Skip to main content
Question

Questions about the new IFC writer

  • April 30, 2026
  • 3 replies
  • 99 views

sealsarecute
Contributor
Forum|alt.badge.img+4

Hello FME-Communtiy,
With the advent of the new IFC-Writer we wanted to update and hopefully slim down our FME Workspace, which reads Multipatch Geometries via an Esri Geodatabase (File Geodb) Reader and writes IFC-Features via an IFC XML/STEP (deprecated) writer. Sadly we’ve not managed to get the new writer working as needed and have found the documentation rather lackluster, which is why I’d appreciate any pointers from the knowledgeable people on here.

The new workspace has managed to correctly export the feature geometries, but the attributes seem to be missing/not written at all. Inside the new Workspace the features have the correct attributes and values up until the very end where they are sent to the IFC-writer (In this Case I tried Slab as the Element Type, BuildingElementProxy gave the same results and SpatialZone doesn’t work at all anymore).

New Workspace final export inside Data Inspector (red color intentional)
Old Workspace final export inside Data Inspector

In the old Workspace there were 4 IFC-Writer-Feature Types (if thats the correct terminology to use) called IfcProject, IfcSite, PropertySetDefinition and IfcSpatialZone. When running the workspace Building and BuildingStorey elements are automatically created and the SpatialZone-Features were automatically attached to the BuildingStorey.

old Workspace IFC-writer

 

Old Workspace ProperySetDefinition

The old workspace uses an IFCPropertySetDefinitionCreator Transformer to create all of the PropertySets (extremely tedious because of the high amount of attributes that need to be manually entered). According to the FME Documentation you should now be able to avoid this manual PropertySet-Definition by simply using the naming convention SetName.PropertyName. My question here is if this is only true when modifying already existing IFC-Files like in this exercise and if you do have to write a PropertySetDefinition when creating IFC-Files from the ground up.

Another issue is the hierarchy of written objects. In the old workflow, the SpatialZones were automatically attached to BuildingStorey, which was nested within Building and so on (viewed in BIMvision).

Hierarchy of old workflow Project > Site > Building > BuildingStorey > SpatialZone

In the new workflow, both the IfcSite and IfcBuilding objects seem to be attached to IfcProject, even when manually trying to force the correct hierarchy (Site > Building > BuildingStorey > actual features) by writing ifc_global_id / ifc_parent_id attribute values (they get overwritten by the IFC writer for some reason). Most importantly the actual features (Slab/BuildingElementProxy) are completely missing. 

Hierarchy of new Workflow Project > Site = Building > BuildingStorey

Is there some specific way you need to write the Project / Site / Building / BuildingStorey features to ensure that the main objects can “attach” to them?
I hope I’ve managed to describe my problems somewhat sensibly and would be happy about some feedback/tips!

3 replies

pierrekoelich
Safer
Forum|alt.badge.img+6

Hi sealsarecute,

I have some answers and comments here courtesy of one of our developers:

  • We do have the ability to set the heirarchy as you described in the post. There is an attached workspace in the .zip file that shows a configuration and there is also a screenshot of the output in BIMVision. You would have to use the 2026.2 beta to open it.
  • We don’t have support for IfcSpatialZone yet, but we now have a record of it in our system, internal reference FMEENGINE-97973
  • The IFC_API writer is 1-1 with the official IFC documentation, and so the official documentation should typically be used as the main point of reference when it comes to defining elements/hierarchy.

If you would like to have us help investigate further you can also submit a support ticket, we’d be happy to take a closer look at your workspaces, data, and troubleshoot directly with you.

 


sealsarecute
Contributor
Forum|alt.badge.img+4
  • Author
  • Contributor
  • May 11, 2026

Sorry for getting back to you so late pierrekoeli,

First of all I want to thank you for your answer to my post! Sadly I’ve not been able to test the workspace you have kindly produced, since we actually use the ArcGIS Interoperability with Version FME 2025.1.2.0. My IT-department is looking into installing the 2026.2 Beta Version, but it’s a possibility that we won’t be able to install it due to company security requirements (I will find out next week). I therefore wanted to inquire, whether or not it would be possible for you to send the workspace in an older/current version of FME.

Sending much appreciation!


pierrekoelich
Safer
Forum|alt.badge.img+6

Hi ​@sealsarecute,

My apologies for getting back to you so late.  We had to make a few changes to the workspace to make it work in FME 2025.1. I’ve packaged 2 workspaces in the zip file, this time reading from OBJ files. One was made in 2025.1 and the other in 2025.2.

We introduced a lot of improvements to the IFC format in 2025.2 and I’d recommend upgrading to that if you are able to. The most noticeable one in the workspace is that we can assign arbitrary ifc_global_id and ifc_parent_id values and the Writer will maintain the links and enforce them on write, similar to our old IFC Writer. 

Pierre