Validating Wireframes

Doing multiple validate interactively in Vizex wouldn't be possible, but we could add something in Wireframe | Manage | Wireframes to validate multiple wireframes and create a report file with the result

I agree that would be useful!

This might help in the time being: If I have a load of wireframe solids in a set I often use the Wireframes>Report>Volumes function to quickly check that they are all closed. 

Thanks,  that would be great to have something like that added to the Wireframe | Manage | Wireframes menu.

You're welcome, it has been planned for the next major version.

I think being able to validate multiple WFs is a required enhancement and likes Yannick's idea.

Just to add to the "multiple wireframe validation" function that is being planned - we have been contacted by a few clients who have asked that we accompany our models with a validation report of all wireframes.  I think this is quite an important tool, especially for mines that go through an in-depth review of all their data and models, which also forms part of their QA/QC process before proceeding to resource estimation, pit design, mine design etc.  

Occasionally, our models get reviewed externally in software packages such as Gems, Surpac, Datamine etc. and they often complain about errors that we cannot see in Micromine - I use some of these packages and I am convinced that this is because these packages are quite simply useless and inferior to Micromine. However, having said that, it would be beneficial to provide an accompanying report of error free wireframes for our clients peace of mind.

Unfortunately, Wireframes>Report>Volumes can only tell you if the wireframes have volumes, but it can't tell you if the wireframes are error free.

Is there any other way of getting around this issue for now?

Hi David

Thank you for the suggestion. I agree that it will be a valuable enhancement and shouldn't be difficult to implement. I think right now the Reporting tool will not report a volume if you have any invalid WFs in your data. This can be something you can look out for until we implement the enhancement.

FYI In the past I have also experienced the WF validity issues you describe with other products. My personal view is that the issue is caused by the product's import/export capabilities and file type - with regards to the level of precision their file types can create/store. If the level of precision is not sufficient (file with non-binary structure) then the issues could be with validity. 

Yes, this makes sense.

Thanks.

Hi Andrew,

From my experience the Reporting tool is great for a quick check but unfortunately depending on the type of error it could still report a volume.

I have had instances where the WF can report a volume but a wireframe validate of the same solid will report intersecting triangles.  Clients run their own validation on the wireframes and pick up on these errors.  Doing a manual validation on solids/surfaces is not a pain when one has a small model but when the model reaches sizes of 200+ wireframes doing the WF validate manually can take a very long time.

On a separate note I would just like to say that the new version of MM is brilliant, I have been enjoying using all the new features and get a kick out of all the little enhancements made.
  

This has been completed and will be available in the next major version, thank you for your input.