Building Information Modeling – Umsetzung in der Tragwerksplanung

Kepplin, Ragna; Schnellenbach‐Held, Martina; Held, Markus

doi:10.1002/bate.201700003

Cited by 3 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 2 publications

(4 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, the stakeholders belonging to various domains still aim to exchange information of interest. One of the greatest challenges is the transfer of a building model between architectural design and structural analysis [13]. The experts exchanging information of interest need to have mutual understanding of each other's domains in order to facilitate the communication [14].…”

Section: Data Exchange Concepts and Challengesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Implementation of Open Data Exchange between Architectural Design and Structural Analysis Models

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Building information modelling promises model-based collaboration between stakeholders in the project design stage. However, data exchange between physical and analytical building models used for architectural design and structural analysis respectively rarely takes place due to numerous differences in building element representation, especially the representation of geometry. This paper presents the realization of a novel data exchange framework between architectural design and structural analysis building models, based on open interpretations on central storage. The exchange is achieved with a new system architecture, where the program redDim was developed to perform the interpretations, including the most challenging transformations of geometry. We deliver a proof of concept for the novel framework with a prototype building model and verify it on two further building models. Results show that structural-analysis models can be correctly automatically created by reducing dimensionality and reconnecting building elements. The proposed data exchange provides a base for missing standardization of interpretations, which facilitates the non-proprietary automated conversion between physical and analytical models. This research fills the gap in the existing model-based communication that could lead to a seamless data exchange.

show abstract

Section: Data Exchange Concepts and Challengesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Implementation of Open Data Exchange between Architectural Design and Structural Analysis Models

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Die Erstellung eines eigenen Modells mit dem Referenzmodell als Vorlage ist hier vielfach eine sinnvollere und schnellere Alternative. Neben dem Aufsetzen des Tragwerkmodells kann im weiteren Planungsverlauf auch die schlüssige Aufbereitung des analytischen Modells, wie von Kepplin et al in beschrieben, sehr aufwendig sein, vor allem wenn Modellierungskonflikte und Unstimmigkeiten an Knotenpunkten zu lösen sind. Abstimmung und Wahl der Software entscheiden daher zu einem großen Teil, ob die Digitalisierung der Planungsprozesse einen Mehrwert oder Mehraufwand mit sich bringt.…”

Section: Statische Berechnung Im Bim‐prozessunclassified

“…Gegenüber der 3D‐Berechnung bestehen vielfach große Vorbehalte, vgl. auch Kepplin et al . Im Fokus steht hier vor allem der veränderte vertikale Lastabtrag: Im 3D‐Modell verformen sich die aufgehenden Bauteile wie Stützen und Wände aufgrund ihrer individuellen Belastung und Federsteifigkeit in der Regel unterschiedlich.…”

Section: Statische Berechnung Im Bim‐prozessunclassified

Der BIM‐Prozess in der Tragwerksplanung

Stracke¹,

Kepplin

2020

Beton und Stahlbetonbau

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Im Zusammenhang mit der fortschreitenden Einführung von Building Information Modeling (BIM) in Deutschland werden im vorliegenden Beitrag die Auswirkungen auf die Arbeitsprozesse in der Tragwerksplanung untersucht. Die Planungsschritte, wie aus der HOAI bekannt, können den Abläufen bei BIM‐Projekten zugeordnet und durch zusätzliche Leistungen ergänzt werden. Es zeigt sich aber eine Verschiebung des Aufwands in die frühen Leistungsphasen. Inwieweit sich für den Tragwerksplaner durch die BIM‐Methode ein Mehraufwand oder ein Mehrwert ergibt, hängt im Wesentlichen vom Beauftragungsumfang, von der eingesetzten Software und von der Kompatibilität der Schnittstellen ab. Des Weiteren wird untersucht, welchen Einfluss BIM auf die statische Berechnung selbst hat. Das Vorhandensein eines 3D‐Fachmodells der Tragwerksplanung führt häufig zu der Erwartung, dass die statische Berechnung auf Basis dieses Modells ebenfalls als 3D‐Statik durchgeführt wird. Dies ist aber im Zusammenhang mit BIM nicht zwingend erforderlich. Eine 2D‐Positionsstatik lässt sich gleichermaßen gut in den BIM‐Prozess integrieren. Ob eine 2D‐ oder eine 3D‐Statik gewählt wird, muss der Tragwerksplaner unabhängig von BIM vielmehr in Abhängigkeit vom individuellen Projekt und von der damit verbundenen Bemessungsaufgabe entscheiden.

show abstract

“…These elements usually originate from architectural design, which tends to be a step preceding structural analysis. Data exchange between architectural design and structural analysis is one of the most important and common exchanges during the planning process, and needs to be included in the data exchange framework (Kepplin et al, 2017, Kovacic et al, 2015.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Data exchange between architectural design and structural analysis models is still conducted via physical documents (paper), digitized documents (pdf files) or files containing two-dimensional (2D) geometry (dwg drawings), while three-dimensional (3D) model-based exchange currently takes place only in isolated cases and intrafirm workflows. If a 3D building model is created from 2D documents, geometry needs to be remodeled in 3D structural analysis tools, which is an expensive, redundant and error-prone process (Kepplin et al, 2017). Despite these problems the industry has so far failed to achieve a model-based exchange that displays a sufficient level of usability as well as trust for the end users (Sibenik and Kovacic, 2020).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interpreted open data exchange between architectural design and structural analysis models

Sibenik¹,

Kovačić²

2021

ITcon

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The heterogeneity of the architecture, engineering and construction (AEC) industry reflects on digital building models, which differ across domains and planning phases. Data exchange between architectural design and structural analysis models poses a particular challenge because of dramatically different representations of building elements. Existing software tools and standards have not been able to deal with these differences. The research on inter-domain building information modelling (BIM) frameworks does not consider the geometry interpretations for data exchange. Analysis of geometry interpretations is mostly project-specific and is seldom reflected in general data exchange frameworks. By defining a data exchange framework that engages with varying requirements and representations of architectural design and structural analysis in terms of geometry, which is open to other domains, we aim to close the identified gap. Existing classification systems in software tools and standards were reviewed in order to understand architectural design and structural analysis representations and to identify the relationships between them. Following the analysis, a novel data management framework based on classification, interpretation and automation was proposed, implemented and tested. Classification is a model specification including domain-specific terms and relationships between them. Interpretations consist of inter-domain procedures necessary to generate domain-specific models from a provided model. Automation represents the connection between open domain-specific models and proprietary models in software tools. Practical implementation with a test case demonstrated a possible realization of the proposed framework. The innovative contribution of the research is a novel framework based on the system of open domain-specific classifications and procedures for the inter-domain interpretation, which can prepare domain-specific models on central storage. The main benefit is a centrally prepared domain-specific model, relieving software developers from so-far-unsuccessful implementation of complex inter-domain interpretations in each software tool, and providing end users with control over the data exchange. Although the framework is based on the exchange between architectural design and structural analysis, the proposed central data management framework can be used for other exchange processes involving different model representations.

show abstract

Building Information Modeling – Umsetzung in der Tragwerksplanung

Cited by 3 publications

References 2 publications

Implementation of Open Data Exchange between Architectural Design and Structural Analysis Models

Implementation of Open Data Exchange between Architectural Design and Structural Analysis Models

Der BIM‐Prozess in der Tragwerksplanung

Interpreted open data exchange between architectural design and structural analysis models

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About