Hi!
Is there a way to access all these options from GH?
Unfortunately no.
Does it gives a good advantage having access to it through the API?
Yes, actually essential, since the default standard is not EN, but EKS so it does not work for bridges 
The underlined options chooses EKS
PS, or if there is a way do change the default, it would save you alot of dev-work 
Is there a way to change the default in FEM-Design in the meantime?
There is an utility command in the load groups windows but it will also save the load cases.
As you have said, we might be able to solve this part through the API but it will require some work
In the meantime I will try to find another country code to see if it fits me better…
Hi!
Some more issues/questions related to this:
I have two types of traffic load, with their own set of “LoadCategory”.
These two should not happen simultaneously.
Is there a way to solve this?
EDIT: Could a temporary solution be to make GH components that read custom combinations from *.ldgroupcase and *.ldcomb files?
I need to create something like this I think:
It seems a task that the Traffic load generator of FEM-Design can handle. However, there is no plan YET to do implementation for the API for it.
.Struxml file format can handle Load Group Combinations and it might be a work around for your case. Unfortunately, we do not have resources right now to implement features realted to Load Group
Hi @MarcoPelle!
Speaking with Isak, he informed me that I don’t need to use load-combinations (generating thousands of LCs) but load-groups in order to solve my work-flow, meaning that a GH-workflow still is a very feasible approach, already today, IF it was possible to define custom “Load group combinations”, “Load case relationships” AND “Sub-groups”.
I think this is a very important thing to do for the “completeness” of the API.
Having this would make the Traffic Load Generator redundant for simple cases.
I was pretty sure that there were a simple way for your use case. Well done @isak.bjorhag 
I will plan the development of those features for our API.
It has already been asked from also an other user as well.
1 Like
Yes, I saw that! Thank you very much @MarcoPelle and @isak.bjorhag !!!
Hi Marco!
This utility removes all loads in the load-cases. You maybe knew that already.
Do you see a work-aroud for this?
I have got stuck again…
Is it not possible to create a temporary component based on the model component
Which does not force me to define loadcases and load groups but only loads? ANd also takes the file path for my saved *.lgroupcase file?
Unfortunately, our API has not been explored that much in details in terms of Load groups and we are lacking of functionality.
Some work related to it will be done in the next sprint (February).
Your script is pretty advance and your aim is to “automatise” start to end an entire process ( which I love ).
Most of our users, they just use the API to do some part of the work and then continue with the GUI. I do totally understand the limitation but we are working on it
Well,
Based on the positive experience we’ve had with the API until now,
we decided to work more and more with it in our projects, and as you see, this is a new (much simpler) project, and more bridges are in line.
However, I am stuck on how to continue. Stopping now and doing the rest manually means 50-90% manual work which will be wasted if a certain geometry would require change. Then, all the manual part would need to be done again. Multiply that for each new bridge we design with a slight difference in geometry.
Suddenly, the design is not paramteric anymore if the tool does not go all the way.
ehi @Poja!
The actual limitation will be solved but it will not happen tomorrow. Our team is working on several improvement/feature which comes from several users and we have to prioritise. When the Github issue is closed, we will inform you.
CustomLoadGroup is an advance feature which takes more than a simple script on our side.
Having said that, the API is also open-source which means that anyone can implement new .struxml functionality without any external support if skilled in c# coding.
1 Like
I am not sure it can be a temporary solution for you but you can “manually modify” the text file so that you can insert the loads from a different file.
The loaded file will have the LoadGroup that you have created.
This sounds interesting, which file is this?
FEM-Design model can be created from a text file.
The custom load group that you want to use can also be generate by text file.
I have saved an empty model with the the load group to .struxml and I have place the text in the model.struxml as I show in the picture.
Have a look at the attached file to see if you can understand the logic.
loadGroup.struxml (3.0 KB)
column.struxml (15.2 KB)
1 Like
Ehi @Poja
It is a WIP and it might contains some bug (especially for custom load group combinations)
However, I think you can use the following methodology to keep working in a full parametric environment
The basic idea is:
- create a .struxml file which will be a sort of template for you model
- read the file and create a model with
ReadFromFile AddElementsto the model will then add your parametric bridge geometry
As LoadGroup are referencing some existing LoadCase, I think that you need to assign the existing load case to your loads using the one from Model.Deconstruct
You should use the following .gha tool to have the Load relationship bug fixed
FemDesign_24.0.0_WIP.zip (1.2 MB)