Elements of a Hotlink disappear when moved in a Teamfile

[JSN]

I loaded two IFC Files into a new PLN and shared it on the Bimcloud.

Now when I load it into the Teamfile, everything looks ok.

But When I move it to the designated position several elements are vanishing.
See the attached video, compare the first and the last frames and you clearly see what I mean.

Btw, I could not really reproduce it in a third file. Can you tell me what it might be? The AC Origin is unfortunately not around the next corner, but not too far away - about 1.5 km.

https://imgur.com/l40qxPX

[JSN]

UPDATE:

When I delete the layers (and all containing elements) from previous imported ifc (from Revit) - then the elements pop up again.

- All layers are visible
- It is not about rennovation filter, overrides or anything else ....
- All new hotlink layers have different names than existing ones - they have no layer in common so that there might be a confusion.
- When I delete the layers from previous import, everything becomes visible - but only if I delete all the elements as well, because when I move them all to a new layer - nothing changes.
- Moving the hotlink just a few meter let's all the missing elements appear again

- It just happens in this temafile. Yes it is quite messy because people working in it are not very experienced - however, I have no idea how they managed it to ruin the whole file.

Any ideas? Struggling with it now already way too long. I tried it online, offline, with nested hotlinks, direct import, exported it totally fresh, ... always the same.

[Minh Nguyen]

Hello,

Thank you for reporting the issue and I am very sorry about the experience!

First, we need to find out what is really causing the issue. I have some theories: the Teamwork operation, the IFC files and the 3D environment:

- Teamwork operation: if you save a local copy of the whole teamwork file as a PLN, do you experience this issue on this PLN file?

- IFC files: Let's make a brand new file, hotlink the 2 IFC files and turn them into teamwork file. Can you replicate the issue here? I noticed that you said: "I could not really reproduce it in a third file", and "It just happens in this teamfile", but I'm not quite sure if you have carried out this test or not

- 3D environment: If you move the element in the floor plan (instead of moving in 3D environment), then switch to 3D, does it make the elements disappear?

Looking forward to hearing from you!

Best regards,
Minh

[JSN]

It turned out that there was a problem with the Layer Intersection Priority. I had to put the IFC Files in a new file and then tried to relink this one (with all the IFC in it) as a hotlink in the Teamfile.

However depending on my translator settings the elements have been either put on new layers with intersection priority of 1000 or existing ones with 1. Both of them had coincidentally problems with existing layers (or maybe also existing materials) which led always to the disappering of elements. Now it should be good. But I still do not fully get how Layer Intersection Priorities from Hotlinks are really inherited as they always end up with 1 in the host file no matter what values they really have.

[Minh Nguyen]

Hi,

Thank you for the information! I was unable to find any information regarding how the layers are handled exactly when you hotlink a file. What I know is that, hotlinking does not consider any layer combination (which contains the layer intersection group)

I did some tests with a simple file containing walls placing in different layers, with different Layer Intersection Group. Here is what I found (all tests are carried out using default template):
- PLN as module: layers with the same name as the host file will be merge. New layers will be imported, with the layer intersection group similar to the module's last saved sate.
- IFC as module: by default, all layers containing elements will be imported, with suffix and with layer intersection group of 10000

I believe this is the designed behavior, but I'm not quite sure. What is your experience between hotlinking IFC vs hotlinking PLN?

Best regards,
Minh

[JSN]

Hi,

I will post some screenshots again to make communication a bit easier.

1) This is my hotlink.
It contains some IFC and they are all put on the Master Layer 999_Structural_IFC.
The elements on the layers of the IFC have been put on the other 999_* Layers.

2) This is my Teamwork File (actually here it is just a new file based on the default template)
It is "empty" and I just added a Layer called "X_Hotlink Master" to show where the Hotlink of Step 1 will be placed.

3) The Hotlink will be placed as described in this Teamwork File.

4) Now that's how the Screenshot from Step 2 is looking after the Hotlink has been placed in the Teamwork Host.

Now I guess you see what I meant. All the Layers which have been created in the Hotlink File itself on IFC Import (via the Translator Setting > Layer Conversion > Use Existing Layers > Layer Mapping Table) are now getting the Layer Intersection Priority Value of 1 while the two other Layers (for the Master in the Hotlink and a Layer for a Marker) which have been created manually, still have the value 999.
(Actually the Marker Layer had 1 but I guess it inherits the 999 now ... or doesn't it? I thought it would probably get 123 from the new Master of the Host.)

So for me that is rather confusing, and as you said there is not so much documetnation about it. Actually it would be good to have this Layer Intersection Priority column in the IFC translator as well. However, it is not crucial now as I know to handle it .... it is just not so self explaining but probably it is the designed behaviour?

[Minh Nguyen]

Hi,

Thank you once again for the detailed description! At this point, there is no further documentation that I can rely on to offer a correct answer for this. I will have our colleagues to investigate it further. Once we have a conclusion I will let you know!

Best regards,
Minh

[Minh Nguyen]

Hi,

Our developer has been trying to understand and reproduce the phenomenon, unfortunately so far he failed to find it out what is causing this. Is it possible for you to share the PLN/IFC files that we can use for this investigation?

Is there any additional step we missed? Like we should do something with Layer Combinations as well, or use a special translator settings we are not aware of?

Looking forward to hearing from you!

Best regards,
Minh