I'm building a hobby project called Property X-Ray, its purpose is to pull in hazard data such as flood, bushfire and crime rate for a single property address. I want to learn the proper way to model it in Project Haystack, but I notice it is mainly for describing industrial devices, like how they are related or installed on a site. Just wondering if modeling using Project Haystack for my little project is the right way to go?
What I have so far:
site = a property address (geoAddr, geoCoord, area). This part feels clean.
equip = the hazard itself, so a "flood" entity and a "bushfire" entity under the site.
points = the measurable bits of each hazard. For flood: overlay category (flood severity), modelled depth (m), annual exceedance probability (1% AEP / 1-in-100-year), floor elevation (m AHD). For bushfire: slope and distance to vegetation.
The bit I'm unsure about: is it idiomatic to treat a hazard as an equip? It isn't a physical device with sensors, so part of me thinks these attributes should just hang off the site directly, or maybe live in a custom def.
Thanks. Still very much learning, so happy to be told I've got the hierarchy upside down.
Brian FrankSun 28 Jun
My first inclination is to model those those as type of space because they have geometric boundaries. Although they are more akin to GIS spaces than BIM spaces
Property XMon 29 Jun
Hey Brian, thanks so much for jumping in, not expecting the founder himself to reply himself haha, really appreciate it.
The space framing clicks straight away. You're right that a flood or bushfire zone is fundamentally a geographic area with a boundary, not a device, so forcing it into equip always felt a bit off.
Modelling it as a space (the GIS-flavoured kind) lands exactly where I was stuck.
Property X Sun 28 Jun
Hello all,
I'm building a hobby project called Property X-Ray, its purpose is to pull in hazard data such as flood, bushfire and crime rate for a single property address. I want to learn the proper way to model it in Project Haystack, but I notice it is mainly for describing industrial devices, like how they are related or installed on a site. Just wondering if modeling using Project Haystack for my little project is the right way to go?
What I have so far:
site= a property address (geoAddr,geoCoord,area). This part feels clean.equip= the hazard itself, so a "flood" entity and a "bushfire" entity under the site.points= the measurable bits of each hazard. For flood: overlay category (flood severity), modelled depth (m), annual exceedance probability (1% AEP / 1-in-100-year), floor elevation (m AHD). For bushfire: slope and distance to vegetation.The bit I'm unsure about: is it idiomatic to treat a hazard as an
equip? It isn't a physical device with sensors, so part of me thinks these attributes should just hang off thesitedirectly, or maybe live in a customdef.Thanks. Still very much learning, so happy to be told I've got the hierarchy upside down.
Brian Frank Sun 28 Jun
My first inclination is to model those those as type of space because they have geometric boundaries. Although they are more akin to GIS spaces than BIM spaces
Property X Mon 29 Jun
Hey Brian, thanks so much for jumping in, not expecting the founder himself to reply himself haha, really appreciate it.
The
spaceframing clicks straight away. You're right that a flood or bushfire zone is fundamentally a geographic area with a boundary, not a device, so forcing it intoequipalways felt a bit off.Modelling it as a
space(the GIS-flavoured kind) lands exactly where I was stuck.Many thanks again!