tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5791588710449126240.post4645222329807488838..comments2024-03-16T07:33:01.532+00:00Comments on Geometry Gym: Getting Geometry into RevitJon Mirtschinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09698974959593709039noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5791588710449126240.post-27440843664449557062016-02-03T19:55:39.481+00:002016-02-03T19:55:39.481+00:00Hi Chuhee,
Thanks for the post. I didn't exp...Hi Chuhee,<br /><br />Thanks for the post. I didn't explicitly check, but the main difference is that my developments often use the IFC4 version of the schema (which was officially released nearly 3 years ago. Support of this new version with it's many improvements is still scarce, and I would suggest you contact the developers of the utilities you have tested and ask them when this will be supported. If you don't believe this is the reason, let me know and I'll dig further. You can check by opening the .ifc file in notepad or similar.<br /><br />Cheers,<br /><br />JonJon Mirtschinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09698974959593709039noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5791588710449126240.post-12080096022772098942016-02-03T17:22:28.320+00:002016-02-03T17:22:28.320+00:00Dear Jon, many thanks for your examples. I have on...Dear Jon, many thanks for your examples. I have one question about the 2nd example (nurbs ojbect).<br /><br />I tried to bake the IFC file on your GH definition file and opened the IFC file on IFC viewer (ex. solibri, ifcviewer...). However I could not see the shape on the viewer. I tried to open your IFC file as well but that was the same. Other example (gothic facet brep) could be open and visualised the shape well. <br /><br />What is the main difference between the examples? Assumed the ifcProxy? Could you please explain this more? <br />Thanks in advance - Chuhee chubarihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04830438536033507508noreply@blogger.com