starting point: 

What challenges are faced by designers implementing higher Level of Detail Building (LOD) Information Modelling (BIM), and how can they be overcome to enhancing sustainability and integrating building systems? 

This topic may include: consideration of how BIM supports sustainability and building systems integration; analysis of LOD requirements for residential and commercial projects; identification of designers’ challenges implementing LOD and BIM and exploration of technology’s role in alleviating these challenges; identification of BIM benefits and drawbacks for facility management, and definition of effective strategies for communicating value. 

project summary: 

PROBLEM 

Building Information Modelling (BIM) is expanding in Australia through government policy drivers and client requirements, yet the sector remains highly fragmented: 98% of firms employ fewer than 20 staff and exhibit uneven digital capability (Tan, 2024; Gonzales, 2025; Australian Institute of Architects, 2021). In most architectural practice, models are typically developed to LOD 300–350 for coordination and documentation. Increasingly, however, clients and agencies are demanding higher levels of detail, up to LOD 400–500, to support digital coordination, asset handover, and fabrication workflows (Alshorafa & Ergen, 2021; Zhang et al., 2024). While high-LOD models provide richer information, they also strain computational resources, increase coordination overhead, and amplify the risk of rework (Zadeh et al., 2017; Zhao & Taib, 2022). 

Ambiguity in the use of terms such as Level of Detail (LOD) and Level of Information Need (LOIN) contributes to under-specified BIM Execution Plans (BEPs), which often fail to define what should be delivered, when, and by whom (Abanda et al., 2025; ISO 19650-1, 2019). As a result, compliance checks are frequently deferred to late project stages, when design changes are costly and disruptive (Eastman et al., 2009; Beach et al., 2020). Models must also meet the requirements of the National Construction Code and align with ISO 19650 information management processes. On some public-sector projects, additional cybersecurity controls such as ISO 27001 or the Australian Signals Directorate’s Essential Eight may apply, further increasing the burden on practices without dedicated IT support (Beach et al., 2015). Collectively, these technical and regulatory pressures create avoidable risk, disproportionately affecting small and mid-sized firms (Tan, 2024; Gonzales, 2025). 

GAP 

Current guidance does not show how firms should calibrate the appropriate LOD/LOIN for purpose, verify it early inside authoring environments, or maintain repeatable validation across projects (Abanda et al., 2025; ISO 19650-1, 2019). There is no widely adopted, Australia-specific framework linking LOD/LOIN decisions with BEP clauses and NCC compliance requirements in a form that designers can operationalise during modelling (Alshorafa & Ergen, 2021). 

Evidence from practice is limited: there is little Australia-specific data on effective targets, QA checks, or exchange formats across firm sizes and levels of digital maturity (Tan, 2024; Gonzales, 2025; AIA, 2021). As a result, both small studios and larger offices lack benchmarks for achieving value at acceptable cost, reinforcing the need for sector-specific data from surveys and interviews. Decision support is also missing for where compute-intensive tasks, such as large-scale clash detection, scan-to-BIM processing, AI-assisted rule checks, or 4D/5D simulations, should best be run; on local workstations, virtual desktop/on-prem servers, or managed cloud infrastructure (Zabin et al., 2022; Zhao & Taib, 2022). The optimal choice depends on factors such as model size, concurrency, latency to design hubs, licensing and plugin support, data residency requirements, and where mandated, cybersecurity obligations. This gap impacts small practices most severely, as they form the majority of Australian firms yet often lack BIM managers or IT specialists to navigate these decisions (Gonzales, 2025). 

PROGRESS  

We are expanding our scoping literature review that maps LOD/LOIN practices, ISO 19650 information-management processes, and the Australian market context, which now anchors our study design. Preliminary insights have informed the design of survey and interview questions, which are now finalised and, following final ethics clearance, ready to start. In parallel, a series of case studies are in progress, including a hackathon that resulted in the development of a PyRevit Plugin (H’sainm et. Al. 2025). These exploratory activities have provided practical context for subsequent technical development. A proof-of-concept compliance checker has been produced as a pyRevit add-in that interprets a defined set of NCC rules and generates in-model feedback within Revit. Initial deployment trials on a high-specification workstation is in progress. 

FUTURE  

Data collection will begin with a national survey (target 100–120 responses) and 20–25 semi-structured interviews. The survey will capture firm size and sector, digital maturity, current LOD/LOIN targets by phase, hardware/software toolchains and interoperability issues, typical BIM model sizes, coordination frequency, time spent on QA and compliance, rework and RFI rates, and IT infrastructure choices (local workstations, VDI/on-prem servers, or managed cloud). Interviews will extend this by gathering workflow narratives and artefacts, including BEP excerpts, parameter mappings, and decision criteria for LOD and exchange formats, allowing analysis across firm sizes and project types. 

The study will deliver a right-sized LOD/LOIN framework linked to BEPs and the NCC, a lightweight validation toolkit that runs within authoring workflows, and IT deployment templates for small, medium, and large practices. The goal is to reduce rework, lower cognitive load, and provide clear, repeatable compliance pathways for design teams. 

References  

Abanda, F. H., Balu, B., Adukpo, S. E., & Akintola, A. (2025). Decoding ISO 19650 through process modelling for information management and stakeholder communication in BIM. Buildings, 15(3), 431. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings15030431 

Alshorafa, R., & Ergen, E. (2021). Determining the level of development for BIM implementation in large-scale projects: A multi-case study. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 28(1), 397–423. https://doi.org/10.1108/ECAM-08-2018-0352 

Australian Institute of Architects. (2021). BIM and beyond: Design technology in architecture.  

Beach, T., Rezgui, Y., Li, H., & Kasim, T. (2015). A rule-based semantic approach for automated regulatory compliance in the construction sector. Expert Systems with Applications, 42(12), 5219–5231. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2015.02.029 

Beach, T. H., Hippolyte, J. L., & Rezgui, Y. (2020). Towards the adoption of automated regulatory compliance checking in the built environment. Automation in Construction, 118, 103285. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2020.103285 

Eastman, C., Lee, J., Jeong, Y., & Lee, J. (2009). Automatic rule-based checking of building designs. Automation in Construction, 18(8), 1011–1033. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2009.07.002 

Gonzales, K. (2025). Architectural services in Australia (M6921). IBISWorld. 

ISO. (2019). ISO 19650-1:2019, Organization and digitization of information about buildings and civil engineering works—Information management using BIM—Part 1: Concepts and principles. International Organization for Standardization. 

Tan, R. (2024). Architectural services in Australia (M6921). IBISWorld. 

Zabin, A., González, V. A., Zou, Y., & Amor, R. (2022). Applications of machine learning to BIM: A systematic literature review. Advanced Engineering Informatics, 51, 101474. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aei.2021.101474 

Zadeh, P. A., Wang, G., Cavka, H. B., Staub-French, S., & Pottinger, R. (2017). Information quality assessment for facility management. Advanced Engineering Informatics, 33, 181–205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aei.2017.06.003 

Zhang, S., Tang, Y., Zou, Y., Yang, H., Chen, Y., & Liang, J. (2024). Optimization of architectural design and construction with integrated BIM and PLM methodologies. Scientific Reports, 14(1), 26153. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-75940-x 

Zhao, Y., & Taib, N. (2022). Cloud-based Building Information Modelling (Cloud-BIM): Systematic literature review and bibliometric-qualitative analysis. Automation in Construction, 142, 104468. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2022.104468 

Hsain, H. E., Memon, F., Stellini, J., Zhou, K., Zhu, I., Micuta, M., Jefferrys, M., & Ostwald, M. (2025). AI-Guided Building Regulatory COmplaince [Hackathon project report]. Arch_Manu Hackathon, ARC Training Centre for Next-Gen Architectural Manufacturing.