Research Article

Comparison of Data Integration Methods in BIM Tools for Structural Engineering: An Evaluation through Structural Analysis Tools

Volume: 38 Number: 3 September 1, 2025
EN

Comparison of Data Integration Methods in BIM Tools for Structural Engineering: An Evaluation through Structural Analysis Tools

Abstract

Building Information Modelling (BIM) is a technology that allows data generated by different disciplines using different software to be shared and used in a digital environment. By promising bi-directional data integration between all stakeholders, BIM encourages interoperability in the industry. This study aims to assess the operability and reliability of bidirectional data exchange methods within BIM technology, specifically Industry Foundation Classes (IFC) and Application Programming Interface (API). The study tests these methods between the architecture and structural engineering disciplines using Autodesk Revit along with the structural software packages: ETABS, Robot Structural Analysis, SAP2000, and Tekla Structures. The results show that the IFC file extension causes data losses in information sharing between software, while the API method can provide reliable data integration between different tools. However, the API only works smoothly between the tools developed by the same company. Nevertheless, API may be a promising way to achieve the interoperability goal of BIM technology.

Keywords

References

  1. [1] Chen, P. H., Cui, L., Wan, C., Yang, Q., Ting, S. K., Tiong, R. L., “Implementation of IFC-based web server for collaborative building design between architects and structural engineers”, Automation in Construction, 14(1), 115-128, (2005).
  2. [2] Aldegeily, M., “From Architectural Design to Structural Analysis: A Data-Driv al Analysis: A Data-Driven Approach to Study Building Information Modeling (BIM) Interoperability”, Michagen, USA, (2018).
  3. [3] Sampaio A. Z., Gomes A. M. and Farinha T., “BIM methodology applied in structural design: Analysis of interoperability in ArchiCAD/ETABS process”, Journal of Software Engineering and Applications, 14(6): 189-206, (2021).
  4. [4] Smith D. K. and Tardiff, M., “Building Information Modeling: A Strategic Implementation Guide for Architects, Engineers, Constructors, and Real Estate Asset Managers, Building Information Modeling: A Strategic Implementation Guide for Architects, Engineers, Constructors, and Real Estate Asset Managers”, John Wiley and Sons, 1–186, (2009). https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470432846
  5. [5] NIBS., “United States National Building Information Modeling Standard―Final Report, December 2007”, National Institute of Building Sciences, Washington, DC, (2007).
  6. [6] Campbell D. A., “Building Information Modeling: The Web 3D Application for AEC, In Proceedings of the twelfth international conference on 3D web technology“, ACM, Perguia, Italy: ACM, 173–176, (2007). https://doi.org/10.1145/1229390.1229422
  7. [7] Wang Y., Gosling J., Kumar M. and Naim M., “Accelerating BIM Adoption in The Supply Chain”, Report for Highways England, UK, (2017).
  8. [8] Yamazaki Y., Tabuchi T., Kataoka M. and Shimazaki D., “BIM Application to Large-scale Complex Building Projects in Japan, International Journal of High-Rise Buildings”, 3(4): 311-323, (2014). http://global.ctbuh.org/resources/papers/download/2263-bim-applications-tolarge-scale-complex-building-projects-in-japan.pd

Details

Primary Language

English

Subjects

Architectural Science and Technology

Journal Section

Research Article

Early Pub Date

July 29, 2025

Publication Date

September 1, 2025

Submission Date

October 27, 2023

Acceptance Date

May 5, 2025

Published in Issue

Year 2025 Volume: 38 Number: 3

APA
İlipınar, D., Ay, B. Ö., & Pekeriçli, M. K. (2025). Comparison of Data Integration Methods in BIM Tools for Structural Engineering: An Evaluation through Structural Analysis Tools. Gazi University Journal of Science, 38(3), 1062-1078. https://doi.org/10.35378/gujs.1380649
AMA
1.İlipınar D, Ay BÖ, Pekeriçli MK. Comparison of Data Integration Methods in BIM Tools for Structural Engineering: An Evaluation through Structural Analysis Tools. Gazi University Journal of Science. 2025;38(3):1062-1078. doi:10.35378/gujs.1380649
Chicago
İlipınar, Damlanur, Bekir Özer Ay, and Mehmet Koray Pekeriçli. 2025. “Comparison of Data Integration Methods in BIM Tools for Structural Engineering: An Evaluation through Structural Analysis Tools”. Gazi University Journal of Science 38 (3): 1062-78. https://doi.org/10.35378/gujs.1380649.
EndNote
İlipınar D, Ay BÖ, Pekeriçli MK (September 1, 2025) Comparison of Data Integration Methods in BIM Tools for Structural Engineering: An Evaluation through Structural Analysis Tools. Gazi University Journal of Science 38 3 1062–1078.
IEEE
[1]D. İlipınar, B. Ö. Ay, and M. K. Pekeriçli, “Comparison of Data Integration Methods in BIM Tools for Structural Engineering: An Evaluation through Structural Analysis Tools”, Gazi University Journal of Science, vol. 38, no. 3, pp. 1062–1078, Sept. 2025, doi: 10.35378/gujs.1380649.
ISNAD
İlipınar, Damlanur - Ay, Bekir Özer - Pekeriçli, Mehmet Koray. “Comparison of Data Integration Methods in BIM Tools for Structural Engineering: An Evaluation through Structural Analysis Tools”. Gazi University Journal of Science 38/3 (September 1, 2025): 1062-1078. https://doi.org/10.35378/gujs.1380649.
JAMA
1.İlipınar D, Ay BÖ, Pekeriçli MK. Comparison of Data Integration Methods in BIM Tools for Structural Engineering: An Evaluation through Structural Analysis Tools. Gazi University Journal of Science. 2025;38:1062–1078.
MLA
İlipınar, Damlanur, et al. “Comparison of Data Integration Methods in BIM Tools for Structural Engineering: An Evaluation through Structural Analysis Tools”. Gazi University Journal of Science, vol. 38, no. 3, Sept. 2025, pp. 1062-78, doi:10.35378/gujs.1380649.
Vancouver
1.Damlanur İlipınar, Bekir Özer Ay, Mehmet Koray Pekeriçli. Comparison of Data Integration Methods in BIM Tools for Structural Engineering: An Evaluation through Structural Analysis Tools. Gazi University Journal of Science. 2025 Sep. 1;38(3):1062-78. doi:10.35378/gujs.1380649