Reference study of IFC software support
The GeoBIM benchmark 2019—Part I
Francesca Noardo (TU Delft - Architecture and the Built Environment)
Thomas Krijnen (TU Delft - Architecture and the Built Environment)
Ken Arroyo Ohori (TU Delft - Architecture and the Built Environment)
Filip Biljecki (National University of Singapore)
Claire Ellul (University College London)
Lars Harrie (Lund University)
Nebras Salheb (Student TU Delft)
Jordi van Liempt (TU Delft - Architecture and the Built Environment)
Jantien Stoter (TU Delft - Architecture and the Built Environment)
undefined More Authors (External organisation)
More Info
expand_more
Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download, forward or distribute the text or part of it, without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license such as Creative Commons.
Abstract
Industry Foundation Classes (IFC), the buildingSMART open standard for BIM, is underused with respect to its promising potential, since, according to the experience of practitioners and researchers working with BIM, issues in the standard’s implementation and use prevent its effective use. Nevertheless, a systematic investigation of these issues has never been carried out, and there is thus insufficient evidence for tackling the problems. The GeoBIM benchmark project is aimed at finding such evidence by involving external volunteers, reporting on various aspects of the behavior of tools (geometry, semantics, georeferencing, functionalities), analyzed and described in this article. Interestingly, different IFC software programs with the same standardized data sets yield inconsistent results, with few detectable common patterns, and significant issues are found in their support of the standard, probably due to the very high complexity of the standard data model. A companion article (Part II) describes the results of the benchmark related to CityGML, the counterpart of IFC within geoinformation.
help_outline