See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/337111149

BIM-based wall framing calculation algorithms for detailed quantity takeoff

Conference Paper · November 2019

CITATIONS READS

2 3,013

3 authors:

Chavanont Khosakitchalert Nobuyoshi Yabuki

Chulalongkorn University Osaka University
7 PUBLICATIONS   45 CITATIONS    222 PUBLICATIONS   1,062 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Tomohiro Fukuda
Osaka University
157 PUBLICATIONS   788 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

BIM-based quantity takeoff enhancement View project

Walkability, urban planning View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Chavanont Khosakitchalert on 23 February 2020.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Civil and Building Engineering Informatics, 2019

BIM-BASED WALL FRAMING CALCULATION ALGORITHMS FOR DETAILED

QUANTITY TAKEOFF
Chavanont Khosakitchalert1, Nobuyoshi Yabuki2, and Tomohiro Fukuda3

1) Ph.D. Candidate, Division of Sustainable Energy and Environmental Engineering, Graduate School of Engineering, Osaka
University, Japan. Email: khosakitchalert@it.see.eng.osaka-u.ac.jp
2) Ph.D., Prof., Division of Sustainable Energy and Environmental Engineering, Graduate School of Engineering, Osaka
University, Japan. Email: yabuki@see.eng.osaka-u.ac.jp
3) Ph.D., Assoc. Prof., Division of Sustainable Energy and Environmental Engineering, Graduate School of Engineering, Osaka
University, Japan. Email: fukuda@see.eng.osaka-u.ac.jp

Abstract: Although an automated quantity takeoff using building information modeling (BIM) is proved to be
faster and more reliable than the traditional quantity takeoff method, the information and geometries in a BIM
model must be input correctly. Drywall is a wall type that consists of wall framings as a core structure layer and
drywall sheets as finish layers. During a tendering phase, the area of each layer of drywall is used for cost
estimation. However, during a construction phase, the material quantity of wall framings must be calculated in
length in order to purchase the materials effectively. If the wall framings do not exist in the BIM model,
construction practitioners have to create them or calculate their length manually. Creating wall framing elements
in a BIM model is a time-consuming and error-prone task, especially in a large scale project. The increased
geometries in a BIM model also affect the working performance of the software. This research proposes a method
that automatically calculates the lengths of vertical and horizontal members of wall framings from the extracted
wall surfaces and the input spacing values. The method also eliminates the region of walls that overlap with
structural elements such as columns and beams. The validation is done by using an interior construction project as
a case study. It showed that the proposed method provides an accurate wall framing quantity when compared with
the quantity results from the BIM model that has wall framings and the quantity results from the manual calculation
methods. With this method, the wall framing elements do not need to be created in a BIM model for quantity
takeoff. The modeling time can be saved while construction practitioners can get an accurate wall framing quantity
for purchasing material during a construction phase.

Keywords: Building Information Modeling (BIM), Quantity takeoff, BIM-based quantity takeoff, Wall framing

1. INTRODUCTION
Quantity takeoff, a measurement of building elements, is a time-consuming and error-prone task in the
design and construction processes (Holm et al., 2005; Monteiro & Martins, 2013). Although the development of
information technology such as computer-aided design (CAD) and spreadsheet software increases convenience
for practitioners and improve their work efficiencies, the process of measurement still based on 2D drawings,
which require manual measurement and human interpretation.
Building Information Modeling (BIM) technology introduces a new method for quantity takeoff by
extracting quantities directly from object-oriented digital models of a building (Sacks et al., 2018). This method is
called BIM-based quantity takeoff. It delivers less working time and more reliable outcome when compared to the
traditional method (Bečvarovská & Matějka, 2014; Sattineni & Bradford, 2011). However, because the quantities
are extracted from geometries and information of building elements, they can be wrong if the geometries or
information do not exist or are not correct. Therefore, the accuracy and reliability of the extracted quantities depend
on the completeness and correctness of the BIM model.
Quantity takeoff of building elements that consist of sub-components is complicated in both traditional
and BIM-based method. In the traditional method, quantity surveyors have to measure each sub-component
manually. In the BIM-based method, BIM modelers have to model every sub-component in order to extract
accurate quantities. Walls are the example of this complication because they consist of a core structure layer and
finish layers, which require separated measurements. During a tendering phase, only the area of each wall layer is
measured and used for cost estimation (Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RISC), 2012). However, in actual
construction, walls are made up of sub-components such as bricks in masonry walls and wall framings in drywalls.
Although the quantities of these sub-components are not necessary for cost estimation, it is necessary for material
purchase and material optimization in a construction phase (Peansupap & Thuanthongdee, 2016; Sacks et al.,
2018).
The focal building element in this research is a wall framing of drywall. The drywall is made up of wall
framings as a core structure layer and drywall sheets as finish layers. During the construction phase, a general
contractor or a sub-contractor has to estimate the length of wall framings for material purchase. According to the
Level of Development (LOD) Specification 2019 (BIMForum, 2019), the drywall at LOD 350 represents the
details of wall framings and the drywall at LOD 400 represent the connection details of wall framings. Therefore,
the drywall at LOD 350 and higher can be used for wall framing takeoff. Nevertheless, a BIM model that

251
 Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Civil and Building Engineering Informatics, 2019

contractors receive from design teams usually do not contain all necessary information for quantity takeoff and
hence they have to develop their own BIM models (Sattineni & Bradford, 2011). Developing model elements in a
BIM model from one LOD to another is time-consuming and error-prone especially in a large scale project. The
tight time constraints in a construction site are also challenging for construction practitioners to develop BIM
models (Liu et al., 2018). Furthermore, the details of sub-components in a large scale project increase the
geometries and the file size of a BIM model which can affect the working performance of the software.
The objective of this research is to develop an automated calculation approach that can estimate the
quantities of the wall framings without creating model elements in a BIM model. The main contribution of this
paper is to propose a new method for calculating wall framings quantities from a BIM model which is faster and
easier than making detailed framing models. The proposed method uses the surfaces of drywalls in a BIM model
and the input spacing values to calculate the lengths of the vertical and horizontal members of wall framings. The
calculation algorithms are developed according to the construction method of light gauge steel framing system for
non-load bearing walls. The proposed method is validated using a case study by comparing the quantity results
from the proposed method with the quantity results from the BIM model that has wall framings and the quantity
results from the manual calculation methods. After that, the results are discussed and the conclusion is summarized.

2. BACKGROUND AND RELATED RESEARCH

2.1 Construction method for light gauge steel framing system
A light gauge steel framing is a structural system of drywall that is widely used as an alternative to a wood
framing in buildings nowadays (Packer, 2016). The principle of construction is similar to wood framing. The
framing system consists of horizontal and vertical members. The horizontal members are called track or U-track
which is named by the U-shaped section of the steel member. The vertical members are called stud or C-stud which
is named by the C-shaped section of the steel member. Figure 1 illustrates components in a light gauge steel
framing system.

Figure 1. Components in a light gauge steel framing system (front view)

The construction method for a light gauge steel framing system is inquired from installation guides by
material suppliers (The Siam Cement Group Public Company Limited, 2016; The Siam Gypsum Industry
(Saraburi) Company Limited, 2015; USG Australasia, 2011). It can be summarized that the ordinary spacing for
C-stud is 600 mm maximum on center. The spacing for U-track depends on the need of nogging to prevent stud
rotation and buckling. The intersection and corner details are divided into two methods (see Figure 2) which
depend on the condition of the construction site. The method one needs one extra stud at a corner and a T-
intersection and two extra studs at a cross intersection (see Figure 2a). The method two only needs one extra stud
at a cross intersection (see Figure 2b). The studs at both sides of openings (doors and windows) are to use two C-
studs combined into boxed studs (see Figure 1a). The header or lintel and the sill trimmer are to use U-track (see
Figure 1b and Figure 1c). The jack studs between header or sill trimmer and top or bottom track are to use the
same size and spacing as other C-studs (see Figure 1d).
The specific construction details used in the case study such as the spacing of members and the intersection
and corner details are obtained from an interview with the construction manager of the case study building. This
information is then used as the setups for the prototype system in the validation section.

252
 Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Civil and Building Engineering Informatics, 2019

Figure 2. The intersection and corner details of light gauge steel framing system

2.2 Quantity Takeoff

According to Holm et al. (2005), the traditional quantity takeoff methods for wall framings are divided
into two calculation methods: by wall framing spacing and by wall framing per area. Additional interviews with
construction practitioners were conducted to gain more details about both methods which can be summarized as
follows. The first method calculates the length of C-studs and U-tracks by wall dimensions and spacing between
members. As for the C-stud, the number of studs is calculated by dividing the total wall length by the stud spacing,
then round up the result to the whole number and plus one for the stud at the end. The extra studs at the intersections,
corners, and openings should be counted separately and add to the number of studs. After that multiplying the total
number of studs by the wall height to find the total length of C-studs. As for the U-tracks, the number of tracks is
calculated by dividing the total wall height by the track spacing, then round up the result to the whole number and
plus one for the track at the end. After that multiplying the total number of tracks by the wall length to find the
total length of U-track. The second method calculates the length of C-studs and U-tracks by multiplying the net
wall area by the length of studs or tracks per one square meter. Then the extra length of studs at the intersections,
corners, and openings should be added to the results. It should be noted that both methods are an estimation. The
quantity results may be more or less than the actual use. The most accurate calculation would be the method that
draws the actual number of studs and tracks and measures them. However, this method is very time-consuming
and not practical in a large scale project.
BIM has a capability to extract quantities information from building model elements (Sacks et al., 2018);
therefore, the actual number of studs and tracks can be extracted instantly if they exist in a model. However, a
BIM model from a design stage usually does not contain all necessary information (Olsen & Taylor, 2017;
Sattineni & Bradford, 2011). Developing a BIM model to higher LOD within a limited time constraint become a
challenge for construction practitioners (Liu et al., 2018). The modeling time increases in the range of two to
eleven times when developing a BIM model from one LOD to another (Leite et al., 2011). Furthermore, the
increased LOD also increases the geometries and the file size of a BIM model, which causes scalability problems.
Large scale project that contains millions of objects consumes memory resource and increases the processing time
of a computer (Sacks et al., 2018). Therefore, it may not necessary to create every detailed in building model
elements (LOD 350 or higher).
Several pieces of research have been done to improve the process of construction and quantity takeoff
using computer-aided design (CAD) or BIM approach. Our previous research proposed an automatic method that
enhances the accuracy of the quantities of each wall and floor layer in a BIM model by using clash detection
capability (Khosakitchalert et al., 2018, 2019). Choi et al. (2015) proposed a quantity takeoff process and a
prototype system for estimation of building frame in an early design stage. Rajabi et al. (2015) developed a system
that can estimate quantities of mechanical, electrical, and plumbing (MEP) from a BIM that has no detailed
building model available. Cho & Chun (2015) proposed a cost estimation system for reinforced concrete structures
using BIM-based quantity takeoff and data mining. Manrique et al. (2015) proposed a method that automatically
generates shop drawings of wood-framing in a 3D CAD environment. Lim et al. (2016) proposed a rebar estimation
algorithm to quickly evaluate the financial performance of the design. Zaki et al. (2017) developed algorithms that
can automatically generate a masonry wall assembly at LOD 400 in a given BIM. Liu et al. (2018) developed a
rule-based BIM approach to minimize material waste for drywall sheets.
However, the estimation algorithms for light gauge steel framing of drywall that use the capability of BIM
has not been proposed. This proposed method will not change the original BIM model. Therefore, the speed and
the accuracy of the proposed method would benefit for construction practitioners who need a quantity of wall
framings but does not want to develop every detail of walls in a BIM model.

3. PROPOSED METHOD
The proposed method uses the surfaces of drywalls in a BIM model and the spacing values of wall
framings to calculate the total length of vertical and horizontal members of wall framings. To implement the

253
 Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Civil and Building Engineering Informatics, 2019

proposed method, a prototype system is developed using Dynamo 1.3.3.4111, a visual programming extension in
Autodesk Revit (“Dynamo BIM,” 2016). This is because this software platform can connect with BIM models
directly and easily for both non-programmers and programmers to develop and visualize the results.
The process flowchart of the proposed method is shown in Figure 3. The first step is the preparation of
surfaces of drywall. The wall elements are imported from a BIM model and the wall types that are not drywall will
be filtered out. The location lines and the wall heights are extracted from the drywall. They are then used to form
wall surfaces. The structural columns, structural framings (beams), floors, doors, and windows are imported from
a BIM model and combined into an integrated geometry. This geometry is used to check the intersection with the
wall surfaces. The regions of the wall surfaces that overlap with the geometry will be subtracted. The final products
are the net surfaces of walls that have been subtracted with columns, beams, floors, doors, and windows. The net
wall surfaces, the wall heights, and the wall location lines will be used to calculate the length of wall framings in
the following steps.

Start
Input: Structural columns,
structural framings, and floors No

Check for Subtract the The net

Input: Combine into an
intersection overlapping wall
Doors integrated geometry
Yes regions surfaces
Input: Extract wall
Windows location lines Create
surface from
Extract extrusion
Input: Select only
wall
Walls drywalls
heights

(a) Select the bottom Calculate

horizontal lines (represent the length The length of
Extract Select the top horizontal lines bottom U-tracks) bottom U-tracks
Extract of lines
perimeter lines (represent header tracks)
perimeter
Select the top horizontal Calculate
lines The length of
Select the top and bottom lines (represent top U- the length
Extract horizontal lines (represent tracks) of lines Top U-tracks
perimeter lines header and sill trimmer tracks)

Manual Divide wall Create Duplicate location lines Intersect lines

Calculate the length of The length of
input: heights by sequence of to the points (exclude the with wall
lines middle U-tracks
Spacing value spacing points on Z axis first points) surfaces
U-track

(b)
Find points on the Project them on Split the Calculate the Divide the Create sequence Plus the
Manual the wall location lines by the length of each
corners of doors lengths by of points on the end point
input: lines points line
and windows spacing lines of the lines
Spacing
value of
common stud Create vertical lines
Intersect lines
on sequence of points
with wall Remove lines that Calculate the length
surfaces intersect with doors of lines (represent
The
and windows common C-studs)
length of
C-studs
Combine into
Input: an integrated Select the
Doors geometry top and
bottom Calculate the Divide the Create Create vertical Intersect
Input: Extract horizontal length of each lengths by sequence of lines on sequence lines with
Windows perimeter lines lines line spacing points the lines of points wall surfaces

Manual input: Calculate the length

Spacing value of of lines (represent
jack stud jack studs)

(c) Find intersection Points of the

The length of
corner Find C- Select lines Calculate
points of the wall stud lines (represent the length extra C-studs
location lines Points of the of lines at the
that are extra studs at
T-intersection intersections
on those intersections
Point of the cross- points and corners) and corners
intersection

(d) Select the side

The length of
Find C-stud lines Select lines (represent Calculate extra C-studs
vertical lines of that overlap the extra studs at both sides the length at both sides End
doors and windows side vertical lines of openings) of lines of openings

Figure 3. The process flowchart of the proposed method

3.1 Calculation algorithms for U-tracks

U-tracks are the horizontal members of light gauge steel framing system. They consist of top tracks,
bottom tracks, and middle tracks. Figure 3a shows the flowchart of the calculation algorithms for U-tracks. The
length of the top and bottom tracks can be obtained from the perimeter lines that are extracted from the net wall
surfaces. The top horizontal lines will be selected as the representative of the top U-track. The bottom horizontal

254
 Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Civil and Building Engineering Informatics, 2019

lines will be selected as the representative of the bottom U-track. These lines will be then calculated their lengths.
The middle U-tracks consist of the tracks that are used as noggings, the tracks that are used as headers at doors
and windows, and the tracks that are used as sill trimmers at windows. The length of header tracks is calculated
from the top horizontal line extracted from door and window geometries. The length of sill trimmer tracks is
calculated from the bottom horizontal line extracted from window geometries. The length of nogging tracks is
calculated from the following process. First, the wall heights are divided by the input track spacing. The results
are rounded up to the whole number and used to create the sequence of points on the Z axis of the walls. Second,
the wall location lines are duplicated to those points except the first points which are the location of the bottom U-
tracks. Third, the lines are intersected with the net wall surfaces to eliminate the part of lines that are not inside the
surfaces. Finally, the length of noggin tracks is calculated from the lines and they will be combined with the length
of header tracks and sill trimmer tracks to form the total length of middle U-tracks. Figure 4a shows the
visualization of U-tracks represented by lines in Dynamo.

3.2 Calculation algorithms for C-studs

C-studs are the vertical members of light gauge steel framing system. They consist of common studs and
jack studs. Figure 3b shows the flowchart of the calculation algorithms for C-studs. The length of common studs
is calculated from the following process. First, the points on the corners of doors and windows are detected from
the net wall surfaces. They are then projected on the wall location lines. These points are used to split the wall
location lines into segments. Second, the lengths of line segments are divided by the input stud spacing. The results
are rounded up to the whole number and used to create the sequence of points on the lines. In addition, the end
points of the lines are added to the sequence of points. The vertical lines are then created on these points. Third,
the lines are intersected with the net wall surfaces to eliminate the part of lines that are not inside the surfaces.
Fourth, the lines are checked the intersection with door and window geometries in order to remove the lines that
intersect with doors and windows. Finally, the length of the common stud is calculated from the lines. Similar to
the common studs, the length of jack studs is calculated from the following process. First, the top and bottom
horizontal lines are selected from the perimeter lines of door and window geometries. Secondly, the lengths of line
are divided by the input stud spacing. The results are rounded up to the whole number and used to create the
sequence of points on the lines. The vertical lines are then created on these points. Third, the lines are intersected
with the net wall surfaces to eliminate the part of lines that are not inside the surfaces. Finally, the length of the
jack stud is calculated from the lines and they will be combined with the length of common studs to form the total
length of C-studs. Figure 4b shows the visualization of C-studs represented by lines in Dynamo.

3.3 Calculation algorithms for extra C-studs at intersections and corners

Different numbers of extra studs at intersections and corners are used according to different construction
details (see Figure 2). When two walls meet each other, the calculation algorithms for C-studs only calculate one
stud per wall at the intersection point. Therefore, the calculation for extra studs is needed. Figure 3c show the
flowchart of the calculation algorithms for extra C-studs at the intersections and corners. The wall location lines
are used to find the intersection points between walls. The points are divided into points of the corner, points of
the T-intersection, and points of the cross-intersection. Then the C-stud lines that are on the points will be selected.
The lengths of C-stud lines are calculated again for the extra C-studs at the intersections and corners. Figure 4c
shows the visualization of extra C-studs at intersections and corners represented by lines in Dynamo.

3.4 Calculation algorithms for extra C-studs at both side of openings

Figure 3d show the flowchart of the calculation algorithms for extra C-studs at both side of openings.
These extra studs are calculated when the studs at both sides of openings are two C-studs combined into boxed
studs. The side vertical lines are selected from the perimeter lines of door and window geometries. Then the C-
stud lines that overlap with the side vertical lines will be selected. The lengths of C-stud lines are calculated again
for the extra C-stud at both sides of openings. Figure 4d shows the visualization of extra C-studs at both sides of
openings represented by lines in Dynamo.

Figure 4. (a) Lines represent U-tracks. (b) Lines represent C-studs. (c) Lines represent extra C-studs at
intersections and corners. (d) Lines represent extra C-stud at both sides of openings.

255
 Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Civil and Building Engineering Informatics, 2019

4. VALIDATION
A case study was used to verify the prototype system and validate the proposed method. It is an interior
construction project on the fifth floor of Chulapat 14 building located at Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok,
Thailand (see Figure 5a). This case study covers all scenarios of walls interact with other walls, structural columns,
beams, and floors. The gross internal area of this floor is 1,280 m2. Drywalls are used to divide the interior space
into 28 rooms. This construction project uses construction details as follows. The typical wall height is 3.65 m and
the wall height under beams is 3.45 m. The spacing of vertical members (C-studs) is 600 mm maximum on center.
The spacing of horizontal members (U-tracks) is also 600 mm maximum on center, which is divided into seven
rows. The intersection and corner detail is the detail (a) in Figure 2. The studs at both sides of doors and windows
are to use two C-studs combined into boxed studs. The header and sill trimmer are to use U-track and the jack
studs are to use C-stud with the same 600 mm spacing.
Two BIM models were created in Autodesk Revit 2018.2. The first BIM model is the accurate detailed
BIM model used as a baseline for the comparison. This model has drywalls at LOD 350. The wall framings were
precisely modeled according to actual construction details (see Figure 5b). The quantities of wall framings were
extracted directly from the BIM model. The second BIM model has drywalls at LOD 300. The drywalls are single
model elements with defined material layers (see Figure 5c). Some walls were created by overlapping with
structural columns and beams. The prototype system was applied to this BIM model. Figure 5d shows the
visualization of wall framings represented by lines in Dynamo. The quantities of wall framings were automatically
calculated by the prototype system and the results were compared with the results from the accurate detailed BIM
model.

Figure 5. (a) The photo of the case study. (b) The wall framings in the accurate detailed BIM model (drywall
sheets are hidden from this view). (c) The BIM model at LOD 300. (d) The visualization of wall framings
represented by lines in Dynamo.

Furthermore, manual quantity takeoff methods were used to compare the performance of the proposed
method. According to section 2.2, the manual quantity takeoff methods for wall framings are divided into two
methods. In this validation, the first method is named manual method 1. It calculates the length of studs and tracks
from wall dimensions and spacing between members. The total wall length measured from the construction
drawings is 314.20 m. The wall height and the spacing of stud and track is described in the first paragraph of
section 4. The second method is named manual method 2. It calculates the length of studs and tracks from net wall
area and length of studs and tracks per one square meter. The net wall area measured from the construction
drawings is 947.91 m2. The length of studs per one square meter is 2 m. The length of tracks per one square meter
is 2 m. The net wall area excludes the area of openings and the area that overlap with structural columns and beams.
The length of extra studs at the intersections, corners, and openings were measured separately and added to the
results of both manual method 1 and manual method 2. The numbers of corners, T-intersections and cross
intersections are 20, 24, and 3 respectively. The number of doors is 47 and the number of windows is 5.
The quantity results from the proposed method, the manual method 1, and the manual method 2 were
compared with the quantity results from accurate detailed BIM model. Table 1 shows the comparison and the
deviation of each method when compared to the baseline.

256
 Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Civil and Building Engineering Informatics, 2019

Table 1. Comparison of the wall framing quantities among the accurate detailed BIM model, the proposed
method, the manual method 1, and the manual method 2.
Accurate
Detailed Proposed Method Manual Method 1 Manual Method 2
Wall Framings BIM Model
Length Length Deviation Length Deviation Length Deviation
(m) (m) (%) (m) (%) (m) (%)
C-studs 2,726.18 2,729.35 0.12 2,857.95 4.83 2,837.52 4.08
U-tracks (Total) 1,971.49 1,974.66 0.16 2,199.40 11.56 1,895.82 -3.84
- Top tracks 320.30 321.80 0.47 315.30 -1.56 N/A N/A
- Bottom tracks 263.98 261.90 -0.79 315.30 19.44 N/A N/A
- Middle tracks 1,387.21 1,390.96 0.27 1,576.50 13.65 N/A N/A

The quantity of wall framings from the accurate detailed BIM model is the most accurate, but the time
spent on creating wall framings in the BIM model is massively high when compared to the execution time of the
proposed method. Additionally, the increased geometries in a BIM model slow down the viewport rendering speed,
especially in a computer with less memory and a low-end graphics card.
The quantity of C-studs from the proposed method is 0.12% higher than the accurate detailed BIM model
and the quantity of U-tracks from the proposed method is 0.16% higher than the accurate detailed BIM model.
The deviation of C-studs and U-tracks are less than 0.20% which can be said that the wall framing quantities from
the proposed method are accurate when compared to the accurate detailed BIM model. The slightly excess
quantities are not significant because generally, contractors will add a percentage of waste on top of the calculated
quantities when purchasing materials.
Furthermore, the result from the proposed method is more accurate than the result from the manual method
1 and 2. The quantity of C-studs from the manual method 1 is 4.83% higher than the accurate detailed BIM model
and the quantity of C-studs from the manual method 2 is 4.08% higher than the accurate detailed BIM model. The
quantity of U-tracks from the manual method 1 is 11.56% higher than the accurate detailed BIM model. The
deviation of U-tracks from the manual method 1 is the highest because this method does not subtract the U-track
at doors and windows. All of these deviations are usable in practice because the quantities results are higher than
the actual use. However, leftover materials could occur, especially when a percentage of waste is added to the
deviated quantities which causes much more excess materials. On the other hand, the quantity of U-tracks from
the manual method 2 is 3.84% lower than the accurate detailed BIM model. The absent quantity would be a
problem when purchasing materials because the quantity of U-tracks may not be enough during the construction.
The percentage of waste that is added may or may not cover the absent quantity.
In summary, the proposed method produces the quantity results that is as accurate as the results from the
accurate detailed BIM model, but it spends much less time to execute. Both manual methods are usable in practice,
but not as efficient as the proposed method. The results from different manual methods are not constant and the
excess quantities plus a percentage of waste would cause tremendous excess materials in a construction site.

5. CONCLUSION
This paper presented a method to estimate the quantity of wall framing from a BIM model that does not
contain wall framing elements. The proposed method extracts surfaces of drywall in a BIM model and eliminates
the parts of the surfaces that overlap with structural elements by using clash detection capabilities. Afterward, the
surfaces and the spacing values of wall framings are used to calculate the positions and the lengths of the vertical
and horizontal members of wall framings. The prototype system is developed using Autodesk Revit and Dynamo
extension.
The validation was done by using an interior construction project on the fifth floor of Chulapat 14 building
located at Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand. A BIM model with accurate wall framings was created
as a baseline for the comparison. A BIM model with walls that are single model elements was used to apply the
prototype system. Two manual quantity takeoff methods were also done to compare the performance of the
proposed method. The comparison revealed that the quantity of wall framing from the proposed method is accurate
when compared to the results from the baseline. Moreover, the results from the proposed method have less
deviation than the results from the manual methods. With this method, construction practitioners do not need to
create wall framing elements in a BIM model to measure quantities, which is time-consuming and error-prone,
especially in a large scale project. The accurate estimation of the quantity of wall framings is beneficial for material
purchase during a construction phase because excess materials and waste can be reduced. The principle of the
proposed method can be used to develop a wall framing estimation system in any BIM software products.

257
 Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Civil and Building Engineering Informatics, 2019

REFERENCES

Bečvarovská, R. and Matějka, P. (2014). Comparative Analysis of Creating Traditional Quantity Takeoff
Method and Using a BIM Tool. Construction Maeconomics Conference 2014.
BIMForum. (2019). Level of Development (LOD) Specification Part 1 & Commentary For Building Information
Models and Data. Retrieved from https://bimforum.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/LOD-Spec-2019-
Part-I-and-Guide-2019-04-29.pdf
Cho, J. and 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.
Choi, J., Kim, H., and Kim, I. (2015). Open BIM-based quantity take-off system for schematic estimation of
building frame in early design stage. Journal of Computational Design and Engineering, 2, 16–25.
Dynamo BIM. (2016). Retrieved from website: http://dynamobim.org/
Holm, L., Schaufelberger, J.E., Griffin, D., and Cole, T. (2005). Construction Cost Estimating: Process and
Practices (1st ed.). Pearson.
Khosakitchalert, C., Yabuki, N., and Fukuda, T. (2018). The Accuracy Enhancement of Architectural Walls
Quantity Takeoff for Schematic BIM Models. In Proceedings of the 35th International Symposium on
Automation and Robotics in Construction (ISARC) (pp. 768–775). Berlin, Germany.
Khosakitchalert, C., Yabuki, N., and Fukuda, T. (2019). Improving the accuracy of BIM-based quantity takeoff
for compound elements. Automation in Construction, 106, 102891.
Leite, F., Akcamete, A., Akinci, B., Atasoy, G., and Kiziltas, S. (2011). Analysis of modeling effort and impact
of different levels of detail in building information models. Automation in Construction, 20(5), 601–609.
Lim, C., Hong, W.K., Lee, D., and Kim, S. (2016). Automatic Rebar Estimation Algorithms for Integrated
Project Delivery. Journal of Asian Architecture and Building Engineering, 15(3), 411–418.
Liu, H., Singh, G., Lu, M., Bouferguene, A., and Al-Hussein, M. (2018). BIM-based automated design and
planning for boarding of light-frame residential buildings. Automation in Construction, 89, 235–249.
Manrique, J. D., Al-Hussein, M., Bouferguene, A., and Nasseri, R. (2015). Automated generation of shop
drawings in residential construction. Automation in Construction, 55, 15–24.
Monteiro, A. and Martins, J.P. (2013). A survey on modeling guidelines for quantity takeoff-oriented BIM-based
design. Automation in Construction, 35, 238–253.
Olsen, D. and Taylor, J.M. (2017). Quantity Take-Off Using Building Information Modeling (BIM), and Its
Limiting Factors. Procedia Engineering, 196(2017), 1098–1105.
Packer, A.D. (2016). Building Measurement: New Rules of Measurement (2nd ed.). Routledge.
Peansupap, V. and Thuanthongdee, S. (2016). Levels of Development in BIM for Supporting Cost Estimation of
Building Construction Projects. In Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Computing in
Civil and Building Engineering (ICCCBE) (pp. 671–678). Osaka, Japan.
Rajabi, M., Bigga, T., and Bartl, M.A. (2015). Optimization of the quantity take-off (QTO) process for
Mechanical, Electrical and plumbing (MEP) trades in tender estimation phase of the construction projects.
In Proceedings of the 32nd International Symposium on Automation and Robotics in Construction
(ISARC) (pp. 1–8). Oulu, Finland.
Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RISC). (2012). NRM 2: Detailed measurement for building works.
Retrieved from https://www.rics.org/globalassets/rics-website/media/upholding-professional-
standards/sector-standards/construction/nrm-2-detailed-measurement-for-building-works-1st-edition-
rics.pdf
Sacks, R., Eastman, C.M., Lee, G., and Teicholz, P.M. (2018). BIM Handbook: A Guide to Building Information
Modeling for Owners, Designers, Engineers, Contractors, and Facility Managers (3rd ed.). Wiley.
Sattineni, A. and Bradford, R. (2011). Estimating with BIM: A Survey of US Construction Companies. In
Proceedings of the 28th International Symposium on Automation and Robotics in Construction (ISARC)
(pp. 564–569). Seoul, Korea.
The Siam Cement Group Public Company Limited. (2016). SCG Smartboard Installation Manual. Retrieved
from https://www.scgbuildingmaterials.com/th/Download/Manual.aspx
The Siam Gypsum Industry (Saraburi) Company Limited. (2015). ProWall Partition Metalprofile. Retrieved
from https://www.usgboral.com/content/dam/USGBoral/Thailand/Website/Documents/English/brochure-
catalogues/ProWall.pdf
USG Australasia. (2011). Steel Stud & Track Installation Details. Retrieved from
https://www.usgboral.com/content/dam/USGBoral/Australia/Website/Documents/English/installation-
guide/usg-steel-stud-installation-7-11-aus.pdf
Zaki, T., Nassar, K., and Hosny, O. (2017). Parametric Blockwall-Assembly Algorithms for the Automated
Generation of Virtual Wall Mockups Using BIM. In Proceedings of the Architectural Engineering
Conference (pp. 844–854). Reston, VA: American Society of Civil Engineers.

258

View publication stats