INVESTIGATING INTEROPERABILITY CAPABILITIES BETWEEN IFC AND CITYGML LOD 4 – RETAINING SEMANTIC INFORMATION
- 1School of Rural and Surveying Engineering, National Technical University of Athens, 9 Iroon Polytechneiou str., 15780 Zografou, Athens, Greece
- 2Dept. of Civil, Environmental & Geomatic Engineering, UCL, Gower Street, London, WC1E 6BT, UK
Keywords: CityGML, IFC, 3D Model, BIM, GIS, Data Integration, FME
Abstract. Applications of 3D City Models range from assessing the potential output of solar panels across a city to determining the best location for 5G mobile phone masts. While in the past these models were not readily available, the rapid increase of available data from sources such as Open Data (e.g. OpenStreetMap), National Mapping and Cadastral Agencies and increasingly Building Information Models facilitates the implementation of increasingly detailed 3D Models. However, these sources also generate integration challenges relating to heterogeneity, storage and efficient management and visualization. CityGML and IFC (Industry Foundation Classes) are two standards that serve different application domains (GIS and BIM) and are commonly used to store and share 3D information. The ability to convert data from IFC to CityGML in a consistent manner could generate 3D City Models able to represent an entire city, but that also include detailed geometric and semantic information regarding its elements. However, CityGML and IFC present major differences in their schemas, rendering interoperability a challenging task, particularly when details of a building’s internal structure are considered (Level of Detail 4 in CityGML). The aim of this paper is to investigate interoperability options between the aforementioned standards, by converting IFC models to CityGML LoD 4 Models. The CityGML Models are then semantically enriched and the proposed methodology is assessed in terms of model’s geometric validity and capability to preserve semantics.