Proposal for IsReinforced to be upgraded to a higher level applicability

[Moult]

Right now the IsReinforced property applies to pad footings only.

Isn't this property useful for knowing whether slabs, blockwork walls (yes, not just concrete walls), or other elements are reinforced too?

Outside the structural domain, costers have different cost rates for these, and schedulers have different times too (instead of FRP - formwork, reo, pour, it's just formwork + pour).

[TLiebich]

yes, in my view, there is still a lot of improvements possible in psets. I would personally propose something along:

within the Pset_SlabCommon (and others)

• ConstructionMethod : PEnum [Brick, Concrete, Wood, ...]

Pset_ConcreteElement(General) - provided, if ConstructionMethod = "Concrete"

• here add "IsReinforced"

Pset_ReinforcedConcreteElement(General) - provided, if IsReinforced = TRUE

• here all the reinforcement info

this would allow for some logical queries, like:

if ConstuctionMethode = "Concrete" then exists Pset_ConcreteElementGeneral

[aothms]

If we'd have proper IfcMaterial categories and pset applicability (using PSET_MATERIALDRIVEN) based on these categories. How much of this could be accomplished using that route instead? I realize the properties on the material vs the object are not entirely the same, but I'd like to avoid these kind of pset dependencies.

[TZwielehner]

PSET_MATERIALDRIVEN would be a great way for improving the applicablity. We often define main materials for elements for checks. The "purity" of materials is the question; is "reinforced concrete" a material? or is "concrete" the material and the reinforcement is part of the element? I would say the first one would be more convenient (in terms of hatching if possible, mass calculation etc.)