AUTOMATED BIM-BASED FORMWORK QUANTITY TAKE-OFF

Yasar Cepni & Asli Akcamete

Middle East Technical University, Turkey
Ralf Klein
KU Leuven, Belgium
ABSTRACT: Quantity take-off (QTO) is an indispensable part of construction projects since it is used for
scheduling and cost calculation. However, obtaining accurate QTOs from 2D traditional drawings is tedious
and time-consuming. Therefore, the use of BIM for QTO is increasing. According to literature, the accurate,
automated calculation of formwork areas from BIM remains still problematic. This is mainly due to lack of
modeling conventions, agreed workflows, and classification, together with modeling errors like overlapping
structural elements and limitations of BIM software. It is important to note that QTO is needed during several
phases of the design and construction process, with differing requirements and available information. Moreover,
automated formwork generation is not supported by the majority of BIM tools although it is also a time-
consuming task and necessary for construction phase planning, visualization, and interference check. Therefore,
this publication describes how the extraction of formwork quantities and the creation of formwork models can be
automated with Autodesk Revit Dynamo. A case study is presented, and the results obtained from the presented
algorithm are verified with the manual operation of the BIM quantification features as well as manual
calculations for some elements. Consequently, accurate and faster formwork quantification results and generic
formwork models are automatically obtained. Ongoing research is focused on the extension of the tool to
automate the creation of formwork models for 4D modeling for the construction stage, including the aspects of
scheduling and clash detection in the context of open-BIM.
KEYWORDS: Automation, Building Information Modeling (BIM), BIM-Based Quantity Take-Off, Formwork

1. INTRODUCTION

Material quantity take-off (QTO) plays a prominent role in the construction industry starting from the early
design stage, before tendering and preconstruction stage, and during the construction phase to assist scheduling
and cost calculations (Monteiro & Martins, 2013). Generally, the QTO process includes identification of items
and their relations on drawings, obtaining dimensions, and calculating units of measurements such as areas,
volumes, and linear meters (Shen & Issa, 2010). Hence, despite its importance, QTO requires a significant
amount of time to interpret conventional printed and CAD drawings (Sabol, 2008). Besides, estimators need to
investigate each drawing set carefully and perform calculations meticulously so that errors due to double
counting and omissions can be eliminated (Olsen & Taylor, 2017). On the other hand, BIM has a potential to
enable more accurate and faster material QTO process while minimizing fluctuations in the cost calculation
stages (Sabol, 2008). It is because information for cost estimation is already included or linked in BIM, which
reduces errors and misinterpretations, and it can be automatically updated when design changes (Ashcraft, 2008).
However, the reliability of BIM-based quantification is generally questioned owing to modeling mistakes,
limitations in BIM tools, and not establishing ground rules for the modeling process (Bečvarovská & Matějka,
2014). Difficulties in the implementation of classification systems into BIM, lack of level of development (LOD)
in different project phases where needed, and exchange of building data among distinct tools are also main
challenges for BIM-based QTO (Firat et al., 2010). Furthermore, design models may provide inadequate and
excessive quantities since they contain less detailed BIM objects due to the modeling process (Khosakitchalert et
al., 2019a). Consequently, BIM-based QTO requires further research to increase its reliability.
In the case of concrete formwork, the geometric accuracy of BIM models and concrete placement sequence
significantly affects the quantification results. Usually, it is unlikely to extract complete and systematic
formwork QTOs from BIM models due to the intersection between different elements resulting in excess
material quantification (Monteiro & Martins, 2013). Likewise, overlapping volumes of structural components
and software limitations complicate BIM-based formwork quantification. Besides, formwork is a temporary
structure in the construction phase, and creating detailed formwork models for QTO extraction requires time and
rigorous work (Khosakitchalert et al., 2019b). Therefore, investing additional time and work is generally not
favorable for a provisional activity from the construction practitioner’s standpoint.
This research proposes a framework to calculate concrete formwork areas and automatically generate generic
formwork panels with distinctive information for the classification of area quantities with respect to different

220
structural elements. For this purpose, a reinforced concrete (RC) building is created in the BIM environment to
compare the accuracy and estimation time of quantification obtained from the proposed method and
conventional BIM-based quantification approach together with manual calculations. Moreover, a limited
investigation of open BIM standard IFC is also performed, and eventually, research results are discussed, and
possible future works are explained.

2. PRELIMINARY RESEARCH

2.1 Limitations of BIM-Based Quantity Take-Off

Traditional QTO gets iterative and ineffective since design development between different phases and activities
create time lags during reviews, and consequently, cost estimation and QTO becomes slower (Cheung et al.,
2012). Nonetheless, BIM-based QTO enables estimators to access material quantities in various formats for
examining and grouping information whenever it is essential (Masood et al., 2014). However, architecture,
engineering, and construction (AEC) industry generally confront problems in BIM-based quantification. It is
because the quality of BIM models is not trustworthy due to a lack of understanding of automated QTO among
estimators and limitation of solid knowledge of the QTO process, which may result in not realizing CAD/BIM
problems in terms of QTO (Smith, 2014). Moreover, the time spent on checking models and updating
information with misleading data brings about entanglements in BIM-based QTO (Olsen & Taylor, 2017). The
requirement for control and modification of existing BIM data is mainly caused by the lack of modeling
conventions and agreed workflows during the project execution.
For this reason, models need to be developed following the construction sequence with proper modeling
guidelines and a sufficient level of detail, which agreed upon by all stakeholders (Firat et al., 2010). For
example, while linear meter for a particular type of wall is sufficient for early estimations, contractors need to
know the type of gypsum boards, the number of wall layers, frames, and even screw quantities in cost calculation
during the construction stage (Sabol, 2008). Hence, models with the required information need to be provided for
efficient BIM-based estimation. Furthermore, BIM tools should be appropriate for QTO and cost calculations,
and information needs to be complete and quantitative (Aram et al., 2014). In light of these limitations,
quantification using BIM requires extensive modeling approaches and high adoption of BIM software. Similarly,
concrete formwork QTO is affected both from modeling conventions and software limitations, and eventually,
formwork quantification and visualization become a problem in the BIM platform, especially for the contractors.
It is because object information of the 3D structural components cannot be directly utilized to extract the
formwork area unless additional formwork modeling is done in the current state of the art (Cho & Chun, 2015).
Meanwhile, manual modeling of formwork is time-consuming and error-prone, which increases the importance
of the automatic generation of formwork models with required area information.
2.2 BIM-Based Formwork Quantification
BIM tools neither have a specific tool for formwork modeling nor calculate the formwork areas correctly where
building components intersect with each other (Monteiro & Martins, 2013). However, the quantification of
formwork depends on the information in models; otherwise, estimation of formwork bases upon statistical
approaches resulting in less accuracy and inefficient process (Cho & Chun, 2015). Therefore, several types of
research have been focusing on improving the accuracy of BIM-based formwork quantification. For example,
Meadati et al. (2011) proposed a BIM-based repository by associating additional information to 3D models for
design checks, material take-off, constructability analysis, and automatic shop drawing preparation in Autodesk
Revit and Navisworks environment. Kannan & Santhi (2013) created formwork components in Autodesk Revit
for a high rise building and simulated formwork activities in Navisworks by integrating with the construction
schedule. Lee et al. (2017) developed an object-oriented approach to integrate schedule and cost estimation using
ArchiCAD models for labor productivity in formwork activities. Khosakitchalert et al. (2019a) suggested
utilizing their visual programing approach BCEQTI (BIM-based compound element quantity take-off
improvement) for calculating structural concrete volumes and formwork areas. Recently, Khosakitchalert et al.
(2019b) proposed a visual algorithm based on their previous studies and calculated structural formwork areas of
an RC building.
Although there are a few studies using visual programming to calculate formwork quantities from BIM, it is
observed that the previous algorithms have not been tested to calculate RC objects with complex geometries. For
example, the faces of the rectangular and arched openings in the walls and inclined surfaces of columns, beams,
and walls, which are posing challenges, are not included in the previous algorithms. Therefore, in this study, we
have developed an algorithm that can accurately calculate formwork areas from a building model, including

221
slanted columns, tapered beams, inclined wall surfaces, arched wall openings, and circular columns with drop
panels. Another goal of the research is to generate formwork panels for each formwork surface using generic
models and store some relevant information such as formwork area and formwork ID in the formwork model for
future activities. In addition to accuracy, time comparison is also made to reveal the speed of automated
formwork quantification.

3. CASE STUDY MODEL

This research is focused on reinforced concrete (RC) structures, hence a two-story RC building with a courtyard
area in the center is created in Autodesk Revit 2021 for the case study implementation. Figure 1 illustrates the
building overview and detailed visualization of several structural components. Tapered beams, inclined wall
surfaces, slanted columns, circular columns with drop panels, and arched opening heads for windows are
explicitly added in the model since these types of conditions complicate the formwork estimation. Tapered
beams are created by cutting typical rectangular beams with mass components, and slanted columns are modeled
utilizing mass in place feature in the BIM tool. All other elements are created using available families in the
software library. The formwork area for each structural category is calculated and visualized by using Dynamo
2.5.0.7586, a well-known visual programing tool integrated into Autodesk Revit. Moreover, this case study is
performed by utilizing a computer with internal working memory (RAM) of 16 GB, Intel Core i7-9750H 2.6
GHz CPU, and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 6GB video card.

Fig. 1: Building model with the detailed view of structural components in Autodesk Revit environment

4. PROPOSED METHOD
Constructions are executed in a systematic way such that foundations are cast first, and walls and columns
follow the foundations. Structural slabs and beams are placed upon completion of vertical structural elements.
Stair and parapet walls are generally constructed after casting the adjacent components. This hierarchy is also
considered in the development and application of the proposed method so that the formwork area of a structural
category is calculated by intersecting its surfaces with other structural categories to eliminate surfaces, which do
not require formwork. For example, beam and slab elements are built on structural walls and columns; hence,
some surfaces of beams and slabs do not require formwork since they are already enclosed with columns and
walls. Besides, stairs are not included in the calculation of other categories since surfaces, which stairs intersect
with other elements, need to be formed separately in the real situation considering the construction sequence.
The proposed method aims to eliminate overlapping areas between the same and different structural components
to obtain area information correctly. It also extracts the formwork areas, which is not ordinarily possible to
calculate due to software limitations such as beam-column intersections and wall opening surfaces. Figure 2
illustrates the framework of the algorithm to calculate and visualize formwork elements. The method consists of
both manual and automated processes, and the process for all structural categories is the same. The manual
process is done by the user, and it includes the creation of a structural view, assigning project parameters,
grouping, and saving formwork models and linking the formwork model back to the original model at the end.

222
The automated process is done by Revit Dynamo. It detects intersections and overlaps between structural
elements, filters formwork requiring surfaces, creates formwork panels, and export results in a spreadsheet. The
method is applied for each structural category at different times in such a way that one category is selected for
formwork calculation at a time, while others are used for eliminating overlapping and intersected surfaces of the
formwork category.
The process starts with the creation of a 3D structural view, including only structural components, and then three
different project parameters formwork area, formwork type, and formwork ID are assigned for generic model
categories. These parameters are automatically filled by the algorithm later, and the only purpose here is to
allocate an information space within the generic model category, which is also the category of formwork models.
Moreover, "parapet" information is added for parapet walls using the comment section of wall elements, later
this information is filtered in the Dynamo to eliminate top surfaces of parapet walls.
Selecting formwork elements and other elements are done with the input variables shown in Figure 3a. After
running Dynamo, the algorithm gets the formwork elements and extracts all surfaces of each element.
Meanwhile, the algorithm obtains the other categories and combines the element surfaces of these categories.
Additionally, surfaces of the formwork category are also included in other elements to eliminate overlaps and
intersections between the same elements. After that, formwork element surfaces are intersected with the surfaces
of the other elements to eliminate intersections and overlaps of formwork elements by a surface difference
operation. This operation provides formwork requiring surfaces for all structural categories. Then, side and
sloped surfaces are filtered since they need to be formed in all structural categories, and top and bottom surfaces
are investigated in a different path.

Fig. 2: Framework for the formwork area quantification and visualization

Since bottom surfaces are not formed in foundation elements, a boolean operation is performed to eliminate
bottom surfaces for the foundation category. Hence, "is_foundation" is checked as true to calculate the formwork
area of foundations while false is checked for the bottom of beams, slabs, stairs, and opening heads. It is
important to note that the bottom surfaces of columns and walls are already eliminated in previous steps since
they intersect with foundation and slab elements.
Top surfaces are first eliminated for all elements since the top of structures are not formed in the construction
stage, but the bottom of the window and door openings in the wall category needs to be formed. Therefore,
another boolean operation is implemented to filter door and window sills and include them into the calculation
process by checking true under "is_wall" input, as shown in Figure 3a. Furthermore, the algorithm also examines
the top surfaces for parapet walls, and it disregards top surfaces if they are part of parapet walls by filtering
parapet walls using the "parapet" information inserted in previous stages. After manipulating top and bottom
surfaces, they are gathered with side and sloped surfaces that are filtered in previous stages. These surfaces are

223
converted into generic formwork panels using the node obtained from the spring node library in Dynamo (see
Figure 3c). The generic family template is imported from the Revit library by using the “file path” node in
Figure 3a. Later, previously created project parameters for the generic model category are filled with formwork
area, type, and ID information, and they are exported into a spreadsheet using the nodes shown in Figure 3b.
After that, the formwork model is grouped and saved as a different Revit model. This model is also linked back
to the original model, and formwork information is also scheduled in the software. This process is repeated for
all structural categories.
The proposed method stores the element ID information, which is automatically generated by Autodesk Revit,
and uses this information as formwork ID during the calculation. This way, formwork panels and areas could
present the information of the structural elements which they belong to. Consequently, the proposed method
classifies the formwork area information according to each structural element ID and it facilitates retrieving area
information for individual building components.

Fig. 3: View of visual code and essential nodes for the algorithm. (a) Nodes for input variables. (b) Nodes for
spreadsheet creation. (c) Node for formwork panel generation

5. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

This research aims to investigate the formwork quantification process in terms of accuracy and time. Since the
building model is not an actual structure, there are no calculated quantities that can be used as a baseline for
comparison of accuracy and time. Therefore, the manual quantity take-off area noted in Table 1 is calculated by
manual measurement of beam and column formwork dimensions from the BIM model and manually splitting
and painting of formwork requiring surfaces of foundations, slabs, walls, and stairs in the model. The reason for
using two different approaches for different categories is because formwork area quantities obtained from Revit
with paint and split face feature is known to be erroneous for beams and columns since intersections between
elements cannot be split and painted. It is observed that using paint and split face features of the software make
formwork area calculation possible and accurate for foundations, slabs, walls, and stair categories. Hence,
formwork faces of these structural categories are split, where necessary, and then painted with a different
material. After that, a material take-off schedule is created to extract the paint material, which is also the
formwork area. Duration for splitting element faces and painting formwork surfaces are recorded, as shown in
Table 1. Even though the software is utilized for take-off, the splitting and painting process took a significant
amount of time when compared to the proposed automated method. This process cannot be shortened unless the
splitting and painting tasks are automated since a user has to manually identify faces that need to be covered with
formwork.

224
Beam and column areas, however, are calculated with measuring dimensions from the model and manually
recording them in a spreadsheet since the Revit options mentioned above do not work for these elements. The
time for the quantification process was again recorded and tabulated in Table 1. According to results shown in
Table 1, the use of visual programming provides accurate formwork area information for all structural
components investigated in this study. Besides, the duration for estimation was significantly reduced with this
approach. Furthermore, Figure 4 shows the formwork model automatically created in Autodesk Revit
environment with the proposed algorithm. Formwork elements are created by using generic family category, and
area information, type of formwork, and formwork ID are included in each generic formwork element property
with the help of project parameters assigned at the beginning of the process.
Table 1: Comparison of formwork quantity and duration between manual and automated processes

Automated Automated
Formwork Manual Quantity Manual Quantity Deviations
Quantity Take-Off Quantity Take-Off
Elements Take-Off Area (m2) Take-Off Time (s) Area (%)
Area (m2) Time (s)

Foundations 262.45 04 min 11:44 s 262.45 01 min 07:36 s 0

Walls 2957.53 75 min 10:55 s 2957.53 08 min 45:77 s 0

Columns 558.22 110 min 05:26 s 558.22 06 min 28:32 s 0

Beams 580.36 90 min 08:13 s 580.36 07 min 44:55 s 0

Slabs 1375.59 31 min 55:43 s 1375.59 02 min 41:07 s 0

Stairs 93.90 20 min 45:36 s 93.90 07 min 39:45 s 0

Total 5828.05 332 min 17:37 5828.05 34 min 28:12 s 0

Fig. 4: (a) Visualization of formwork model and specific parts. (b) Automatically filled formwork properties.

225
The method is also tested with the IFC model of the same building, and new nodes, which are taken from the
Dynamo bimorph nodes library, are incorporated into visual code to read IFC link information (see Figure 5).
For this purpose, the building model created in Revit is exported to the IFC model, and this model is linked to a
new project. After implementing new nodes into existing code, geometric information from the IFC model is
read. Even though the formwork area for each structural group is precisely calculated, the formwork ID cannot
be extracted from the IFC model. Hence, the algorithm needs to be improved, and it should also be investigated
with different IFC models created in other modeling tools such as Tekla Structures and Allplan. Moreover,
formwork quantification using different IFC platforms should also be studied in detail in order to enable a
generic approach for automated QTO from all modeling tools.

It is verified that the proposed algorithm can calculate formwork areas accurately and faster than the current
Revit based and spreadsheet approaches. Besides, a generic formwork model with valuable information can be
generated by utilizing visual programing.

Fig. 5: Dynamo nodes used for reading IFC geometric information

6. CONCLUSION
Quantity take-off (QTO) using conventional 2D drawings is a time-consuming and tedious task. The use of BIM
in the QTO process is not a straightforward process for area-based materials. Hence, this study focused on visual
programming for formwork estimation and visualization of formwork panels by utilizing Autodesk Revit and
IFC models. The visual coding aims to reduce the time for formwork quantification and increase the accuracy of
BIM-based formwork QTO, which is usually obstructed by modeling mistakes and software limitations.
For this purpose, a reinforced concrete (RC) building is modeled, including tapered beams, slanted and circular
columns, inclined wall surfaces, and arched and rectangular wall openings. Formwork quantities obtained from
the modified model and the manual calculations and visual coding are compared in terms of time and accuracy.
It is observed that formwork quantities are accurately extracted from Autodesk Revit models, and time is
significantly reduced. With small modifications, the visual code is also applied to the IFC model extracted from
the same Revit model, so that formwork quantification can be done utilizing open BIM standards. Accordingly,
the total formwork area for different structural categories is calculated correctly, both using IFC and Revit
models.
In future studies, the surfaces that are eliminated should also be classified according to element IDs so that the
total eliminated area from the gross area of a structural element can also be determined and classified. Besides,
the developed algorithm needs to be tested with real and more complex building models, including curved and
faceted walls, to validate the proposed method for Revit and IFC models. Other types of RC structures, such as
bridges and tunnels, should also be studied with the proposed method to test whether it can correctly calculate
the formwork area. Furthermore, the creation of formwork elements is limited to the panel portion of the
formwork assembly. Hence, further attempts need to be made for automatic modeling of the entire formwork
system, including the actual amount of plywood that needs to be procured considering the waste, formwork
supports, bracings, and cross beams to perform clash detection during the construction stage properly.

7. REFERENCES
Aram, S., Eastman, C., & Sacks, R. (2014, January). A knowledge-based framework for quantity takeoff and
cost estimation in the AEC industry using BIM. In The 31st International Symposium on Automation and
Robotics in Construction and Mining (p. 1).

226
Ashcraft, H. W. (2008). Building Information Modeling: A framework for collaboration. Construction
Lawyer, 28, 5.
Bečvarovská, R., & Matějka, P. (2014). Comparative Analysis of Creating Traditional Quantity Takeoff Method
and Using a BIM Tool. In Construction Maeconomics Conference 2014.
Cheung, F. K. T., Rihan, J., Tah, J., Duce, D., & Kurul, E. (2012). Early stage multi-level cost estimation for
schematic BIM models. Automation in Construction, 27, 67–77.
Cho, J., & Chun, J. (2015). Cost estimating methods for RC structures by quantity takeoff and quantity
prediction in the design development stage. Journal of Asian Architecture and Building Engineering,
14(1), 65–72.
Dynamo Bimorph Nodes, https://bimorph.com/bimorph-nodes/
Dynamo Spring Nodes, https://dynamonodes.com/category/springnodes/

Firat, C. E., Arditi, D., Hämäläinen, J. P., Stenstrand, J. and Kiiras, J. (2010). Quantity Take-off in Model-based
Systems, In Proceedings of the 27th CIB W78 International Conference, Cairo, Egypt, 16–18.
Kannan, R., & Santhi, H. (2013). Automated Construction Layout and Simulation of Concrete Formwork
Systems Using Building Information Modeling. In The 4th International Conference of European Asian
Civil Engineering Forum (EACEF), Singapore, C7-C12.
Khosakitchalert, C., Yabuki, N., & Fukuda, T. (2019a). Improving the accuracy of BIM-based quantity takeoff
for compound elements. Automation in Construction, 106.
Khosakitchalert, C., Yabuki, N., & Fukuda, T. (2019b). Automatic concrete formwork quantity takeoff using
building information modeling. In Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Construction
Applications of Virtual Reality (CONVR), 21–28.
Lee, J., Park, Y. J., Choi, C. H., & Han, C. H. (2017). BIM-assisted labor productivity measurement method for
structural formwork. Automation in Construction, 84, 121–132.
Masood, R., Kharal, M. K. N., & Nasir, A. R. (2014). Is BIM adoption advantageous for construction industry of
Pakistan? Procedia Engineering, 77, 229–238.
Meadati, P., Irizarry, J., & Aknoukh, A. (2011). BIM and Concrete Formwork Repository. In 47th ASC Annual
International Conference Proceedings, Omaha, NE.
Monteiro, A., & Martins, J. (2013). A survey on modeling guidelines for quantity takeoff-oriented BIM-based
design. Automation in Construction, 35, 238–253.
Olsen, D., & Taylor, J. M. (2017). Quantity Take-Off Using Building Information Modeling (BIM), and Its
Limiting Factors. Procedia Engineering, 196, 1098–1105.
Sabol, L. (2008). Challenges in Cost Estimating with Building Information Modeling. Design and Construction
Strategies, 1-16.
Shen, Z., & Issa, R. R. A. (2010). Quantitative evaluation of the BIM-assisted construction detailed cost
estimates. Journal of Information Technology in Construction, 15, 234–257.
Smith, P. (2014). BIM & the 5D Project Cost Manager. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 119, 475–
484.

227