IFC who's using it?

[Anonymous]

We've had a few more companies recently wanting to know more about IFC & how to support it.

Just wanted to know how many people on here are actively using IFC ??

[Chadwick]

We needed to further edit the model after the IFC exchange. We needed to be able to roundtrip the IFCs from ArchiCAD to Revit and then back to ArchiCAD again several times during the project. The end of every week actually.

I agree that IFCs are developing a lot better now than say, four or five years ago but then again so is Linux. The scary thing is, will either IFCs or Linux matter outside of a realm of die-hards if the rest of the industry uses a single piece of software? That is what I'm afraid of - without any competition you get development stagnation.

[Anonymous]

Chadwick wrote:
I agree that IFCs are developing a lot better now than say, four or five years ago but then again so is Linux. The scary thing is, will either IFCs or Linux matter outside of a realm of die-hards if the rest of the industry uses a single piece of software? That is what I'm afraid of - without any competition you get development stagnation.

yes fair point.

[Anonymous]

Chadwick wrote:
We needed to further edit the model after the IFC exchange. We needed to be able to roundtrip the IFCs from ArchiCAD to Revit and then back to ArchiCAD again several times during the project. The end of every week actually.

Have you set up templates and tweaked your attributes to match between ArchiCAD and Revit? This will go a long way to giving you reliable round trip conversions, though in my experience it won't work with all element types. The basics (walls, doors, windows, roofs, slabs, beams and columns) work pretty well, except that Revit can do things with slabs that ArchiCAD can't replicate so those come in as library parts.

I agree that IFCs are developing a lot better now than say, four or five years ago but then again so is Linux. The scary thing is, will either IFCs or Linux matter outside of a realm of die-hards if the rest of the industry uses a single piece of software? That is what I'm afraid of - without any competition you get development stagnation.

I really don't see Revit completely dominating the field. I suppose it could happen but there are many more competitors besides ArchiCAD (even some from Autodesk)with a wide range of applications and advantages and I just don't think Revit can do it all.

[Laszlo Nagy]

I am reading this thread and I would be very interested to know what people's perception about how IFC is supposed to be used is.
For example, I see some people want to import data from Revit through IFC and work on the imported data in ArchiCAD.
However when I am reading the Help files I notice that it says that recommended way of working is to use the data from the IFC files as a Reference Model.
I was told by the IFC guys at GS that many firms said this is how they want to work.
So in this case the data coming from the IFC serves as a reference based on which one modifies the geometry in his/her own file.
This may make sense because the translation will never be perfect.

However, I can imagine someone saying that using IFC data only as Reference Model defeats the whole purpose of IFC data exchange.

[Chadwick]

I agree completely in that I could see its benefits as being a reference file but then what separates IFCs from a 3D .dwg or SketchUp file? I think the purpose of the IFC is to bring the information from a 'smart' object to each piece of software that imports it. You lose that information transfer and then you just have a model.

[Erika Epstein]

Laszlo,
Currently most of the time IFC models are brought in as reference to overlap the different building systems.

There are an increasing number of times as we collaborate with others using that we must be able to successfully round-trip IFC files.

[Anonymous]

laszlonagy wrote:
I am reading this thread and I would be very interested to know what people's perception about how IFC is supposed to be used.

IFC should be used in whatever way that serves a purpose. I have used if for all sorts of things both for reference and to convert editable models between platforms. Round trip conversion for editable parts is problematic but can be done within limits.

[Chadwick]

Matthew wrote:
Round trip conversion for editable parts is problematic but can be done within limits.

This is the problem we primarily have. We want to use IFCs for round trip collaboration with other firms and the effects are akin to recycling in that after awhile the materials just aren't useable anymore. We need Cradle to Cradle IFCs!

[Anonymous]

Chadwick wrote:

Matthew wrote:
Round trip conversion for editable parts is problematic but can be done within limits.

This is the problem we primarily have. We want to use IFCs for round trip collaboration with other firms and the effects are akin to recycling in that after awhile the materials just aren't useable anymore. We need Cradle to Cradle IFCs!

With careful setup and management you should be able to get most walls, beams, columns, floors and roofs to round trip reliably. Other stuff not so much. This is getting better in general with AC14 but most of the improvements are with structure and MEP which have the Revit add-in.

[Chadwick]

That is good to know. Like I said, we are keeping an eye on it since we work with other architectural firms who do not use Revit. The other bump in the road is hoping that these firms are using the latest version of their software in order to take advantages of the progress made in IFCs. Unfortunately, that is completely out of our control...