DOI: https://doi.org/10.14256/JCE.3259.

2021 Građevinar 3/2022

Primljen / Received: 5.5.2021.

Ispravljen / Corrected: 25.11.2021.
Automated preprocessing of building
models for structural analysis
Prihvaćen / Accepted: 5.12.2021.
Dostupno online / Available online: 10.4.2022.

Authors:
Subject review
Goran Šibenik, Iva Kovačić, Valentinas Petrinas, Wendelin Sprenger, Dario Bubalo, Nikola Ruzičić
Automated preprocessing of building models for structural analysis
1
Goran Šibenik, M.Sc. CE
goran.sibenik@tuwien.ac.at BIM workflows still involve time-consuming manual model preprocessing for structural
Corresponding author analysis such as assigning new data like structural material properties or loads, which
prevents prompt feedback and is error prone. The main objective of this research is
to automate the preprocessing of analytical building models so as to accelerate and
improve structural analysis. The research is based on literature review and a real use
case analysis, followed by formalization of preprocessing methods, their verification via
two pilot building models, and evaluation by practitioners through panel discussion. The
1
Prof. Iva Kovačić, PhD. CE developed procedures can automatically assign loads, supports and joints floor-wise and
iva.kovacic@tuwien.ac.at reduce the model preparation time, errors and design costs in daily structural analysis
practice; however, further adoption and consideration of existing practices is needed to
increase the usefulness and usability of the proposed methods.

Key words:
structural analysis, automation, building information modelling, BIM, preprocessing
1
Valentinas Petrinas, B.Sc.
valentinas.petrinas@tuwien.ac.at Pregledni rad
Goran Šibenik, Iva Kovačić, Valentinas Petrinas, Wendelin Sprenger, Dario Bubalo, Nikola Ruzičić
Automatizirana predobrada modela građevine za proračun konstrukcija

Tijek rada prilikom korištenja BIM-a i dalje zahtijeva dugotrajnu ručnu predobradu
(preliminarnu analizu) modela za proračun konstrukcija, kao što je dodjeljivanje novih
2
Wendelin Sprenger, PhD. CE podataka poput svojstava građevnog materijala ili opterećenja, što sprječava slanje
wendelin.sprenger@zueblin.de brzih povratnih informacija i podložno je pogreškama. Glavni cilj ovog istraživanja jest
automatizacija predobrade analitičkih modela građevina radi ubrzanja i poboljšanja
proračuna konstrukcija. Istraživanje se temelji na pregledu literature i analizi slučaja,
uz formalizaciju metoda preliminarne analize, njihovu verifikaciju kroz dva pilot modela
građevina i evaluaciju u panel-raspravi stručnjaka u praksi. Izrađene procedure mogu se
automatski dodijeliti opterećenja, oslonce i spojeve za podne konstrukcijske elemente i
2
Dario Bubalo, MCE smanjiti vrijeme pripreme modela, pogreške i troškove projektiranja u svakodnevnoj praksi
dbubalo1987@gmail.com proračuna konstrukcija. Međutim, potrebna je šira primjena postojeće prakse kako bi se
povećala korisnost i primjenjivost predloženih metoda.

Ključne riječi:
proračun konstrukcija, automatizacija, informacijsko modeliranje gradnje, BIM, predobrada

3
Nikola Ruzičić, MCE
nikola.ruzicic@atp.ag

1 
Institute of Interdisciplinary Building Process
Management, Technische Universität Wien,
Austria
2
Ed. Züblin AG, Stuttgart, Germany
3
ATP architekten ingenieure, Vienna, Austria

GRAĐEVINAR 74 (2022) 3, 211-226 211

 Građevinar 3/2022 Goran Šibenik, Iva Kovačić, Valentinas Petrinas, Wendelin Sprenger, Dario Bubalo, Nikola Ruzičić

1. Introduction geometry interpretations, redefining building element

types or materials, deal with interpretations of the already
Building information modelling (BIM) workflows are becoming defined information. A resulting building model is still not
a wide-spread practice in the design of buildings. However, ready for structural analysis. Preprocessing of a building
the studies related to the domain of structural analysis and model involves procedures of assigning new information
optimization lag behind other AEC domains [1], and numerous like loads or supports to create an analysis-ready model.
challenges in the BIM-based collaboration with this domain These procedures interrelate structural design and analysis,
still exist [2]. BIM is defined as the “use of a shared digital and automating them could provide prompt feedback and
representation of a built asset to facilitate design, construction reduce time, errors, and costs needed for structural analysis.
and operation processes to form a reliable basis for decisions” The automated preprocessing and modelling of structural
[3]. Therefore, in structural analysis, BIM addresses the use components constitutes a research gap that is addressed in
of shared digital representation of a built asset to facilitate this research [1].
structural analysis in order to form a reliable basis for decisions. The aim of this research is to develop and verify an automated
Even though this definition integrates building models and solution for preprocessing procedures within a structural BIM-
processes, the scope of shared information and affected authoring software, as these procedures are currently carried
processes remains unclear. BIM potentials have not as yet out manually by structural engineers (Figure 1). They are
been realised in their full scope due to multiple reasons, such not standardized within existing heterogeneous workflows
as the resistance of stakeholders, lack of know-how, and in the building design process. The primal beneficiary of the
the need for adaptation of the already existing workflows automation are structural engineers, since the time-consuming,
[4]. These challenges are also encountered in the scope of erroneous, and costly manual work is partly automated.
structural modelling and analysis within BIM environments, Additionally, the automation of preprocessing procedures
resulting in building models that are often not shared between allows for improvement of the design process and delivery of
the stakeholders and the processes that are characterized by better results due to prompt feedback, enabling more iterations
manual (re)work in the realisation of daily structural analysis and thus resulting in an optimized building design, and in safer
tasks. The content of analytical BIM models and related and better performing buildings.
processes remains vague, as the international BIM standards
(e.g. [5, 6]), or national ones [7], provide general frameworks and 2. Literature review
lack detailed specification of digital domain-specific workflows.
BIM software tools should allow seamless information flow 2.1. BIM in the AEC
between project stakeholders [8], but the differences in data
classification systems, levels of development, and standards The AEC (Architectural Engineering and Construction) industry
have still not been overcome [2, 9]. lags behind other industries regarding its gain on productivity
This paper addresses development of more efficient processes and disruption across the value chain; digital technologies are
for the structural analysis of buildings in BIM environment, with recognized as part of the solution to improve collaboration,
the objective of automating preprocessing of structural analysis control of the value chain and data-driven decision making
building models (Figure 1). [10]. BIM covers several industry’s digitalization goals and
Interpretations from physical to analytical models are should bring multiple advantages in the design phase like earlier
described in the existing work. Physical building models collaboration of domains and provide a possibility to link building
are defined by other stakeholders in the design process. models to various analysis tools [11]. However, implementation
[9]. In the preceding work, the automated procedures, like of BIM is facing multiple difficulties like stakeholders’ resistance

Figure 1. Focus of research within BIM environment

212 GRAĐEVINAR 74 (2022) 3, 211-226

Automated preprocessing of building models for structural analysis Građevinar 3/2022

to change, problems in adapting existing workflows, proper BIM software [14], although traditional FEM software tools
understanding and use of tools, or lack of required collaboration are mostly realized as object-oriented.
[4]. Multiple national and international standards aim to -- The core feature of BIM is the workflow in which the design,
speed up the implementation of BIM in the industry. A set of analysis and documentation are interrelated processes,
international standards ISO 19650 deals with the organization meaning that their interdependencies are at least partly
and digitization of information about buildings and civil automatically resolved [15].
engineering works including BIM. To reach true collaboration -- A workflow in which the data is digitally transferred to
a higher level of standardized processes is required [3]. The structural analysis is considered a BIM workflow in [16],
standard emphasizes the importance of information delivery compared to the traditional one where the data is remodelled.
planning and responsibility matrix [3]. Transfer of information is -- The greatest potential of BIM is recognized in workflow
achieved via common data environment (CDE) throughout the automation [16], as the tasks like remodelling or assigning
whole life cycle of buildings and civil engineering works. The new information performed manually by engineers increase
delivery phase of the assets, which encompasses the design the likelihood of errors and inconsistencies.
phase is addressed [5]. These standards represent an important
step towards facilitating automated information management Review of the state of the AEC industry reveals that the
by providing a framework which can be used for developing next step in BIM development is to improve the internal BIM
information management systems. This research aims to further workflows, where the existing data will be used in a more
investigate the possibilities recommended by the standard in efficient way to create structural models [17]. Vilutiene et al. [1]
the case of information management for structural analysis of offer an exhaustive review of BIM implementation in structural
building construction. The industry is characterized by loosely- analysis. They argue that technical issues relevant for structural
coupled one-time organizations consisting of multiple small and engineers have been neglected in the research community.
medium enterprises cooperating on delivering a unique building In order to efficiently interrelate the design and analysis, and
project. This type of cooperative work results with heterogeneous eventually the documentation process, the interpretation of
workflows, and the standardized workflows and information information coming from other stakeholders, and assignment of
flows are still not available. Therefore, we investigate domain- new information for structural analysis, need to be automated as
specific workflows relevant for structural analysis. much as possible. Although different views on BIM in structural
analysis exist, the literature reveals that procedures executed
2.2. BIM tools for structural analysis by structural engineers are more automated in BIM workflows
compared to traditional approaches, such as allowing import
The emergence of BIM in the AEC industry has yielded BIM- of external models and enhancing connections between the
authoring tools for structural analysis, but the concept of design, analysis, and documentation processes.
BIM for structural analysis still needs to be clarified. Digital
tools using the finite element method (FEM) have been used 2.3. BIM advancements in structural analysis
to simulate structural performance for many decades now.
More recently, BIM tools for structural analysis have become Experts from various domains contribute to the design
available. The most commonly used method for performing of buildings. An increase in research on the topic of BIM
structural analysis is the FEM, where building elements are implementation in structural design and analysis visibly points
defined in their analytical representation [9, 12]. The FEM can to its rising significance [1]. A slow pace of BIM application in
be applied on various scales, from a single connection detail to civil engineering, and especially in structural engineering has
an entire building, but in practice it is usually found on a building been recognized, and it can be concluded that promises coming
element scale, e.g., a slab or a part of the structural system; with BIM workflows and software tools need to be investigated
the use of this scale has roots in traditional analysis methods to solve technical issues for structural engineering [1]. Similarly,
in which it was unfeasible to simulate an entire building. The a literature review on the automation of structural analysis
current literature offers a variety of features distinguishing underlines its gain in importance in recent years [18]. In this
software tools facilitating FEM simulations from BIM structural review, a survey is described, and it is noted that structural
analysis tools. Features of BIM authoring tools for structural design automation and interoperability with other domains,
analysis are described in the literature as follows: which are also the topics of this research, are of highest
-- BIM authoring tools allow communication with other importance for improving the design process. The authors state
stakeholders via standardized formats, such as industry that the automatic preprocessing of the model would enable
foundation classes (IFC), or provide additional methods that more iterations and therefore a more optimized design; it
can import and edit models originating from other software would save time and money needed for model preprocessing,
tools [13]. while also avoiding human errors that occur due to repetitive
-- The use of intelligent objects and support of object-oriented manual rework. Time dependent structural analysis would
design in structural analysis models is the core feature of become feasible, and the safety of construction sites would

GRAĐEVINAR 74 (2022) 3, 211-226 213

 Građevinar 3/2022 Goran Šibenik, Iva Kovačić, Valentinas Petrinas, Wendelin Sprenger, Dario Bubalo, Nikola Ruzičić

be improved. A proposal for an automated preprocessing is 2.4. Preprocessing in various AEC domains
described in [18], albeit only for an early phase of the design.
New work procedures that will improve the effectiveness and A data management approach with the focus on energy and
efficiency of current design processes are recognized as the structural optimization is described in [26]. The authors of that
most popular BIM-related topic for structural analysis [19]. paper emphasize the need for vagueness in the architectural
A common structural analysis workflow during building design model at the early stage of the design process. Structural
is described in [14], where it is stated how a significant amount optimization during the early stage of design is characterized by
of manual work can be avoided by relating structural analysis the lack of information for structural analysis. Thus, BIM models
and architectural design models. The authors present a fairly with different LODs are used to capture and implement expert
simple case study and describe how loads like self-weight and knowledge to perform the analysis [26], which was developed
uniform design load are manually created for the analysis. In with a fuzzy logic inference system in [27]. The authors of [26]
a traditional planning workflow, architectural design model do not discuss interoperability with diverse software tools
is generally imported to FEM tools from schematic design and data transfers, but rather they keep the proposed multi-
through design development [20]. A workflow supporting data LOD meta-model compliant with the IFC standard. However,
analysis during building design is proposed in [20], but here the the transfer of data complying with the IFC standard could
focus is on structural design rather than on structural analysis. engender multiple problems and reduce the practicability of
A plug-in tool for structural analysis called Robot can assist the approach [2]. Keough et al. [28] develop CatBot that directly
structural engineers in performing optimization of a building connects parametric design in Catia and structural analysis
structure [21]. Some steps provided with the plug-in are the in Robot, which generates new designs considering also the
cross-section, supports and load cases definition. Supports structural performance. The structural information is assigned
can be roller, pinned or fixed connections to the foundations, in Catia so that it can perform a multi-objective optimization
and the load cases include self-weight, live load, and wind of design at an early stage of design. A tool that automatically
loads. However, most of the inputs are assigned manually in provides multiple design variants of tall buildings, which are of
the model. significant importance in an early phase of design, is presented
Another form of the automation of structural analysis is in [29]. There is a lack of automated approaches for performing
provided as a support tool for architectural design, by introducing structural analysis, especially if BIM models are involved [29].
structural knowledge to architectural design tools. The members Automation attempts similar to those relating to early stages
and connections design can be realized in such a way [22]. of design have not been found for the developed design stage.
However, this approach can hardly replace established structural Building models and structural analysis in the developed design
analysis practices which rely on structural analysis software tools stage are characterized by more detailed information and
having a large market share. An additional tool in Matlab can help different type of uncertainties compared to the early design
architects in the early design stages to receive feedback for the stage, which is why a different expert knowledge needs to be
renovation projects based on floor plans [23]. The motivation captured in order to automate the model preprocessing.
for the tool are iterative requests on design feedback, which The need for automatic preprocessing of FEM models from the
structural engineers usually provide only for a decided design, available models is recognized in other domains of civil engineering
which is also the case in the developed design stage. The research beyond building design and construction. The tunnel information
[23] focuses on the floor plans and walls as structural elements, modelling, as a parallel to BIM, is used to automatically prepare
which does not entirely correspond to the BIM approach in the the FEM calculation [13]. The boundary conditions and material
developed design stage of architectural design. properties, besides the geometry, are automatically established
The validation of models before assignment of new information in the “BIM-to-FEM” approach, and not described to detail [13]. A
can be considered a part of the preprocessing for structural framework for calculating wind effects on buildings is developed
analysis, and is especially required if the models originate from in [30], where the need for automatic geometry interpretation
an external practice. This is a broad topic that is developing in and calculation for such a repetitive and error-prone analysis is
multiple directions. Since the standards available for structural recognized. Although research conducted in other domains has
analysis are not yet digitalization-ready [9], an extensive similar motives, the workflows and stakeholder involvement in
reconsideration of building element definitions, properties other civil engineering domains differ from those encountered in
and the corresponding boundary conditions, is required. The building design and construction.
validation can focus on two types of information: geometrical
information [24], e.g. if a certain building element having a certain 2.5. Structural analysis workflows
geometrical shape is valid, or semantical information [25], e.g. if
the objects and their properties correspond to a certain schema. The review presented in this subsection focuses on the
In our work, the validation is not extensively researched, but research details describing structural analysis workflows on
it is recognized as a step preceding the assignment of new a building element scale. The structural analysis workflow
information for structural analysis. represents all processes and information leading to

214 GRAĐEVINAR 74 (2022) 3, 211-226

Automated preprocessing of building models for structural analysis Građevinar 3/2022

Table 1. Information origin from the review of digital workflows exchanging architectural design and structural analysis models

Architectural design Structural analysis

[20] Geometry Section properties, boundary conditions, loads

[21] Geometry (option 1) Geometry (option 2), sections, supports, load cases
[32] Drawings, initial dimensions, section sizes Analytical models, structural properties, loads
[35] Geometry, location of the members, types of materials and properties Load types and cases, boundary conditions
[36] Appearance – art, geometrical and spatial aspect Simplified model, loading component and joint connections
Geometric locations, member section profiles, material data,
[37], New structural members, load cases and their combinations,
structural members that are provided by the architects as a
[38] geometric boundary conditions
vertical and lateral load transferring system
[39] Geometry (physical model) Loads and supports
Analytical model, material properties, section properties, boundary
[40] Elevation, grids, geometry
conditions, load information
Geometry, element connectivity, cross-sectional dimensions, Geometry and support creation, material definition, load
[41]
mechanical properties of materials assignment

structural analysis. It involves data exchange and definition to the developed design; therefore, it directs towards
of new information. Structural engineers do not define their generative design. Other civil engineering practices, such as
model from scratch. The model geometry results from the tunnel design, have a partly automated model preprocessing,
data exchange between architectural design and structural but different workflows and involvement of stakeholders.
analysis. The workflow first involves creation of geometry Structural analysis workflows in the developed building
by an architect, mutual consent on the structural system, design are heterogeneous and have not been sufficiently
and extraction of the structural model from the architectural explored in the existing literature. From the literature review
model. The information resulting from these tasks is neither of digital workflows presented in Table 1, it can be concluded
standardized nor defined in detail. that the geometry of all building elements enclosing a space,
Structural analysis workflows and the data flow within them and materials of building elements with visual properties and
are described in multiple papers dealing with BIM workflows types of building elements, are delivered from architectural
and structural analysis. A set of modelling guidelines, aimed design to structural analysis. In some cases, after
at improving data exchange between physical and analytical consultation with structural engineers, architects define
models focusing on model geometry, is defined in [32]. A the information about the load-bearing property of building
framework involving the interpretation of physical model with elements, foundations, and grids. The following information
regard to a corresponding analytical model, both in the IFC is usually not explicitly defined during architectural design:
format, is proposed, but the models are not preprocessed for analytical geometry of structural building elements,
structural analysis [33]. They interpret existing information loads, structural properties of materials, supports, and
[33], such as geometry and material, and do not enrich it in structural connections of building elements. Architectural
order to make it ready for simulation. Several practical cases software tools generally do not provide ways to define
using 3D structural analysis are reported, and the advantages that information. The automated preprocessing methods,
of 3D analysis such as better understanding of the structure as part of structural analysis workflows, are missing in the
and more cost-effective results, are listed in [34]. There is no standards or literature, except for the methods provided by
consensus about information origin in the research describing software tools that overcome software-specific problems
data exchange workflows (Table 1). in the form of workarounds. We aim to advance the existing
structural analysis practices by providing an automated
2.6. Literature review summary model preprocessing, thereby reducing costs, errors and time,
and providing better feedback to other domains. Problems
BIM for structural analysis does not imply a certain scale arise due to lack of documentation describing workflows
or type of analysis, but it does imply more automated for structural analysis, and lack of methods that are
processes, greater amount of information sharing and needed for automation and, finally, automated procedures.
less manual work. Proposals for the automation of current Therefore, this research aims to close the gap of the missing
structural engineering practices address primarily an early preprocessing by identifying and automating potentially
phase of design (e.g., [26]), which still lacks significant standard preprocessing procedures for the developed design
amount of information about a building design compared stage during building design.

GRAĐEVINAR 74 (2022) 3, 211-226 215

 Građevinar 3/2022 Goran Šibenik, Iva Kovačić, Valentinas Petrinas, Wendelin Sprenger, Dario Bubalo, Nikola Ruzičić

Figure 2. Methodological steps and corresponding deliverables

3. Methodology comparing the initial and expected building models, and by

identifying and describing processes that provide a desired
The automation of the preprocessing steps preceding structural result.
analysis in the building design phase, which are currently -- The developed data management tool maintains
conducted manually, is the focus of this paper, which rounds up communication with the central data storage (realized
the implementation of data exchange between the architectural with MongoDB) and facilitates conversion to a particular
design and structural analysis. A framework that facilitates structural engineering finite element calculation tool
data exchange between the architectural design and structural (RFEM Dlubal). The data in MongoDB and RFEM Dlubal
analysis building models was developed, implemented, and can be accessed via the application programming interface
verified in the previously published research [9, 31]. The (API). The APIs are used with ..Net framework to create a
framework allows for an open classification and interpretation software tool that is available as a plug-in in RFEM Dlubal.
at the central storage, and finally automates the data exchange The RFEM graphical user interface (GUI) also serves as a
with the proprietary software tools. Objects are defined on the GUI for the plug-in and allows the end user to gain insight
building element scale, where semantic information is defined into the automation methods. The developed preprocessing
using IFC terminology, and geometrical information using the methods were implemented and verified via two pilot
Open Cascade geometry kernel. The Open Cascade provides building models originating from the above-mentioned
predefined methods that are used for the interpretation of structural engineering company. The two models were
geometry. The automation of preprocessing procedures that preprocessed with the developed tool and their structural
create an analysis-ready model is realized through several performance was calculated. The results were evaluated
methodological steps that are described below and in Figure 2: by the authors and compared to the results of a traditional
-- Identification of preprocessing methods is based on a structural analysis. In this step of the research, the two pilot
thorough literature review (Subsection 2.5) as well as on buildings were used to verify the approach and sufficiency of
the real use case analysis of a modelling and data exchange the identified procedures and information (Section 6).
process of a German structural engineering company (Section -- Finally, the feedback and evaluation of generalization
4). The real use case reflects the everyday procedures potential of implemented automation methods was realised
conducted with BIM authoring tools for structural analysis. through the practitioners’ panel discussion (Section 7). The
-- Formalization of the preprocessing methods in an practitioners’ expertise is needed to identify optimization
automatable form is required so that they can be realized potentials as preprocessing rules are bound to individual or
as a data management tool (Section 5). The tool accesses interfirm conventions.
analytical model at the central storage, after interpretation
of geometrical and non-geometrical information from a 4. Identification of preprocessing steps: analysis
physical building model provided by an architect [9, 31]. Such of structural analysis workflows
a model is considered a starting point for preprocessing
methods that enrich it to an analysis-ready model. Similar 4.1. Workflow procedures
models can be manually recreated from the information
provided in architectural design. Analytical models that were The objective of the presented research is to automatically
used for model preprocessing contain analytical geometry establish a model that is sufficient for structural analysis by
of building elements, building element types, and materials. enriching model information originating from other domains. In
The preprocessing methods are derived from the previously order to achieve this, a significant amount of novel structural-
conducted analysis. The methods are developed by analysis-specific information is required. Each information is

216 GRAĐEVINAR 74 (2022) 3, 211-226

Automated preprocessing of building models for structural analysis Građevinar 3/2022

Figure 3. Procedures leading to structural analysis feedback

generated or edited at a specific point in the workflow (Figure analysis; architectural design is not always created within the
3); the automation methods are replacing manually performed company, i.e., it might also be external. The real use case serves
procedures and generate or edit the same information. The primarily to validate the findings made during literature review
information origin is investigated in this section. Multiple (Subsection 2.5); the details that were inexistent or insufficiently
procedures that lead to feedback from structural engineers described in the literature for automation purposes regarding the
are displayed in Figure 3. The procedures where information is modelling and reasoning processes for creating an analysis-ready
defined by structural engineers solely belong to preprocessing, building model were documented. Exact information assigned
while redefining information originating from the architectural during the procedures was obtained and, if necessary, discussed
model, centrally stored as a non-proprietary architectural with competent experts.
design building model, belong to interpretation; an interpreted Process analysis of the company specific practice revealed
model is also centrally stored as a non-proprietary structural that an architectural model is generated in Revit, which needs
analysis model. to be filtered, leaving the definition of load-bearing elements
Multiple information, such as loads, load combinations or to structural engineers. The filtered model is not imported as
additional structural building elements, is defined solely by such in the RFEM Dlubal analysis tool. It is remodelled for the so
structural engineers. The identification of such information, called “2,5D structural analysis”. This analysis involves modelling
its separation from the information originating from an of individual slabs and the underlying building elements are
architectural model, and procedures that define such represented as punctual or linear supports, depending on the
information, require a detailed investigation of the structural underlying element. The calculations are individually performed
engineers’ workflow, practices, and processes. Therefore, for each slab. If the slab is not the top slab, all overlying
the workflow is investigated through the literature review elements are represented as punctual or linear loads, depending
(Subsection 2.5) and the real use case, the purpose being to on the building element type, with the values resulting from
capture existing modelling and analysis processes. the previous simulation. The first slab being calculated is the
top slab, and the lower slabs are assessed sequentially. Slab
4.2. Real use case geometry is redrawn from the existing filtered model.
Multiple loads need to be assigned: dead loads and live loads
Within the real use case (involving a German construction for each slab, and additionally environmental loads on the
company), the process analysis including the design, interpretation roof slab. A standard analysis does not include calculation
and preprocessing procedures, was conducted during the period of environmental loads for vertical elements, although this
of eight months (from April 2020) through multiple interviews, calculation can be required. The loads calculated on the upper
observation of processes and continuous feedback from a team slab supports, which are actually the underlying building
of company experts. The team was composed of multiple BIM elements, are transferred to the lower slab at the place where
experts and structural engineers, working in the company on the the same building elements are in contact with the lower
implementation and improvement of building design workflows slab. These can be linear or punctual loads, depending on the
across domains, as well as conducting various day-to-day building element type. Joints between the supports and slabs
structural analysis tasks. Therefore, they were able to identify are modelled so that they do not transfer rotation, but here
challenges and opportunities within the existing workflows, and the exception are the joints supporting the console. The real
to describe standard workflows leading to structural analysis use case delivers results similar to the literature review of
feedback. Engineers use RFEM Dlubal to conduct structural the structural analysis workflow: geometry originates from

GRAĐEVINAR 74 (2022) 3, 211-226 217

 Građevinar 3/2022 Goran Šibenik, Iva Kovačić, Valentinas Petrinas, Wendelin Sprenger, Dario Bubalo, Nikola Ruzičić

Table 2. Information origin from the process analysis

Information origin Information

Geometry, building element types – architectural semantics, materials with visual properties,
Architectural model
space uses (not always defined)
Mutual consent on architectural model (structural
Geometry of structural system, load bearing properties
model)
Analytical geometry, building element types – structural analysis semantics, materials with
Structural analysis model
structural properties, load types and cases, supports, joints

the architectural model, the structural concept is generated and depends on the architectural input, while some is new.
by mutual consent of an architect and structural engineer, We will focus on the new information required for structural
which results in the structural analysis model. The model analysis, and define the automation methods based on the
consists of multiple horizontal building elements and vertical type of information. While the way to interpret geometric and
elements converted to supports and loads. The material and non-geometric information about building elements with load-
interpretation of building elements follow the architect’s input. bearing properties based on the information defined by the
The following completely new information is assigned by the architect has been previously developed in detail [9, 31], the way
structural engineers: loads, load combinations and supports. In to generate new information recognized as crucial for structural
the 2,5D simulation, the supports are defined under each slab analysis will be presented here.
for the underlying elements, not only the foundations. In the 3D The preprocessing methods developed based on the results of
analysis, the connections between building elements and slabs workflow analysis are presented in this section. The input and
are modelled as joints, rather than as supports. An overview of output information remains the same in the traditional and
information origin is provided in Table 2. automated procedures, while the developed methods reflect the
The analysed 2,5D workflow is realized with multiple RFEM practices of structural engineers. The aim is to achieve the same
files and the information is assigned manually. Figure 4 depicts result as with traditional preprocessing, i.e., an analysis-ready
the 2,5D workflow: a) loads are assigned to the top slab; b) model, but without repetitive and error-prone manual work. The
underlying building elements are defined as supports and the results of the process analysis imply that the structural building
reactions are calculated; c) the reactions are assigned to the elements are filtered and interpreted in the interpretation part
next slab as additional loads. A significant part of the workflow from the architectural building model. Based on the analysed
can be automated in its current state. However, in our paper process, the following information is available after the
we address the fully developed BIM workflows, based on 3D interpretation part: analytical geometry of building elements,
building models. For this reason, our preprocessing methods materials, element types and their load-bearing properties.
partly differ from the analysed workflow. The additional required information concerns: loads, supports,
and joints. In the traditional approach, the validation step is
5. Formalization of preprocessing methods for conducted by visual inspection of the model, and possibly by
automated preprocessing assigning new or editing the information in problematic spots.
The validation is of crucial importance for the preprocessing
5.1. Novel workflow overview methods. Once the validation is over, methods are proposed
for defining the following information: floor levels, foundations,
The information defined in the architectural building model loads, and joints. The novel workflow encompassing the
is enriched with additional information to prepare the model transfer of data from architectural design to structural analysis
for structural analysis. Some information can be interpreted is presented on Figure 5.

Figure 4. Workflow in 2,5D analysis

218 GRAĐEVINAR 74 (2022) 3, 211-226

Automated preprocessing of building models for structural analysis Građevinar 3/2022

the architectural software tool, but these

levels do not necessarily comply with the
needs of structural engineers, or with
the way they are defined in the structural
analysis tool. Generally, the floor levels are
defined in structural engineering as the
axial plane of the floor slabs, which is the
information that is already available after
the interpretation step. The purpose of
the preprocessing method is to discover
relevant floor slabs, assign to them the
correct placement or z coordinate, and set
a structure for the rest of preprocessing
steps. The floor slabs are first filtered,
and only horizontal slab elements are
considered relevant. They can also be
validated if there are multiple slabs within
a certain tolerance value; the alignment of
Figure 5. Overview of novel workflow neighbouring slabs is already considered
in the interpretation step [9]. The method
5.2. Model validation defining the floor levels does not generate
new knowledge. It is nevertheless considered to be a preprocessing
Model validation is the initial step that comes before assignment method as it creates a structure for the rest of preprocessing.
of new information. Some exemplary problems that can occur
during the import include inadequate or absent definition of Foundations
material, and incorrect rendering of complex geometry. We It is not clearly defined within the building design process
took into account some of these problems and treated them whether foundations are modelled during the architectural
before the import. Model validation represents a broad set of design or structural analysis. Even if foundations are defined
topics that have to be considered before the new information is in the architectural model, structural engineers are responsible
assigned. We recognize the importance of validation before the for their dimensioning. We concluded from the process analysis
preprocessing steps, but treat it exemplarily in our work due to that foundations are generally defined by structural engineers,
the fact that we realize the preprocessing methods on a single and proposed an automatic creation of foundations during
workflow. For a wider implementation, the validation would preprocessing of the structural analysis model.
need extensive development. Three types of foundations need to be automatically generated:
In this paper, the information about material is considered as individual foundations, strip foundations, or mat foundations,
an example. The element lacking the material information depending on the geometrical element where they are placed:
during import is identified, and the request for appropriate point, line, or surface. The foundations are placed at the
action is initiated, as this information is expected to originate bottom of each structural element that transfers loads to the
from the architect. The example is shown in Figure 6. Such ground, and so the point represents the bottom of a column,
approaches overcome the discrepancies between the expected a line the bottom of a wall, and a surface the slab used as the
and available amount of information. The additional information mat foundation. In the case foundations are modelled during
may be needed due to lack of information on the central storage architectural design, building elements defining the foundations
or performance of software tool. The exhaustiveness of should be defined as points, lines, or surfaces already during
validation methods improves the quality and effectiveness of the interpretation. The foundations are generally placed at the
preprocessing methods. lowest level in the floor-wise calculation, but the positioning
might be more complex and involve multiple levels. The position
5.3. Preprocessing methods: new information of the ground or outside space determined by enclosed space
uses could be considered for more complex validation steps.
Ppreprocessing methods will be presented based on the building
information they address: floor levels, foundations, loads, joints. Loads
Imported structural analysis models do not contain information
Floor levels about loads since loads are normally not defined during
A preprocessing method aimed at determining floor levels is architectural design. Loads are a requirement for any structural
needed as the current practice in the use case analysis focuses analysis. There are several types of loads that are assigned
on the floor-wise calculation. The floor levels are often defined in before the analysis takes place. Additionally, load combinations

GRAĐEVINAR 74 (2022) 3, 211-226 219

 Građevinar 3/2022 Goran Šibenik, Iva Kovačić, Valentinas Petrinas, Wendelin Sprenger, Dario Bubalo, Nikola Ruzičić

need to be defined to analyse structural performance in Joints

more complex conditions, and the way they are defined is During structural analysis of slabs without modelling of vertical
standardized [42]. Four types of loads are common: dead load, elements, there are no joints between vertical and horizontal
live load, impact load, and environmental load [43]. Dead load is elements as the vertical elements are represented as supports
the constant load imposed on the structure, and it is typically the or loads. Joints define in which way the building elements
self-weight of building elements. The self-weight is dependent are connected to each other. For the 3D analysis, they have a
on materials and is applied on each structural element. The self- significant effect on the final analysis results. The joints are
weight can be assigned automatically for the whole building as primarily modelled as pin-connected, and the rotation is not
the information about the material comes from the architectural transferred in both directions in the case of punctual joints,
model, while material properties, such as specific weight, are while the rotation can be transferred in the direction of the line
available in RFEM. defining the joint in the case of linear joints. Fixed-connected
Live loads are applied to all slabs in the building models. They joints are modelled for the case of cantilevers, when the rotation
can be temporary loads like those imposed by furniture or transfer is necessary. The information about cantilevers is not
occupancy and are calculated using standard values [44, 45]. directly defined by the architect. Nevertheless, this knowledge
They can also be the loads imposed by the non-load-bearing can be automated, either by analysing the room functions (e.g.,
structure of the building element, and their calculation is also balcony), or by using a more complex algorithm that can identify
standardized [46]. A precondition for automating the live loads cantilevers based on geometry. We assign pinned-connected
based on the interpreted models is that an architect adequately joints as a default, but this can be readjusted in the follow-
defines the room uses. However, this is not often the case, and, up. The joints between individual elements are a topic that
therefore, the aim is to assign the uses for the entire floor. requires further research for obtaining realistic results and for
Besides the dead and live loads the environmental loads remain investigation of their automation potential.
required in the standard calculation. Environmental loads
depend on two factors: geographical location of the building, 6. Implementation and verification: pilot building
which determines specific values for environmental loads, and models
whether a building element borders the external space. If the
rooms are defined in the model, the building element bordering The proposed preprocessing methods are implemented
external space can be identified easily. Otherwise, a more and verified on two pilot building models provided by the
complex reasoning algorithm needs to be developed. If the room construction company. The preprocessing methods are
uses are missing, and if the floor-wise calculation takes place, a implemented on 3D models, developed in the previous work
simplified approach is to assign the environmental snow load including interpretation of building models [9, 31]. The models in
only to the slabs on the top level, using the coefficients available the preceding study are created with IFC exports from Autodesk
in standards for specific locations [46]. In RFEM, these values Revit, and automatically interpreted to analytical building
can be assigned based on the altitude and snow zone. The models. The context of these studies conforms to the scope
geographical location is a known input from the start of the of information of the architectural design models described
project and should be present in the central database. Impact in the workflow analysis. The interpreted models provide a
loads are usually assigned in special cases only. starting point for the preprocessing methods, and these models

Figure 6. Material assignment after validation

220 GRAĐEVINAR 74 (2022) 3, 211-226

Automated preprocessing of building models for structural analysis Građevinar 3/2022

Table 3. Screenshots of results of preprocessing methods and analysis

Pilot model 1 Pilot model 2
Foundations
Loads
Simulation results

contain analytical geometry of structural building elements the central storage. This facilitated the use of the Open Cascade
with assigned building element types and materials. However, geometry kernel with the .Net framework system architecture
the same or similar models can also be manually generated to realize the communication and preprocessing methods.
using structural analysis tools, after redefining the information The preprocessing tool is realized as the RFEM plug-in. The
provided in the architectural design. approach is developed as a semi-automatic process. However,
The proposed automation of preprocessing methods requires the default values or additional information such as space use
transitioning from 2.5D to 3D models. The implementation can lead to a fully automated approach. Analytical models that
involved a way to validate the models through validation of are addressed with the plug-in need to have sufficient and
materials (Figure 6), and preprocessing of the validated model. accurate information: analytical building element geometries,
The preprocessing methods included definition of floor level, building element types and materials assigned. The plug-in first
foundations, loads, load combinations, and joints. Finally, the detects the building floors that represent the main structure for
results of the structural analysis were compared with the further automation steps (Figure 7).
results assessed by the company, from which the models It is possible to automate creation of supports or loads on a
originate. particular floor. In Table 3, the results are demonstrated on two
The preprocessing was implemented using the centrally stored pilot models. The joints are defined without the user interaction.
structural models and the available proprietary RFEM model, However, they can be further edited if required. The created
where the RFEM Dlubal API was used with the data available at foundations, loads and the results of the analysis are displayed.

GRAĐEVINAR 74 (2022) 3, 211-226 221

 Građevinar 3/2022 Goran Šibenik, Iva Kovačić, Valentinas Petrinas, Wendelin Sprenger, Dario Bubalo, Nikola Ruzičić

are familiar with 2.5D, as the results differ by more than 15

% in 18.2 % of foundations of the first pilot model, and 29.9 %
of foundations of the second pilot model. Even if the relative
difference is significant, the absolute difference does not
point to unrealistic values. The results were validated with a
structural engineer.

Figure 7. Plug-in screenshot

Additionally, the verification was performed by comparing

simulation results obtained with the proposed methods with
simulation results from the 2.5D analysis. A schematic view of
2.5D and 3D analyses are given in Figure 8. The 2.5D analysis Figure 8. Schematic comparison of a) 2,5D analysis and b) 3D analysis
is performed step-wise, floor by floor, with multiple files and
models, while 3D involves a single analysis. RFEM Dlubal 7. Evaluation through practitioners’ panel
supports 2.5D analysis by allowing transfer of the calculated discussion
reactions as loads between multiple files.
The resulting reactions in foundations, obtained with Panel discussion is chosen as a method for receiving feedback
2.5D and 3D analyses, were compared. Although the loads from a small group of experts, and as a means to evaluate
assigned to the slabs are equivalent in both analyses, the the proposed approach. The panel discussion was held as an
resulting reactions differ. The difference is measured as online workshop and involved three structural engineers from
percentage of the 2.5D results. The 3D analysis generally two different construction companies, and two BIM experts.
results in similar reactions in foundations. However, the The discussion time was 108 minutes, and was moderated
results are sometimes significantly different, and sometimes by the first author of the paper. The general workflow with
they even change direction of the reaction. Single results are interpretations and preprocessing methods for the analytical
compared in Table 4, and the difference between 2.5D and model was presented, followed by semi-open discussion. The
3D results is summarized in Table 5. The difference points discussion included a predefined open-ended questionnaire
to the unreliability of the 3D analysis for the engineers who assessing the usefulness and usability of the developed plug-

Table 4. Comparison of 2,5D and 3D analysis results

Screenshot with foundation positions Position 2.5D 3D Diff. [kN] Diff. [%]

1 185.71 kN/m 170.21 kN/m 15.5 8.35

Pilot model 1

2 117.38 kN/m 134.40 kN/m -17.0 14.50

3 170.84 kN/m 179.51 kN/m -8.7 5.07

4 876.49 kN 657.25 kN 219.2 25.01

1 3.16 kN/m 3.58 kN/m -0.42 13.29

Pilot model 2

2 83.73 kN 179.31 kN -95.58 114.15

3 55.81 kN 38.40 kN 17.41 31.20

4 100.52 kN 97.47 kN 3.05 3.03

222 GRAĐEVINAR 74 (2022) 3, 211-226

Automated preprocessing of building models for structural analysis Građevinar 3/2022

Table 5. Overview of reaction differences in foundations between corresponding 2,5D and 3D analysis results

Difference 0-5 % 5-15 % 15-25 % 25-50% >50%

Pilot model 1 1 (9.1%) 8 (72.7%) 1 (9.1%) 1 (9.1%) 0 (0%)
Pilot model 2 55 (51.4%) 20 (18.7%) 9 (8.4%) 11 (10.3%) 12 (11.2%)

in. The focus of the discussion and questionnaire was set on the The preprocessing methods require some adaptation, but a
applicability of the preprocessing methods in daily practice. As similar plug-in that could automate the existing practices or
all participating engineers have been using RFEM Dlubal in their some preprocessing steps is recognized as a great help for a
work, RFEM Dlubal plug-in provides a possibility to examine the day-to-day business.
procedures in a familiar environment.
The feedback provided by the participants in the discussion 8. Discussion
addressed general issues regarding the preprocessing
automation, as well as the specific preprocessing methods. This research answers the question “How to facilitate
General remarks include: automated building model preprocessing within a structural
-- Both companies use architectural models originating from analysis software tool”. The proposed preprocessing methods
Revit and RFEM Dlubal for structural analysis automate assignment of additional information traditionally
-- 2.5D is preferred to 3D structural analysis primarily due to performed manually, and round-up the information flow
traceability and clarity of calculation; however, the calculated before structural analysis. Manual preprocessing, suboptimal
cross sections of building elements may be greater than in exploitation of software tools in the existing BIM-based
the case of 3D. workflows, lack of technical solutions for structural analysis,
-- 3D analysis delivers results that are difficult to verify due to and inadequate support for the existing practices, are the issues
complexity of the system. that are answered with the novel proposal. These problems are
-- Traceability of simulation is needed for the inspection identified in the literature [1, 17] and, although some automated
engineers, which is not available in 3D analysis. preprocessing exists at other design stages [26] or in other
-- Automation of preprocessing methods is regarded as useful domains [13], the structural analysis preprocessing is still
and usable, but needs some adaptation. lacking in the developed building design. The proposed solution
-- Practices do not significantly differ between companies. is in accordance with general tendencies of BIM for structural
-- Structural engineers are generally part of the project before analysis, to automate workflows within and beyond the AEC
the developed design and specific information can be defined domains [15, 16]. An automated preprocessing provides
in advance. speedier feedback and reduces errors, cost, and time needed
-- Significant amount of experience-based knowledge is used for structural analysis.
in the identification and analysis of the model. Standard workflow for structural analysis involves data
generation during architectural design, interpretation of
Feedback received from the participants shows that they existing data for structural analysis, and assignment of new
recognize the standardization potential of the proposed data through preprocessing. The flow of information within the
preprocessing methods: workflow, including the responsible stakeholder, position within
-- A similar approach is performed to identify the floor levels; the workflow, and the way it is generated, are all recognized
however, an important point is the detection of the ground as crucial for digitalization in standards [3]. Structural analysis
floor, which is usually placed close to ±0,00 elevation. workflows are analysed in this research as they are currently not
-- Foundations can be defined in two ways, based on the results of sufficiently documented. Interpretations use already defined
the geotechnical analysis: information and create non-proprietary structural models
-- as the proposed solution, under each element separately; [9]. On the other hand, the presented preprocessing methods
-- by excluding the support capabilities of a ground plate due assign new information to the analytical models interpreted
to poor characteristics of the soil. from architectural design and are software tool specific.
-- Loads are highly dependent on the building use and special The feedback discussion points to the existing discrepancy
building requirements. The proposed loads can be regarded as between the practice and the theoretical hypothesis behind
standard input. It is necessary to include multiple building codes. the BIM-based structural analysis concept, the gap which is
-- Joints can be modelled in two ways, depending on whether addressed through this research. While BIM promotes the use
the of shared digital representation of a building, and BIM-authoring
-- prefabricated, which indicates that the rotation is not tools for structural analysis provide ways for the creation and
transferred, or analysis of 3D models, a hybrid solution is implemented in
-- cast in place, meaning that the rotation can also be practice: 3D analysis is conducted by simplifying it to the scale
transferred. of a single floor level, commonly only a single slab, the so called

GRAĐEVINAR 74 (2022) 3, 211-226 223

 Građevinar 3/2022 Goran Šibenik, Iva Kovačić, Valentinas Petrinas, Wendelin Sprenger, Dario Bubalo, Nikola Ruzičić

2,5D analysis. The 2,5D analysis is especially appreciated for create analysis-ready building models by assigning structural
the transparency of calculation, which is required by inspection information. The interpretation procedure, which precedes
engineers. When the analysis is performed with a complete preprocessing, is based on the previously developed data
3D model, the proprietary tools do not offer clear explanation exchange framework characterized by multiple domain-specific
of simulation steps, nor do they take responsibility for the classifications and open interpretations [9]. As the building
analysis results, which is not acceptable for the engineers models originating from architectural BIM models do not
holding responsibility for the stability of buildings. 2,5D can be provide sufficient information for the analysis, the processes
seen as a sub-set of analysis based on a 3D model, where the of assigning new structural information are herewith captured
preprocessing method is applied on a smaller scale of a building and automated. The novelty of this research is the proposal
floor or only a building element, such as a floor slab. Additional for the automation of preprocessing methods, which may
tool for decomposition of a 3D model and achievement of serve as a basis for future development and standardisation of
communication between partial models is needed for full methods. Additionally, the presented work provides a detailed
automation of preprocessing with the 2,5D analysis. The workflow analysis including the information flow, documented
participants, structural engineers, expressed their concerns preprocessing methods, realisation of a plug-in, and experts’
regarding the results and reliability of 3D analyses, as a rigid feedback. Further on, a comparison of 2,5D and 3D is provided
model often delivers unsatisfactory results. The 3D model with to answer concerns of structural engineers. The automation of
exhaustive validation and automatic preprocessing methods workflows is anticipated with the development of BIM tools,
is regarded as a feasible solution, but 2,5D provides better and is recognized as a knowledge gap in the literature.
and faster results if the preprocessing steps are performed The building model preparation for analysis rounds up the data
manually. An exemplary comparison of 2,5D and 3D analysis exchange framework in one direction, from architectural design
is provided within the research, demonstrating the reliability of to structural analysis, and can provide first analysis results by
the 3D analysis. introducing some assumptions with less effort. Our approach
The proposed preprocessing methods are regarded as a does not automate further structural optimizations like
possible way towards a reliable 3D analysis, albeit with some reinforcement placement or material change (postprocessing);
adaptations, like choosing the construction type (prefabricated these tasks are topics for future research. However, as confirmed
or cast in place) or defining the foundation capabilities of during panel discussion, the automation of preprocessing steps
the bottom plate based on the ground. The 3D analysis is is at this point crucial for realizing BIM benefits and speeding
performed for earthquake simulation, usually with a decided up digitalization in the domain of structural design and analysis.
design. Therefore, constant feedback by structural engineers The proposed preprocessing methods are at this stage based
through a simulated structural behaviour is not anticipated, on the literature review and intra-firm data-exchange practices,
especially for the demanding and long-lasting simulations like and include definition of floor levels, foundations, loads, and
behaviour during a seismic event. By automating preprocessing, joints. The methods depend on the architectural building model
workflows could eventually achieve a real-time feedback and as well. The external models, from another software tool,
optimize the design of buildings. or different structural engineering practices, would require
Model updating and change tracking still constitute a challenge, exhaustive validation procedures and might require edited
and require consideration within the new framework. In the or new preprocessing methods. A system architecture that
existing practice, the changes are performed manually and can adequately support such a heterogeneous set of services
transferred to the affected floors, except in cases when the is required. Our approach needs to be verified with additional
changes require a completely new simulation. software tools; some tools might not provide interfaces
The workshop participants acknowledged the potential of to achieve similar results. Following the consideration of
the proposed automated preprocessing methods and further other software tools, the positioning of methods within the
automation of model preparation. An automatic recognition of framework is of crucial importance. The limitations of RFEM API
floor levels, and definition of foundations, loads and joints, are are recognized as lying in the sphere of geometry modifications.
considered a significant aid, which could allow for faster and Therefore, the Open Cascade kernel and the centrally edited
less error-prone model editing, eventually leading to real-time geometry, which provides greater flexibility, is needed for some
feedback. The real-time feedback would open new possibilities preprocessing steps.
for model optimization, and would consequently deliver more The future research will involve provision of similar services
higher-quality buildings. with additional structural analysis tools, building models, and
practices. Similar plug-ins are required for other structural
9. Conclusion analysis software tools, and the presented proposal may
serve as a basis for such development. The authors intend
In this paper, the model preprocessing for structural analysis to investigate the possibility of providing such services
during building design is identified and formalized, and then with microservice architecture, so as to be able to satisfy
automation methods are proposed. The automated methods heterogeneous workflows.

224 GRAĐEVINAR 74 (2022) 3, 211-226

Automated preprocessing of building models for structural analysis Građevinar 3/2022

Acknowledgements ATP architekten ingenieure, Vienna, for taking part in the panel
discussion. We express our gratitude especially to Konstantinos
We would like to express our gratitude to Strabag SE, Vienna, and Kessoudis, Richard Schaffranek, Maximilian Knoll and Dr. Georg
their subsidiary Züblin, Stuttgart, for supporting this research Hochreiner for providing their support in the realisation of this
through the DATAFILTER project. We would also like to thank research.

REFERENCES
[1] Vilutiene, T., Kalibatiene, D., Hosseini, M.R., Pellicer, E., Zavadskas, [12] Hasan, A.M.M., Torky, A.A., Rashed, Y.F.: Geometrically
E.K.: Building Information Modeling (BIM) for Structural accurate structural analysis models in BIM-centered software,
Engineering: A Bibliometric Analysis of the Literature, Advances in Automation in Construction, 104 (2019), pp. 299-321, https://doi.
Civil Engineering, (2019), https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/5290690. org/10.1016/j.autcon.2019.04.022.
[2] Sibenik, G., Kovacic, I.: Assessment of model-based data exchange [13] Alsahly, A., Hegemann, F., König, M., Meschke, G.: Integrated BIM
between architectural design and structural analysis, Journal to FEM approach in mechanised tunneling, Geomechanics and
of Building Engineering, 32 (2020), https://doi.org/10.1016/j. Tunnelling, 13 (2020), pp. 212-220, https://doi.org/10.1002/
jobe.2020.101589. geot.202000002.
[3] ISO: ISO 19650-1:2018 Organization and digitization of [14] Bhusar, A.A., Akhare, A.R.: Application of BIM in Structural
information about buildings and civil engineering works, including Engineering, SSRG International Journal of Civil Engineering
building information modelling (BIM) - Information management (SSRG-IJCE), 1 (2014) 5, pp. 11-17.
using building information modelling - Part 1: Concepts and [15] Strafaci, A.: What does BIM mean for strucutral engineers?, CE
principles. Geneva, Switzerland: ISO, 2018. News, 20 (2008) 9, pp. 62-65, https://images.autodesk.com/
[4] Arayici, Y., Coates, P., Koskela, L., Kagioglou, M., Usher, C., O’Reilly, adsk/files/what_does_bim_mean_for_civil_engineers_ce_
K.: Technology adoption in the BIM implementation for lean news_1008.pdf.
architectural practice, Automation in Construction, 20 (2011) 2, [16] Sampaio, A.Z., Azevedo, V.: BIM in structural analyses of buildings,
pp. 189-195, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2010.09.016. Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Mechanics
[5] ISO: ISO 19650-2:2018 Organization and digitization of and Materials in Design, eds. Silva Gomes, J.F., Meguid, S.A., pp.
information about buildings and civil engineering works, including 349-358, Ponta Delgada, Portugal, 2015.
building information modelling (BIM) — Information management [17] Mackey D.: BIM and Structural Engineering. Structure, 2017
using building information modelling — Part 2: Delivery phase of (2017) January, pp. 46-49, https://www.structuremag.org/wp-
the assets. Geneva, Switzerland: ISO, 2018. content/uploads/2016/12/D-Business-Issues-Mackey-Jan17-1.
[6] ISO: ISO 29481-1:2016 Building information models - Information pdf.
delivery manual - Part 1: Methodology and format. Geneva, [18] Hamidavi, T., Abrishami, S., Hosseini, M.R.: Towards intelligent
Switzerland: ISO, 2016. structural design of buildings: A BIM-based solution, Journal
[7] LM.VM.: Leistungsmodelle Objektplanung – Architektur [LM. of Building Engineering, 32 (2020), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
OA.BIM], eds. Lechner, H., Heck, D., Graz, Austria: Verlag der jobe.2020.101685.
Technischen Universität Graz, 2014. https://www.arching.at/ [19] Ciotta, V., Asprone, D., Manfredi, G., Cosenza, E.: Building
fileadmin/user_upload/redakteure/LM_VM_2014/LM_ Information Modelling in Structural Engineering: A Qualitative
Objektplanung_Arch_BIM_.pdf Literature Review, CivilEng, 2 (2021), pp. 765-793. https://doi.
[8] Miettinen, R., Paavola, S.: Beyond the BIM utopia: Approaches org/10.3390/civileng2030042
to the development and implementation of building information [20] Boechat, L.C., Correa, F.R.: Augmented BIM Workflow for
modelling, Automation in Construction, 43 (2014), pp. 84-91, Structural Design Through Data Visualization, Proceedings of the
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2014.03.009. 18th International Conference on Computing in Civil and Building
[9] Sibenik, G., Kovacic, I.: Interpreted open data exchange between Engineering (ICCCBE) 2020, eds. Toledo Santos, E., Scheer, S.,
architectural design and structural analysis models, Journal of Cham, Switzerland, Springer, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-
Information Technology in Construction (ITcon), 26 (2021), Special 3-030-51295-8_15.
issue CIB World Building Congress 2019: Information technology [21] Eleftheriadis, S., Mumovic, D., Greening, P., Chronis, A.: BIM Enabled
of smart city development,. pp. 39-57, https://doi.org/10.36680/j. Optimisation Framework for Environmentally Responsible and
itcon.2021.004. Structurally Efficient Design Systems, Proceedings of the 32nd
[10] McKinsey & Company: The next normal in construction, https:// ISARC, pp. aa1-9, Oulu, Finland, 2015, https://doi.org/10.22260/
www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/operations/our- ISARC2015/0096.
insights/the-next-normal-in-construction-how-disruption-is- [22] Patlakas, P., Livingstone, A., Hairstans, R., Neighbour, G.:
reshaping-the-worlds-largest-ecosystem, 2020. Automatic code compliance with multi-dimensional data fitting in
[11] Sacks, R., Ghang, L., Eastman, C., Teicholz, P.: BIM Handbook: a a BIM context, Advanced Engineering Informatics, 38 (2018), pp.
Guide to Building Information Modeling for Owners, Managers, 216-231, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aei.2018.07.002.
Designers, Engineers and Contractors. Wiley-Blackwell, 2018.

GRAĐEVINAR 74 (2022) 3, 211-226 225

 Građevinar 3/2022 Goran Šibenik, Iva Kovačić, Valentinas Petrinas, Wendelin Sprenger, Dario Bubalo, Nikola Ruzičić

[23] Kim, S., Ryu, H., Kim, J.: Automated and qualitative structural [35] Aldegeily, M., Zhang, J.: From architectural design to structural
evaluation of floor plans for remodeling of apartment housing, analysis: a data-driven approach to study Building Information
Journal of Computational Design and Engineering, 8 (2021) 1, pp. Modeling (BIM) interoperability, Proc., 54th ASC Annual
376–391, https://doi.org/10.1093/jcde/qwaa085. International Conference, ed. Sulbaran, T., pp. 537-545, Fort
[24] Wu, J., Zhang, J.: New Automated BIM Object Classification Collings, Colorado, ASC Associated Schools of Construction,
Method to Support BIM Interoperability, Journal of Computing 2018, http://ascpro0.ascweb.org/archives/cd/2018/paper/
in Civil Engineering, 33 (2019) 5, https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE) CPRT152002018.pdf.
CP.1943-5487.0000858. [36] Chi, H.L., Wang, X., Jiao, Y.: BIM-Enabled Structural Design: Impacts
[25] Lee, Y.-C., Eastman, C.M., Solihin, W.: Rules and validation and Future Developments in Structural Modelling, Analysis and
processes for interoperable BIM data exchange, Journal of Optimisation Processes, Archives of Computational Methods in
Computational Design and Engineering, 8 (2021) 1, pp. 97–114, Engineering, 22 (2015), pp. 135–151, https://doi.org/10.1007/
https://doi.org/10.1093/jcde/qwaa064. s11831-014-9127-7.
[26] Abualdenien, J., Schneider-Marin, P., Zahedi, A., Harter, H., Exner, [37] Deng, X.Y., Chang, T.Y.P.: Creating structural model from IFC-based
H., Steiner, D., Singh, M.M., Borrmann, A., Lang, W., Petzold, architectural model, Joint International Conference on Computing
F., König, M., Geyer, P., Schnellenbach-Held, M.: Consistent and Decision Making in Civil and Building Engineering, pp. 3687-
management and evaluation of building models in the early 3695, Montreal, Canada, 2006, https://itc.scix.net/pdfs/w78-
design stages. Journal of Information Technology in Construction 2006-tf577.pdf.
(ITcon), 25 (2020), pp. 212-232, https://doi.org/10.36680/j. [38] Qin, L., Deng, X.Y., Liu, X.L.: Industry foundation classes based
itcon.2020.013. integration of architectural design and structural analysis, Journal
[27] Steiner, D.: Formulierung und Generierung von Expertenwissen zur of Shanghai Jiaotong University (Science), 16 (2011) 1, pp. 83-90,
Entwicklung intelligenter Ersatzmodelle für die Tragwerksplanung https://doi.org/10.1007/s12204-011-1099-2.
in frühen Entwurfsphasen (in German), Tagungsband 30. Forum [39] Papadopoulos, N.A., Sotelino, E.D., Martha, L.F., Nascimento,
Bauinformatik, eds. Steiner, M., Theiler, M., & Mirboland, M., D.L.M., Faria, P.S.: Evaluation of integration between a BIM platform
Weimar, Germany, Bauhaus-Universität Weimar, 2018. and a tool for structural analysis, Systems & Management, 12
[28] Keough, I., Benjamin, D.: Multi-objective optimization in (2017), pp 108-116, https://doi.org/10.20985/1980-5160.2017.
architectural design, SpringSim ‘10: Proceedings of the 2010 v12n1.1203.
Spring Simulation Multiconference, San Diego, California, USA, [40] Ren, R., Zhang, J.: A new framework to address BIM
Society for Computer Simulation International, 2010, https://doi. interoperability in the AEC domain from technical and process
org/10.1145/1878537.1878736. dimensions, Advances in Civil Engineering, (2021), https://doi.
[29] Hamidavi, T., Abrishami, S., Ponterosso, P., Begg, D., Nanos, N.: org/10.1155/2021/8824613.
OSD: A framework for the early stage parametric optimisation [41] Wu, J., Sadraddin, H.L., Ren, R., Zhang, J., Shao, X.: Invariant
of the structural design in BIM-based platform, Construction signatures of architecture, engineering, and construction objects
Innovation, 20 (2020) 2, pp. 149-169, https://doi.org/10.1108/CI- to support BIM interoperability between architectural design
11-2019-0126. and structural analysis, Journal of Construction Engineering
[30] Delavar, M., Bitsuamlak, G.T., Dickinson, J. K., Costa, L.M.F.: and Management, 147 (2021) 1, https://ascelibrary.org/doi/
Automated BIM-based process for wind engineering design abs/10.1061/%28ASCE%29CO.1943-7862.0001943.
collaboration, Building Simulation, 13 (2020), pp. 457–474, [42] ÖNORM: ÖNORM EN 1990:2013 03 15 Eurocode - Basis of
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12273-019-0589-2. structural design (consolidated version), Vienna, Austria, Austrian
[31] Sibenik, G., Kovacic, I., Petrinas, V., Sprenger, W.: Implementation of Standards, 2013.
Open Data Exchange between Architectural Design and Structural [43] Udoeyo, F.: Structural Analysis, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, U.S.,
Analysis Models, Buildings, 11 (2021) 12, pp. 605, https://doi. Temple University Press, 2019.
org/10.3390/buildings11120605. [44] ÖNORM: ÖNORM EN 1991-1-1:2011 09 01 Actions on structures
[32] Birkemo, A.S., Hjortland, S.C., Samindi, S.M., Samarakoon, M.K.: - Part 1-1: General actions - Densities, self-weight and imposed
Improvements for the workflow interoperability between BIM loads for buildings (consolidated version), Vienna, Austria,
and FEM tools, Building Information Modelling (BIM) in Design, Austrian Standards, 2011.
Construction and Operations III, eds. De Wilde, P., Mahdjoubi, L., & [45] ÖNORM: ÖNORM B 1991-1-1:2020 12 01: Eurocode 1 - Actions
Garrigos, A., pp. 317 – 327. Southampton, UK: WITpress, 2019. on structures - Part 1-1: General actions - Densities, self-
[33] Ramaji, I.J., Memari, A.M.: Interpreted information exchange: weight and imposed loads for buildings - National specifications
implementation point of view. Journal of Information Technology concerning ÖNORM EN 1991-1-1 and national supplements,
in Construction (ITcon), 25 (2020), pp. 123-139, https://doi. Vienna, Austria, Austrian Standards, 2020.
org/10.36680/j.itcon.2020.008. [46] ÖNORM: ÖNORM B 1991-1-3:2018 12 01 Eurocode 1: Actions
[34] Haefner, L.: Nowadays Structural Engineering with the Use of on structures – Part 1-3: General actions - Snow loads, Vienna,
BIM Technology—From 3D Modeling, Structural Analysis, and Austria, Austrian Standards.
Design to Structural System Evolution: Practitioner Report,
Structures Congress 2017: Business, Professional Practice,
Education, Research, and Disaster Management, ed. Soules
J.G., pp. 24 – 34, Reston, Virginia, USA, ASCE, 2017, https://doi.
org/10.1061/9780784480427.003

226 GRAĐEVINAR 74 (2022) 3, 211-226