cables, data cables, pipework, ductwork

[jgunstone]

The following have abbreviations for cables, data cables, pipework, ductwork have recently been requested.

#234
#233
#232
#231
#230
#229
#228

asset_description	asset_abbreviation	dbo_entity_type	ifc_class	ifc_type	can_be_connected
electric distribution - coaxial cable	COAXCA		IfcCableSegment	NOTDEFINED	0
electric distribution - data cable	DCCA		IfcCableSegment	NOTDEFINED	0
electric distribution - fire rated cable	FCA		IfcCableSegment	NOTDEFINED	0
electric distribution - cable	CA		IfcCableSegment	NOTDEFINED	0
piped services - pipework	PW		IfcPipeSegment	NOTDEFINED	0
ventilation - ductwork - fire rated	FDW		IfcDuctSegment	NOTDEFINED	0
ventilation - ductwork	DW		IfcDuctSegment	NOTDEFINED	0

At Max Fordham we have been using the BDNS standard for defining BIM objects in the model and producing equipment schedules. Every specified item in a schedule requires a unique reference (as described here: https://github.com/theodi/BDNS/blob/master/BDNS_Specification_naming_syntax.md#format-1). Although we wouldn't typically mark up a drawing with ductwork references (though perhaps sometimes, for special cases like ductwork with specific acoustic requirements in a concert hall), we do still need a unique reference to attach data to in our schedules. This lead us to request abbreviations for these items. It is acknowledged that these are not connected devices which was the original main BDNS use case... but they are items that we specify exactly on many projects, which is how we have been using BDNS on projects.

[RitaLav]

Makes sense as a use case.

@pisuke?

[pisuke]

I think it would be useful to add the concept of asset.type in the specification, so this needs further discussion.

[RitaLav]

@jgunstone can we pick up this discussion next time you join the call?

[jgunstone]

following discussions last week -
here is an example of how we use the abbreviation "PW" in equipment schedules to distinguish different types of pipework:

in the BIM model the length of pipe would then be given a type reference PW-1 for example. Many lengths of pipe in the model would be of type PW-1 and there would be no expectation or requirement that every instance of pipe in the model would get its own unique reference