Well it does NOT work, it is even worse :( The IfcGuid is not written back and so always creates a new one. The basic walls do not get an IFCGuid that hosts these windows etc..
:(
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
So.. How can we rely on IFC if the IfcGuid keeps changing?? THIS IS A HUGE PROBLEM!! I really want to adopt all the standardisation made bij buildingSMART, but we need to rely on the unique GUID's stay the same after multiple IFC exports from Revit AND other software.
When can we expect this to be fixed??!
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Do you have a quickstart on how to compile the code on github to an installable plugin?
It would be nice to be able to evaluate intermediate fixes and improvements.
Regards,
Dirk
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
No don't have that, but is not too difficult to change to your own enviroment.
If you installed in the normal paths (C drive) it works out off the box with updating the exporter.
In the source directory for the projects there are .props files
IFCExporterUIOverride.props.template - copy this file and change its name to IFCExporterUIOverride.props
you will have to rename this file to IFCExporterUIOverride.props
In this file edit the line which point to the revit references.
Sample:
<!-- Change to your directory of Revit installation. --><HintPath>C:\Program Files\Autodesk\Revit Architecture 2018\Program\RevitAPI.dll</HintPath>
When compiling in Visual studio and not working on the default path, change the 'Build events' Postbuild events to youre environment.
This should do the trick, need more help let me know.
Regards
Eddy
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Hi Eddy,
Renaming the props.template(s) and adjusting the paths, is working well.
But in the Solutions Explorer, there seems stil to be a problem with the References of Revit.IFC.export. I don't have a clue how to get this corrected.
Regards,
Dirk
Hi Eddy,
Ignore my question above. I've got it working.
It's nice to be able to make use of an intermediate exporter with fixed issues (and to follow up the bunch of issues that are unfortunately not yet fixed).
Regards,
Dirk
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Great hope Autodesk will take this more serious, as the world tries to use IFC as an exchange format and the output from the Exporter is that unreliable.
We have great problems with the Guid changing, BCF can not be used with IFC created by Autodesk. They should start unit testing on the exports. Build some testing code that compares IFC models. We created our own reader/writer and this is able to do this. So Autodesk should also be able to do that.
regards
Eddy
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
I can only fully agree with the content of your message.
We shouldn't be busy anymore by worrying about the issues of the export, or inventing all kind of workarounds, so that all the time could be spent in the real challenge: getting better buildings, making processes more effiently, doing smart stuff, getting focus back on our real jobs, by USING the IFC-models. It's amazing how much time is lost now: if you just take in mind the time you spent on this kind of issues, and you add the time which is spent by your clients or contractors in your network on this kind of things ... and if you extrapolate it nationwide ... it's a bit frustrating, also compared to the nice roadmaps & presentations that are spread.
I'm very curious how serious the IFC4 certification will be, since the IFC2x3 one was an empty shell. Soon I'm going to start using the EDM-server for validation. It's not my job, but I want to get in control in the usability/predictability of the exportoutcome.
I do follow up this/your GUID-topic. Concerning units I also already posted some issues.
Luckely I don't have any personal benefit in this matter, but since having a reliable model is so crucial for whatever you want to do with the IFC-model, I will do my best to get this painfull issue on the national (bouw)agenda (or any related initiative).
Regards,
Dirk
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
A while ago i uploaded a sample revit file with description on what the problem is.
VGK-B-BWK-R17_DetachDebug.zip (in this discussion)
This simple and small sample illustrates the problem. tried to help but the github is incomplete (not all revit versions there). In this discussion i also described how to debug and find the exact problem.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
I don't see this happening in 2018 or later with a new file I created using out of the box windows. However I do see the issue using your file. It must be the window is created differently - we'll figure it out.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Create a family just like the sample and it will happen.
Problem in the code is that the Guid from the window goes to the created opening (not created in revit). What we do is create a sample revit model with all possibilities. So wall with a opening in revit and then fill it with the window and just the window in the wall and the same with created families. Also it is needed to create a family that is based on a created family.
And then do the same testing, Do this standard walls and walls that are filled with isolation material.
I know there are a lot off posibilities but that is what is possible in Revit :)
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
We are weeks further and no news, what can i tell my customers?
We need a deadline, else we have to take steps to look at other solutions from other vendors.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
v19.1 is out here, as an interim to Github being ready. We are working out the contribution for the github project now.
Please keep us update to date....
So, Version 18.4.0, 6/25/2018 is out.
In the 'Export Bug Fixes' section, I read the following:
So does this mean the 'Changing GUID problem' is now fixed? And if yes, will it be fixed as well for the 2016/2017 versions?
fingers crossed..
I will do some testing, hope it works.
Was working on the problem on Github, hope they will switch over with all code soon.
will update you if it works or not :)
Well it does NOT work, it is even worse :( The IfcGuid is not written back and so always creates a new one. The basic walls do not get an IFCGuid that hosts these windows etc..
:(
So.. How can we rely on IFC if the IfcGuid keeps changing?? THIS IS A HUGE PROBLEM!! I really want to adopt all the standardisation made bij buildingSMART, but we need to rely on the unique GUID's stay the same after multiple IFC exports from Revit AND other software.
When can we expect this to be fixed??!
Hi Eddy,
Do you have a quickstart on how to compile the code on github to an installable plugin?
It would be nice to be able to evaluate intermediate fixes and improvements.
Regards,
Dirk
Hi Dirk,
No don't have that, but is not too difficult to change to your own enviroment.
If you installed in the normal paths (C drive) it works out off the box with updating the exporter.
In the source directory for the projects there are .props files
IFCExporterUIOverride.props.template - copy this file and change its name to IFCExporterUIOverride.props
you will have to rename this file to IFCExporterUIOverride.props
In this file edit the line which point to the revit references.
Sample:
When compiling in Visual studio and not working on the default path, change the 'Build events' Postbuild events to youre environment.
This should do the trick, need more help let me know.
Regards
Eddy
Hi Eddy,
Thx!
I'll try if I get it working (or as a good literal translation: if can make chocolate out of it :-) )
Regards,
Dirk
Hi Eddy,
Renaming the props.template(s) and adjusting the paths, is working well.
But in the Solutions Explorer, there seems stil to be a problem with the References of Revit.IFC.export. I don't have a clue how to get this corrected.
Regards,
Dirk
Hi Eddy,
Ignore my question above. I've got it working.
It's nice to be able to make use of an intermediate exporter with fixed issues (and to follow up the bunch of issues that are unfortunately not yet fixed).
Regards,
Dirk
Hi Dirk,
Great hope Autodesk will take this more serious, as the world tries to use IFC as an exchange format and the output from the Exporter is that unreliable.
We have great problems with the Guid changing, BCF can not be used with IFC created by Autodesk. They should start unit testing on the exports. Build some testing code that compares IFC models. We created our own reader/writer and this is able to do this. So Autodesk should also be able to do that.
regards
Eddy
Hi Eddy,
I can only fully agree with the content of your message.
We shouldn't be busy anymore by worrying about the issues of the export, or inventing all kind of workarounds, so that all the time could be spent in the real challenge: getting better buildings, making processes more effiently, doing smart stuff, getting focus back on our real jobs, by USING the IFC-models. It's amazing how much time is lost now: if you just take in mind the time you spent on this kind of issues, and you add the time which is spent by your clients or contractors in your network on this kind of things ... and if you extrapolate it nationwide ... it's a bit frustrating, also compared to the nice roadmaps & presentations that are spread.
I'm very curious how serious the IFC4 certification will be, since the IFC2x3 one was an empty shell. Soon I'm going to start using the EDM-server for validation. It's not my job, but I want to get in control in the usability/predictability of the exportoutcome.
I do follow up this/your GUID-topic. Concerning units I also already posted some issues.
Luckely I don't have any personal benefit in this matter, but since having a reliable model is so crucial for whatever you want to do with the IFC-model, I will do my best to get this painfull issue on the national (bouw)agenda (or any related initiative).
Regards,
Dirk
Eddy, what are the particulars of what doesn't work? I see basic elements getting their GUIDs and retaining them on re-export.
Andy,
A while ago i uploaded a sample revit file with description on what the problem is.
VGK-B-BWK-R17_DetachDebug.zip (in this discussion)
This simple and small sample illustrates the problem. tried to help but the github is incomplete (not all revit versions there). In this discussion i also described how to debug and find the exact problem.
Making use of the sample of Eddy: screenshot of the changing GlobalId's of the IfcWindows.
Tested with R19.1.current-IFC4RVcert.-branche
I don't see this happening in 2018 or later with a new file I created using out of the box windows. However I do see the issue using your file. It must be the window is created differently - we'll figure it out.
Create a family just like the sample and it will happen.
Problem in the code is that the Guid from the window goes to the created opening (not created in revit). What we do is create a sample revit model with all possibilities. So wall with a opening in revit and then fill it with the window and just the window in the wall and the same with created families. Also it is needed to create a family that is based on a created family.
And then do the same testing, Do this standard walls and walls that are filled with isolation material.
I know there are a lot off posibilities but that is what is possible in Revit :)
Angel, that's REVIT-135617
Hi All,
Any progress made ? Need this fix soon, my customers are getting crazy with the bcf problems because off the changing Guid.
regards
Eddy
Not yet. It is on our backog for further investigation.
:(
We are weeks further and no news, what can i tell my customers?
We need a deadline, else we have to take steps to look at other solutions from other vendors.
I'll prioritize the investigation for the next 2 week planning period.
please keep us updated, this issue is the absolute deal-breaker for IFC and open collaboration (my opinion)