Silent Installation and Other Administrator Documentation

System Administrators are able to silently install Solibri Model Checker (SMC) and Solibri Model Viewer (SMV) remotely to the machines of users by running the installer in unattended mode.  This can be done by passing the -q command line argument to the installer.

This information is found in the “Documentation for SMC System Administrators.pdf” document for both PC and MAC users.

This document provides also other useful information outlined below in its table of contents:

  • Super User vs. End User
    • User Profile
    • Roles
    • Shared Resources
    • Specifying Common Layouts
      • Specifying a Video Page for Common Layouts
    • Tasks and Responsibilities of System Administrator
      • Silent Installation for Windows
      • Silent Installation for Mac Os X
      • Setting the User Profile and Shared Resources

You can find this document depending on your machine here:

For PC:

C:\Users\Public\SolibrI\[VERSION OF SOLIBRI SOFTWARE]\Documents\System Administrator

For Mac:

Applications > [VERSION OF SOLIBRI SOFTWARE]\Documents\System Administrator

Silent Installation and Other Administrator Documentation

Creating Presentations on-the-Fly in SMC

The core functionality of Solibri Model Checker (SMC) is to run rules-based checks on your Building Information Model (BIM), review the results of those checks, and generate issue slides of those results to create a presentation/report of issues.   The presentation and report can be generated automatically by selecting the “From Checking Results” option in the New Presentation dialog.

You can also create presentations manually during your coordination meeting by creating your own issue slides outside of a rule check.   The following article will demonstrate this simple function, which can be useful when you are getting started with SMC or if you want a quick way to create snapshots of your model on-the-fly.  You can follow along using the SMC Building.smc model that comes with SMC located in the Models folder in the program files.

After opening the SMC Building.smc sample model, you’ll notice in the Checking layout, that a rule check has already been run on the model and issue slides have been created for some of the results of the check:

You can tell a slide was created for this result as a slide icon  appears next to the result.

If you select the Communication layout, you’ll see there are two presentations listed in the Presentation view.  The “Issues (12)” presentation is a presentation created from checking results.  Below you see the issue slide previously seen in the Checking layout.

You can tell these slides were created from Results as there is result link icon  shown on each slide in the Issue Sorter view.

To create a presentation from checking results, after clicking the New Presentation button in the Presentation view, click the “From Checking Results” option and mark the Rules you want slides created for in the Presentation.

If you look in the Presentation view, you’ll see a presentation named “General Presentation (4)”.  There are no result link icons  shown on the slides in the Issue Sorter view.  This is because this presentation was created without the means of checking results.  To create a presentation of this sort, in the New Presentation dialog, mark the first option “New.”

You can then add issue slides manually by right-clicking on a slide in the slide sorter, and select “New Issue” option.

Below, we selected the 4th issue of the “General Presentation” in the Issue Sorter.  We then zoomed out to the front wall, made the wall transparent and added some markup using the Markup tool stating that the water closet room needs a toilet:

After right-clicking the 4th issue slide in the Issue sorter, we select New Issue. A new issue slide is created in the presentation with the visualization saved and we can add a title to the slide.

From there, we can add more slides manually in this same way without the need of having an actual checking result.

Creating Presentations on-the-Fly in SMC

Forward and Backward Relations in SMC

In Solibri Model Checker (SMC), relationships exist between components and are reflected as “Relations”.  These are similar to properties and are grouped into folders within the Relations tab of the Info view. These relationships can be termed ‘forward, backward, or forward and backward’. We’ll explain what this means to you, as an SMC user.

In the previous article, Using the Decomposes Relation Property, we used the example of a stair to explain the forward and backward Decomposes relation between the stair assembly and the stair runs, landings, and railings that make up that assembly.

In this article, we’ll focus on some other relations and explain their forward and backward direction.

For more information on relations within SMC, please see the help topic:

SMC Help – Relations

The Containment Relation

As the name suggests, the containment relation is present when one component contains another component.  For example, a Building component contains Floors, Floors contain components such as Spaces, and Spaces contain other components.

Looking at the structure of the sample model (SMC Buildng.smc) that comes with SMC, you see that the Ground floor contains a space Men[104].  That space contains two Sanitary Terminal components, which are a toilet and a sink.

If you select the Men[104] space, in the Relations tab of the Info view, you’ll see the containment relation for the space.

Notice there are arrow icons in front of the listed relations that denote the direction of the relation.  A forward direction is denoted by the  forward (pointing to the right) icon, and a backward direction is denoted by the backward (pointing to the left) icon.  Since the Space is a sub-element of the Ground floor, this containment relation has a backward direction, and since the Space contains the sanitary terminals, these containment relations have a forward direction. Essentially, as you get more granular, you have forward relations, and as you refer to those elements ‘upstream’ you are expressing backward relations.

If you select the ground floor, it will have a  forward containment relation to the Mens[104] space.

So logically, if Component A has a forward relation of some relation type to Component B, then Component B has a  backward relation of that same relation type to Component A. The result is a hierarchy of the related model components.

Relations are used in the rule Comparison Between Property Values [SOL/171], by selecting “Related Component” in the Components to Compare drop-down.

In the example of this rule below, the parameters are specified to check that there is at least 1 toilet on each floor.  Since we are checking floors, Floor is set in the Components to Check table.  We are using the Containment relation, so Related Component is selected in the Components to Compare dropdown, Containment is set as the type, and the Forward direction is selected.  The Follow Relation Chain checkbox is marked because there isn’t a direct containment relation to the floor and the Toilets. Instead, a floor contains the space and the space contains the toilet.  Lastly, since we are looking for at least 1 toilet on each floor, components classified as Toilet Seat is listed in the Components to compare using a count quantifier greater than or equal to the target value 1.

The only result returned is for the Roof floor which logically doesn’t require a toilet.  This floor could be ignored in the Components to Check table in the rule parameters or the result can simply be approved.

Doors, Openings, Walls and the Void/Filling relation

Rather than a direct containment relation, doors, and walls have a Filling and Void relationship to an opening component respectively.

If you select a door in a model, you’ll find that it has a  forward Filling relation to an opening component, since the door “fills” the opening.  However, there is no direct relation listed between the door and the wall.

If you double-click the opening listed in the Info view it will become selected. You’ll see the    backward Filling relation to the door and also a  forward Void relation to the wall.

Since there are two different relation types, a single Comparison Between Property Values [SOL/171] rule cannot be used to compare walls to doors.  Instead, a gatekeeper rule can be used to return the opening of a wall, which passes those openings to a sub-rule to check the door that fills the opening.

We’ll use a simple check to ensure that 1-hr fire rated walls have 1-hr fire rated doors. This example can be found here:

Fire Rating – Relations.smc

The file consists of 4 walls that have doors attached:

Below you can see which walls and doors have a 1-hr rating as those without a rating are hidden.  Only the third wall from the left is a 1-hr fire rated wall that doesn’t have a 1-hr fire rated door:

After running a check, only that wall/opening is listed as a result:

To create the ruleset, the “Gatekeeper: Openings in 1-hr Walls” has the following parameters filled in to return as results any openings that do not have a forward void relationship to a wall with a 1-hr fire rating:

Since only openings that fill 1-hr fire rated walls pass this check, “Check only passed components” is marked for this gatekeeper rule in the Ruleset Manager.

Those openings are passed to the sub-rule “1-hr Components must fill Openings.”  This rule checks that those openings have a backward filling relation to a door that has a 1-hr fire rating.  Notice this is a backward relation since the door fills the opening.

The result is any opening that creates a void in a 1-hr wall that does not have a 1-hr door filling that opening.

Decomposes Relation in Information Takeoff (ITO)

Relations can be used in ITO to group components by their related component.  In the example below, there are beam assemblies that group multiple beams.  The total lengths of these grouped beams are listed for each assembly along with their counts. For example assembly with id 185923 has 7 beams that have a total length of 192′- 3 7/8″.

The Decomposes relation is used for components such as stairs, beam assemblies, and curtain walls that are can be made up of differing components. For example, stairs can be made up stair runs, landings, and railings.  Beam assemblies can be made up of multiple beams. Curtain walls can be made up of panels (windows) mullions (members), and doors. These examples are a subset of commonly found components that can be assemblies with a Decomposes relation.

To create this ITO we create a new ITO Definition to report only Assembly components.

Right-click on the Type column and select New Column to group and report assemblies by their Building Authoring Tool (BAT) ID.

As we don’t wish to report the Type, this column is edited by right-clicking the column and selecting Edit.  We select Relation as the Column type, Decomposes as the relation, Forward as the direction, and Grouping to group the beams to find their total length.

Right-click the Count column, and select new column to create a column that reports the total length of the beams in each assembly.  Select Quantity for column type, Length for the Quantity, leave grouping unmarked and Sum for the Function.

This example can be found through the link below:

Decomposes – ITO.smc

 

 

Forward and Backward Relations in SMC

Resetting a Forgotten Password

You use your Solibri Solution Center (SSC) username and password to login to the Solibri Solution Center as well as register Solibri Model Checker (SMC).

If you forget your password or wish to change it, you can easily do so by going to the SSC at https://solution.solibri.com/ and click the Forgot Your Password link:

A dialog will prompt you to enter your username, which should be your email address that was used when you or your license administrator added you to your company’s SSC account.

Enter your username and click the reset button. An email will be sent to that email address used for your SSC username.  In the email, click the link to reset your password:

The link directs you to a page to enter your new password.  You must enter a password that is at least 8 characters long and contains an uppercase character, lowercase character, and a number.

Resetting a Forgotten Password

Saving Custom Layouts in SMC

Version 9.7.11 of Solibri Model Checker (SMC) adds the ability to save sets of layouts of views.  Previously, you could move/undock/resize views in the layouts to the way you want or create additional layouts of specific views and those changes would persist across sessions.  However, you couldn’t save the layouts for later use, for instance, if you reset to the default layouts or temporarily needed to adjust the views.

Below is the default layout set of the Checking layout, which consists of the Checking, Result Summary, Results, and Info view on the left side and the 3D view on the right side of the application window.

If you want more space for checking related views at the expense of a narrower 3D view, you could remove the Results Summary view, move the Results view to the right side of the application, and add the checked components view as seen below:

This layout set can be saved to your computer to be opened later by clicking File > Settings > Layouts.

You can then re-open the Layout Set if you modify your layouts over time during your SMC session.

In addition, you can save different Layout Sets to different roles under File > Settings > Roles.  For instance, below we can set the “My Layout” layout set previously created as the default for the “BIM Validation – Architectural Role”:

Saving Custom Layouts in SMC

New in SMC v9.7.15: Component Distance Improvements

In the latest version of Solibri Model Checker (SMC) v9.7.15, enhancements have been made to the Component Distance (SOL/222) rule template.  You can now set the top or bottom surfaces to check when checking for a distance above or below components.  Additionally, when checking distance above and below components, you can set a horizontal offset to the footprint of the source component rather than only checking if components are directly above or below.

The following article will provide a complete detailed explanation of this rule along with these new features. For additional information, please read the online help for this rule:

Component Distance_222 (SOL/222)

You can follow along with this article using the sample model that provides examples of each check through the link below:

Component Distance Examples.smc

The example consists of a model that has a pyramid-like object with several blocks in its vicinity along with rules that check for minimum distances between the pyramid and the blocks.  The following image provides a top, front, and top-front-right view of the model:

In the rule checks, the required minimum distance value is set to a large enough value to cause issues, which thereby provides a visual dimension line that shows how the distance is calculated of the violation.

Horizontal Distance Between Footprints

With the “Horizontal Distance Between Footprints” distance calculation, the distance between components that are next to one another is measured in 2D based on the footprint of the components.

Below, you see the two blocks alongside the pyramid fail the ruleset as they are within 15′ of the footprint of the pyramid.  The red circular visualization shows the area that is within 15′ of the footprint of the pyramid.

Shortest Distance Between Shapes

With the “Shortest Distance Between Shapes” distance calculation, the distance between components is measured in 3D based on the shortest distance between the components’ geometry.

Below you can see the dimension lines that show the shortest distance between the pyramid and the blocks that fail the check.

Facing within Distance

With the “Facing Within” distance calculation, the distance between components that are next to one another is measured in 2D based on the footprint of the components similar to the “Horizontal Distance Between Footprints” distance calculation.  However, only the space that resides in front of edges of the footprint is checked.

Below, you see that only one of the blocks alongside the pyramid fails the check.   Recall, in the “Horizontal Distance Between Footprints” check, there were two blocks that were within 15′ of the pyramid.  However, one of those blocks resides at the corner of the pyramid.  Since that block isn’t in front of the face of the pyramid, it doesn’t create an issue using the “Facing within Distance” distance calculation. The red visualization shows the area that is within 15′ of the faces of the footprint of the pyramid.

Horizontal Alongside

With the “Shortest Distance Between Shapes” distance calculation, the distance between components that are next to one another is measured in 2D.  However, the geometry of the components is used rather than the footprint to calculate the distance.

Below, you see the two blocks that are alongside the pyramid.  Notice the dimension lines showing how the distance is calculated extend to the surfaces of the pyramid.  Since the pyramid narrows at the top, these distances are further than those calculated using the footprint of the pyramid.

Directly Above / Directly Below

In version 9.7.15 of SMC, you can now set either top or bottom surfaces to check when checking for a distance above or below components. Below is an elevation view of two slabs that show how distances are calculated depending on the component surfaces distance calculation.

Below you can see the rule parameters for a check using the “Directly Above” distance calculation using “Top to Bottom” component surfaces.

The pyramid and block component that fail this check are transparent in the views that follow to allow the dimension lines to show through. Below the distance is measured from the top of the pyramid to the bottom of the block using “Top to Bottom” component surfaces setting.

Below the distance is measured from the bottom of the pyramid to the top of the block using “Bottom to Top” component surfaces setting

Below the distance is measured from the top of the pyramid to the top of the block using “Top to Top” component surfaces setting

Below the distance is measured from the bottom of the pyramid to the bottom of the block using “Bottom to bottom” component surfaces setting

Above / and Below within Offset Footprint

New in version 9.7.15 of SMC, when checking distance above and below components, you can set a horizontal offset to the footprint of the source component rather than only checking if components are directly above or below.  For example, there is a required distance a heater should reside below a window. The window is inside the wall, while the heater is attached outside the wall.  Since they aren’t directly above/below one another, you’ll need to specify a horizontal offset.

Below, in the rule parameters, we’ve set the horizontal footprint offset to 15′ for the “Above within Offset Footprint” distance calculations.

Below the distance is measured from the top of the pyramid to the bottom of the block using “Top to Bottom” component surfaces setting. Notice the red visualization of the 15′ footprint offset.  Notice even though the block to the left of the pyramid isn’t directly above it, because it is within the 15′ footprint offset, it fails the check.

Below the distance is measured from the bottom of the pyramid to the top of the block using “Bottom to Top” component surfaces setting. Notice the red visualization of the 15′ footprint offset is now at the base of the pyramid due to the “Bottom to Top” component surface setting.  Notice the two additional blocks alongside the pyramid fail the check due to the 15′ footprint offset is now checked from the bottom of the pyramid.

Below the distance is measured from the top of the pyramid to the top of the block using “Top to Top ” component surfaces setting.  Notice the 15′ footprint offset is at the top of the pyramid so only two blocks above the top of the pyramid are returned.

Below the distance is measured from the bottom of the pyramid to the bottom of the block using “Bottom to Bottom” component surfaces setting.  Again, with the footprint offset being set to the bottom of the pyramid all 4 blocks that are above the base of the pyramid fail the check.

New in SMC v9.7.15: Component Distance Improvements

New in SMC v9.7.15: Model Comparison Improvements

In the latest version of Solibri Model Checker (SMC) v9.7.15, enhancements have been made to the Model Comparison (SOL/206) rule template. The rule now allows you to check if components have been added or removed based on their Global Unique ID (GUID) rather than only their geometry as in the previous version. Also, you now have the ability to compare specific individual properties from the Identifications, Location, and Quantities property groups instead of those property groups in their entirety. Both of these improvements allow for a more precise check for changes that have occurred in iterations of a building information model.

The remainder of this article will explain these enhancements in further detail. For an overview of the Model Comparison rule prior to these enhancements, please see the article:

https://solibri.wordpress.com/2015/05/05/model-comparison-sol206/

Identify Components Only With GUID

Version 9.7.15 of SMC adds an “Identify components only with GUID” checkbox. When marked, SMC ignores the geometry of a component in determining if it still exists in the model.

In the example below, two versions of the same model are loaded that contain a door attached to a wall.

The door in the old version of the model is of type 36″ X 84″ and the value of its GUID is 1iZj__xXf78BSFTMaX7Drh.

This model was later modified by deleting the door and replacing it with a new door of type 30″ X 80″ that has been moved 6″.  Since the door was deleted and replaced rather than modified in Revit, the GUID has changed to 1hm2STqeTCcuuYSoDEhuFt.

With “Identify components only by GUID” unmarked in the Model Comparison rule check, the Results view lists the door as being modified with its various changes to geometry, identification, and location in the Info view.  Since the two versions of the doors are at the same relative location, it is treated as the same door that was modified even though it was actually removed, then added back in Revit. 

However, with the “Identify components only by GUID” checkbox marked, the results will then list the door from the old model as removed, while the door in the new model was added rather than stating the door was modified.  The old door appears red in the 3D view, while the new door appears blue.  Interestingly, the wall will remain modified as the opening that the door cutout is smaller and shifted.

Note, if you were to simply change the location and type of the door in Revit without removing and replacing it, the results would state that the door was modified rather than removed and added with the “Identify components only by GUID” checkbox marked.  This is because you modified the door in Revit, which does not change the GUID.

The previous version of SMC didn’t have the option to identify components only by GUID and always performed the check as if the checkbox is unmarked in the example above.

Compare Property List

In the previous version of SMC, the Model Comparison rule was limited to check boxes of property groups that checked all properties that fell under the categories of those property groups.

In the screenshot of SMC v9.6, two slabs have various quantities changed. You can see in the 3D view that the length was increased along the x-axis.

In the Rule Parameters view of the version of the rule template in version 9.6, only the quantities checkbox is marked.  SMC will thereby check for any changes to any property that falls under that category.

However, you may only be interested in a particular property, such as area, and only wish to have that listed in the Info view to copy into your issue slide. If the area of a slab changes, logically, so will the gross area, perimeter, and volume of the slab, which is why they are reported as well.

In the screenshot of the Rule Parameters view in new SMC version 9.7.15 below, you see the compare rule that had the checkbox for quantities marked.  The Compared Properties list contains the long listing of all those properties from the Quantities property group.

We can select those properties and click the Remove Row  button.  Then click the Add Row  button to add only the Area property.  Below, you can see that you can select any individual property from one of the property groups.

We set our rule to check for changes for the areas of components.

The Results and Info view now only show the change in the area of components.

New in SMC v9.7.15: Model Comparison Improvements