Example Validation

Design validations can be performed on any* design produced in 3D. Validation is not only physical (size, distance) but can also be semantic, relational, schedule, structural and many more. The Vicis validation engine differs in that we understand and have built our engine recognising that the composition of exported design varies widely in quality and we are therefore do not rely on “perfect” well described IFC’s.

There are literally ten’s of thousands of possible requirements to validate against and therefore it is incumbent on us to identify and develop validations that solve for the most common and largest impact issues first.

The following validations are therefore provided as example cases; we invite you to review the researched case studies that illustrate the need to implement such a validation. We invite customers to engage with us to develop additional validations to both drive better quality and concurrency of design in your organisations whether you are a product supplier dependent on the design of others, clients wishing to improve reliability of delivery or contractors wishing to understand the risk they are exposed to or protecting stage payments in project delivery.

Validation requires simply that design data be exported to the IFC format. Once registered the IFC file is uploaded to our server for validation, the results are then reported live as the testing progresses.

Ventilation – Access Panel doors.

Access panel doors exist wherever duct segments exist they provide access for cleaning and maintenance. The cost of non-compliant design ranges; the issue may be identified and solved at design stage or it post manufacture or post installation.

This individual conformance issue has been known to drive the decision by installers to actually “cut in” access panel doors manually on-site rather than the more efficient approach during the manufacturing process!
Learn more

Access Panel size proportionality to duct segment

The “Access panel to duct segment proportionality” validation test if they are proportionally too large for a duct segment this can over time stress the duct segment leading to safety and maintenance issue resulting in the replacement of both access panel and duct segment.

Cost to redesign £100. Cost to retrofit compliant £800.

Access Panel placement relative to Damper

The “Access panel to Damper” distance validation tests whether the Access panel door is within a maximum distance from a Damper. The maximum distance represents a distance which allows a maintenance operative to perform the cleaning function. If the maximum distance is exceeded the operation may be unduly strenuous and be a safety hazard to the operative or worst case inhibit the cleaning operation entirely.

Access panel clearance

The “Access panel clearance” validation tests whether any objects obstruct access to the access panel. A lack of clearance may prevent an operative gaining entry and performing the maintenance function which may be grounds for closure of an entire facility.

Access panel distance to Ceiling

The “Access panel maximum distance to Ceiling” validation tests the extent of the distance between the ceiling and the access panel. Where the distance exceeds 500mm it is suggested that the maintenance operative will be unable to reach up sufficiently high enough to allow the effective cleaning of a related damper.

Where this is found to be the case the ceiling type may not offer the operative any remedial choices to improve their ability to access the access panel.

* design outputs must allow for the differentiation of object classes.