Climbing the BIM bandwagon for non-typical structures: A case-study.

NIMISH PRABHUKHANOLKAR ( PARTNER, FOUNDER AGAMI ENGINEERING ) | SHRUTHIN PEESU ( DESIGN ENGINEER AGAMI ENGINEERING) PUBLISHED 20-04-2017

Brief
We attempted to model an irregular tower structure in one of the foremost BIM softwares available in market as an evaluation. This was not for commercial purposes. The learnings in doing the same were converted into a white
paper.

Structure Description
The structure is fire monitor tower with a height of 20m above ground level. It houses automated fire-fighting equipment at the top point for which a ladder is required for access and maintainence. It has a base of 2mX2m and the
enclosed area of the tower decreases to 1.45mX1.45m at the top. This leads to the slanting of the members and members with same functionalities having varying lengths along the height of the tower. It has a monkey ladder with
landings at every 2.5m interval placed inside the tower.

Challenges Faced
This structure posed a few challenges.
1. The slanting nature is difficult to model in 2D software along elevation. This also created a problem in determining the lengths of individual members for fabrication.
2. Visualising and conveying the members to the site and creating the drawings for individual members.
3. Creating details of monkey ladder which is fitting in extremely limited space.

Modelling in Tekla
We examined the possibility of modelling and creating fabrication drawings using a 3D software. Tekla was one of the frontrunners due to its perceived abilities for steel detailing.So, Tekla was selected and the model was created
using existing member profiles in the selected environment and using the tools like work planes to model the inclining nature of the columns and the braces. Following images show the level of detail achieved in the model.

The bolts are placed as per design requirement in arrays. The gusset pltes are added at the central location using construction lines for accurate positioning.
Creating Fabrication Drawings:
Below are the few drawings created using Tekla for illustration purpose.
 Advantages:

More detailed views of the structure are possible to avoid confusion.

More detailed drawings can be prepared easily as per requirement in shorter timeframe.
Clashes can be easily detected and resolved immediately.
 The use of components feature can reduce the modelling time significantly.

Disadvantages:
We cannot use it to draw a rudimentary sketch when there is a small clarification is to be issued to site. The whole model has to be changed to create that sketch.
Sometimes the 3D model is less suited for a change than a 2D CAD model. For example, any change in the tower base dimensions would not be easy to implement in 3D.
Very few direct automatic components provided by Tekla were used for modelling the tower. Although Tekla has a tower component, we could not use this directly to satisfy our functional constraints. This implies
components may be of limited use for some non-typical structures and modelling has to proceed at individual nut & bolt level. Many connections were unable to be fitted into a suitable template connection and gusset plates
including bolts had to be modelled individually. This is not expected to be the case when doing structures like sheds and warehouses with typical geometry, but would be a problem with bespoke layouts for industrial
facilities.

Conclusion
Tekla can be used for almost all steel structures but the use has to be intelligent to gain any benefit. For typical structures like sheds and warehouses, the Tekla model can be created from the beginning as the only working model.
For more complex or non typical structures like the one we modelled here, it would be the best if Tekla model was kept only for fabrication drawings purpose and the initial design development took place in a 2D software.