Shafiq, M T and Lockley, S R (2022) Application of signature-based matching for IFC model comparison. International Journal of Construction Management, 22(9), pp. 1765-1774. ISSN 1562-3599
Abstract
The paper highlights the problem of Industry Foundation Classes (ISCs) model comparison in a platform-neutral collaboration of Building Information Models (BIMs). A critical issue in the IFC model comparison is establishing the right candidates for comparison, which typically depends upon using Globally Unique Identifiers (GUIDs). GUIDs are criticised for inconstancies that result because of complex modelling operations and nature of BIM authoring tools that are used to exchange IFC data. This paper presents a signature-matching approach that advocates using dynamic object identities, calculated from the characteristics and attributes of IFC objects, using hash keys that can create a unique signature for an object. Exemplars of creating IFC object signatures are presented. The proposed methodologies for creating IFC object signatures are implemented in a custom-built tool, xBIM Signatures exporter, and are verified using a test case. This research is limited to discussing signatures for IfcBuildingElements and has not considered a level of details and signature weighting of various object characteristics to formulate a robust solution. The proposed signature matching approach can benefit model comparison functionality for model servers and cloud-based collaboration tools.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | building information modelling; collaboration; model comparison; signature matching |
| Index terms: | modelling, cloud-based collaboration tool, test case, identity, industry foundation classes, authoring, platform, building information modelling, critical issue, collaboration, methodology, functionality, level of detail |
| Subjects: | computational design, risk assessment, design features, technical documentation, analytical methods, professional practice, research methods, management, digital design, coding, sociology, information systems |
| Topics: | Engineering Principles, Research Practice, Risk Management, Digital Applications, Design Practice, Organizational Design |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here