-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 20
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
UT Cross Disciplinary 1 #65
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
UT Cross Disciplinary 1 #65
Conversation
Can you please merge in the latest state of the |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Firstly, thank you for the unit test and against this very new and alien concept to Infrastructure.
The file is Syntactically correct which is highlighted by the passing checks, but semantically there are a few issues around the organisation of the spatial hierarchy. we are trying to make sure the unit tests are simple representatives both in syntax and modelling practices so the advised changes are as follows:
- ROADSEGMENT is logically not associated to a LATERAL IfcFacilityPart and more suitable value would be TRAFFICLANE;, which would make this model a 2 lane road.
- longitudinal segments can be decomposed into lateral parts or vice versa but logically usually don't exist as a siblings in the hierarchy.
- the conceptual organisation of the model is a bit perculiar as it is the road and railway both pass over the bridge (inferring they are side by side) then they intersect. would it be more understandable and to highlight the possible elements better by having one PassUnder then intersect further along??
once these are discussed and resolved we can merge this useful unit test!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Only Issue:
- IfcRelInterferesElement relationships are directional and currently backwards.
other than that LFTM.
#36 = IFCRELINTERFERESELEMENTS('1KGxl_MJzCugAzAbkkkI95', #1, $, $, #33, #26, $, 'PassesOver', .U.); | ||
#37 = IFCRELINTERFERESELEMENTS('258z1l3OLB2AfN2jNMLr8D', #1, $, $, #33, #30, $, 'PassesUnder', .U.); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
As per the developing Documentation around IfcRelInterferesElements
PassesOver and PassesUnder is directional in nature so it should be as below.
- PassesOver: the RelatingElement is passing over the RelatedElement (e.g a bridge passing over a water canal)
- PassesUnder: the RelatingElement is passing under the RelatedElement (e.g a Pipe passing under a road)
therefore your relationships are currently backwards (e.g. Bridge passesOver Road... :P)
link to developing docs: IfcRelInterferesElements Documentation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Okkk! Let's see if I got this right!
Unit test
Test the interaction / interference with different domains spatial structures.
Covered topics