Skip to content
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

SectionedSolidHorizontal with a horizontally oriented directrix 1 #145

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

Nadia-Sugar
Copy link

Unit test

IfcSectionedSolidHorizontal with a horizontally oriented directrix in world coordinates

Covered topics

  • project setup
  • georeferencing
  • alignment semantics
  • alignment geometry
  • linear placement
  • project breakdown structure / spatial structure
  • terrain
  • triangulated irregular network
  • open cross profile
  • sectioned surface & solid
  • pavement & course
  • surface feature
  • earthworks
  • geotechnics
  • longitudinal products (barriers, guardrail, ...)
  • interchange
  • structural
  • drainage
  • signage
  • road furniture
  • rail furniture
  • ports & waterways furniture
  • bridge furniture

#79= IFCARBITRARYCLOSEDPROFILEDEF(.AREA.,'',#82);
#82= IFCCOMPOSITECURVE((#90,#99,#107,#115,#126,#134,#145,#153,#164,#172,
#180,#188,#196,#204,#215,#223,#234,#242,#253,#261),$);
#84= IFCPOLYLINE((#86,#88,#86));
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The polyline segments within your composite profile curve return on themselves. Ie #86 appears twice on the line above. This doesn't seem right. Did you also consider using an IfcIndexedPolyCurve to define the profile? It is a simpler an more efficient way to do so. https://standards.buildingsmart.org/IFC/RELEASE/IFC4/ADD2_TC1/HTML/link/ifcindexedpolycurve.htm

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants