I have a question for which did not find help from the documentation,
In Tekla designers work with the assembly hierarchy structure wherein multiple “parts” can make up an “assembly”. Currently in Speckle i dont see that this hierarchy would be kept or stored (maybe it is but i can’t see it)
For example in Tekla these three layers make up a sandwich wall and both in Speckle and in PowerBI i’d like to filter based on the properties of the assembly, not the parts that make up the assembly
Hope the question is clear enough
Also, related to this one. In order to create correct reporting in PowerBI using Speckle, we’d need correct volume, weight and area of elements from Speckle. This is tricky to achieve since the area calculations differ based on specific elements.
The best way would be if we could write from Tekla to Speckle to each ASSEMBLY the custom properties from Tekla. Is that possible to do?
For example here the area seems to be the total area of all faces of the wall, but in reporting we only want to use the front face of the wall
In short from Tekla I’d like to see all these values from assembly written on the assembly level in Speckle as well.
Hey @Morten.Kaasik ,
The Tekla connector is in its early days still and I think the assembly structure is not currently preserved.
We’re planning to focus on improving the structural connectors and workflows with them in one of the coming iterations, so your feedback is very helpful!
Please feel free to share anything else you’d like to see here and out team will pick it up as soon as we get there
Hi, thanks for the reply.
One other thing that is crucial is the upload speed - right now in a big model (3437 elements) it seems to take somewhere close to 30 minutes.
Tekla itself in the modelsharing service manages to only upload in the write-out process only the changed geometry and metadata, perhaps this could be included in Speckle workflow to improve performance?
Performance is always a concern as it affects your experience quite considerably. The conversion step from Tekla to Speckle is more likely where we can seek to gain performance improvement.
Currently, only changed data gets sent to Speckle as you suggested, but this is changed data relative to that already sent as opposed to “clean” vs. “dirty” objects in your currently open model.
Likely, Tekla model sharing isn’t normalising to a different schema that is open to other applications to receive.
The first send will always be everything you select.