Getting a bit fed up at the moment because I spend hours and hours of bug hunting in Aecosim...
There have been numerous discussions on communities about Bentleys inability to provide proper support for costumers outside the US. In addition there I do have a bunch of Service Requests that are not reproduceable by Bentley staff, because they just test against US dataset.In my opinion the core problem of the whole thing is that BuildingDesigner.cfg has this definition.TF_DATASETNAME : Dataset_USThis should be changed to a metric dataset instead.
SR 7000185460 filed.
I have a long time wish to go one step further - a pure ISO install!
No feet or inches anywhere in the software.
regards / Thomas Voghera
So one thing you could try is this:
In C:\Program Files (x86)\Bentley\AECOsimBuildingDesigner V8i Ss5\AECOsimBuildingDesigner\config\appl
create a file ZZ_DefaultDataset.cfg
it needs to contain the line TF_DATASETNAME = Dataset_NM (or whichever dataset you are using)
However I don't think that really has any effect that would not be applied by setting the same value at the project level because the default value in BuildingDesigner.cfg of TF_DATASETNAME : Dataset_US is a 'use this unless re-defined later' statement.
The product is delivered with the US dataset to provide a working and testable out of the box installation.
Setting TF_DATASETNAME = <regional dataset name> has the same effect as a hypothetical product only installation followed by the regional dataset installation (or a hypothetical product plus metric dataset installer), the US dataset is ignored.
The current design is intended to use the TF_DATASETNAME value in the project configuration file.
Marc
The problem is not that I am not able to change a variable, however I appreciate that you gave a solution to this issue as well.
My issue is that the default - or fallback situation should not be US with imperial settings.
There are many ISO standards, do you have a particular ISO standard in mind and can you tell me how you see this solves the issue at hand. Most ISO standards that support building support both imperial and metric units.
Configurations aside, there needs to be a default dataset delivered with ABD. And that dataset is US Imperial simply because it reflects the highest number of ABD users per dataset; while Metric (aka non-US) ABD users do represent a higher global number overall, they are spread out among 12 regional metric datasets. So by using the US Imperial as our default we are covering the single largest majority.
FWIW, we do test ABD against both the US Imperial and GB datasets, so we are covering Imperial and Metric. In those metric tests in particular, I don't believe our certification team has come across any issues related to the Imperial dataset.
Jeff, correct.
I mean SI-units of course.
en.wikipedia.org/.../SI_base_unit.
I think Thomas and I agree that you don't test against metric, the 747 issues has a couple of issues that clearly show that. For me it is not understandable why the beta period is not done with a metric dataset, a lot of problems in the final release could be eliminated that way.
My proposal at the moment would be to switch to the neutral metric dataset (Dataset-NM).
This document attempts to provide a general overview of the main items contained in the Neutral Metric Dataset for AECOsim Building Designer, a workspace designed to be used in any country, or as basis for any other metric ‘Workspace’.
Andreas,
Please can you identify the issues referred to with SR numbers if appropriate.
Thank you, just makes sure we are discussing the right points!