PLQ 2.5 – Information Model Complete!

Hello BIMfans,
As promised, after last week’s post about my Architectural model, I have resolved all the additional comments you have provided (Thank you).  This means that my information is ready to be formally shared, completing Plain Language Question 2.5.

Links to the project outputs can be found below and in the main menu.

Once again, a big thank you to everyone who took the time to review my project outputs.  All of your comments have been very constructive and have led to a better, and more compliant project; so thank you.  Right, let’s see that I have resolved this week:

Property Sets:

I was told that within my IFC files, I had not grouped my properties under the correct property sets.  To check this, I consulted the NBIMS COBie Responsibility Matrix, and the IFC 2×3 Schema.  When doing so, I found that I had indeed not grouped my properties correctly.  Luckily for me, this was a pretty quick fix as the property sets are controlled by the Property Set Definition Text File that I used when exportting.  I also had a few properties that didn’t fit into any property sets, such as the FensaCertID for my windows, so I created my own property set called ‘Addition_Pset_Custom’.  Note:  Revit can’t do property grouping, so this can only be seen within my IFC file.


Credit: Rob Jackson (@BondBryanBIM) of Bond Bryan Digital.

Default COBie Values:

I was told that some of the default values I had used in my COBie file were not correct.  Once again I referred to the NBIMS COBie Responsibility Matrix and found that some of my default values where indeed not compliant.  To be perfectly honest, I took the easy road any defaulted any values I didn’t know to ‘n/a‘, not applicable.  However, n/a isn’t always suitable, as it breaks the formatting of a number of fields.  For example, all elements should have an installation date and if the date isn’t known it should default to ‘1900-12-31T23:59:59‘. My house was built around then, so it’ll confuse matters for items I know were built later than that, but that’s the rule!

It might be correct, but now my boiler is as old as the house…

Credit:  Dan Mofakham of Cadan Design.

Drawing Annotations:

I was also noted that I hadn’t put any section or elevation annotations on my drawing sheets.  The reason for this is typically when using Revit , the BS 1192 file name is used as the sheet number, this helps locate the file when exporting, however, if do this your section head looks something like this…

Urgh…I think I’m going to be sick

Luckily for me, I have a solution; it relies on the fact that the file name isn’t the sheet number.  Those of you who read Drawing to Conclusions will have noticed that ISO 7200 requires a sheet number; however this sheet number isn’t the file name, it is a single number showing its place in the package being issued.

In ISO 7200 the sheet number is 1 (of 5), not AB123 456-7

Now BS 8541-2 specifically states sheet number; not the file name.  So as I used both of these standards in tandem, I have a similar convention on my title block to get the following block and section head.

and just like that, order has been restored

Note: I know A LOT of you will dislike this; tough.

Credit:  Me!

And there we have it.  Thanks to the continued support of this wonderfully open community, I have been provided with a myriad of comments to improve the deliverables within my information model.  The Architectural, Mechanical, and Electrical Native, IFC, and COBie files have all now been issued.  This means that PLQ2.5 is finally complete; Woohoo!

Model Generation:
2.1 What existing information is available?
2.2 Is there sufficient information to produce a BEP?
2.3 What is the layout of the house?
2.4 What assets are contained within?
2.5 What asset information can be linked to the graphical model?

Now that I have finished my model generation Plain Language Questions, let’s reflect on this year…

Note:  If you have any comments regarding my information model or how I have resolved these issues, then please let me know either on Twitter, or by commenting below.

3 thoughts on “PLQ 2.5 – Information Model Complete!

  1. Dan,

    Good blog, enjoyed readign trough this 🙂

    Re your Drawing Annotation in particular the section head. The problem with the BS’ is that they are never joined up with each other, you’d think that BSI would do this to ensure consistency, but never mind thats a debate for another time.

    You used the Sheet number as in Sheet x of n, in this instance i believe you should be looking to the BS1192 Discipline & Number field. The Number field is supposed to be a unique identifier therefore you should never have more then one file numbered 1001 within any given discipline. This makes number more likely to be used as a Sheet number on BIM Projects. As BS1192 number field is limited to 4 digits you have 9999 numbers to choose from, my preference is to split these numbers into blocks of 1000, makes identifying the content without opening.

    i.e. 0-(Project Administration) Contracts, Letters, Invoices → 1- (Project Documents) Programs, Reports, Schedules → 2-(Sheets) General Arrangements → 3-(Sheets) Sections → 4-(Sheets) Elevations → 5 (Sheets) Schematics → 6-(Sheets) Reinforcement → 7-(Sheets) Sketches & Mark-ups → 8-(Renditions) Renders, 3D Views, Videos, VR → 9-(Models) Design, Analysis, Coordination, Federated, Clash

    Soo your section tag above would then have A-3001, this is more relatable than 3. What if you are on a project where each floor plan is split into 3 sections, 3 just wouldn’t cut it.


    • Hi Andrew, thank you and thank you for the project number information too. However, you are wrong in that the final number should be unique.

      From speaking with Mervyn (BS1192 Author), he has confirmed that the numbers are sequential; not unique. So if I had to put my ground floor and first floor drawings on separate sheets they should be 7001-BBH-ZZ-00-DR-A-1001 and 7001-BBH-ZZ-01-DR-A-1001 respectively.

      I didn’t use 0001 as my preference is the block split too, reading my BEP you can see that my 1000 series are plans, 2000 elevations, 3000 sections.

      PAS1192-2 states in that the discipline, file type, and number make up the ‘unique number’ (that is what I think you are referring to) but that is rubbish as you need the floor level too. So yes I could have used 01-DR-A-1001 as my unique number but even that wouldn’t fit on a section head properly.

      I fully admit that what I did with the section head is weird, but it works and I can defend it by referring to ISO7200. I have a BS1192 file name, and a unique sheet number for each drawing, which means my section heads look pretty; and I comply with BS1192.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s