Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 143 (2024) 105368

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tust

IFC concepts in the execution phase of conventional tunneling projects

Marco Huymajer a ,∗, Galina Paskaleva b , Robert Wenighofer a , Christian Huemer b ,
Alexandra Mazak-Huemer c
a Chair of Subsurface Engineering, Montanuniversität Leoben, Erzherzog-Johann-Straße 3/III, Leoben, 8700, Austria
b Research Unit of Business Informatics, TU Wien, Favoritenstraße 9, Vienna, 1040, Austria
c
Department of Business Informatics – Software Engineering, Johannes Kepler University Linz, Altenberger Straße 69, Linz, 4040, Austria

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Keywords: The documentation process of conventional tunneling projects is time-consuming and costly. Building Informa-
BIM tion Modeling (BIM) has enabled substantial productivity gains in the Architecture, Engineering, & Construction
IFC (AEC) sector. However, BIM has only been marginally adopted in the execution phase of conventional tunneling
Tunneling
projects. For this purpose, we propose a BIM model that facilitates fully digital and automated data exchange
Construction phase
between project stakeholders. We use the Industry Foundation Classes (IFC) as a basis and identify concepts
Process
Labor
potentially useful to represent data from the execution phase of construction projects. We demonstrate how
Equipment IFC concepts are utilized to represent a shift report of a conventional tunneling project. Thereby, we deliver
Material a reference model as an implementation guide for software developers in this domain. This may serve as a
Digitalization blueprint for handling construction management data in a machine-readable format, laying the foundations
for Big Open BIM in the execution phase of construction projects.

1. Introduction An efficient data flow is relevant both within the company infras-
tructure of the contractor and for the information exchange between
In conventional tunneling, process efficiency has a high impact due the contractor, supervisor, project owner, and other involved par-
to the overall volume of the market. The International Tunnelling and ties. The exchanged information includes, among others, data on the
Underground Space Association (ITA) reported investments of € 125 process, labor, equipment, and material.
billion in tunneling projects worldwide in 2019 (ITA, 2019). On av- This data must be expressed in an international open standard to
erage, 5200 km of tunnels are constructed annually. Although there is
achieve interoperability. The Industry Foundation Classes (IFC) is the
a trend toward off-site construction in general and specifically toward
most commonly adopted open Building Information Modeling (BIM)
mechanized methods in tunneling, there is unquestionably a continuing
standard in multiple subdomains of the Architecture, Engineering, &
demand for tunneling projects employing the conventional tunneling
method. Construction (AEC) sector (Jiang et al., 2019). IFC serves as a machine-
Here, we explicitly focus on the execution phase, which involves readable, semantically rich, and vendor-neutral data exchange format.
much work documenting costs, progress, quality, and safety. The result- Our main objective is to demonstrate that IFC can be applied to the
ing documents are typically exchanged among different departments execution phase of a conventional tunneling project.
within the contractor company, and a subset of data is shared with Since the IFC data model is very flexible, the same semantics
the project owner or the construction supervisor. The data exchange can be expressed by different IFC constructs, causing interoperability
of today’s tunneling projects still heavily relies on paper-based doc- issues. Therefore, we propose an implementation guide showing how
uments or the exchange of unstructured digital data or proprietary to express domain concepts by a specific subset of IFC constructs. This
data formats (Kvasina, 2018; Sabanovic et al., 2022; Sharafat et al., implementation guideline is meant to help software solution providers
2021). Such solutions are cost-intensive and time-consuming because to develop interoperable tools for conventional tunneling. Implementa-
they are not machine-readable and hinder the seamless data flow tion guides are a well-established approach in business data exchanges
between stakeholders. Another drawback is the time delay between the
based on standards such as UN/EDIFACT published by the United
generation of the data and its subsequent processing, which complicates
Nations Center for Trade Facilitation and e-Business1 (UN/CEFACT).
the management of tunneling projects.

∗ Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: [email protected] (M. Huymajer), [email protected] (C. Huemer).
1
https://unece.org

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2023.105368
Received 30 January 2023; Received in revised form 5 August 2023; Accepted 15 August 2023
Available online 3 November 2023
0886-7798/© 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
M. Huymajer et al. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology incorporating Trenchless Technology Research 143 (2024) 105368

In this paper, we propose an IFC model allowing fully automated data application programming interface (API) to allow dynamic object-based
exchange in the execution phase of tunneling projects. Although we queries on IFC data (bSI, 2020b; van Berlo et al., 2021).
focus on data originating from conventional tunnel drives, the model The IFC data model has a modular structure. Its root lies in the
was left sufficiently generic by design to be easily employed in different IFC core module, which houses the most generic elements. IFC’s ca-
contexts. pabilities to model cost and scheduling information are part of the
The remainder of the paper is structured as follows: A brief overview IfcProcessExtension module. Version 1.0. of the IFC specification
of related work is compiled in Section 2. Section 3 touches upon the includes the IfcWorkTask entity, which was later renamed to Ifc-
contractual foundation of executing conventional tunneling projects Task. The process-related semantics were extended by introducing
and introduces the shift report as the key document in such projects. IfcProcedure with version 2 × 2 (bSI, 1999) and IfcEvent with ver-
IFC concepts potentially suitable to digitally represent the shift report sion 4 (bSI, 2021). Multiple authors discussed IfcProcessExtension
are discussed in Section 4. Section 5 presents a reference model for in the context of project management. By modeling a simple test case
a digital counterpart of a shift report based on a simplified example. scenario, Froese et al. (1999) confirmed the ability of IFC to capture
Section 6 discusses our lessons learned, and Section 7 concludes this project management data. Xue et al. (2015) extended the IFC data
paper. model by different entities intending to use IFC for construction sched-
ule management. Yang et al. (2021) showed that IFC is viable for cap-
2. Related work turing construction management information on prefabricated build-
ings. Furthermore, IFC defines entities and types representing employed
resources, such as labor (IfcLaborResource), construction equip-
Rothenberg (1989) defines a model as a simplified representation
ment (IfcConstructionEquipmentResource), and materials (Ifc-
of the reality of an intended purpose and modeling as the process of
ConstructionMaterialResource). In summary, IFC gives compre-
developing and using a model. This representation could be a ver-
hensive support for process-related concepts. Nevertheless, there seems
bal description, a diagram, a mathematical equation, or a technical
to be no commercially available software using those concepts. Apart
drawing. BIM can be seen as a particular manifestation of modeling,
from that, no publication addresses conventional tunneling projects’
which, in line with other AEC subdomains, is increasingly discussed
specifics employing those concepts.
within the tunneling community (Huang et al., 2021). In this article, we
Other domains adopted their standards for exchanging information
follow the concept of BIM as an activity rather than an object (Eastman
related to processes, including standards based on ISA-95 popular in
et al., 2011; Borrmann et al., 2021). Possible applications of BIM
manufacturing (IEC, 2013a,b). Regateiro and Spínola (2014) analyzed
in tunneling range from predicting the settlement risk due to tunnel
BIM in Portuguese public works contracts and identified IFC entities as
construction (Providakis et al., 2019) to the maintenance management
presumably valuable during the cost estimation.
of utility tunnels (Lee et al., 2018).
Our research effort consists of applying IFC-based modeling tech-
To overcome the shortcomings of file-based BIM data exchange, Af-
niques to tunnel construction. In tunnel construction, we distinguish be-
sari et al. (2016b) proposed a web-based data exchange mechanism for
tween conventional tunneling (also called the cyclic method) and mech-
BIM applications. Compared to conventional exchange methods, this
anized tunneling (also called the continuous method) (Girmscheid,
has the advantage that the data consumer can initiate a data exchange
2013; Maidl et al., 2013). A particular variety of the former method,
in real time. Therefore, the receiver manages the data requests, and which allows a certain amount of rock deformation and uses shotcrete
an intermediate, file-based integration technology becomes optional. as a support measure, is called the New Austrian Tunneling Method
The authors suggest the Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) and IFC or (NATM). Using explosives for excavation is often referred to as drill
JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) as data serialization formats. A spe- and blast tunneling. Despite the growing importance of mechanized
cific protocol and serialization format allows two parties to exchange tunneling, NATM plays a crucial role in tunnel construction due to
data more efficiently. However, to have an unambiguous understanding its high flexibility. However, Kvasina et al. (2018) showed that the
of the data between two parties, the data must be based on a common documentation process of NATM tunneling is complex. For this reason,
data model such as IFC. this process harbors a high potential for saving both costs and time by
IFC is a data model for the AEC sector maintained by transitioning out of the paper-based data exchange and into the fully
buildingSMART International2 (bSI) and has been broadly discussed automated digital one.
as a suitable approach to exchange semantically rich design data of Different IFC extensions for the tunnel design have been proposed
buildings (Borrmann et al., 2021; Jiang et al., 2019). The International covering both conventional (Lee et al., 2016; Sharafat et al., 2021;
Organization for Standardization (ISO) has approved IFC Version 4 Huang et al., 2022) and mechanized tunneling (Yabuki, 2008; Hege-
as the standard ISO 16739 (ISO, 2013). In many countries, including mann et al., 2012; Jubierre and Borrmann, 2014; Yabuki et al., 2013;
Norway, Finland, and Spain, state-owned agencies mandate IFC for data Vilgertshofer et al., 2016). Sharafat et al. (2021) proposed a model
exchange (Panteli et al., 2020). Afsari et al. (2016a) consider IFC the to capture different aspects of drill and blast tunnels. However, their
most suitable file format for interoperable cloud-based BIM. proposal seems hardly aligned with IFC concepts, and it appears chal-
IFC is based on the Standard for the Exchange of Product model data lenging to extend to other excavation methods like excavation with
(STEP) and uses EXPRESS as a data modeling language for its schema roadheaders. Despite the high number of suggestions for tunneling-
definition (Anderl and Trippner, 2000). The most common serialization specific IFC extensions, official support is not expected to be included
format for a STEP model is the STEP Physical File Format (SPFF), before version 4.4 of the standard. As of today, only the final draft
which has been approved as ISO 10303-21 (ISO, 2016). Apart from of the IFC-Tunnel ‘‘Requirements Analysis Report’’ (bSI, 2020a) is
SPFF, other serialization formats, such as ifcXML, ifcOWL, and ifcJSON, available.
have been proposed for IFC models (Shelden et al., 2020). In addition, Only a few studies have reported on using IFC in the execution
using linked data and mapping IFC to Resource Description Framework phase of tunneling projects. Lensing (2016) serialized data from a
(RDF) was identified as a possibility to cope with interoperability tunnel boring machine (TBM) process into JSON to compare data with
issues in a cross-domain setting (Shelden et al., 2020; Curry et al., a BIM model. Consolidated digital documentation and straightforward
2013). IFC was initially conceived as a file-based approach to data data exchange have been identified by Winkler et al. (2022) as the
exchange. However, bSI acknowledged the necessity for a standardized cornerstones of digital invoicing for NATM projects. Huymajer et al.
(2022a) presented an architecture and a data model of a Tunneling In-
formation Management System (TIMS) capable of capturing invoicing-
2
https://buildingsmart.org/ relevant information about conventional tunnels. Similarly, Sabanovic

2
M. Huymajer et al. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology incorporating Trenchless Technology Research 143 (2024) 105368

et al. (2022) reported on a prototype of a data entry tool for mobile ∙

blue ; (ii) information about the labor, including the role of each per-
devices employed at conventional tunnel drives. ∙
son during the shift, shown in turquoise ; (iii) information about the
Tunneling is closely linked to other domains, such as geology,
hydrogeology, and geotechnical engineering, supported by multiple
employed equipment, such as wheel loaders, etc., shown in purple ;
(iv) information about consumed materials, including support measures
∙
standards. Examples are GeoSciML (OGC, 2022a) and WaterML (OGC, ∙
and explosives, shown in red ; and (v) general information, such as
2022b), published by the Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC). the tunnel section, date, approvals, etc., shown in gray . ∙
Depending on the contractor and the project, the shift report might
3. Documenting the conventional tunneling process be named differently, e.g., excavation report (Winkler et al., 2022),
or the document could be structured differently. The data could also
In this section, we outline the documentation process of conven- be spread over multiple documents, possibly in a more detailed form,
tional tunneling projects. The documentation of such projects includes such as support logs, round sheets, and daily diagrams. The informa-
many aspects common to construction projects in general. Nevertheless, tion is used in different business units within the contractor, and a
tunneling exhibits some peculiarities compared to other construction subset of the information is shared with the project owner (Kvasina,
domains, which are reflected in the documentation accordingly. One 2018). The information flow is often accomplished by exchanging
peculiarity is the inherent uncertainty of the subsurface physical condi- scanned documents or spreadsheet tables, requiring considerable man-
tions, such as geology and hydrology. Another one is the extensive use ual work. Therefore, an exchange method that allows for automated
of structural elements, which are not part of the final tunnel but serve data processing is desirable.
as temporary support measures and are removed during a subsequent
excavation step. These peculiarities affect the documentation process 3.3. Features of a BIM-based data exchange
and have contractual implications, as discussed in the following.
Based on the use case of the shift report presented above, we
3.1. Contractual foundation outline the most relevant features for the next-generation data ex-
change in conventional tunneling projects. A BIM-based data exchange
There are two significant contractual aspects affecting the docu- should be capable of semantically describing complex processes in
mentation of conventional tunneling projects. The first aspect is that conventional tunneling projects. Such semantically rich models are
the documentation serves as the basis for the remuneration of the con- machine-readable and facilitate automated processing. The data ex-
tractor’s work. In this case, tunneling documentation heavily depends change workflow should support different levels of detail, ranging from
on the type of contracts, such as lump sum and unit price contracts. today’s coarse representations to future comprehensive representations,
The contracts differ regarding ground-related risk due to unforeseeable which enable advanced analyses. Furthermore, multiple stakeholders of
ground conditions. The International Federation of Consulting Engi- tunnel construction projects utilize some or all of the data generated
neers (FIDIC) issued a contractual guidance document (FIDIC, 2019c) in a shift report, possibly using different software solutions, which
in an attempt to harmonize various contracts. The amount of ground suggests an interoperable and vendor-neutral solution. Considering the
support depends on the changing ground conditions, thus affecting the features of modern heavy equipment, the advances in sensor tech-
completion time and associated time-related costs. Implementing a unit nology, and novel technologies, such as the Internet of Things (IoT),
price contract for construction measures is acknowledged to support a real-time data exchange would be beneficial. In light of all this,
the management of such risks (ITA, 2021). Additionally, the FIDIC the data exchange mechanism must provide a smooth transition from
advises using unit price contracts for quantity-related support measures the prevailing documents and legacy software systems to reduce the
to reimburse the amount of ground support appropriately. Therefore, disruptive effect of complete digitalization.
adequately detailed documentation of quantity-related support mea- In addition to these general data exchange features, there are fea-
sures is necessary for invoicing those tunneling projects (FIDIC, 2019b). tures of particular significance to conventional tunneling projects. Not
In addition to this relatively new international standard of FIDIC, there all information in a shift report has a geometric representation or can be
are various local standards. For example, the contractor’s remuneration sensibly attributed to a single tunnel element. Nevertheless, many prac-
in Austria is governed by the standards ÖNORM B 2118 (Austrian titioners use their authoring software to attribute certain information
Standards, 2021) and B 2203-1 (Austrian Standards, 2001), which are to geometrical objects to which it does not belong. These workarounds
agreed on in the contract. The remuneration model, both the FIDIC run counter to seamless data exchange. The data exchange mechanism
and Austrian Standards International, require appropriately detailed should therefore provide the means to model this type of information
documentation of constructional service. explicitly and independently. Despite having to make certain domain-
The second contractual aspect is that the building contract can related assumptions in our reference model, the proposed solution
mandate employing BIM during the construction phase. Despite the should be generic enough to be suitable as a framework for other types
evident requirement of a digital document exchange, there are addi- of construction projects.
tional constraints, frequently stated in two documents, the so-called
Employer’s Information Requirements (EIR) and the BIM Execution 4. Relevant IFC concepts
Plan (BEP) (Borrmann et al., 2021; Daller et al., 2016). These two
documents are typically part of the building contract and contain In the following, we discuss the parts of the IFC data model (bSI,
detailed specifications on when, how, and what exact information to 2021) capable of capturing the most crucial information from the
exchange. construction phase of conventional tunneling projects. In addition, we
identify the entities and types that potentially fulfill the requirements
3.2. Status quo in the previous section.
The EXPRESS modeling language used to define IFC provides its
This subsection discusses the state-of-the-art documentation in con- standardized graphical notation, EXPRESS-G. The Unified Modeling
ventional tunneling construction sites. We illustrate this in the use case Language (UML) (Seidl et al., 2015) is the dominating modeling stan-
of a shift report, the information of which is of paramount importance dard in the area of software engineering, which has long been embraced
in the execution phase of conventional tunneling projects. Fig. 1 shows by the AEC sector (Hiremath and Skibniewski, 2004). Arnold and
a shift report of a conventional tunneling project. The following main Podehl (1999) showed that ‘‘complete and consistent mapping can be
information categories can be identified in the figure: (i) information realised’’ between EXPRESS-G and UML. As UML is the more widely
about the process, including the exact time of each task, shown in used and concise of the two, we presented the relevant mappings in

3
M. Huymajer et al. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology incorporating Trenchless Technology Research 143 (2024) 105368

Fig. 1. Shift report of a conventional tunneling project (Kvasina, 2018).

the UML graphical notation. Specifically, we use UML class diagrams that could facilitate the digital documentation of construction sites. We
to formally describe relevant parts of the IFC data model and a UML use the UML classifier interface to represent an express TYPE and
object diagram to describe our reference model. class to represent an express ENTITY. Our proposed reference model
For the sake of simplicity, we omit details that do not provide is based on IFC 4.3 (bSI, 2021). For interoperability reasons, we aim to
insights into the proposed reference model from the class and object exploit concepts that IFC offers out of the box instead of introducing
diagrams. For example, we only discuss those aspects of the IFC model new concepts which are unlikely to be implemented in any proprietary

4
M. Huymajer et al. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology incorporating Trenchless Technology Research 143 (2024) 105368

Table 1 the common object-class relationship. In contrast to the static entities

Overview of the mapping between concepts found in a shift report to defined by the IFC data model, dynamic types can be defined by the
IFC entities.
user. In the simplest case, all instances of IfcObject can be assigned
Concept IFC Entities
a dynamic type by setting a custom IfcLabel value to the attribute
∙∙ Process
Labor
IfcTask
IfcLaborResource, IfcPerson
ObjectType. Objects derived from IfcProcess, IfcResource, and
∙∙ Equipment
Material
IfcConstructionEquipmentResource
IfcConstructionMaterialResource
IfcProduct offer a second option for typing. Multiple objects of those
entities can be typed by associating them with an IfcRelDefines-
ByType relation to a corresponding IfcTypeObject instance. Ifc-
TypeObject instances could be collected in project-specific libraries
and reused in other projects. The concept behind IfcClassification
and IfcClassificationReference is orthogonal but very similar to
dynamic typing, which is out of the scope of this work.
Another powerful mechanism for dynamic semantic enrichment of
IFC entities is the usage of property sets, which extend the existing
types by adding specialized attributes. Property sets can be declared
by instances of the type IfcPropertySetTemplate. By convention,
the name of property sets is prefixed with Pset_. IfcPropertySet
instances can be attached to any object derived from IfcObject-
Definition. Quantities are a particular type of property aggregated in
IfcQuantitySet instances, the name of which is prefixed with Qto_
by convention. We do not go into details here, but we will mention
all predefined property and quantity sets potentially useful for our
reference model in the following sections.

Fig. 2. An excerpt from the IFC data model: A class diagram of IfcObject in the 4.2. Geometric representation
core layer.
Another remarkable feature of IFC is the strict separation between
semantics and geometry (bSI, 2021; Borrmann et al., 2021). Fig. 3 gives
software in the foreseeable future. This means we base our proposal an overview of IFC entities for geometric modeling. All instances de-
exclusively on entities, types, property sets, and quantity sets defined rived from IfcProduct can optionally have one or multiple geometric
by bSI. representations associated with it by an IfcProductRepresentation
Table 1 gives an overview of how concepts in a shift report (c.f. instance. This approach is chosen to meet the model requirements of
Fig. 1) relate to IFC entities. The relevant entities have been identified different use cases. For example, simulation tools generally require
by analyzing shift reports and other documents from the construction decomposing volumetric elements into a discrete number of ‘‘sim-
phase of ‘‘Zentrum am Berg’’ (ZaB) (Galler, 2016). ZaB is an under- ple’’ volumes. However, this only allows approximate curved surfaces,
which does not fulfill the visual requirements of complex architectural
ground research, development, education, and training facility. The
models. On the other hand, the same representation instance could
table shows that IFC provides the necessary concepts to represent the
even be shared among different products. Instances of IfcProduct are
information blocks of a shift report digitally. In the subsequent figures,
also perfectly valid without any geometric representation. This case is
we apply the color scheme introduced in Fig. 1.
motivated by Fig. 1, which contains no geometric information. Nev-
In the remainder of this section, we analyze the IFC entities listed
ertheless, all instances derived from IfcObjectDefinition can be
in Table 1 and their relevant specializations and associations. Sec-
associated with IfcProduct instances – and therefore with geometric
tion 4.1 presents some general characteristics of the IFC data model.
objects – utilizing the IfcRelAssignsToProduct relationship. This
IFC has comprehensive support for describing processes described in
will become particularly relevant as soon as the planned IFC-Tunnel
Section 4.3. In Section 4.4, we discuss labor, equipment, and material
extension is released. According to bSI, ‘‘IfcShapeRepresentation
as specializations of a resource. Section 4.5 demonstrates the concept of
represents the concept of a particular geometric representation of a product
actors used to represent concrete labor utilization. Finally, Section 4.6
or a product component within a specific geometric representation context.’’
outlines IFC’s capabilities to refer to external data, such as legacy
IfcRepresentationContext defines characteristics, such as the nu-
documents.
meric precision, the offset of the project coordinate system, and the true
north direction. Ninić et al. (2020) point out that this attribute could
4.1. Basics also be used to include different levels of geometric detail within the
same IFC model. The attribute RepresentationIdentifier distin-
Before we go into details about different parts of the IFC data guishes between representations, such as bounding box representations,
model (bSI, 2021), we want to discuss some common characteristics axis representations, or 3D body representations. One or more instances
of IFC. The basic building blocks of the IFC data model are classes derived from IfcGeometricRepresentationItem make up the ac-
or so-called entities, the names of which are prefixed with Ifc by tual geometric representation. Fig. 3 shows only a few of those entities
convention. Many IFC entities in the core, shared, and domain-specific to illustrate the general capabilities of IFC. For example, at a low level
layers are derived from IfcObject, which equips them with some of detail, an IfcProduct instance could be represented only by a point
basic features. The inheritance hierarchy of IfcObject is shown in or its bounding box. In contrast, the same instance could be represented
Fig. 2. All objects derived from IfcRoot provide GlobalId containing by a complex 3D shape at a high level of detail.
an encoded Globally Unique Identifier (GUID). The GUID of a specific
object is an identifier that should not change over time. In addition, 4.3. Process
IfcObject instances have a Description and a Name attribute.
Typing, i.e., assigning one or more (additional) types, allows the
user to specify an object’s semantics or meaning in more detail. IFC Fig. 4 shows a class diagram of the IFC process model. According to
has provisions for dynamic typing of some of the specializations of bSI, IfcProcess is an abstract base class for the three process-related
IfcObject, which is a complementary concept to static typing via classes IfcTask, IfcEvent, and IfcProcedure.

5
M. Huymajer et al. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology incorporating Trenchless Technology Research 143 (2024) 105368

Fig. 3. An excerpt of the IFC model for representing geometric characteristics.

Fig. 4. An excerpt of the IFC process model in the core layer.

IfcTask represents an ‘‘identifiable unit of work to be carried out.’’ In An IfcEvent ‘‘is something that happens that triggers an action or
a conventional tunnel drive, such a task could be, e.g., drilling blasting response.’’ Compared to TaskTime, the attribute EventOccurenceTime
holes to be later filled with explosives. The attribute Status allows one evidently describes a point in time. This entity could, e.g., express the
to specify if a task is scheduled, started, or completed. The attribute event of blasting.
TaskTime is an IfcTaskTime entity, which defines a time period. In addition to the typing mechanisms inherited from IfcObject,
The entity combines multiple IfcDateTime attributes specifying start it is possible to assign a predefined enumerable type to the attribute
and end, multiple IfcDuration attributes, and other attributes repre- PredefinedType of instances of the subclasses of IfcProcess. For
senting project management-specific information. Moreover, the entity the IfcTask, the attribute PredefinedType can, e.g., be set to one of
has dedicated attributes for planned and actual timings. IfcDateTime the literals defined by the enumeration IfcTaskTypeEnum, including
combines a calendar date and the time of day. IfcDateTime instances CONSTRUCTION, OPERATION, MAINTENANCE, DEMOLITION, or USERDE-
do not have time zone information, which does not constitute a restric- FINED, to name a few. In this way, the task can be specified further
tion as most tunnel projects are located within a single time zone or if necessary. The attributes Name and Description are inherited from
could agree on a project-wide time zone. IfcDateTime instances offer the parent classes. Additionally, IfcProcess introduces the attribute
a time resolution of one second, sufficient for replacing paper-based LongDescription, which can carry verbose information about the
documentation. However, it could become an obstacle to using IFC as instance. IfcProcess instances can be related by nesting or chain-
a data format for construction equipment and sensor usage. ing, achieved through IfcRelNests and IfcRelSequence instances,
bSI describes IfcProcedure as a ‘‘logical set of actions to be taken in respectively.
response to an event or to cause an event to occur.’’ Fig. 4 illustrates that
procedures do not have any timing information attached. A potential 4.4. Resources
use case would be a project owner defining a set of tasks to be
carried out by the contractor to comply with the Exchange Information A class diagram of the IFC resource model is depicted in Fig. 5. Its
Requirements (EIR) (ISO, 2018). subtype IfcConstructionResource in the domain-specific layer of

6
M. Huymajer et al. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology incorporating Trenchless Technology Research 143 (2024) 105368

Fig. 5. An excerpt of the IFC resource model in the core and domain-specific layers.

IFC serves as a base class for various construction resources, including a common property set Pset_ConstructionResource, capturing the
labor, equipment, and materials. temporal evolution of costs and scheduling data.
IfcLaborResource represents ‘‘particular skills or crafts required There are two ways of specifying the amount of resources employed:
to perform certain types of construction or management related work.’’ (i) Using the QuantityInProcess attribute of IfcRelAssignsTo-
Tunneling-related skills could include miner, foreman, site manager, Process (c.f. Fig. 4); or (ii) the BaseQuantity attribute of Ifc-
geologist, geotechnical engineer, or surveyor. Qto_LaborResource- ConstructionResource. We opted for the second alternative, al-
BaseQuantities can extend labor resources to differentiate between lowing different quantities without instantiating multiple IfcRel-
regular working time and overtime. AssignsToProcess. Furthermore, all construction resources have a
Heavy equipment is modeled with IfcConstructionEquipment- BaseCosts attribute, which could provide further information on the
Resource instances. Drilling jumbos, wheel loaders, and shotcrete quantity. This detail supports the idea of keeping all the information in
robotic arms are conventional tunneling equipment typically used one place — in the same instance.
in conventional tunneling. Qto_ConstructionEquipmentResource- A set of IfcResource instances can be assigned to one Ifc-
BaseQuantities allows distinguishing between the productive and Process through an IfcRelAssignsToProcess instance (c.f. Fig. 4).
idle operating time. The bSI specification advises the usage of IfcRelAssignsToProcess
to indicate that a resource is consumed by the process or acts as a
IfcCrewResource represents a ‘‘collection of internal resources used
mechanism to facilitate a process. This association is distinct from Ifc-
in construction processes.’’ A crew can consist of both labor and equip-
RelAssignsToResource, depicted in Fig. 5, which allows associating
ment resources. According to bSI, labor, and equipment resources are
a set of other objects with one resource. According to bSI, the semantics
associated with crew instances through IfcRelNests relationships.
of this association is to model the ‘‘assignment of a resource usage to a
It has also been suggested that labor and construction equipment
construction resource.’’ An example is identifying a product as part of a
could be related to the crew by utilizing the IfcRelAggregates
resource, e.g., a material produced as part of a material resource. We
relationship (Regateiro and Spínola, 2014).
will elaborate on another example in the following subsection.
Material usage is represented by IfcConstructionMaterial-
Resource, whose instances are defined to be ‘‘consumed (wholly or 4.5. Actors
partially), or occupied during a construction work task.’’ On the other
hand, IfcConstructionProductResource can be instantiated in An overview of IFC’s actor model is depicted in Fig. 6. An Actor is
cases where the material is the product of another action, such as 100 kg a concept that abstracts persons and organizations. IFC defines three
of gravel excavated in a previous task. Construction materials in con- types of actors: IfcPerson, IfcOrganization, and IfcPersonAnd-
ventional tunneling drives are generally used as support measures, such Organization. Evidently, IfcPerson is meant for human beings,
as shotcrete, steel meshes, and anchors. A second important class of ma- whereas IfcOrganization is a generic type representing compa-
terials is the explosives used in the drill and blast method. The quantity nies and other organizational units. IfcPersonAndOrganization ad-
set Qto_ConstructionMaterialResourceBaseQuantities speci- dresses cases where a person acts on behalf of an organization. The
fies the volume and weight of the corresponding resource. three aforementioned classes are not specializations of IfcActor but
As in the case of the process model, resources provide the attributes can be assigned to the attribute TheActor of class IfcActor instead.
Description, LongDescription, Name, and Identification. Con- Compared to processes and resources, using the attribute Object-
cerning additional typing, subclasses of IfcResource can have the at- Type is the only mechanism for dynamically typing actors. Actors can
tribute PredefinedType set to a predefined enumerable literal, in ad- refer to the property sets Pset_ActorCommon and Pset_Address,
dition to all other typing mechanisms inherited from IfcObject, just which allow for additional categorization and specification of the postal
as we described for the entity IfcTask. All construction resources have address, respectively.

7
M. Huymajer et al. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology incorporating Trenchless Technology Research 143 (2024) 105368

Fig. 6. An excerpt of the IFC actor model in the core layer.

Fig. 7. An excerpt of the IFC document model.

According to bSI, IfcRelAssignsToResource (Fig. 5) is used to document owner and editors can be supplied by referring to, e.g., an
indicate that a work is performed by a specific actor. This association IfcPerson. The attributes Revision, CreationTime, and Last-
should be distinct from IfcRelAssignsToActor, shown in Fig. 6. RevisionTime allow some rudimentary version control of external
IfcRelAssignsToActor has the semantics that an actor is ‘‘responsible documents. ElectronicFormat defines the media type
for allocating the resource such as partitioning into task-specific allocations, (formerly known as MIME types) (IANA, 2022), and enumerations per-
delegating to other actors, and/or scheduling over time.’’ Because IfcRel- mit setting the status and confidentiality of the referenced document.
AssignsToResource lacks an attribute to designate the role, one actor
A potential usage of this concept is to refer to the photo documenta-
cannot take a specific role when assigned to a resource.
tion of a tunneling round. The photos can be stored as raster graphics
4.6. External data files on the project’s common data environment (CDE). In this case,
ElectronicFormat is, e.g., image/jpeg, and Location is set to the
IFC provides a means to refer to data external to the model. This photo URL on the CDE.
is especially useful when referring to files, such as scanned documents, Two relation types exist for IfcDocumentInformation instances.
text documents, spreadsheets, audio and video data, monitoring data, IfcRelAssociatesDocument defines relations to any object derived
and proprietary binary files. The possibility of referring to external data from IfcObjectDefinition. On the other hand, IfcDocument-
opens the opportunity for a smooth transition from legacy documents InformationRelationship provides a way to associate one docu-
to BIM models. Apart from that, referencing other models provides a ment with a set of other documents. The cardinalities in Fig. 7 make
mechanism for building multi-models (Fuchs et al., 2010). We believe it clear that no document can have more than one parent document;
that this machinery should not be used to circumvent IFC concepts and
therefore, only tree-like structures can be represented.
therefore run counter to the ideas of BIM.
For completeness, it should be mentioned that the type
Fig. 7 gives an overview of how IFC can refer to legacy data.
IfcDocumentInformation serves as storage for the metadata of ex- IfcDocumentReference provides a second option to refer to
ternal documents. It is important to note that the actual content external content. IfcDocumentReference differs from
of the referenced document is not contained in the IFC model. The IfcDocumentInformation in that it has only limited metadata ca-
attributes Identification, Name, and Description are attributes pabilities. The second difference is that they can be associated with
we have already encountered in other parts of the data model. Lo- different elements within the IFC data model. Appendix lists essential
cation holds the document’s Uniform Resource Locator (URL). The IFC concepts used in this paper.

8
M. Huymajer et al. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology incorporating Trenchless Technology Research 143 (2024) 105368

Fig. 8. An object diagram representing a minimal example of IFC-based documentation of a conventional tunneling drive.

Table 2 activity is a task performed during the tunneling round and, therefore,
Data of an exemplary shift report. nested within a tunneling round through IfcRelNests. Activities
Concept Specification could be further broken down into subactivities by nesting using
∙ Process shift: 2022-10-01 14:00-22:00
round: started 2022-10-01 17:30
IfcRelNests. This technique allows modeling the process at different
levels of development (LOD), from the coarse round level to a subac-
activity: lining support, 2022-10-01 19:30-21:30
∙∙ Labor
Equipment
Michael Miller, miner, id: P48348
tunneling jumbo, id: E932
tivity level. The same construction activity is also performed during
a shift. However, the cardinalities in Fig. 4 show that IfcRelNests
∙ Material rock bolt, id: M5036517 does not allow more than one parent element. We, therefore, resort to
IfcRelAggregates to connect an activity to a shift. In the unlikely
scenario of a construction activity crossing the shift boundary, one
could represent it by two tasks of the same type without information
5. Case study loss. By contrast, a shift can involve multiple tunneling rounds; con-
versely, a tunneling round can generally span multiple shifts. Thus,
Based on the discussion in the previous sections, we propose an IFC tunneling rounds cannot be nested within shifts and vice versa. For
instance model of a typical shift report of a conventional tunneling embedding the round within the remaining model, the round could be
project. We keep the example simple while retaining all concepts further nested within a task for the tunnel drive. This task, in turn,
relevant to a real-world shift report. In our example, we assume that a could be nested within a top-level task for the whole project. Our
miner installs one rock bolt to support the tunnel face using a tunneling simplified example assumes a shift of 8 h. A tunnel round starts during
jumbo. The data we wish to input into the model is summarized in Ta- this shift but does not finish until the end of the shift. The construction
ble 2. Fig. 8 shows the corresponding object diagram as an instantiation activity is performed during the shift and can be attributed to the
of the IFC model. Due to space constraints, we have to omit some details round. Table 2 shows the exact timing of the tasks. The location of
from the figure. The complete model is serialized as a STEP file at the tunnel rounds is crucial during both the construction and operation
end of the section. phases. As pointed out in Section 2, IFC currently lacks dedicated
In the previous section, we outlined multiple possibilities for object entities for semantically representing tunnel rounds. We, therefore, fall
typing. We employ the attribute ObjectType (c.f. Fig. 2) instead of the back to an IfcSpace entity to represent the location of a tunnel round.
association with IfcRelDefinesByType to avoid visual clutter. The As this entity is derived from IfcProduct, it can optionally have one
attribute Identification allows matching the model data with data or more geometric representations, including the placement along the
in another software system, such as an enterprise resource planning tunnel axis. The IfcSpace entity is associated with the task utilizing
(ERP) system, according to its identifier. The second possibility is the an IfcRelAssignsToProduct association.
GlobalId, which requires the generating system to generate ‘‘stable’’ In our simplified example, we assume that the crew consists of
GUIDs and the receiving system to track those. the miner Michael Miller (IfcLaborResource) and a tunneling jumbo
The process is modeled by three tasks: One for the shift (Object- (IfcConstructionEquipmentResource), where the crew members
Type=SHIFT), one for the tunnel round (ObjectType=TUNNEL_ROUND), are assigned to the IfcCrewResource by nesting them with IfcRel-
and one for the particular activity in the tunneling cycle (Object- Nests. The labor resource is then associated with a concrete IfcActor
Type=TUNNEL_SUPPORT_FACE). We denote any concrete task per- by an IfcRelAssignsToResource instance. The actual person (Ifc-
formed during the excavation work, e.g., ground support, surveying, Person) is represented by the reference TheActor. In cases where
dewatering, and installation, as a construction activity. A construction data protection regulations require it, this personal data can be omitted

9
M. Huymajer et al. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology incorporating Trenchless Technology Research 143 (2024) 105368

Fig. 9. An IFC STEP file of the reference model.

without affecting the rest of the model. Because the crew compo- lines of entity instantiations (lines 8 to 28) corresponding to the in-
sition is generally not altered during a shift, we assign the crew stances in Fig. 8. For clarity, however, we represented IfcTaskTime
instance to the shift task with IfcRelAssignsToProcess. Another op- and IfcQuantityCount in Fig. 8 ‘‘inline’’. For example, line 9 of the
tion would be to assign the equipment to individual activities. Although STEP file corresponds to the top left blue IfcTask instance named
this information is not available in current paper-based documentation, shift in Fig. 8. One can further identify, e.g., lines 8 to 13 as process-
this may change in the future because of the increasing usage of related definitions, line 19 as related to the material, line 21 as related
equipment-generated data. to the equipment, and lines 22 to 24 as related to labor. Unlike the
Material usage can generally be attributed to a specific activity alphanumeric instance names in Fig. 8, instances in the STEP file have
in a construction process. This connection is necessary for the con- numeric names that can be referenced in other instantiations in the
tractor to assess the construction process. For example, it is of the same model. The instances’ attributes are instantiated as part of the
contractor’s interest if shotcrete is used as a support measure or if it input parameter list of the constructor call.
is used to fill up excavation volumes. Furthermore, this connection Even though we did not include all details of a real shift report in
allows locating the corresponding item in a bill of quantities. For the simplified example, the serialization presented in Fig. 9 shows that
example, generally, a rock bolt securing the tunnel face corresponds it is possible to transform the shift report into exchangeable data.
to a different item than a rock bolt securing the tunnel lining. For
6. Discussion
these reasons, we use an IfcRelAssignsToProcess to assign the
IfcConstructionMaterialResource instances to the related task.
Section 3.3 lists the must-have features of the BIM-based data
Now, after describing the reference model, we demonstrate the most
exchange. We will now assess how the proposed reference model could
common form of serialization for such models – a STEP file. STEP files
address those features. IFC offers multiple beneficial properties. There
were initially designed as ‘‘clear text encoding of product data for which
is no doubt that it is capable of creating semantically rich models. The
the conceptual model is specified in the EXPRESS language’’ (ISO, 2016). previous sections showed that IFC is also capable of representing com-
Fig. 9 shows the serialized counterpart to the graphical representation plex tunnel construction processes. IFC’s strict separation of semantics
of the reference model in Fig. 8. Serialization refers to transforming a and geometry allows for the unambiguous representation even of non-
data structure into a sequence of bytes to save or transfer it. The file was geometric information. Relations and property sets enable the gradual
generated with the Python implementation of IfcOpenShell3 version enhancement of a model with further details. IFC is an open standard
0.6.0b0. The semantic and syntactic correctness of the generated file already well-established within the construction sector and the research
has been checked with IfcCheckingTool4 version 2.2. As discussed community (Jiang et al., 2019), which generally has a positive effect
previously, there are other serialization formats for IFC files, apart from on interoperability.
STEP files, but they are outside the scope of this work. On the other hand, it also comes with certain disadvantages. For
One can identify two sections within the STEP file: A header (lines example, the lack of a subsecond time specification makes the stan-
2 to 6) and a data section (lines 7 to 29). Predefined keywords encapsu- dard unsuitable for real-time data exchange in modern technologies,
late the whole file and every section in it. The data section comprises such as IoT. This, however, is not an issue, as dedicated standards
exist addressing this use case (OGC, 2023). Furthermore, in line with
other authors (Shelden et al., 2020), we consider IFC to be highly
3
http://www.ifcopenshell.org/ complex, significantly impacting the completeness and correctness of its
4
https://www.iai.kit.edu/english/1302.php implementation in domain tools. On top of that, IFC leaves much room

10
M. Huymajer et al. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology incorporating Trenchless Technology Research 143 (2024) 105368

We applied our model in the tunneling domain, but the model is

designed such that it could easily be extended to the execution phase
of other kinds of construction projects. Future work should also inves-
tigate how the model leverages technology such as IoT, Augmented
Reality (AR), or autonomous construction equipment.

7. Conclusion

We examined the IFC standard for elements useful for representing

key information from the construction phase of conventional tunneling
projects. UML models were derived to capture information about the
process, labor, equipment, material, and external data. Based on these
results, we presented an IFC reference model of an exemplary shift
report of a conventional tunneling project. This model was serialized
Fig. 10. Qualitative relationship between flexibility and interoperability of data
to an IFC STEP file as a proof of concept.
standards.
The proposed reference model could serve as an implementation
guide for software developers to achieve a fully automated data ex-
for flexibility, i.e., the same semantics can be expressed by different change in conventional tunneling. Future software tools represent a
IFC concepts. For example, the attribute Status of type IfcLabel substantial improvement compared to the paper and unstructured data
can be set to a custom value, potentially leading to an undefined exchange prevailing in the construction phase of conventional tunnel-
behavior during data exchange and harming interoperability. However, ing projects. This could bring us a step closer to the goal of Big Open
this inherent trade-off between interoperability and flexibility in data BIM in tunneling projects. Because of the generic nature of our model,
standards, shown in Fig. 10, is not unique to IFC.
we see a high potential in its utilization in the construction phase of
Interoperability itself has multiple aspects. For example, the Eu-
construction projects in general. A well-designed data model will pave
ropean interoperability model defines four layers of interoperability:
legal, organizational, semantic, and technical (European Commission, the way for applying other technologies, such as IoT, AR, and digital
2017). The proposed IFC reference model contributes to semantic and twins, to tunneling projects.
technical interoperability within this conceptual framework. The pub-
lication of the Emerald Book we mentioned in Section 3 is a significant
step toward legal interoperability (FIDIC, 2019b). On the other hand, CRediT authorship contribution statement
organizational interoperability requires the stakeholders involved in
tunnel construction projects to align their business processes.
In Section 5, we presented an IFC reference model for a use case Marco Huymajer: Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Investi-
during the construction phase in a conventional tunneling project. gation, Methodology, Writing – original draft. Galina Paskaleva:
This model could become the basis for automated data exchange in Formal analysis, Investigation, Writing – review & editing.
conventional tunneling projects. Robert Wenighofer: Investigation, Writing – review & editing.
To keep the case study lean and straightforward, we focused on
Christian Huemer: Project administration, Funding acquisition,
the main elements of a shift report, i.e., process, labor, equipment,
Writing – review & editing. Alexandra Mazak-Huemer: Project
and material. In our future work, we will show how our proposal
could be practically embedded in conventional tunneling projects. It administration, Funding acquisition, Writing – review & editing.
might also be beneficial to develop a tunneling-specific project library
of reference models containing IfcTaskType, IfcConstruction-
EquipmentResourceType, IfcLaborResourceType, and Declaration of competing interest
IfcConstructionMaterialResourceType. Alternatively, one could
design a classification scheme using IfcClassification. However,
to achieve full interoperability, further specification through an Infor- The authors declare that they have no known competing finan-
mation Delivery Manual (IDM) and a Model View Definitions (MVD) is cial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to
necessary (Eastman et al., 2010), which we plan for our future work. influence the work reported in this paper.
There are further aspects the proposed reference model still needs Data availability
to address. Despite covering all information relevant to a shift report, it
does not include many other documents generated during the construc-
tion phase of conventional tunnel drives, such as geological surveys No data was used for the research described in the article.
or quality checks. Therefore, the model should also be extended to
deal with this data. Furthermore, energy usage is highly significant in
tunneling (Huymajer et al., 2022b). While this work has shown how
Acknowledgments
to represent the amount of used material digitally, future work should
consider exploring the possibilities of representing the energy usage of
construction processes. This research was funded by the Austrian Federal Ministry of Educa-
The upcoming tunneling extension of IFC will provide new opportu-
tion, Science and Research under grant number BMBWF-11.102/0033-
nities for modeling tunnels. Further research is necessary on how this
IV/8/2019.
future extension could complement our proposal to generate seman-
tically rich models for the execution phase of conventional tunneling This research was funded by the Austrian Research Promotion
projects. Agency (FFG) under grant number 879573.

11
M. Huymajer et al. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology incorporating Trenchless Technology Research 143 (2024) 105368

Appendix. Excerpt of IFC concepts used References

Afsari, K., Eastman, C.M., Shelden, D.R., 2016a. Cloud-based BIM data transmission:
Entity/Attribute Type Current status and challenges. In: Sattineni, A., Azhar, S., Castro, D. (Eds.), 33rd
∙ IfcTask
GlobalId IfcGloballyUniqueId
International Symposium on Automation and Robotics in Construction. ISARC 2016,
International Association for Automation and Robotics in Construction (IAARC), pp.
1073–1080. http://dx.doi.org/10.22260/isarc2016/0129.
Name IfcLabel Afsari, K., Eastman, C.M., Shelden, D.R., 2016b. Data transmission opportunities for
Description IfcText collaborative cloud-based building information modeling. In: XX Congress of the
ObjectType IfcLabel Iberoamerican Society of Digital Graphics. In: Blucher Design Proceedings, vol.3,
Identification IfcIdentifier pp. 907–913. http://dx.doi.org/10.5151/despro-sigradi2016-448.
LongDescription IfcText Anderl, R., Trippner, D., 2000. STEP – STandard for the Exchange of Product Model
Data, Eine Einführung in Die Entwicklung, Implementierung Und Industrielle
Status IfcLabel Nutzung Der Normenreihe ISO 10303 (STEP). Teubner, Stuttgart, Leipzig, http:
TaskTime IfcTaskTime //dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-322-89096-2.
PredefinedType IfcTaskTypeEnum Arnold, F., Podehl, G., 1999. Best of both worlds – a mapping from EXPRESS-G
∙ IfcLaborResource
GlobalId IfcGloballyUniqueId
to UML. In: Bézivin, J., Muller, P.-A. (Eds.), The Unified Modeling Language.
In: Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp. 49–63.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-48480-6_5.
Name IfcLabel Austrian Standards, 2001. ÖNORM B 2203-1:2001-12-01. In: Untertagebauarbeiten –
Description IfcText Werkvertragsnorm. Zyklischer Vortrieb, Teil 1.
ObjectType IfcLabel Austrian Standards, 2021. ÖNORM B 2118:2021-12-01. In: Allgemeine Vertrags-
Identification IfcIdentifier bestimmungen für Bauleistungen unter Anwendung des Partnerschaftsmodells,
LongDescription IfcText insbesondere bei Großprojekten – Werkvertragsnorm.
Borrmann, A., König, M., Koch, C., Beetz, J. (Eds.), 2021. Building information
Usage IfcResourceTime modeling, technologische grundlagen und industrielle praxis, Second ed. VDI-Buch,
BaseCosts IfcAppliedValue Springer Vieweg, Wiesbaden, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-33361-4.
BaseQuantity IfcPhysicalQuantity BuildingSMART International (bSI), 1999. Industry foundation classes 2x specification.
PredefinedType IfcLaborResourceTypeEnum URL https://standards.buildingsmart.org/IFC/RELEASE/IFC2x/FINAL/.

∙ IfcPerson
Identification IfcIdentifier
BuildingSMART International (bSI), 2020a. IFC-Tunnel Project, Report WP2: Require-
ments analysis report (RAR). techreport, buildingSMART International, URL https:
//app.box.com/s/3p28520cgser0sa1bvunhc99bt4qhuza.
FamilyName IfcLabel BuildingSMART International (bSI), 2020b. Technical Roadmap buildingSMART,
GivenName IfcLabel Getting ready for the future. techreport, buildingSMART International,
∙ IfcConstructionEquipmentResource
GlobalId IfcGloballyUniqueId
URL https://www.buildingsmart.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/20200430_
buildingSMART_Technical_Roadmap.pdf.
BuildingSMART International (bSI), 2021. Industry foundation classes 4.3 specification.
Name IfcLabel URL https://standards.buildingsmart.org/IFC/RELEASE/IFC4_3_0_0/.
Description IfcText Curry, E., O’Donnell, J., Corry, E., Hasan, S., Keane, M., O’Riain, S., 2013. Linking
ObjectType IfcLabel building data in the cloud: Integrating cross-domain building data using linked data.
Identification IfcIdentifier Adv. Eng. Inform. 27 (2), 206–219. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aei.2012.10.003.
LongDescription IfcText Daller, J., Žibert, M., Exinger, C., Lah, M., 2016. Implementation of BIM in the
tunnel design – engineering consultant’s aspect. Geomech. Tunn. 9 (6), 674–683.
Usage IfcResourceTime
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/geot.201600054.
BaseCosts IfcAppliedValue Eastman, C.M., Jeong, Y.-S., Sacks, R., Kaner, I., 2010. Exchange model and exchange
BaseQuantity IfcPhysicalQuantity object concepts for implementation of national BIM standards. J. Comput. Civ. Eng.
PredefinedType IfcConstructionEquipmen- 24 (1), 25–34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0887-3801(2010)24:1(25).
tResourceTypeEnum Eastman, C., Teicholz, P., Sacks, R., Liston, K., 2011. BIM Handbook: A Guide to

∙ IfcConstructionMaterialResource
GlobalId IfcGloballyUniqueId
Building Information Modeling for Owners, Managers, Designers, Engineers and
Contractors, second ed. John Wiley & Sons.
European Commission, 2017. New European Interoperability Framework, Promoting
Name IfcLabel Seamless Services and Data Flows for European Public Administrations. Publications
Description IfcText Office, Luxembourg, http://dx.doi.org/10.2799/78681.
ObjectType IfcLabel Froese, T., Grobler, F., Ritzenthaler, J., Yu, K., Akinci, B., Akbas, R., Koo, B., Barron, A.,
Identification IfcIdentifier Kunz, J., 1999. Industry foundation classes for project management — A trial
implementation. ITcon 4, 17–36, URL http://www.itcon.org/1999/2.
LongDescription IfcText Fuchs, S., Katranuschkov, P., Scherer, R., 2010. A framework for multi-model collabo-
Usage IfcResourceTime ration and visualisation. In: Menzel, K., Scherer, R. (Eds.), EWork and EBusiness in
BaseCosts IfcAppliedValue Architecture, Engineering and Construction. CRC Press, London, UK, pp. 115–120.
BaseQuantity IfcPhysicalQuantity http://dx.doi.org/10.1201/b10527.
PredefinedType IfcConstructionMaterial- Galler, R., 2016. Research@ZaB – Start of construction of the ‘‘ZaB – Zentrum am
Berg’’ research and development, training and education centre / Research@ZaB
ResourceTypeEnum – Baubeginn für das Forschungs- und Entwicklungs- sowie Trainings- und Schu-
∙ IfcDocumentInformation
Identification IfcIdentifier
lungszentrum Zentrum am Berg. Geomech. Tunn. 9 (6), 715–725. http://dx.doi.
org/10.1002/geot.201620062.
Name IfcLabel Girmscheid, G., 2013. Bauprozesse und Bauverfahren des Tunnelbaus, third ed. Ernst
Description IfcText & Sohn, Berlin, Germany.
Hegemann, F., Lehner, K., König, M., 2012. IFC-based product modeling for tunnel
Location IfcURIReference boring machines. In: Gudnason, G., Scherer, R. (Eds.), EWork and EBusiness in
Revision IfcLabel Architecture, Engineering and Construction. CRC Press, London, UK, pp. 289–296.
CreationTime IfcDateTime http://dx.doi.org/10.1201/b12516-47.
LastRevisionTime IfcDateTime Hiremath, H.R., Skibniewski, M.J., 2004. Object-oriented modeling of construction
ElectronicFormat IfcIdentifier processes by unified modeling language. Autom. Constr. 13 (4), 447–468. http:
//dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2003.09.011.
Status IfcDocumentStatusEnum
Huang, M., Ninić, J., Zhang, Q., 2021. BIM, machine learning and computer vision
Confidentiality IfcDocumentConfidentiali- techniques in underground construction: Current status and future perspectives.
tyEnum Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 108, 103677. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2020.
103677.

12
M. Huymajer et al. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology incorporating Trenchless Technology Research 143 (2024) 105368

Huang, M., Zhu, H., Ninić, J., Zhang, Q., 2022. Multi-LOD bim for underground metro Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC), 2022a. OGC geoscience markup language
station: Interoperability and design-to-design enhancement. Tunn. Undergr. Space (GeoSciML). URL https://www.ogc.org/standards/geosciml.
Technol. 119, 104232. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2021.104232. Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC), 2022b. OGC WaterML. URL https://www.ogc.org/
Huymajer, M., Operta, D., Mazak-Huemer, A., Huemer, C., 2022a. The tunneling standards/waterml.
information management system – a tool for documenting the tunneling process in Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC), 2023. Sensor model language (SensorML). URL
NATM projects. Geomech. Tunn. 15 (3), 259–264. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/geot. https://www.ogc.org/standards/sensorml.
202100064. Panteli, C., Polycarpou, K., Morsink-Georgalli, F., Stasiuliene, L., Pupeikis, D., Jure-
Huymajer, M., Woegerbauer, M., Winkler, L., Mazak-Huemer, A., Biedermann, H., lionis, A., Fokaides, P., 2020. Overview of BIM integration into the construction
2022b. An interdisciplinary systematic review on sustainability in tunneling— sector in European member states and European union acquis. IOP Conf. Series:
Bibliometrics, challenges, and solutions. Sustainabil. 14 (4), http://dx.doi.org/10. Earth Environ. Sci. 410, http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/410/1/012073.
3390/su14042275. Providakis, S., Rogers, C.D., Chapman, D.N., 2019. Predictions of settlement risk
International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), 2013a. IEC 62264-1:2013, enterprise-
induced by tunnelling using BIM and 3D visualization tools. Tunn. Undergr. Space
control system integration – part 1: Models and terminology.
Technol. 92, 103049. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2019.103049.
International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), 2013b. IEC 62264-2:2013, enterprise-
Regateiro, F., Spínola, R., 2014. Challenges of building information modeling (BIM)
control system integration – part 2: Objects and attributes for enterprise-control
in Portuguese public works contracts. In: 2nd European Conference on E-Public
system integration.
Procurement. ECPP, Observatório de Prospectiva da Engenharia e Tecnologia, pp.
International Federation of Consulting Engineers (FIDIC), 2019b. General Conditions.
209–220, URL http://www.opet.pt/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=
International Federation of Consulting Engineers (FIDIC), pp. 1–138.
60&Itemid=1.
International Federation of Consulting Engineers (FIDIC), 2019c. Guidance for the
Preparation of Particular Conditions. International Federation of Consulting Rothenberg, J., 1989. The nature of modeling. In: Widman, L.E., Loparo, K.A.,
Engineers (FIDIC), pp. 1–95. Nielsen, N.R. (Eds.), Artificial Intelligence, Simulation, and Modeling. John Wiley
International Organization for Standardization (ISO), 2013. ISO 16739, industry foun- & Sons, pp. 75–92.
dation classes (IFC) for data sharing in the construction and facility management Sabanovic, N., Wannenmacher, H., Stauch, F., Fentzloff, W., 2022. Demands on digital
industries. data capturing of TBM and conventional tunnel drives. Geomech. Tunn. 15 (2),
International Organization for Standardization (ISO), 2016. ISO 10303-21, industrial 207–214. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/geot.202100077.
automation systems and integration – product data representation and exchange – Seidl, M., Scholz, M., Huemer, C., Kappel, G., 2015. UML @ classroom: An introduction
part 21: Implementation methods: Clear text encoding of the exchange structure. to object-oriented modeling. In: UML @ Classroom. In: Undergraduate topics
International Organization for Standardization (ISO), 2018. EN ISO 19650-1, organiza- in computer science, Springer International Publishing, Cham, Switzerland, http:
tion and digitization of information about buildings and civil engineering works, //dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-12742-2.
including building information modelling (BIM) — Information management using Sharafat, A., Khan, M.S., Latif, K., Seo, J., 2021. BIM-based tunnel information
building information modelling — Part 1: Concepts and principles. modeling framework for visualization, management, and simulation of drill-and-
International Tunneling and Underground Space Association (ITA), 2019. Tunnel blast tunneling projects. J. Comput. Civ. Eng. 35 (2), 04020068. http://dx.doi.org/
Market Survey 2019. resreport, International Tunneling and Underground Space 10.1061/(ASCE)CP.1943-5487.0000955.
Association, URL http://www.societaitalianagallerie.it/notizia/1618/global-market- Shelden, D.R., Pauwels, P., Pishdad-Bozorgi, P., Tang, S., 2020. Data standards and
survey-ita/download/5820/. data exchange for construction 4.0. In: Sawhney, A., Riley, M., Irizarry, J. (Eds.),
International Tunneling and Underground Space Association (ITA), 2021. The Construction 4.0. Routledge, Abingdon-on-Thames, Oxfordshire, England, UK, pp.
ITA Contractual Framework Checklist for Subsurface Construction Contracts, 222–239. http://dx.doi.org/10.1201/9780429398100.
techreport, Second Edition International Tunneling and Underground van Berlo, L.A., Krijnen, T., Tauscher, H., Liebich, T., van Kranenburg, A., Paasiala, P.,
Space Association, URL https://about.ita-aites.org/news/download/1903_ 2021. Future of the industry foundation classes: Towards IFC 5. In: Proceedings of
96d66759e8ac241be6b320718c7f867c. the 38th International Conference of CIB W78. pp. 1–15, URL https://itc.scix.net/
Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA), 2022. Media types. URL https://www. pdfs/w78-2021-paper-013.pdf.
iana.org/assignments/media-types/media-types.xhtml.
Vilgertshofer, S., Jubierre, J.R., Borrmann, A., 2016. IfcTunnel – a proposal for a multi-
Jiang, S., Jiang, L., Han, Y., Wu, Z., Wang, N., 2019. OpenBIM: An enabling solution
scale extension of the IFC data model for shield tunnels under consideration of
for information interoperability. Appl. Sci. 9 (24), http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/
downward compatibility aspects. In: Christodoulou, S.E., Scherer, R. (Eds.), EWork
app9245358.
and EBusiness in Architecture, Engineering and Construction. CRC Press, London,
Jubierre, J.R., Borrmann, A., 2014. A multi-scale product model for shield tunnels
UK, pp. 175–182. http://dx.doi.org/10.1201/9781315386904.
based on the Industry Foundation Classes. techreport, Technische Universität
Winkler, L., Melnyk, O., Goger, G., 2022. Prerequisites for BIM-based invoicing in
München, https://www.cms.bgu.tum.de/images/forschung/IfcTunnel/IFC-Tunnel%
NATM projects. Geomech. Tunn. 15 (3), 279–283. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/geot.
20Documentation.pdf.
Kvasina, G., 2018. Dokumentation bei zyklischem Tunnelvortrieb, Erhebung von 202100067.
wesentlichen Parametern von Bauzeit und Kosten als Grundlage für ein digitales Xue, W., Wang, Y., Man, Q., 2015. Research on information models for the construction
Modell. (Master’s thesis). TU Wien, http://dx.doi.org/10.34726/hss.2018.43926. schedule management based on the IFC standard. J. Ind. Eng. Manag. 8 (3),
Kvasina, G., Goger, G., Huymajer, M., 2018. Dokumentation bei zyklischem Tunnelvor- http://dx.doi.org/10.3926/jiem.1283.
trieb, Wesentliche Parameter als Grundlage für ein digitales Modell. bau aktuell Yabuki, N., 2008. Representation of caves in a shield tunnel product model. In:
9 (4), 155–161, URL http://www.lindedigital.at/doc-id/art-bauaktuell-2018-04- Zarli, A., Scherer, R. (Eds.), EWork and EBusiness in Architecture, Engineering
155a. and Construction. CRC Press, London, UK, pp. 545–550. http://dx.doi.org/10.1201/
Lee, S.-H., Park, S.I., Park, J., 2016. Development of an IFC-based data schema for the 9780203883327.
design information representation of the NATM tunnel. KSCE J. Civ. Eng. 20 (6), Yabuki, N., Aruga, T., Furuya, H., 2013. Development and application of a product
2112–2123. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12205-015-0123-8. model for shield tunnels. In: Hassani, F., Moselhi, O., Haas, C. (Eds.), Proceedings
Lee, P.-C., Wang, Y., Lo, T.-P., Long, D., 2018. An integrated system framework of of the 30th International Symposium on Automation and Robotics in Construction.
building information modelling and geographical information system for utility International Association for Automation and Robotics in Construction (IAARC),
tunnel maintenance management. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 79, 263–273. pp. 435–447. http://dx.doi.org/10.22260/ISARC2013/0047.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2018.05.010. Yang, B., Dong, M., Wang, C., Liu, B., Wang, Z., Zhang, B., 2021. IFC-based 4D
Lensing, R., 2016. BIM and Construction Process Data in Mechanized Tunnel Construc- construction management information model of prefabricated buildings and its
tion, Milestone Control for Tunnel Construction Sites Using Automatically Created application in graph database. Appl. Sci. 11 (16), http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/
Process Data in Comparison With 4D BIM. (Master’s thesis). Universität Salzburg, app11167270.
http://unigis.sbg.ac.at/files/Mastertheses/Full/103255.pdf.
Maidl, B., Thewes, M., Maidl, U., 2013. Handbook of Tunnel Engineering, Struc-
tures and Methods, Vol. 1. Ernst & Sohn, Berlin, http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ Further reading
9783433603499.
Ninić, J., Koch, C., Vonthron, A., Tizani, W., König, M., 2020. Integrated parametric International Federation of Consulting Engineers (FIDIC), 2019a. Conditions of Contract
multi-level information and numerical modelling of mechanised tunnelling projects. for Underground Works (Emerald book). International Federation of Consulting
Adv. Eng. Inform. 43, 101011. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aei.2019.101011. Engineers (FIDIC).

13