Model Comparison in SMC v9.8

Solibri has a powerful rule template named Model Comparison that can compare two different iterations of an IFC model for differences. This rule template is used in the Model Revisions Comparison – Architecture ruleset found in the Architectural folder of the rulesets included with Solibri.

You are able to find information for this rule in the help topics by following the link below to the Solibri Solution Center: 206 Model Comparison – Solibri Desktop Help Center

The following article will provide an additional explanation using the Model Revisions Comparison – Architecture ruleset and two versions of the Solibri Building sample models that come with Solibri.

First, open Solibri and set your role to BIM Validation – Architectural by clicking File > Roles > Open. By using this role, when you Add Rulesets in the Checking View, the Model Revisions Comparison – Architectural ruleset will be listed in the dialog box that opens, with the default rulesets included in this role.

Now that your role is set, click File > Open Model…

Open Solibri Building.ifc and Solibri Building – modified.ifc found in the Samples\IFC folder.

After the IFC models load, in the Ensure Model Disciplines dialog leave the discipline of both models set to Architectural. To help identify the models, you can enter NEW for the short name of the modified model and OLD for the short name of the original and click the OK button.

NOTE: The Model Comparison rule template is for comparing IFC models, not .smc models. Solibri is unable to load multiple .smc files at the same time.

With the two versions of the same IFC model loaded, you can now open the Model Revisions Comparison – Architecture ruleset. Select the Checking layout tab at the top of the Solibri window, and you will notice that the BIM Validation – Architectural, General Space Check, and Intersections Between Architectural Components rulesets have already loaded by default using the role you previously selected.

If the To-Do dialog opens, you can simply click the X button in the top right corner, as you will not need to verify any of these tasks to ensure the results are accurate.

Click the Add Rulesets button

Select the Model Revisions Comparison – Architectural ruleset and click OK.

If you want, you can right-click the other three rulesets listed in the Checking view and select Disable to save time by not running those checks.

Before running the check, you need to ensure that the rule parameters are correctly set in the Component Comparison ruleset.

Right-click the Component Comparison rule in the Checking view and click Rule Parameters

Ensure that the original model is selected in the Old Model dropdown and the modified model is selected in the New Model dropdown.

After correctly setting the model dropdowns, the rule parameters should show as below:

Notice next to the drop-down boxes, you can set the colors for the Old Model and New Model. By default, the Old Model is set to a red color with 60% transparency and the New Model is set to a blue color with 60% transparency. Therefore, if a component was removed, it will show up as Red, since it only existed in the Old Model. If a component is added, it will show up as blue as it only exists in the New Model. If a component is modified, it exists in both the Old Model and New Model. If the modified component moved to a new location, you would see the component in two different locations: one as red and one as blue. However, if only a property was modified for a component, the component will reside in the same location in both the Old Model and New Model, and display in purple, caused by the overlapping colors of the components.

Notice the Identify components only with GUID checkbox is not marked. A component such as a door may be replaced in an iteration of a model with a different type of door, and this can cause the GUID to change between doors in the two versions even though they represent the same door in the model. This can happen if you delete the component and replace it with another type of component in the same spot. If the checkbox is marked, the old component is returned as a Deleted result in the old model, and the new component in the same location is returned as an Added result. However, if you leave the checkbox unmarked, the other properties of the components such as Type, Location and Geometry are considered. If you simply replaced the component in the same spot, it will return a result that the component was modified even if the GUIDs differ between iterations.

Next, notice under Checked Components, we are checking Any components from an Architectural Model, but Excluding Openings and Spaces. These are excluded since spaces will be checked on their own in the Space Comparison rule and openings are normally created by doors or windows, which will already be compared.

NOTE: By setting the Component column under Checked Components to Any, only components that have geometry will be checked. This does not include container components such as Buildings, Floors, Systems, etc. If you wish to compare container components, you must add a row to the filter to Include those individual container components as well.

In the Compare panel, there is a Geometry checkbox, that when marked, any actual geometry of a component (what you see in the 3D View) that has changed is checked for changes.

Next is a list of Compared Properties. You can Add or Remove properties to the list by clicking the respective buttons. After clicking the Add, a Select Property dialog opens as seen below that allows you to select from various properties you wish to monitor for changes across iterations.

Lastly, Model Comparison is one of the rule templates in Solibri that has a configurable report. The Report section of the Parameters dialog allows a user to customize what columns are included in the report. The table on the left allows a user to specify which classifying columns to report and their order. These are the left-most columns of the report that will sort the components in the report by their column values. The table on the right in the Report section of the Parameters dialog allows a user to specify what components and which of their quantity and location properties to report.

For example, in the report of this rule, components will first be grouped and sorted by the floor they are located on, then by the component (Door, Wall, etc) they are, and then by their Type. For quantities, furniture counts are reported along with lengths of beams and columns, and area of curtain walls along with other quantities.

With the rule parameters set, and better understood, close the dialog if it is still open, and in the Checking View, click the Check Model button in the Checking view.

Select the Component Comparison rule under the Model Revision Comparison – Architectural ruleset to view its results in the Results view.

In the results view, notice a result stating Incorrect Model Timestamps (see below), warning that the Old Model set in the Rule Parameters does not have an earlier Timestamp than the New Model. Though the modifications obviously came after in the modified model, the modified model was exported to an IFC before the original model was later opened in the design application and exported to IFC. It is important to point this out, since if the Old Model and New Model are incorrectly set in the rule parameters, the rule will incorrectly report components as being added that were removed and vice versa.

Notice there are three other categories of results listed above: Added, Removed, and Modified.

Double-click and expand the Added category to zoom to the components that were added in the modified model.

You will see that a door, a suspended ceiling, and a wall have been added to the modified model. Again, as these are components that only exist in the New Model, they show in the 3D view as blue.

In the Results view, expand the Removed category until you find the “Double Sash Window 16” result of a window that was removed from the model. You can see that the window was removed in the modified model as the window only appears red in one location (where the modified wall was later moved to) from the Old Model.

In the Results view, if you expand the Modified category, scroll to and double-click the result “Wall.0.16 – Wall.0.17,” you’ll see that one of the walls in the New Model was moved and had an opening cut out of it for the door that was added:

You can see that it moved in the 3D view as it is shown in two locations: in red from the Old Model, and in blue from the New Model. Notice the sub-category states “Wall: Geometry, Location, Quantity”. The results are organized first by what the component is that has changed and then by what has changed about that component. The Geometry has changed since an opening was cut out of the geometry of the wall for the door that was added. The Location properties have changed since the wall itself has shifted locations. The Quantity properties have changed since the area of the wall is now smaller due to the opening that was cut out of it.

Also notice that when you select the result in the Results view, you see a detailed listing in the Info view of all the properties and their values that have changed.

Double-click the Report icon in the Checking view to open the report of the results of the Component Comparison rule.

You will see changes that have been made to components, which are sorted first by the floor that they are located on, then by what component they are, and then by their Type.

For example, when viewing this report, we see that 2 Door components of Type Door 16 have been added on the Ground floor level in the modified model. We can also see that -1.39 m2 of Wall of Type

EW-3 100 have been removed from the Roof level in the modified model; however, 3.36 m2 of Slab of Type FS-2 200 has been added.

You can export this report to an excel .xls file by clicking the Export to Excel Worksheet button.