Introduction

This case study explores the barriers to seamless integration between Building Information Modeling (BIM) and sustainability assessment tools in contemporary construction practice. While BIM and digital analysis platforms hold great promise for supporting greener, more performance-driven building design, interoperability challenges and workflow inefficiencies often undermine this potential. Drawing on insights from semi-structured interviews with industry leaders as well as research project experience, this study identifies both technical and organizational barriers to effective data exchange. The findings highlight the need for improved interoperability standards, more automated workflows, and greater investment in user training and organizational readiness to fully unlock the value of integrated digital sustainability workflows.

Rationale for Studying the Case

The integration of Building Information Modeling (BIM) with sustainability assessment tools has immense potential to streamline green construction practices. However, this integration is often hindered by data exchange problems that make automation difficult and lead to inefficiencies in project workflows. As the demand for sustainable buildings increases globally, understanding the core reasons behind these data challenges is critical. This case study is focused on examining these issues from a practical, industry-based perspective to generate insights that could guide future improvements.

Motivation :

While BIM has revolutionized how buildings are designed and documented, sustainability assessments often remain manual or semi-automated due to lack of interoperability between software platforms. Tools like LEED, BREEAM, or SBTool rely on specific data formats that BIM software does not natively export. As a result, professionals must often reformat, re-enter, or manually verify data—wasting time and increasing the risk of errors. This study is motivated by the need to understand these bottlenecks in order to improve data reliability and streamline sustainability analysis workflows.

Purpose :

The purpose of this case study is to investigate the barriers that prevent seamless data exchange between BIM software and sustainability assessment platforms. The study will analyze where and why data exchange fails, identify the limitations of current interoperability standards (like IFC or gbXML), and document real-world challenges faced by professionals. By focusing on diagnosing the problem, this study sets the stage for future innovations in BIM interoperability.

Question: What are the main challenges in data exchange between BIM platforms and sustainability assessment tools in construction projects?

Focus :

This study will focus on the data interoperability challenges encountered during the use of BIM for sustainability assessments in the AEC (Architecture, Engineering, and Construction) industry. It will be limited to exploring issues in data formats, file translation, tool compatibility, and user workflows.

The facts related to the case

Insights from Industry Interviews

To explore the current state of interoperability challenges in the construction industry, I conducted interviews with two industry professionals: Renzo Di Furia from Turner Construction and Trevor Lunde from GLY Construction.

Both interviewees hold leadership roles at large general contracting firms and offered valuable insights into how interoperability issues and digital tool adoption challenges manifest on real projects. Although they were not directly involved in using sustainability-specific software such as IESVE or LCA platforms, their perspectives on broader software interoperability and organizational barriers provided important context for this study.

Both interviewees highlighted that inconsistent data standards and file format mismatches are still a routine source of friction in project workflows. They described scenarios where project partners such as architects, engineers, and subcontractors work with different software tools or incompatible data schemas, often leading to translation errors, rework, and loss of data fidelity. Maintaining consistent data as models move across different phases of a project remains an ongoing challenge. Another important theme that emerged was the difficulty of spreading awareness and driving adoption of new digital tools across project teams. While the industry is making strides in digitalization, many practitioners in the field lack training or familiarity with advanced tools, including those for sustainability analysis. Both Renzo Di Furia and Trevor Lunde noted that organizational inertia, limited time for upskilling, and competing project priorities often hinder the effective adoption of new technology. Even when sophisticated solutions are available, cultural and workflow-related barriers slow their integration into mainstream project delivery.

Personal Case Study: Architecture Hall Research Project

In parallel with the industry interviews, I drew upon my experience on conducting a research project on Architecture Hall at the University of Washington. The goal of this project was to evaluate the building’s performance through detailed sustainability analysis, using both BIM-based modeling and actual building data. I developed a detailed Revit model of Architecture Hall and exported the data for analysis in IESVE.

This hands-on process revealed several significant challenges related to interoperability and workflow. Exporting a clean and usable gbXML file from Revit required multiple iterations and extensive manual corrections. Many complex building elements such as walls with intricate profiles, nested families, and unique construction details did not translate accurately into the gbXML format. Once imported into IESVE, I encountered further difficulties. The software often failed to correctly interpret room volumes, thermal zones, and building envelope definitions, resulting in inaccurate or incomplete energy simulation results unless the data was carefully reviewed and adjusted. Preparing the Revit model for use in IESVE also demanded considerable simplification and parameter tuning, as the default BIM model contained far more geometric detail than was suitable for performance analysis.

Finally, reconciling the modeled results with actual operational data from UW Facilities proved challenging. Differences in modeling assumptions, parameter definitions, and operational conditions led to noticeable discrepancies between the simulated and real-world energy performance. These challenges underscored the extent to which manual intervention and interpretive judgment are still required when attempting to integrate BIM-based modeling with sustainability analysis tools in a real-world project setting.

The image above shows the Revit-based geometry of Architecture Hall after being imported into IESVE’s ModelIT module for energy modeling. The import process required multiple iterations to achieve a clean and usable model. As seen in the visualization, individual building spaces were detected and converted into energy modeling zones. However, throughout this process, several geometric translation issues emerged for example, irregular wall outlines, overlapping spaces, and incorrect interpretation of complex roof geometry. Manual cleanup and verification of the model were necessary to ensure accurate room volumes, thermal zones, and surface definitions. This visual output illustrates both the potential and the limitations of current interoperability between BIM authoring tools and sustainability analysis platforms such as IESVE.

Description of Data Collected

The data for this case study was drawn from several sources. I conducted two structured interviews with industry professionals Renzo Di Furia and Trevor Lunde whose insights provided a real-world perspective on current interoperability challenges. I also documented my experience working on the Architecture Hall project, including detailed notes on the specific technical issues encountered during model preparation, file exports, and parameter mapping. In addition, I conducted a review of relevant academic and industry literature on BIM interoperability and sustainability workflows, which provided context for interpreting these findings and situating them within broader industry trends.

Patterns/Theories to Explore

The findings of this case study, drawn from both the industry interviews and my personal project experience, reveal several consistent patterns that help explain why seamless BIM-based sustainability assessment remains difficult to achieve in practice.

First, format compatibility and data translation challenges continue to pose major barriers across all types of construction software workflows. While file formats such as IFC and gbXML are widely promoted as interoperability standards, their implementations vary between software platforms and even across software versions. Both the professionals I interviewed and my work with Revit and IESVE highlighted the frequent need for manual checking and correction of exported files to achieve reliable results. In the Architecture Hall project, the process of exporting usable gbXML files and resolving translation errors was especially time-consuming and prone to error, underscoring the fragility of current interoperability pathways.

Second, manual intervention remains the norm. Across both interviews and my modeling experience, it was clear that significant effort is required to clean, simplify, and adapt BIM data so that it can be used effectively in downstream sustainability analysis tools. Automation remains limited, and the absence of fully integrated toolchains compels project teams to depend on manual workarounds and repeated trial-and-error processes. In my research project, even after multiple rounds of model refinement, considerable manual tuning was still needed to produce accurate and interpretable simulation results in IESVE.

Third, a lack of user training and organizational readiness consistently emerged as a limiting factor. Both interviewees emphasized that introducing new digital tools, even those with proven sustainability benefits, is difficult when project teams lack the training, time, or organizational support to adopt them fully. This observation aligns closely with my project experience: documentation on best practices for preparing BIM models for sustainability analysis remains sparse, and the learning curve for tools such as IESVE is steep. Without dedicated training and workflow support, practitioners often struggle to achieve consistent and reliable outcomes.

Finally, the alignment between modeled building performance and actual operational outcomes remains weak. In the Architecture Hall project, reconciling simulated energy performance with real-world utility data revealed gaps caused by differing assumptions, incomplete model fidelity, and data limitations. Achieving closer alignment will require both improved interoperability and more rigorous model validation processes.

Together, these patterns suggest that while the technical capabilities of both BIM and sustainability analysis tools have advanced considerably, the lack of seamless integration, robust standards, and widespread user expertise continues to limit their combined potential. Addressing these issues will require not only technical improvements in interoperability but also greater emphasis on organizational change, training, and workflow alignment across the construction industry.

Connection to the Larger Scheme

Overcoming interoperability barriers between BIM and sustainability analysis tools is an essential step toward scaling up green construction practices and meeting global net-zero carbon goals. However, as this case study highlights, the challenges are not limited to technical issues alone. Broader organizational, cultural, and training-related barriers also play a significant role in limiting the seamless adoption of integrated digital workflows. The industry interviews conducted for this study underscored that even as software capabilities advance, many project teams lack the awareness, training, or organizational support needed to take full advantage of new tools. In parallel, my experience with the Architecture Hall project revealed that even when software integration is technically possible, the current state of interoperability still requires extensive manual intervention and interpretive effort.

If BIM-based sustainability assessments are to become a routine part of everyday design and construction workflows, progress will be needed on both fronts. Tool developers must continue improving the robustness and consistency of interoperability standards and automated translation processes. At the same time, project organizations must invest in workforce training, establish clearer workflows for performance-driven design, and foster a culture of digital literacy and innovation across all levels of the project team. Ultimately, seamless integration of sustainability analysis into the broader project delivery process is not just a software problem, it is a systems challenge that will require coordinated action across technology, practice, and education. Addressing these challenges holistically is essential to ensuring that the construction industry can deliver on its sustainability ambitions in the coming decades.

References

• Ansah, M., X. Chen, H. Yang, L. Lu, and P. Lam. 2019. “A Review and Outlook for Integrated BIM Application in Green Building Assessment.” Science Direct.
• Carvalho, J., I. Alecrim, L. Bragança, and R. Mateus. 2020. “Integrating BIM-Based LCA and Building Sustainability Assessment.” MDPI.
• Carvalho, J., L. Bragança, and R. Mateus. 2020. “A Systematic Review of the Role of BIM in Building Sustainability Assessment Methods.” MDPI.
• Carvalho, J., L. Bragança, and R. Mateus. 2023. “Automating Building Sustainability Assessment Using Building Information Modelling: A Case Study.” Science Direct.
• Carvalho, J., L. Bragança, and R. Mateus. 2019. “Optimising Building Sustainability Assessment Using BIM.” Science Direct.
• Chen, Y., X. Cai, J. Li, W. Zhang, and Z. Liu. 2021. “The Values and Barriers of Building Information Modeling (BIM) Implementation Combination Evaluation in Smart Building Energy and Efficiency.” Science Direct.
• Chen, Z., L. Chen, X. Zhou, L. Huang, M. Sandanayake, and P. Yap. 2024. “Recent Technological Advancements in BIM and LCA Integration for Sustainable Construction: A Review.” MDPI.
• Kalutara, P., K. London, and C. Taylor. 2021. “Significance of a Software Interoperability Matrix.” ITcon.
• Marzouk, M., and R. Thabet. 2023. “A BIM-Based Tool for Assessing Sustainability in Buildings Using the Green Pyramid Rating System.” MDPI.
• Okonta, E., V. Vukovic, and E. Hayat. 2024. “Prospective Directions in the Computer Systems Industry Foundation Classes (IFC) for Shaping Data Exchange in the Sustainability and Resilience of Cities.” MDPI.
• Personal interview with Renzo Di Furia, Turner Construction, May 2025.
• Personal interview with Trevor Lunde, GLY Construction, May 2025.
• Personal notes and project documentation from Architecture Hall BIM & Sustainability Research, University of Washington, Spring 2025.

About the author

name: Shraddha Kalyani

I am a Master’s student in Construction Management at the University of Washington, with a background in Architecture and a strong interest in BIM-based sustainability analysis. My research focuses on enhancing energy efficiency and building performance through advanced modeling tools. I have industry experience as a BIM Architect where I worked on large-scale commercial and institutional projects. I am passionate about bridging the gap between digital design and sustainable construction practices.