123

-

Over the last seven years that I have been analysing Revit models, I often ran into issues with duplicate shared parameters or others. We at DAQS.IO have developed a check that will find shared parameters that are non-standard. In this case, we mean that the shared parameter does not exist in the list of published shared parameters of the NLRS (Dutch Revit standards) 

This visual can show the following: Shared parameters that are not standard and to which family they have been added.

Notice the parameters and in which family they have been used.

The first one:

The second one:

This week we have been continuing and adding new features that will allow you to check you Revit models more thorough.

Material names according NLRS standards. 

An example of the detail screen:

One of the first IFC parameters that we are check so that you will if your model is ready for export.

This analysis checks if anything has been filled in, in the parameter IfcExpertAs and if it does it checks if the assembly code matches with the IfcClass. 

Next to that more stuff has been developed but these were harder to screen shot.

More assembly code checks this week. Time for number 28.1 

Structural framings and Columns. Notice the different parameters for concrete and steel.

Also better status and progress of scan visualization.

and 23.*

The first visuals generated by the Custom checker engine are coming online

Proof of concept of the DAQS assist plugin is working

1. The dashboard shows issues
2. The DAQS assist plugin uses that information to help the user fix those issues.

The project dashboard has gone live.

Currently it hosts only three visuals and one drill down but more will be coming soon.

New visuals

• Number of Projects
• Number of total scans
• Number of BIM authors
  • Experience per model and category - Drill down

The Experience per model and category is showing the number of elements a BIM author has modeled or modified per Revit Discipline. It is currently missing some needed filters but we add the ones we think that are necessary we would like to hear from people how the would like to read it.

In week 40 we have been working on the following features, ongoing topics and a bug fix.

• Exports CSV + Dynamo script
• Search functionality in the project selector
• Umbraco CMS integration
• Company Dashboard online
• User Experience
• Number of Scans

Multiple customer presentations

Ongoing

• ISSUES back to Revit

Bug fix:

• Drill down of the sheets

Sometimes, you spend a lot of time working on a thing without being able to show something. This was one of those weeks. For example, we move the content for the I dialogues from the database to the CMS. Same stuff to see for the user, big difference for us.The devs are busy with the company dashboard and a summary dashboard to allow you to see even quicker where your attention is needed.

We also did further investigation into the feedback loop. See the movie, I am excited about what we will be able to offer you soon.

Security

Security has been interwoven into the design of the service from the start and now there is also more documentation about it. Be aware future developments may require changes to the security model.

The company dashboard is getting more visuals.

Number of disciplines.

With this visual we want to be able to show a company how many different disciplines are working and how many models and for which project they create. This is going to be an interesting visual as the rules for this visual could change per standard. The next part is going to be in Dutch as it is a Dutch ILS standard.

Het volgende staat er in de BIM basis ILS over bestandsnamen:
Zorg altijd voor een uniforme en consistente benaming van (aspect) modellen binnen het project.
voorbeeld:
<Bouwwerk>_<Discipline>_<Onderdeel>

Oftewel aan de hand van de bestandsnaam zouden we de disciplines moeten kunnen vinden. Nu leert echter de ervaring zodra gebruikers zelf namen mogen verzinnen dat dit ook heel vaak tot problemen leid. Eigenlijk zou je dus willen dat je of allerlei varianten op een naam toch goed kan herkennen of met correcties een 'override' kunt maken. De eerste versie gaat er vanuit dat de gebruikers netjes de naam invullen zoals het hoort... 

Number of Service providers not filled in. 

(more Dutch as for English we probably have to target a different piece of information)

Is onderdeel van de groep service providers, hiervoor gebruiken we de parameter: NLRS_C_opdrachtnemer_bedrijfsnaam.

Als eenmaal die parameter goed wordt ingevuld dan wordt het ook mogelijk om een review te doen over meerdere modellen en projecten van die service providors. Wat er ook in zit is dat wanneer niet de juiste shared parameter wordt gebruikt dat dit ook is terug te zien. Hiermee wordt bedoeld een parameter met dezelfde naam maar een andere GUID.

This week we added the shared coordinates check on the dashboard. We think that the shared coordinates across project models should be the same. This should help making federate models easier and it should be better for exporting.

We ran into an issue when we were testing this feature. We were seeing results with more than one set of shared coordinates. After some investigation we realized that I had given a model with multiple shared coordinates. When you define sites in Revit, each of those sites can have their own shared coordinates.We updated the queries and we now also extract if the set of shared coordinates is active and the name of the defined site.On the dashboard we want to see if there are more than one unique sets of shared coordinates. and we divided that in to survey points and project base points. These visuals will drill down to something like this. You will see the Revit model name and each site with the values for the shared coordinates with some filtering techniques.

We have also added a grading to a groups of visuals. This grading is added at a project level and for project models.

This architectural model scores a 6.7 for performance.This score is calculated as follows:

White = Not calculated

Green = 0 point

Yellow = 1 point

Red = 2 points

Purple = 4 points

We have setup a system that should allow us to tweak the calculations later to reflect findings. So this system is not set in stone. We intend to modify the calculations based upon real world examples.

For the perfomance we have set the weightfactor to one. Of course we are fully aware that if you import a tiny dwg file or a huge toposite that there is a signifcant performance difference. We anticipate quite some changes to this system. For the quality of a model we have used the same system but we have set the weight factor as follows. Notice that if the warning is less severe the weight factor is lower.

If all the visuals are purple the score is zero and if all the visuals are green the score is a ten.

Is this system perfect, No but now we have something to shoot at. Currently we have set up the calculations but at some point this will become customer configurable. Because some companies might not care about the Omniclass code and therefore do not want this to affect their scores. Or maybe they want other parameters to be evaluated and included in the score.

We also worked further on Disciplines of models and service providors but those still need a bit of tweaking, so maybe next week they make an appearance.

This week we worked on database performance improvements. 

A lot of the visuals were generated on the fly, gather all the data and processing it to show it on the website, during early development this was fine. For performance, we are aware that doing this every time is going to be too resource-intensive. Now it was a good moment to improve this.

Instead of processing the required data when the user wants to see it, we now prepare it right after the data from the extracts is imported into the database. So no movie or new visuals this week. Next week we are getting started with all the ‘ILS compliancy’ tests. Part of those test will also be compliance to NLRS standards and making use of NL-sfb classifications.

These week we worked on family name checks according to Dutch NLRS standards. 

For the time being we have decided to only do the first 4 positions.

The checks we do are:

Position 1:

Are the first two letters a valid country abbreviation?

Position 2:

Are the first two numbers from the Assembly Code the same as the numbers on this position? Assumming the 4 number notation is used.

Position 3:

Is the correct Abbreviation used for this family's category.

Position 4:

Based upon how the family is placed in a project an abbreviation needs to be choosen. 

The first ILS checks are appearing on the dashboard. Read all about it in the blog post.

oh and also the disclaimers have come online. 

This week we have finished the design for the Assembly code check details page and we added two more visuals and not to forget incredible performance improvements to all the pages.

Continued in Dutch as the ILS is specifically Dutch.

De ILS detail pagina geeft je de mogelijkheid om te onderzoeken welke regel er niet voldoet. Omdat regels naar parameters op instance of type niveau kijken zat daar wel een uitzoek klus in om een prettig werkbare pagina te maken. Je kan dadelijk per hoofdgroep kijken, per Type en Instance en filteren op regels.

We would like to share with you a preview of the new project dashboard. We think the first project dashboard could be more condensed so we improved the design. We are aiming for a project dashboard that focuses your attention to there where it is needed without having to scroll.

The same groups as before are there! We took away all the text as we think after a while you will know what is where and if you want to read the text hover over it.

Of course all the underlying data is only one click away.