 + 312 = 1.752 € |, RLT 359 + 359 = 718 €,
third year 1.440 + 312 + 312 = 2.064 €, RLT 1.077 €.
... ..
24. year TC 8.616 €, RLT 8.616 €
From 25 years of software usage, TurboCAD will actually be more cost-effective.

If you use TC you will pay more in 24 years. Instead of a full BIM, you have to use only "simply BIM", where you do not know whether or not everything is really missing. You can not use publicly available BIM objects, revit family libraries, you do not have sophisticated project management from floor to cut, you do not have dynamic connections, you do not have a full dynamic connection when you change (from linking objects, through listings to dimensions) you pay significantly more.

TurboCAD is more versatile. For general drawing it is definitely better. This former advantage has gradually become its major drawback. If you are designing buildings, you only use half of the tools that are included here.


This is not important to me. I would only like one. And make everything work 100% at just 98%. That's for me.

Logged


* November 23, 2018, 04:46:05 PM
#19
Yes :)

If you want to compare you need to do it on the same level, like annual subscripton, TC also have BF discount until end of this month if i not remember wrong.
I use US $ price for 1 year under here, based on the NOK to US $

TC PP = 500 - 25% = 375
Revit LT = 526 Revit LT dont seems to have BF discount
AC Revit LT Suite = 647 - 30 % = 452

And also LT only have GL render i believe so ...
Fusion 360 = 437 no discount

We can also add terrain, ppm / Autolisp, do LT have Component walls ??

In my opinion i feel Revit LT is more the same as TC Deluxe with simple BIM, but i dont know as i have never used Revit LT or LT Suite
And maybe it is Autocad Revit LT Suite you think of as i believe that have more functions and BIM tools, Librarys etc. it was also the Suite version that have BF discount on 30 %

TC is a allround, Revit LT is for building only, that is good and bad, good because i can think it work more easy with architect tools, bad because of more cumbersome to make spesial styles if you cant find what you want finish made inside the program alredy.

Maybe i should take down a trial of it :)


Logged
V20, V21, 2015/ 16/ 17/ 18/ 19 Pro. Platinum
Deluxe 2015/ 16/ 19
RedSDK enabled
Windows 10 Home Premium 64 bit, 32 GB
NVIDIA Geforce GTX 780m, 1 GB


* November 23, 2018, 08:02:44 PM
#20
Torfinn we can use property sets -  but they don't save to IFC correctly because the IFC filter we have changes things.
 It often overwrites all the effort that goes into putting things in the correct categories.
Psets are  limited to a few types of objects - mainly architectural. This means that we cant draw custom objects and categorise them which makes it simple BIM instead of a fully functioning BIM. I am fairly certain that it would be easy for a programmer to add more items to that short list and give us more control. There is a huge advantage to being able to draw using the more advanced modelling tools a mechanical cad program  like TC has. We can basically draw anything easily
With Archicad and revit there is a separate way to tell the program how to save each item to IFC - they call it mapping we need something like that.
Google "mapping to IFC" and hundreds of tutorials for most BIM programs will show what I mean.
« Last Edit: November 23, 2018, 08:17:06 PM by nikkipollard »

Logged
Nikki
TC20 platinum
TC 2015 platinum
TC 2017 with lightworks


* November 23, 2018, 11:24:41 PM
#21
I think I know what the IFC filter is doing and I am confident that it's not my error.
 The edge offset in the wall style sets the position of the wall relative to the baseline - hence my negetive 185 value, obviousy you cant have a component with a negetive value.
the width of the component sets the width of the wall.
The filter is taking the edge offset as the width which is wrong.
Surely this is something that is easily corrected. They have obviously used a template from another program and not checked that the correct information is being read. I presume that the incorrect height of each component is caused by a similar error.

I see that revit uses stacked walls to create a wall with a footing.- but essentially it is the same thing.

Logged
Nikki
TC20 platinum
TC 2015 platinum
TC 2017 with lightworks


* November 24, 2018, 12:13:28 AM
#22
Here is another example of the faulty IFC filter
The kitchen appliance file was taken from a BIM object library on the web. It opens correctly in Turbocad as a group with all the relevant intelligent data listed in the property sets In TC I can extract data from it via the report tool. Working as designed. Everything has been assigned the correct IFC information . Try saving it as an IFC file from Turbocad(the fridge file) and opening it with a BIM viewer - see the difference? Lots of unidentified objects and all the  BIM information is gone. Groups of items with one set of properties need to be saved as one item with one set of properties. There is no point in allowing you to assign a block or a group a property set with a list of IFC properties. Only explode that block and lose the information when you save to the IFC format.

Logged
Nikki
TC20 platinum
TC 2015 platinum
TC 2017 with lightworks


* November 24, 2018, 04:33:06 AM
#23
Torfinn,
these are the endless discussions. Just sellers and shoppers. :-)
I will not comment more. It's not the point, and it's not a benefit to anyone

The theme is saving component walls In the IFC file format
I say. It's a problem, I do not recommend using it. Sometimes the output is correct, complete, sometimes not. Some of the wall components are sometimes not stored. But when saved in another format it is stored properly, nothing is missing. See the attachment above. Where is the wall? Miss.
My question is: Was this bug fixed in TC2018?

The import of the ifc file is as problematic as saving. Sometimes parts of files are completely missing. Software that is free (= Lada) will display the content correctly. But TurboCAD, which is better than Revit (at least in relation to free software is TC Benz), shows only half. Appendix below. My question is: Was this bug fixed in TC2018? Does anyone know?
« Last Edit: November 24, 2018, 04:39:36 AM by mpavelek »

Logged


* November 24, 2018, 06:48:52 AM
#24
Hi mpavelek

I agree :)
I try'd to take down Revit last nigth, but something went wrong and it stop download, so try again today.

In your pic's i assume "grey" is tcw and "black" is ifc, so attach what i get when open your ifc file, then you can see if what show is correct or not.
They have fixed some bugs in 2018 and we did get options to add Pset to architectual object's


Torfinn

Logged
V20, V21, 2015/ 16/ 17/ 18/ 19 Pro. Platinum
Deluxe 2015/ 16/ 19
RedSDK enabled
Windows 10 Home Premium 64 bit, 32 GB
NVIDIA Geforce GTX 780m, 1 GB


* November 24, 2018, 07:30:09 AM
#25
Torffin,
Thanks. Cool. Bugs were corrected in TC2018. Super.

I received the ifc file. Is not created in TC. It's just the "basis" for my next work.
It's exactly the opposite as you write.
Gray - open in free BIM. Is right, is complete. Is for me just control.
Black - open in TC2017. Is wrong. There is no half of file here. Try opening the file in TC2017 if you can. You will see yourself.

According to your images, it is clear that in TC2018 ifc is complete. Errors in TC2017 have been fixed.

Logged


* November 24, 2018, 08:03:28 AM
#26
I open the file in v 2017 and got a lot of warnings about selfintersecting, so when it finally open i could see that a lot of parts was missing there

Torfinn

Logged
V20, V21, 2015/ 16/ 17/ 18/ 19 Pro. Platinum
Deluxe 2015/ 16/ 19
RedSDK enabled
Windows 10 Home Premium 64 bit, 32 GB
NVIDIA Geforce GTX 780m, 1 GB