Opinion on the ability of IFC to provide the level of exchange necessary is divided: Is it the truly interoperable solution it was designed to be? Is it the only option when software vendors refuse to provide direct compatibility? Is it merely a DXF for the 21st Century, incapable of providing a level of geometric coordination necessary for the majority of projects?

What is the reality?

Much has been made over the past 12 months or so about the need for an ‘Open BIM’ solution. Even the UK government talk about “open sharable asset information” and there is plenty of evidence of one ‘open’ solution communicating with another. Whether a solution is pigeon-holed as ‘closed’ or ‘open’ is somewhat irrelevant when it comes to delivering projects using whatever software each stakeholder has selected. The bottom line is software should not be getting in the way of moving our industry forward and everyone should all be able to use the best tools for their needs. All solutions must ultimately be ‘open’ and geometry and data must be exchanged efficiently and reliably for BIM to succeed.

Evolve and Bond Bryan Architects have worked with many consultants and contractors over the years exchanging information between Autodesk, Bentley and Graphisoft authoring and collaboration tools. The growth of BIM, particularly with major contractors, has accelerated the need to make workflows better and more reliable.

We are sure everyone has seen presentations showing lost geometry or lost data but the question is – are these the exceptions or just evidence of an inadequate format? Is it really the IFC standard that is to blame or is it the implementation of it? Can we eliminate these issues? Nigel Davies, Daniel Heselwood and Rob Jackson will explain the key aspects of model structure and organisation and how best to exchange coordinated information, including:

  • Preparation and planning
  • Aligning coordinate systems in disparate software
  • Modelling methodology
  • Structuring the model to best suit IFC
  • The good, the bad and the ugly: case studies of IFC exchange
  • Differing results from the same IFC model

While there is never a definitive answer to the challenges of BIM exchange, this presentation will help you understand of the reality of what is possible, what is “somewhat idealistic” and the workarounds to success. The next time you are required to provide IFC format on your project, you’ll be better prepared.

Learning Objectives:

  • Identify & list key areas for success and failure both in terms of graphics and metadata exchange
  • Demonstrate IFC best practice workflows and solutions to known issues
  • Understand the actual technicalities of BIM exchange between major BIM software including Autodesk Revit, Bentley AECOsim Building Designer and Graphisoft ArchiCAD amongst others.


There are no reviews yet.

Be the first to review “BIM SHOW LIVE 2013 – IFC THE GOOD THE BAD THE UGLY”

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *