topic Re: Component Area Errors in Schedules in Collaboration with other software

Component Area Errors in Schedules

Anonymous — Fri, 15 May 2020 16:55:58 GMT

I've encountered this problem, when i try to calculate the area of a certain skin through the projected component/skin area listing parameter, if the element is cut by another element through SEO in a certain way (still haven't figured what's the conditions), then, the projected area gets doubled for the face of that object.

An example would be: I created a roof and then the wooden structure using beams then i cut the wooden beams from the insulation skin of the roof. one of the beams had to cut throughout all the skins. Now in the schedule the roof face witch is cut by the wooden beam, is calculated 2 times.

In the first image there's the roof and rafter, not being subtracted from one another, and the folowing 2 images is the schedule befor and after substration.

In someone knows what to keep in mind when modeling in such cases so the data in the schedules is accurate.

Re: Component Area Errors in Schedules

Steve Jepson — Mon, 18 May 2020 23:54:37 GMT

It will help to use answer your question if you use a Signature so we know what version of the program you are using.

Yes, is can be risky business relying on the Interactive Schedules for several things that I think should have a warning. It depends on what version of the program you are using for some things. For example, in version 23 we can split the fill in the Profile Manager window to get the beam to display with an X and it will still be one beam in the Interactive Schedule. That was not the case for earlier versions of the program where it you did that, it would count 4 beams instead of one. Things like that have been fixed but people using older versions of the program might not be aware of that. ? Perhaps that has been fixed in all previous versions with an update. I don't know.

This is that the same two beams ( the one made by splitting the fill in the Profile Manager to make the X mark) and they do not show the same Projected Component Skin Area. I can't think of what that would be used for in relation to a beam schedule but that is not the issue. The issue is that it may no be reporting correctly. But then I have no idea what Projected Component Skin Area has to do with rafters. ?

The schedule is correct until you add the Field for Projected Component Skin Area - then it will report the one rafter as 4 - as it used to do in earlier versions even without adding that Filed. Does not matter if the beams are intersected by something else or not, flat or sloped.

Re: Component Area Errors in Schedules

Steve Jepson — Mon, 18 May 2020 23:56:59 GMT

Perhaps an unrelated question, but why are you wanting to schedule the surface area of a rafter? Just curious.

Re: Component Area Errors in Schedules

Anonymous — Tue, 19 May 2020 08:22:55 GMT

Maybe i haven't expressed myself correctly, english is not my first language. That aside, I'm usig the 23 version, and the area that i want to calculate is not of the rafters, but of one of the roof composite skins. The problem with therafters in that example above, is that, when the roof is cut throughout by the rafter, the composite skin area is doubled.

Re: Component Area Errors in Schedules

Steve Jepson — Wed, 20 May 2020 01:51:24 GMT

I see. It looks like I accidentally found a different way that Projected Component Skin Area when used in an Interactive Schedule does not function as expected. I will give it a try the other way too.

I was not able to reproduce our anomaly.

It reminds me of a poem - If our troubles like laundry were hung out on a line, you'd choose yours and I'd choose mine.

Re: Component Area Errors in Schedules

Anonymous — Wed, 20 May 2020 14:31:12 GMT

Yes, and as i said in the beginning, this error is not consistent, and i don't know in what cases it will present itself. And by not knowing what causes it, i don't know what to avoid when modeling, or what to keep in mind.

Thanks a lot anyway !!!

Re: Component Area Errors in Schedules

Minh Nguyen — Mon, 25 May 2020 19:05:36 GMT

Hi Tudor,

Thank you very much for sharing this issue and I am very sorry about the experience!

Since you mentioned that this is difficult to replicate, it would be great if you can share with me the file that is showing this issue, so that I can forward this to the developers for further investigation! Let me know if you need a secure link to drop the file in as well!

Thank you very much for your help, and I look forward to hearing from you!

Best regards,
Minh