Impact of BIM Environment Tool Modifications on Reducing Time for Developing Drawing Documentation in Architectural Design

Rafał Rucki, Janusz Rębielak, Janusz Gołdasz

doi:10.37190/arc250111

Abstract

This article examines the impact of modifications to tools used in BIM (Building Information Modeling) technology on the efficiency of technical drawing development for residential building projects. It presents research results analyzing how these tool modifications affect the time required to create architectural documentation. The authors focused on the most commonly used BIM tools for this purpose.

BIM technology significantly accelerates the process of creating project documentation in the construction industry. Due to its integrated structure, BIM software has the potential for further improvement of tools used for specific design tasks. To identify the benefits of proposed enhancements, three residential building projects consisting of similar components were developed. Virtual building models and their documentation were created using computer scripts that simulated work in two versions of the BIM environment: default and customized. This method allowed for reducing delays and ensuring objective results.

The time required for preparing drawing documentation for a single-family house in the customized BIM environment was 49.87% shorter, for a multi-family building 36.54% shorter, and for a housing complex 79.74% shorter. To compare the benefits gained from the introduced changes with respect to the time spent on modifications, BIM-proficient designers were asked to create a model of one of the projects, and their working time was measured. These results were then averaged and compared with the time achieved by the computer, establishing the ratio between human and computer work efficiency. These results also considered the time needed to implement changes in the BIM environment, allowing for an assessment of their cost-effectiveness. In the cases studied, BIM environment customization proved beneficial for buildings with an area of 600 m². Such an extensive modification process is usually required only once, and subsequent projects can utilize the already developed environment, leading to further time and cost savings. The obtained results confirm that it is worthwhile to customize BIM tools and develop designers’ knowledge in this field. The described method is one of the few that accurately demonstrates the real measurable benefits of using BIM technology.

Full article view is only available on bigger screens.

2025

1(81)

Rafał Rucki*, Janusz Rębielak**, Janusz Gołdasz***

The impact of modifications to BIM environment tools

on reducing the time required for developing drawing documentation

in architectural design

DOI: 10.37190/arc250111

Published in open access. CC BY NC ND license

Abstract

This article explores the impact of changes to the tools used in Building Information Modeling (BIM) technology on the eciency of creating tech-

nical drawings in residential building projects. The study analyses how modications to these utilities aect the time requisite to produce architectural

documentation. The authors focused on the most commonly used BIM tools for this purpose.

BIM technology signicantly accelerates the construction industry’s creation of project documentation. Owing to its integrated structure, BIM

software has the potential to improve further the tools used for specic design tasks. Three residential building projects with similar components were

developed to identify the benets of the proposed improvements. Virtual building models and their documentation were created using computer scripts

that simulated work in two versions of the BIM environment: the default and customized. This method excluded delays and ensured the achievement

of objective results.

The time demanded to complete the drawing documentation for a single-family house in the customized BIM environment was 49.87% shorter; for

a multi-family building, it was 36.54% shorter; and for a building complex, it was 79.74% shorter. To compare the benets derived from the changes

against the time invested in modications, experienced BIM users were tasked to model one of the projects, and their work time was measured. The out-

comes were then averaged and juxtaposed with the time obtained by the computer, establishing a ratio between human and computer performance. The

results also accounted for the time entailed to implement changes in the BIM environment, allowing an assessment of the cost-eectiveness of these

modications. In the cases studied, customizing the BIM environment proved advantageous for buildings accommodating a surface area of 600 m

Such a substantial modication process is typically required only once, with subsequent projects beneting from the already-developed environment,

leading to further time and cost savings. The results conrm that it is worthwhile to customize BIM tools and cultivate more profound software know-

ledge. The method described is one of the few that precisely demonstrates the tangible benets of using BIM technology.

Key words: Building Information Modeling, BIM productivity, BIM objects, detailed design, environment customization

Introduction

The digital revolution has signicantly inuenced all

science, technology, economics, and social life domains.

The construction sector has undergone a profound trans-

formation with the advent of computer-aided design

(CAD). As a result of the rapid development of compu-

tational methods, Building Information Modeling (BIM)

technology was introduced. BIM is a complex digital

information system in building design, construction, and

operation. It reduces design and implementation costs

while improving the quality of produced documentation

(Yang, Chou 2019). BIM is an advanced process that in-

tegrates creating, managing, and exchanging digital rep-

resentations of buildings’ physical and functional char-

acteristics. Its primary goal is to improve collaboration,

communication, and decision-making among all stake-

holders. Additionally, BIM ensures data integrity across

dierent software platforms. It enables real-time updates

for automated processing at every project lifecycle stage

* ORCID: 0000-0001-7942-7282. Faculty of Architecture, Ta-

de usz Kosciuszko Cracow University of Technology, Poland, e-mail:

rafal.rucki@doktorant.pk.edu.pl

** ORCID: 0000-0003-3135-5384. Faculty of Architecture, Ta-

deusz Kosciuszko Cracow University of Technology, Poland.

*** ORCID: 0000-0002-0226-3360.

Faculty of Electrical and Com -

puter Engineering, Tadeusz Kosciuszko Cracow University of Techno-

logy, Poland.

120 Rafał Rucki, Janusz Rębielak, Janusz Gołdasz

(Borkowski 2023)

. The prudent assignment of appropri-

ate physical values to the properties of the digital model

enables numerous benecial procedures. These encompass

clash detection, comprehensive documentation, sche ma tics,

visualizations, analyses, cost estimates, and logistical plans.

Interdisciplinary coordination within the BIM environment

can support early identication and resolution of potential

issues before construction begins. Real-time sharing of

con struction schedules and asynchronous supervision on

the BIM platform allows stakeholders to monitor venture

progress. This collaboration platform ultimately improves

process alignment and reduces the risk of venture delays

(Cha, Kim 2020). Beyond its primary application, BIM

technology also assists in building management and quality

control. It provides detailed information on building com-

ponents and systems. This technology is also employed

in renovation and modernization planning, emergency in -

terventions, and mitigating the environmental impact of

buildings and oers valuable insights into their energy

consumption (Sarvari et al. 2020; Azhar et al. 2012).

Despite its numerous advantages, BIM adoption in de -

ve loped countries remains at approximately 70% of the

market share within the construction sector’s digital tech-

nologies (NBS 2020). As technology advances, govern-

ments increasingly introduce regulations in this eld,

encouraging investors and designers to utilize BIM. New

standards are being proclaimed or implemented in devel-

oping countries, whereas numerous regulations are already

enforced in developed countries. The protracted and de-

layed adoption of BIM can be explained by six key factors:

existing legal frameworks, demand, interdisciplinary col-

laboration, the need for innovation, software costs, and im-

plementation expenses (Edirisinghe, London 2015; Singh,

Holmström 2015; Alreshidi, Mourshed and Rezgui 2017;

Mitera-Kiełbasa, Zima 2024). Although costly, investing

in BIM implementation often yields vast benets in the

design and management process. However, the perceived

high cost of BIM software – especially in emerging mar-

kets – and the lack of awareness regarding implementation

expenses, comprising training and software adaptation,

hinder its full global adoption in the construction industry

(Hong et al. 2020; Bui, Merschbrock and Munkvold 2016;

Herr, Fischer 2019; Charef et al. 2019; Othman et al. 2021;

Blanco, Chen 2014; Mitera-Kiełbasa, Zima 2023).

Each country has its own BIM standards, just as every

professional user of this software has an individual ap-

proach to design. Consequently, BIM allows for tailoring

its utilities according to user preferences. These customi-

zation options typically include interface settings, library

objects, tools, and keyboard shortcuts. The next step in

software personalization can involve creating and storing

predened congurations of tools and objects within a tem-

plate le, which expedites project preparation. Moreover,

using specially prepared BIM libraries augments user capa-

bilities while curtailing the likelihood of abandoning BIM

standards in favour of traditional CAD systems.

Based on a synthesis of existing BIM denitions.

The primary objective of this study is to determine the

ramications of targeted customization of the BIM envi-

ronment on the time needed to consummate three residen-

tial building projects explicitly designed for this research,

each composed of similar housing units. The outcomes

of the analyses provide nuanced insights into the merits

of thorough implementation of BIM standards within the

scope of this study. Additionally, the research proposes an

innovative time measurement method to establish objec-

tive evaluation criteria for assessing the capability of this

technology. A secondary objective is demonstrating the

investment yield of individually targeted alterations to se-

lected BIM environment functions.

State of research

As this article reects, numerous scientic studies high-

light BIM technology’s noteworthy advantages. However,

most of these studies rely on subjective perceptions, often

presented as assertions lacking solid empirical evidence

and on the widespread belief in BIM’s pre-eminence. An-

other source of research is user surveys of BIM software,

which consistently demonstrate the clear advantages of this

technology over CAD. Ultimately, such studies can serve

only as the BIM technology reception indicators. The pri-

mary criteria for assessing the advantages and usability of

digital technology are increased eciency – a reduction in

the time allocated to accomplish specic tasks – and return

on investment (ROI), dened as the ratio of prots to cap-

ital contribution.

Israel Kaner and his co-authors conducted four case

studies on implementing BIM in prefabricated concrete

structure projects by two medium-sized structural engi-

neering rms (Kaner et al. 2008). They concluded that

using this technology markedly improved project quality,

with documentation containing fewer errors and requiring

less temporal investment to validation, ultimately dimin-

ishing company costs despite the designers not being fully

procient in using the software.

Rafael Sacks and Ronen Barak conducted experiments

to evaluate the assets of BIM in structural design, focusing

on creating general and detailed drawings (Sacks, Barak

2008). They demonstrated an eciency increase in doc-

umentation production ranging from 21% to 61%, incor-

porating an average improvement of over 40%. The total

eciency increase ranged from 15% to 41% for design

documentation preparation and 16% to 48% for all engi-

neering tasks. Additionally, they suggested that BIM could

revolutionize design rms by diminishing the necessity for

drawing documentation personnel and introducing a new

professional role – the so-called structural modeler.

Salman Azhar presented case studies highlighting BIM’s

exceptional economic viability across various applications

(Azhar 2011). One case study emphasized signicant cost

savings in the early design stage owing to clash detection,

which is challenging to identify in 2D drawings. In another

project utilizing a budget of $46 million, the estimated sav-

ings surpassed $200,000. In a dierent instance, presenting

the client with three BIM models led to selecting the most

cost-eective version, saving over 15% of the planned

 TheimpactofmodicationstoBIMenvironmenttoolsonreducingthetimerequiredfordevelopingdrawingdocumentation 121

budget. An ROI analysis for ten projects showed an av-

erage return of 1,633%, ranging from 140% to 39,900%.

In their case study, Kristen Barlish and Kenneth Sul-

livan pointed out the lack of a proper calculation method

and a reliable basis for evaluating the strengths of BIM

compared to CAD (Barlish, Sullivan 2012). They pro-

posed a framework-based computational model derived

from large-scale industrial settings, considering parame-

ters such as formal requests for information, change or-

ders, and schedule adjustments from an architectural and

structural design perspective. This method was tested in

three cases, showing substantial upsides of using BIM in

the examined applications.

Nam-Hyuk Ham and his team investigated the use of

BIM technology in generating production documents for

prefabricated steel structures (Ham, Yang and Yuh 2019).

They analysed the extraction of production documents for

two modules consisting of 1,965 and 1,216 drawing sheets,

including general layouts and single-part and single-plate

assembly drawings. A comparative analysis between 2D

CAD-based extraction and 3D BIM revealed improved

eciency, with documentation preparation time reduced

from 17 to 16 hours for the rst module and 12 to 7 hours

for the second module. The eciency of assembly drawing

preparation increased by approximately 48.75%, curtailing

the documentation processing time from 281 to 144 hours.

Beata Grzyl and her co-authors compared the time de-

voted to completing dierent design stages for a dental

clinic and a residential building using traditional 2D CAD

versus modern BIM (Grzyl, Migda and Apollo 2019).

Their case study examined how both approaches impact

design eciency. They found that BIM saved 41% of to-

tal work time compared to the 2D approach, equivalent to

32 hours. BIM signicantly reduces time requirements,

with some design stages showing up to a 75% dierence.

Furthermore, transitioning from BIM to conventional 2D

design can involve up to 70% more time, underscoring

BIM’s eciency compared to traditional design methods.

A literature review identied a gap in research explor-

ing the relationship between BIM environment customiza-

tion and designer productivity. Despite this limitation, the

scope of existing studies referenced in this article can be

extrapolated to comparisons between CAD and BIM tech-

nologies, where industry-standard CAD programs can be

related to the default BIM environment.

Methods

In the initial stage of the research, study samples were

prepared in the form of blueprint sheets characterized by

a uniform graphic design, allowing for impartial compar-

ative analysis. During the research process, quantitative

measurements of the completion time for each project were

collected in two environments: default and customized.

The default environment had minimal graphic modica-

tions, while the customized environment was meticulously

tailored to precise user specications and preferences. The

measurements were obtained using programmed scripts

that simulated user actions when constructing the BIM

model by replicating their interactions with essential pe-

ripheral devices used for computer control, i.e., the mouse

and keyboard. The time expended on the project documen-

tation completion was a benchmark for further calcula-

tions. Additionally, the time allocated to targeted modica-

tions of the BIM environment was measured. The average

time professional software users spent completing a given

task was compared with the execution time of the script

under identical conditions, allowing for an assessment of

the eciency ratio of human labour relative to computer

processing time.

Implementationsubject

Three documentation drawing sheets were prepared:

a oor plan of a single-family house (Fig. 1a), a multi-fam-

ily building layout incorporating a horizontal communica-

tion path (Fig. 1b), and a oor plan of a building com-

plex with three vertical communication shafts per building

module (Fig. 1c). The schematic plans presented in the

aforementioned illustrations have a coherent graphic rep-

resentation in the original project documentation at a scale

of 1:50. Each of them contains the same library objects

and shares residential units, assuming a minimal area is

allocated for technical shafts and internal building commu-

nication. The single-family house includes a living space

featuring a total area of 100 m

located on the ground

level. In the multi-storey, multi-family building, ten apart-

ments per tier are accessible from a common corridor and

staircase. The living space on a single storey is 600 m

which represents 78.8% of the total oor area. The nal

case is a multi-storey complex with four identical mod-

ules arranged along two orthogonal axes. Each part of the

complex has three staircases with elevators. A single level

of this arrangement has 2,400 m

of living space, account-

ing for 77.67% of the total oor area. This last example is

essential for research primarily attributable to its modular

modelling method in BIM software. The created compo-

nents allow mirroring and rotation to replicate the mod-

ule within the model space, truncating the time devoted

to documentation preparation. The time savings correlate

with the number of inserted derivative elements, provided

the BIM model adheres to the software standards.

The documentation of each project consists of three

parts: the building plan, project information, and refer-

ences, which together form a complete blueprint sheet

(Fig. 2). The plan depicts the building with all relevant data

for industry designers or construction contractors during

the building process. The informational section contains

all identication data related to project stakeholders, the

object’s location, and documentation details. The referenc-

es explain abbreviations and symbols used in the project,

while tables expand on drawing data by providing a com-

prehensive summary of separate zones, total building area,

and details of structural partitions along with their compo-

nents. BIM structures, which are virtual representations of

building elements, namely walls, columns, beams, slabs,

windows, doors, stairs, railings, and zones, constitute the

drawing section of the documentation. Labels describing

walls and slabs include their coded names, whose expan-

sion in the reference section provides a precise description

122 Rafał Rucki, Janusz Rębielak, Janusz Gołdasz

type of oor nish, and the measured area of a given room.

Information on windows and doors is presented using

markers, i.e., labels displaying dimensions, identication

numbers, object types, and the zone number in which they

are located, following a sequential pattern within each res-

idential unit. Additionally, these labels indicate the lintel

and sill height, among other attributes.

BIMtools

Projects consist of several types of BIM tools: structures,

auxiliary components, and independent objects. In this arti-

cle, BIM structures represent building components created

using specially designed utilities. These include walls, slabs,

beams, columns, roofs, windows, doors, and zones. Auxilia-

ry components, by connecting with BIM structures, display

attributes such as the code of their layered structure, dimen-

sions, element height, or any other parameter previously

entered in the building component. Auxiliary components

also include dimensions in the BIM model, such as linear,

of each layer. The thickness of partition layers is also pro-

vided via internal dimensions in the plan, whilst the over-

all dimensions of columns and beams are designated using

a dedicated tool. Zone metrics assign spaces to specic

functions, detailing an identication number, zone name,

Fig. 2. Layout division scheme

(elaborated by R. Rucki)

Il. 2. Schemat podziału arkusza projektu

(oprac. R. Rucki)

Fig. 1. Residential buildings

plans scheme:

a) single-family house – 100 m

b) multi-family house – 600 m

c) block of flats – 2400 m

(elaborated by R. Rucki)

Il. 1. Schemat projektów budyn-

ków mieszkalnych:

a) dom jednorodzinny – 100 m

budynek wielorodzinny – 600 m

c) zespół zabudowy

wielorodzinnej – 2400 m

(oprac. R. Rucki)

 TheimpactofmodicationstoBIMenvironmenttoolsonreducingthetimerequiredfordevelopingdrawingdocumentation 123

height, radial, and angular, each with a dedicated tool. For

these tools to work correctly, they must be interconnected to

their source elements. Independent BIM objects represent

building components without separate tools, such as nu-

merical furniture or construction equipment models. This

classication may vary depending on the BIM software.

Customizedcomponents

Interface

The program interface has been appropriately custom-

ized to optimize its functionality in this study. Therefore,

tools that accounted for at least 4% of total utility usage in

the documentation process were integrated into the one-

click workow or assigned to a keyboard shortcut. As

a result, the interface allocated 31.1% of the screen area

to tools and 68.9% to the workspace (Fig. 3). The impact

of the ratio of workspace area to tool area on the project

completion duration was not scrutinized in this study.

Predefined tool settings and BIM object’s properties

In BIM technology, tool settings and the properties of

the structures and objects used are crucial, as they are later

used in analyses, summaries, or schedules and inuence

the time committed to creating documentation. Each tool

and object were predened and placed within a two-click

cycle in the customized environment.

BIM objects

All the BIM objects used serve to dene the space pre-

cisely or specify the required construction techniques. They

come from the default library and were modied in the

source code for research purposes, as shown in Figure 4,

along with the time invested in modications and the de-

viation from the default object expressed as a percentage.

The following changes were made to the BIM objects:

– Sink: The static placement of water connections al-

lowed the faucet position to be changed on the sink mount-

ing side.

– Bathtub/Shower: The ability to display the object’s

dynamic dimensions on the plan was added to avoid prob-

lems in later stages of construction.

– Composite Prole Label: This object consists of two

parts: the body and the line. It is commonly used to display

a unique BIM structure code, referred to in the software as

a composite prole. Reference to this value is explained

in the appropriate section of the documentation sheet. The

label lists all components of BIM structures, particularly

walls, slabs, and roofs, along with their individual and total

thicknesses. The modication was designed to automati-

cally maintain a constant distance between the object’s

body and the BIM structure, thereby ensuring the readabil-

ity of the drawing. As a result, the line length now matches

the element thickness, which previously required manual

adjustments for each structure.

– Door and Window Marker: In the BIM software, doors

and windows are treated as separate objects with their tool,

but they lack text data. Their presentation is handled by

the marker object, which displays dierent data depend-

ing on the BIM structure. Improvements were made to the

door

and window markers, which now automatically in-

clude the building number, staircase, and apartment number.

The marker was also enhanced to display the sill and lintel

height and x the re resistance class display, eliminating

limitations in integrating this object with schemes.

– Entry Label: This object is placed next to each apart-

ment entrance, and its characteristic black triangle sym-

bolizes the main door of the residential unit. The code’s

implementation facilitates seamless integration with the

BIM structure by linking to the door object symbol and au-

tomatically capturing the apartment number, which is then

displayed next to the apartment’s abbreviation.

– Surface Label: Another improvement stems from the

graphic representation of the project. Initially, the object

displayed the name of the surface nish for the selected

BIM structure. It was connected with a triangle-shaped in-

dicator to ensure proper data readability. Using it as a la-

belling tool allowed it to be automatically aliated with

the BIM structure and a parameter referring to its nish.

– Zone Marker: Zones in the BIM software are crucial

for storing and displaying data related to individual rooms,

among others, oor area, oor nish type, or room volume.

The customization project introduced signicant changes

aimed at streamlining the user’s work. For example, the

room ID number was tied to the building and staircase

number to automatically generate the entire ID sequence,

divided by a separator chosen by the user. The introduced

function allows quick selection from predened oor n-

ish types, further speeding up the blueprint assembly. Such

customization immensely reduces the time needed for

zone numbering and potential modications.

Results

Userperformance

A group of six experienced architectural designers, each

with 5–6 years of prociency in BIM software, was se-

lected to create the second project (Fig. 1b) in the custom-

ized environment. Table 1 presents the parameters of their

computer equipment. After familiarizing themselves with

the conguration, they were provided with a template le

containing predened data, layout sheets, and operational

Fig. 3. Software’s work space division scheme

(elaborated by R. Rucki)

Il. 3. Schemat podziału ekranu roboczego w oprogramowaniu

(oprac. R. Rucki)

124 Rafał Rucki, Janusz Rębielak, Janusz Gołdasz

Software

Name, Version ARCHICAD 24 INT, BUILD: 4018

Hardware

Computer ID User 1 User 2 User 3 User 4 User 5 User 6 Scripts

Operating

system

macOS BigSur

11.5

Windows 10

21H1

macOS BigSur

11.5

macOS BigSur

11.5

Windows 10

21H1

Windows 10

21H1

macOS

BigSur 11.5

Resolution 5120×2880 2560×1440 5120×2880 5120×2880 1920×1080 1920×1080 5120×2880

Processor

Intel Core i5

3.1 GHz

6-Core

Inter Core

i7-8700K

3.7 GHz 6-Core

Intel Core i7

3.8 GHz

8-Core

Intel Core i5

3.4 GHz

4-Core

Intel Core

i5-11400F

2.6 GHz 4-Core

Intel Xeon

E5-2620 v2

2.1 GHz 6-Core

Inter Core i9

3.6 GHz

8-Core

RAM Memory

16 GB

2667 MHz

DDR4

24 GB

3200 MHz

DDR4

16 GB

2667 MHz

DDR4

8 GB

2667 MHz

DDR4

8 GB

2667 MHz

DDR4

4 GB

2667 MHz

DDR4

40 GB

2667 MHz

DDR4

Table 1. List of software and hardware used in the research (elaborated by R. Rucki)

Tabela 1. Lista użytego oprogramowania i sprzętu komputerowego w badaniu (oprac. R. Rucki)

Fig. 4. List of customized

BIM objects

(elaborated by R. Rucki)

Il. 4. Lista dostosowanych

obiektów BIM

(oprac. R. Rucki)

 TheimpactofmodicationstoBIMenvironmenttoolsonreducingthetimerequiredfordevelopingdrawingdocumentation 125

Identification

number

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Run 1

Time [s] 33 149 33 642 31 693 33 732 30 814 – 38 369

Compliance level [%] 99.12 99.61 96.53 99.45 94.20 – 99.41

Run 2

Time [s] – – 33 487 – 34 180 33 863 –

Compliance level [%] – – 99.27 – 99.08 99.59 –

Average time [s] 33676

Table 2. Results of executing the second sample project by professionals in the customized BIM environment (elaborated by R. Rucki)

Tabela 2. Wyniki realizacji drugiego projektu przez specjalistów w dostosowanym środowisku BIM (oprac. R. Rucki)

guidelines and began modelling. The accuracy of their

work, assessed using an image pixel analysis program,

mandated that drawings achieve an accuracy of over 99%.

Half of the participants completed the task within a time

dierence of no more than 2%, meeting the required accu-

racy criteria (Table 2). Two drawings did not meet expec-

tations, achieving accuracies of 96.53% and 94.20%, re-

spectively. The authors were asked to correct the errors, and

their completion times were recalculated. One participant

met the accuracy criteria, but his lead time was signicantly

worse than the previous ones. Due to non-compliance with

the BIM model instructions and the inability to repeat the

attempt in light of learning eects, another designer was

invited to perform the same task. Ultimately, the variabil-

ity in all results remained within a 3% range of the times

recorded for all participants, with the average completion

time recorded as 9 hours, 21 minutes, and 16 seconds.

Computerperformance

For each project, sets of source codes were developed

to carry out tasks in two BIM environments: default and

customized. Each command executed via the keyboard and

mouse was recorded using specialized software, which

saved it as a line of code upon receiving a signal from the

controller. The code was then run in isolated conditions, and

time measurements were made. This method ensured con-

sistency in all results and excluded drafting delays. The time

between operations was constant, eliminating discrepancies

caused by changes in computer performance attributable to

background operations, particularly system processes and

data indexing. Although each delay was slight, their cumu-

lative eect could signicantly aect the measurements.

Scripts were executed using Python modules – Pynput and

Pyautogui – enabling simultaneous use of mouse and key-

board operations. The details of the computer equipment

used for measurements are provided in Table 1.

Controllers

Mouse operations involve functionally separate com-

mands related to screen pixels. The scripts operated in the

native screen resolution of 5120 × 2880. The programmed

commands had to be divided into operations for moving,

dragging, single-clicking, double-clicking, and multiple-

clicking within a specied time frame while simultaneous-

ly recording cursor position and time of movement. Scroll-

ing was replaced with other commands, simplifying the

programming process. Keyboard operations involved only

pressing and releasing dierent keys or key combinations.

Multithreading allowed the scripts to interpret more intri-

cate procedure sets appropriately.

Measurementresults

Table 3 presents the results of the time measured for

completing computer tasks (CTET) in two columns. For

the opening two samples, the right column shows the out-

comes for the customized environment. For the third sam-

ple, the last column displays the time to create the docu-

mentation without the modules. The data show a signicant

dierence between the compared environments. Using an

individually addressed BIM environment reduced the time

for drawing preparation by 49.87% for the single-family

house project, 36.54% for the multi-family building proj-

ect, and 79.74% for the complex building ensemble project.

The preliminary hypothesis assumed that time savings in

the customized BIM environment would increase propor-

tionally with the project size. However, the time obtained

for the rst sample contradicts this hypothesis. The rst

project uses the same number of BIM objects as the other

projects but includes only single copies. This phenomenon

highlights the signicant time required to congure tools

before use as part of the total documentation lead time.

User-computertaskperformanceratio

The user-computer ratio (UC RATIO) was calculated

to account for the time devoted to le preparation and

customization. This ratio was determined by dividing the

average time for user-generated documentation in the sec-

ond sample by the time taken for the programmed scripts,

resulting in 2.8476. This ratio was then multiplied by each

project’s computer task performance time (CTET) individ-

ually to obtain the simulated user completion time.

Summaryofcalculations

Table 3 presents the study’s results, showing the time

devoted to creating documentation for three architectural

projects of varying scales. The environment preparation

time (EPT) was added to the time taken by the user (UTET)

to assess the cost eciency of the proposed adjustments.

Analysis of the obtained results shows that considering

126 Rafał Rucki, Janusz Rębielak, Janusz Gołdasz

the time spent on modifying the BIM environment, the

total time for plan development for the rst sample was

129.56% longer than the default environment. However,

for the second project, adjusting the environment reduced

the time by 3.33%. The time consumption for the third

project highlights the exceptional economic value of indi-

vidually addressed BIM tool customization. When applied,

the time for creating drawing documentation was reduced

by 71.04%.

Additionally, presenting the data as an investment re-

turn indicator in the last row excellently exemplies the

savings in required work eort in the customized BIM en-

vironment compared to the costs of the customization pro-

cess. This indicator was –84.03% for the rst project, in-

dicating a loss. The second project returned +11.24%. For

the third sample, the investment was returned with a result

of +1029.57%, emphasizing the signicant rewards of ad-

dressed BIM environment customization for larger archi-

tectural projects.

Conclusions and discussion

The ndings of the conducted research indicate a sub-

stantial increase in the eciency of the designer’s work

when using the customized BIM environment for creating

virtual building models and project documentation. The

application of the developed environment demonstrated

a substantial increase in productivity, notably diminishing

the time necessary to complete drawing documentation

sheets, ranging from 36.54% to 79.74% across all cases.

An ancillary research goal aimed at determining the eco-

nomic viability of this customization is complementary

and relies on the outputs from a relatively small number

of participants. The breakeven point for the investment in

the customized BIM environment, where the savings from

the investment cover its costs, was achieved for a building

with just under 600 m

of residential space. Despite this

limitation, experienced BIM users can compare their needs

and estimate when such commitment might pay o in their

cases. Future research should focus on gathering more de-

tailed data on experienced BIM users worldwide to identify

the size of a representative research group.

It is important to emphasize that such an extensive BIM

environment customization is required only once in each

design rm. Similar customization methods and the same

objects, with occasional minor modications, could prove

helpful in subsequent projects. The ensuing adjustments

may arise from changes in design assumptions, software

updates, new ideas to extend functionality, or a desire to op-

timize the code. However, the time and resources needed for

these improvements will constitute only a minuscule part of

the initial outlay. For this reason, when calculated per unit

of designed building area, the return on such an investment

should almost proportionally increase with the number of

completed projects. It is also worth adding that the present-

ed results refer only to the initial version of the project. Any

changes to the project would engender an increase in the

protability of this customization. Correctly executing the

modules can multiply these benets, elucidating the over

1000% return on investment for the third sample layout. In

future research, it would be valuable to analyse the gains

from customizing the BIM environment in the context of

other types of buildings, such as non-residential ones, and

projects from other industries beyond architecture. Also, an

interesting avenue of exploration would be to examine the

consequence of changes in the project on the return on in-

vestment in the BIM environment.

This research highlights the positive outcomes of ad-

dressing customized BIM environments and may encour-

age designers to invest in software improvements to in-

crease their work eciency. Such customization not only

shortens modelling time but also improves the quality of

documentation and the BIM model itself.

Translatedby

RafałRucki

Table 3. Computer task execution time with following calculations (elaborated by R. Rucki)

Tabela 3. Czas wykonania przez komputer i dalsze obliczenia (oprac. R. Rucki)

Sample Number (Living Area) 1 (100m

) 2 (600m

) 3 (2400m

)

Virtual Environment Type

(EPT[s])

Default

(5723)

Customised

(23158)

Default

(5723)

Customised

(23158)

Default

(5723)

Default *MOD

(5723)

Customised

(23158)

CTET

[s] 1 961 983 18 637 11 826 86 731 46 920 17 571

[hrs:min:s] 00:32:41 00:16:23 05:10:37 03:17:06 24:05:31 13:02:00 04:52:51

UTET

(CTET * UC

RATIO)

[s] 5 584 2 799 53 071 33 676 246 975 133 609 50 035

[hrs:min:s] 01:33:04 00:46:39 14:44:31 09:21:16 68:36:15 37:06:49 13:53:55

UTET + EPT

[s] 11 307 25 957 58 794 56 834 252 698 139 332 73 193

[hrs:min:s] 03:08:27 07:12:37 16:19:54 15:47:14 70:10:38 38:42:12 20:19:53

Relative Performance [%]

(Default/Customised)

43.56 103.45 345.25

Return on Investment [%]

(Profit/Investment)

–84.03 11.24 1029.57

Note: CTET – Task Execution Time by Computer, UC RATIO – User-Computer Ratio, UTET – Task Execution Time by User,

EPT – Environment Preparation Time, *MOD – modules.

 TheimpactofmodicationstoBIMenvironmenttoolsonreducingthetimerequiredfordevelopingdrawingdocumentation 127

References

Alreshidi, Eissa, Monjur Mourshed, and Yacine Rezgui. “Factors for Eec-

tive BIM Governance.” Journalof Building Engineering 10 (2017):

89–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2017.02.006.

Azhar, Salman. “Building Information Modeling (BIM): Trends, Bene-

ts, Risks, and Challenges for the AEC Industry.” Leadership and

ManagementinEngineering 11, no. 3 (2011): 241–52. https://doi.org/

10.1061/(ASCE)LM.1943-5630.0000127.

Azhar, Salman, Malik Khalfan, and Tayyab Maqsood. “Building Infor-

mation Modeling (BIM): Now and Beyond.” AustralasianJournal

ofConstructionEconomics andBuilding12, no. 4 (2012): 15–28.

https://doi.org/10.5130/ajceb.v12i4.3032.

Barlish, Kristen, and Kenneth Sullivan. “How to Measure the Benets

of BIM – A Case Study Approach.” AutomationinConstruction 24,

(2012): 149–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2012.02.008.

Blanco, Fernando G. Bañuelos, and Haibo Chen. “The Implementation

of Building Information Modelling in the United Kingdom by the

Transport Industry.” Procedia–SocialandBehavioralSciences 138

(2014): 510–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.07.232.

Borkowski, Andrzej Szymon. “A Literature Review of BIM Denitions:

Narrow and Broad Views.” Technologies 11, no. 6 (2023): 176. https://

doi.org/10.3390/technologies11060176.

Bui, Nam, Christoph Merschbrock, and Bjørn Erik Munkvold. “A review

of Building Information Modelling for Construction in Developing

Countries.” ProcediaEngineering 164, (2016): 487–94. https://doi.

org/10.1016/j.proeng.2016.11.649

Cha, HeeSung, and Jun Kim. “A study on 3D/BIM-based on-site per-

formance measurement system for building construction.” Journal

ofAsianArchitecture andBuilding Engineering 19, no. 6 (2020):

574–85. https://doi.org/10.1080/13467581.2020.1763364.

Charef, Rabia, Stephen Emmitt, Haz Alaka, and Farid Fouchal. “Build-

ing Information Modelling Adoption in the European Union:

An Overview.” JournalofBuildingEngineering 25 (2019): 100777.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2019.100777.

Edirisinghe, Ruwini, and Kerry London. “Comparative Analysis of Inter-

national and National Level BIM Standardization Eorts and BIM

Adoption.” Proceedingsofthe32ndCIBW78Conference, (2015):

149–58. https://itc.scix.net/paper/w78-2015-paper-015.

Grzyl, Beata, Wojciech Migda, and Magdalena Apollo . “Building Infor-

mation Modeling in Small and Middle Sized Buildings – case Study.”

IOPConferenceSeries:MaterialsScienceandEngineering 603, no. 3

(2019): 032077. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757899X/ 603/3/032077.

Ham, Nam-Hyuk, Jung-Hye Yang, and Ok Kyung Yuh. “A Study on the

Productivity Analysis of 3D BIM-based Fabrication Documents

Extraction.” Journalof KIBIM 9, no. 3 (2019): 30–40. https://doi.

org/10.13161/kibim.2019.9.3.030.

Herr, Christiane M., and Thomas Fischer. “BIM Adoption Across the

Chinese AEC Industries: An Extended BIM Adoption Model.”

JournalofComputationalDesignandEngineering 6, no. 2 (2019):

173–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcde.2018.06.001.

Hong, Ying, Ahmed W.A. Hammad, Ali Akbarnezhad, and Mehr-

dad Arashpour. “A Neural Network Approach to Predicting the

Net Costs Associated with BIM Adoption.” Automation in Con-

struction 119 (2020): 103306. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.

2020. 103306.

Kaner, Israel, Rafael Sacks, Wayne Kassian, and Tomas Quitt. “Case

Studies of BIM Adoption for Precast Concrete Design by Mid-Sized

Structural Engineering Firms.” JournalofInformationTechnology

inConstruction(ITcon) 13, no. 21 (2008): 303–23. https://www.it-

con.org/paper/2008/21.

Mitera-Kiełbasa, Ewelina, and Krzysztof Zima. “BIM Policy in Eastern

Europe.” Civil and Environmental EngineeringReports 33, no. 4

(2023): 14–22. https://doi.org/10.59440/ceer/177606.

Mitera-Kiełbasa, Ewelina, and Krzysztof Zima. “BIM Policy Trends in

Europe: Insights from a Multi-Stage Analysis.” AppliedSciences 14,

no. 11 (2024): 4363. https://doi.org/10.3390/app14114363.

NBS, Enterprises. 10

Annual BIMReport. Published: May 26, 2020.

Accessed: June 6, 2024, at https://www.thenbs.com/knowledge/na-

tional-bim-report-2020.

Othman Idris, Yasser Y. Al-Ashmori, Yani Rahmawati, Y.H. Mugahed

Amran, and Mohammed A.M. Al-Bared. “The Level of Building

Information Modelling (BIM) Implementation in Malaysia.” Ain

ShamsEngineering Journal 12, no. 1 (2021): 455–63. https://doi.

org/10.1016/j.asej.2020.04.007.

Sacks, Rafael, and Ronen Barak. “Impact of Three-dimensional Para-

metric Modeling of Buildings on Productivity in Structural Engi-

neering Practice.” Automation in Construction 17, no. 4 (2008):

439–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2007.08.003.

Sarvari, Hadi, Daniel W.M. Chan, Mansooreh Rakhshanifar, Nerija Ba-

naitiene, and Audrius Banaitis. “Evaluating the Impact of Building

Information Modeling (BIM) on Mass House Building Projects.”

Buildings 10, no. 2 (2020): 35. https://doi.org/10.3390/build-

ings

10020035.

Singh, Vishal, and Jan Holmström. “Needs and Technology Adoption:

Observation from BIM Experience.” Engineering, Construction

and Architectural Management 22, no. 2 (2015): 128–50. https://

doi.org/10.1108/ECAM-09-2014-0124.

Yang Jyh-Bin, and Hung-Yu Chou. “Subjective Benet Evaluation

Model for Immature BIM-enabled stake-holders.” Automation in

Construction 106 (2019): 102908. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.

2019.102908.

Streszczenie

Wpływ modykacji narzędzi środowiska BIM

na skrócenie czasu opracowywania dokumentacji rysunkowej w projektowaniu architektonicznym

Tematem artykułu jest wpływ zmian w narzędziach wykorzystywanych w technologii BIM (Building Information Modeling) na efektywność opra-

cowania rysunków technicznych w projektach budynków mieszkalnych. Przedstawiono w nim wyniki badania analizującego, w jaki sposób mody-

kacje tych narzędzi wpływają na czas tworzenia dokumentacji architektonicznej. Autorzy skoncentrowali się na najczęściej używanych narzędziach

BIM wykorzystywanych do tego celu.

Technologia BIM znacząco przyspiesza proces tworzenia dokumentacji projektowej w branży budowlanej. Ze względu na swoją integralną struk-

turę, oprogramowanie BIM ma potencjał do dalszego doskonalenia narzędzi używanych do specycznych zadań projektowych. Aby zidentykować

korzyści wynikające z proponowanych usprawnień, opracowano trzy projekty budynków mieszkalnych złożone z podobnych części. Wirtualne modele

budynków i ich dokumentację wytworzono za pomocą skryptów komputerowych, które symulowały pracę w dwóch wersjach środowiska BIM: do-

myślnej i dostosowanej. Taka metoda pozwoliła na zredukowanie opóźnień i zapewnienie uzyskania obiektywnych wyników.

Czas realizacji dokumentacji rysunkowej dla domu jednorodzinnego w dostosowanym środowisku BIM był krótszy o 49,87%, dla budynku wielo-

rodzinnego o 36,54%, a dla zespołu zabudowy o 79,74%. Aby zestawić korzyści uzyskane z wprowadzonych zmian odnośnie do czasu poświęconego

na modykacje, projektanci biegli w obsłudze oprogramowania BIM zostali poproszeni o wykonanie modelu jednego z projektów, a ich czas pracy

został zmierzony. Te wyniki zostały następnie uśrednione i porównane z czasem uzyskanym przez komputer, dzięki czemu ustalono stosunek między

wydajnością pracy człowieka i komputera. Wyniki te uwzględniały również czas potrzebny na wprowadzenie zmian w środowisku BIM, co pozwoliło

na ocenę opłacalności ich wdrożenia. W badanych przypadkach dostosowanie środowiska BIM okazało się korzystne dla budynku o powierzchni

128 Rafał Rucki, Janusz Rębielak, Janusz Gołdasz

600 m

. Tak obszerny proces modykacji jest zazwyczaj wymagany tylko raz, a kolejne projekty mogą korzystać z już opracowanego środowiska,

co doprowadzi do dalszych oszczędności czasu i kosztów. Otrzymane wyniki potwierdzają, że warto dostosowywać narzędzia BIM oraz rozwijać

wiedzę projektantów w tej dziedzinie. Opisana metoda jest jedną z nielicznych, które dokładnie pokazują rzeczywiste wymierne korzyści z używania

technologii BIM.

Słowa kluczowe: modelowanie informacji o budynku, BIM, wydajność BIM, obiekty BIM, projekt wykonawczy, dostosowanie środowiska BIM