I would like to use IFC to capture whether or not a product (in this case a mooring bollard) has a coating - this could be paint or galvanising or something else. I am more interested in capturing data about the expected performance of the coating system - i.e. structural components are painted with paint that is expected to last ‘X’ years to first maintenance in environment ‘Y’. Does the schema already include something for this? IfcCovering almost does it but not quite - what do people generally use?
IfcCovering is used in Tekla Structures. What do you think is missing in ifcCovering to do the trick?
My first query was whether or not IfcCovering is intended to be used this way or is in common use in this way. Thanks for your response - it answers this question for me.
The reason it doesn’t quite work for me is because of the limitations of Pset_CoveringCommon. The thing i am most interested in from a paint system is the environment that it is intended for and its durability (eg the corrosivity categories and durabilitiy requirement property from ISO 12944). From the point of view of a structural engineer in the infrastructure sector this is how paint and other coatings are specified. Im wondering if these parameters are already included somewhere or how people generally include them?
The Pset_CoveringCommon as also all the other common property sets include some properties. I have my doubts are they the correct ones and valuable for the data transfer. Therefore it would be very valuable to know what the users are thinking of them. Not only this particular property set.
At least in Tekla it’s possible to add user’s own property sets. That’s the way to add more proper data.
This is one of IFC issues, that could solve with some dirty hack but bSI “should” solve it (software should do this, not with injecting some human tricks on IFC)
IFC has vital issues related to Materials and Finishes (
Indeed, IFC recognizes finishes as “non-” materials