KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering Construction Management

Copyright ⓒ2019 Korean Society of Civil Engineers

DOI 10.1007/s12205-019-1750-2 pISSN 1226-7988, eISSN 1976-3808
www.springer.com/12205
TECHNICAL NOTE

An Efficient Design Support System based on Automatic Rule Checking

and Case-based Reasoning
Pin-Chan Lee*, Tzu-Ping Lo**, Ming-Yang Tian***, and Danbing Long****
Received September 1, 2018/Revised December 20, 2018/Accepted January 9, 2019/Published Online March 4, 2019

··································································································································································································································

Abstract

A well building design support system can not only meet the rules but also automatically recommend the appropriate alternatives
for designers, but most modifications now are conducted in the manual way. Although the method of automatic rule checking can
effectively identify the compliance of rules in Building Information Modeling (BIM) models, recommendation supports are still
lacked in applications. This paper aims to propose a design support system, using automatic rule checking to identify the compliance
of rules and adopting case-based reasoning to provide recommendations via ontology and semantics. The AHP-TOPSIS (Analytic
hierarchy process-Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to an Ideal Solution) method is used to give reliable recommendations rank.
A real case is adopted as an illustrative example. Results show that the proposed system can increase the design efficiency in both
design checking and modifying. Similar applications can be extended to other fields and rules.
Keywords: automatic rule checking, building information modelling, case-based reasoning, design support system, AHP, TOPSIS
··································································································································································································································

1. Introduction review based on the existing rules to inform the design level.
Also, many studies have proposed ARC method in design, but
With the rapid development of Building Information Modelling only the design errors have been identified, and no further solutions
(BIM), it has been wildly adopted in a large number of building have been provided for design errors. Therefore, establishing an
design, which brings new challenges in design collaboration and ARC-based design support system for recommending alternatives
design review. Owning to the complicated architectural rules and to designers is of great significance.
regulations, the manual review has become a difficult and time- An ARC-based design support system to automatically check
consuming work, leading to many errors and omissions. rules and supply solution recommendations is needed. However,
Furthermore, the proficiency of related software designers used the given solutions may be large and disordered, so a reasonable
also directly affects the accuracy and efficiency of the rules rank should be listed considering both the actual situation and
checking on the BIM model. Therefore, automatic rule checking personal preference. Case based reasoning (CBR) is a general
(ARC) is an urgent need to solve the problems of artificial method to solve the problems above mentioned. As for the
inspection to improve the efficiency and accuracy of designing, theoretical basis, Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to
and to meet the requirements of building regulations. an Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) is widely used in all works of life
BIM is different from the 2D design of planar and unstructured including construction risk evaluation fields due to its clear logic
information, and its structured storage and integrated information and simple calculation. It is a multicriteria method to detect the
has brought opportunities for efficient and accurate automatic best alternative from a finite set of ones (Hwang and Yoon, 1981).
rule checking on computer. In addition, BIM components carry Analytic hierarchy process (AHP) method can distinguish in
complete information such as space, size, user-customizable etc. general the more important criteria from the less important ones
Data characteristics of BIM can be applied to different usage to prioritize the selection factors. There are chances that combining
scenarios through regular calculations, which will be beneficial the two approaches to support solution recommendation (Wong
in the engineering design, construction, and operation and and Li, 2008).
maintenance phases. Above all, the paper proposed an ARC-based design support
From the requirements of the design phase, ARC can do regulatory system. The Revit API is developed to check the integrity of

*Associate Professor, School of Civil Engineering, Southwest Jiaotong University, Chengdu 610031, China (E-mail: [email protected])
**Associate Professor, School of Civil Engineering, Southwest Jiaotong University, Chengdu 610031, China (Corresponding Author, E-mail:
[email protected])
***Graduate Student, School of Civil Engineering, Southwest Jiaotong University, Chengdu 610031, China (E-mail: [email protected])
****Assistant Professor, School of Civil Engineering, Southwest Jiaotong University, Chengdu 610031, China (E-mail: [email protected])

−1−
 Pin-Chan Lee, Tzu-Ping Lo, Ming-Yang Tian, and Danbing Long

BIM information and an ARC API is used to view compliance The application in the operation phase mainly aims at the
with the regulations by establishing the correspondence between performance analysis and equipment maintenance of buildings.
model components and design rules. An ontology of building Cheng et al. (2014) applied energy simulation of green building
design is built and ifcOWL is used to describe the semantic by BIM-based cloud service to realize the rule checking about
reasoning of the key factors in design phase. TOPSIS (Technique green issues. Delis (1995) proposed the Fire-Code Analyzer
for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution) and AHP (FCA) framework system, which consists of a series of IF/
(analytic hierarchy process) are employed to identify and sort THEN judgment rules and a space model containing geometrical
alternatives. Recommended cases are available for modification, algorithms for analyzing building safety performance in the fire
application and storage according to designer’s hobby, then the event. Lee et al. (2015) proposed an implementation process for
experience can be accumulated and the knowledge can be a domain-specific computer programming language, named
shared.) Building Environment Rule and Analysis (BERA) Language.
The proposed system aims to achieve following aspects: 1) The BERA Language can deal with building information models
Achieve automatic rules checking and solution recommendations in an intuitive way and assess the design programing requirements
during the whole lifecycle of buildings. 2) Improve the efficiency using user-defined rules in the early design phases.
and accuracy of rule checking to optimize the building design. 3) The above studies show that in the life cycle of construction
Rank the recommendations reasonably to give customized engineering, BIM-based ARC has been widely used, focusing on
selection according to the actual requirements and personal error detection and risk identification, and has also achieved well
preference. performance.
A real case is used to demonstrate the feasibility and effectiveness ARC has been widely used in the whole life cycle of the
of the proposed system. building. By using the method, the preliminary design gets
optimized and unnecessary mistakes can be successfully avoided,
2. Related Works the construction risks can be identified automatically and the
opening hole condition can be detected, the performance analysis
2.1 Automatic Rule Checking and equipment maintenance become more efficient. Current
Due to the value and importance of automatic rule checking, research proved that ARC can bring convenience and efficiency,
many studies have applied ARC techniques to the Architectural, however, the method fails to realize solution recommendations.
Engineering and Construction (AEC) industry. Inspections and corrections should be self-contained, then a
About the design phase, Eastman et al. (2009) concluded that complete review system can achieve automatic inspection,
ARC includes four stages: rule interpretation, building model information integration, as well as knowledge sharing.
preparation, rule execution and rule check reporting, which lay
the foundation for the standardization of automatic rules check. 2.2 BIM-based Case-based Reasoning
Solihin and Eastman (2015) discussed various building codes In the field of construction engineering, case-based reasoning
and rule checking areas in the AEC domain. They provided an (CBR) is the most common method used to develop decision
initial guide for a framework establishment of rule classification support systems. Its problem-solving approach is empirically
by illustrating both the process challenges and the techniques oriented, including the case retrieval, reuse, revisal and case-
required to resolve. retaining (Carrillo and Chinowsky, 2006). While solving a new
Compared with the design review, rule check at the construction case with the case base, its solution can remain in the case base,
stage is more extensive and more detailed, especially in safety so it is also a self-learning system. Moreover, with the information
and risk issues. Yi et al. (2006) analyzed historical safety records age approaching, the research of BIM-based CBR has become
and proposed a theory to estimate project risk distribution. Zhang hot and also breeds the concept of building knowledge management.
et al. (2013) integrated fall protection rules and the best practices Motawa and Almarshad (2013) proposed the concept of building
into a table-based security rules conversion algorithm, and the knowledge modeling (BKM) which applied artificial intelligence
security issues during the construction phase were simulated and machine learning methods to the entire life cycle of construction
with the help of a rule-based BIM system. Zhang et al. (2015) projects. The concept combined knowledge and BIM to achieve
proposed a framework for planning fall protection and developed information-to-intelligent. Based on previous research results,
a safety hazard detection and prevention algorithm based on Motawa and Almarshad (2015) proposed an asset management
BIM and automatic rule checking. Yu et al. (2016) conducted a system based on BIM and CBR for building maintenance.
study on the safety of opening holes in construction site, which Mikulakova et al. (2010) combined BIM with CBR to develop a
combined with the Revit API to automatically check the decision support system and knowledge base, and applied it to the
condition of opening holes. Ji and Leite (2018) proposed a tower automatic evaluation of construction schedules. GhaffarianHoseini et
crane plan review by rule-based checking and 4-dimensional al. (2017) proposed a building management system based on
modeling. They also developed a system framework and integrated knowledge of BIM for inspecting energy efficiency
demonstrated its efficiency and effectiveness with multiple after construction.
types of building construction projects. The combination of BIM and CBR, used for knowledge

−2− KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering

 An Efficient Design Support System based on Automatic Rule Checking and Case-based Reasoning

management, building maintenance, green building simulation, their overall aim of selecting a lighting policy. Chen et al. (2017)
etc., is of great beneficial. applied Fuzzy AHP in TOPSIS to discuss the key factors
Just like the relationship between questions and solutions, we fostering the success of current third-party online payment
can easily establish connections between CBR and ARC. The platforms. Sun (2010) developed an evaluation model based on
essence of ARC is a way to automatically identify problems, and the fuzzy analytic hierarchy process and the technique for order
CBR starts with a description of the input problem and end with performance by similarity to ideal solution, fuzzy TOPSIS, to
a solution recommendation. Namely, CBR can recommend the help the industrial practitioners for the performance evaluation in
most appropriate solution for the identified errors by matching a fuzzy environment where the vagueness and subjectivity are
the most appropriate solution in the case base based on the handled with linguistic values parameterized by triangular fuzzy
characteristics of the problem. Nevertheless, a reasonable support numbers.
method should be carefully employed to ensure that the given There are bunches of studies aiming at TOPSIS and AHP due
recommendations are reliable. to their wide applicability. TOPSIS can prioritize the solutions
and AHP can give weight to the selected factors. The combination
2.3 TOPSIS and AHP Method of the two methods will make the ranking list more accurate and
AHP allows to evaluate the attribute weightings with greater reasonable (Patil and Kant, 2014).
consistency through pairwise comparisons. Khalil et al. (2016)
employed AHP to assign weighting score to all performance-risk 3. Methodology
indicators which help strengthen the assessment of the current
state of building performance with risk concerns for users’ health 3.1 System Framework
and safety. Erdogan et al. (2017) used AHP to determine criteria In order to facilitate timely interaction in design, the system
weight to analyze construction management problems. Yurdakul prototype is presented in the form of API in Revit, including two
and Tansel (2018) developed a multi-level performance measurement modules of ARC and design support system (DSS). The framework
model for manufacturing companies using a modified fuzzy of the design support system is shown in Fig. 1.
TOPSIS method. Companies can compare its performance with Data sources include building regulation, standard specifications,
its competitors’ in critical activities according to the ranking and attributes and spatial parameters in the BIM model.
given by the proposed method. Based on the evaluation values Establishing the modelling standards according to the requirements
obtained, TOPSIS, given crisp data and linguistic variables as the of ARC implementation. To help the computer understand the
alternatives of attributes, is used to select an appropriate rapid rules, the ontology of the rules is established to properly code the
prototyping process for a specific part application (Abdulsalam rules translation. Finally, a standardized knowledge base framework
et al., 2018) proposed an approach to provide decision-makers is established to support the two modules of ARC and DSS.
with opportunities of a different course of action with respect to The ARC module is composed of three parts: model information

Fig. 1. Framework of the Design Support System

−3−
 Pin-Chan Lee, Tzu-Ping Lo, Ming-Yang Tian, and Danbing Long

check, rule execution and rule reporting, which judges the model information is extracted according to the type of project
completeness of the information and regulation compliance of and the design professions. The system extracts geometry and
the model. attribute information based on family categories and types, while
The DSS module provides correction plans and recommendation extracting spatial information based on user-defined room
rankings based on the automatic checking results to support the definitions. The extracted geometry and attribute information is
designer in making decisions. The module is based on CBR and all derived from the model database. Corresponding to the model
consists of four parts, including: 1) Ontology-semantics structure database, the rules for model information are formed according
with ifcOWL, 2) CBR case base, 3) priority algorithm based on to the project class, component class, space class and space
AHP and TOPSIS, and 4) CBR cycle. The ontology and semantic component number, and the standards of building model and
web technology support the logical reasoning for rules and key building rules are completed.
factors for case retrieval. AHP gives weight to differentiate the Building regulations vary by profession and region. The
importance of different factors, while TOPSIS helps retrieve and default attributes of BIM software vendors cannot cover all the
rank cases. The CBR cycle allows users to update, store and information involved in laws and regulations, resulting in
reuse cases as well as update and enrich the case base. incomplete or inaccurate results of rule check. Therefore, this
study develops BIM modeling standards related to the model file
3.2 Automated Rule Checking Module standards, family standards, and space standards through rule
The complete ARC process is shown in Fig. 2. In the data interpretation. These standards make specific requirements for
preparation phase, relevant attributes can be extracted from the model planning, family attributes, and space planning. Users
BIM model, and the completeness of model’s information will need to add attribute fields based on these standards and fill in
be checked. In the rule execution phase, the system will check the correct parameters according to the design requirements. By
the regulation compliance of the model. At last, the feedback will comparing the model database with the modeling standard, a
be shown in two ways: report form and visual expression. model information checker is proposed to check the integrity of
Model information needs to be classified and filtered, that is, the model information. The check results, including the family

Fig. 2. Implementation Process of Automatic Rule Checking Module

−4− KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering

 An Efficient Design Support System based on Automatic Rule Checking and Case-based Reasoning

type, element ID, and the missing parameters, are represented in parameters. Then TOPSIS is used to perform the recommended
the form of a list which clearly reflects the model’s problems. sorting calculation for the same type of case with the violation
The integrity of the model must be checked before entering the component (or space). At last, the recommendation list is given
rule execution stage. users to select.
Rule execution is the core of the entire ARC process. Data in This system proposes a Revit API plug-in in the BIM platform,
the model database should be compared with the rules of design implementing ARC to figure out design problems and CBR to
regulation in the classification, including project class, component provide design suggestion, to complete a design cycle by the
class, geometric space class, and number of space components. BIM information. The procedure of CBR module is shown in
Design errors should be marked and reported through the check Fig. 3. When clicking the inconformity component, the following
result. The system provides two kinds of feedback. The first one steps are conducted, such as basic information, influencing
is in a visual way: in the 3D view, the model component or space factors, CBR family library and custom modifications.
with design problems is automatically changed to highlight red, Users can select the solution according to the comprehensive
while cloud lines are automatically added to the problematic sorting suggestion, and the system will automatically apply the
model component or space in the 2D plane, and also briefly selected solution to the design of the BIM model through the API
explain violations in the revision identifier. Another type of to achieve reuse. If the proposed solution does not fully comply
feedback is textual form: the report firstly describes the basic with the requirements, the user can modify the parameters of the
information and design problems, such as element ID of the existing case according to his own design requirements and
problem component or space, the related rules, and the error generate a new solution. The custom model will be applied to
parameter attributes. correct the case. Meanwhile, the new correction will be saved as
a new case in the case base according to the classification,
3.3 Design Support Module realizing the learning and inheritance of experience.

3.3.1 Cased-based Reasoning Structure 3.3.2 Key Factors from Ontology Semantic Web
The case base is the core basis to drive the building design Ontology and semantic web technologies are useful for
support system. For the flexibility and extensibility of the case developing domain knowledge and have recently been integrated
base, this study establishes the BIM case ontology through with BIM in a variety of applications. Ding et al. (2016) proposed
ifcOWL. BIM model can be stored directly as a new case in the a BIM-based construction risk knowledge management framework,
case base without format conversion. By constructing the and ontology and semantic web are used to search for risk
ontology of the BIM model through ifcOWL, BIM cases can be knowledge and monitor objects in BIM. Pauwels et al. (2017)
stored by category, and MySQL database can be built to store reviewed lots of papers on semantic web technologies and
data outside of the BIM model so that they can be associated revealed the benefits of interoperability, linking data and logical
with BIM cases for search or data visualization. inference. They also indicated that semantic web technologies
Case retrieval is essential to the CBR cycle. The retrieval of have a crucial role in logic-based applications and the applications
key attributes can be obtained through inferencing the connection require information from multiple areas of expertise (e.g., BIM,
point of the normative regulation and the violation component or GIS, infrastructure, energy). Quattrini et al. (2017) used ifc/rdf
space by ontology-semantic web. The weight of each attribute format, relying on semantically structured data (ontology) and
calculated by AHP is to quantify and process key attribute associated data, to manage historical buildings. Ma and Liu

Fig. 3. Implementation Process of the Case-based Reasoning Module

−5−
 원본에 글씨가 요렇게 보여요 ..
Pin-Chan Lee, Tzu-Ping Lo, Ming-Yang Tian, and Danbing Long

Fig. 4. Structure of the Ontology Semantics Web

(2018) proposed an ontology-based platform, which can transform semantic web are employed as the rule hierarchy. Factors can be
BIM data into ontology data and establish three steps: calculation, quantitative (e.g., wall width, column height, etc.) or qualitative
filter and translation. They proved that BIM applications with (e.g., window type, fire rating, supplier evaluation, etc.). The
ontology and semantics can provide reasoning support to save distance is determined by quantitative distance estimation and
cost and improve efficiency. fuzzy quantified semantics.
The traditional way to get the key factors is to identify them by After getting the distance matrix of the parameter C = (rij)m×n , it
conducting expert interviews or retrospective industry information. is necessary to use non-dimensional calculation as Eq. (1):
However, there are a lot of rules on building regulations and each
one often involves multiple components. Therefore, the traditional
r
C =
ij

ij
(1)
n
approach is very difficult to implement. By defining the relationship
between the rules and the related factors of BIM components, ∑= r
i 1
ij
2

reasonable key attributes searching can be implemented through

Evaluation indicators include consumable and profitable
the rule and the BIM component ontology.
indicators. The evaluation indicators in this study are distance,
Therefore, the ontology of the rules is established and
which is a consumptive index. Eq. (2) is to calculate the decision
summarized into three parts: the component class, the space class
matrix:
and the class of the relationship between the space and the
component. After reasoning about the concept of the rule Cij' = 1 − Cij (2)
characteristics, a complete ontology of rules can be set up.
Combining the weighted decision matrix and the weight of the
Hence, the complete ontology of the proposed system is
rule hierarchy obtained by the AHP, the weighted decision
composed of a standard ontology and industry foundation classes
matrix is calculated (Eq. (3)):
(IFC)-based BIM model. The ontology of BIM model provides
reasoning for space, component, and space-component relationships.
⎡wc '

wc '

 wn c n ⎤ '

The ARC module has identified a pair of rules and violations, and ⎢
1 11 2 12

⎥
1

wc '

wc '

 wn c n ⎥ '

can extract violation components (or space) from the ifcOWL Z=(rij ) m×n = ⎢
' 1 21 2 22

.2

(3)
expression of the design model. Fig. 4 shows how key factors are ⎢     ⎥
⎢ ⎥
identified from the ontology-semantic web. ⎣⎢ w cm w cm  wn cmn ⎦⎥
' ' '

1 1 2 2

3.3.3 Recommendation Algorithm The essence of TOPSIS algorithm is to calculate the relative
This study adopts AHP and TOPSIS to retrieve cases. AHP closeness between the measured object and the optimal solution.
−
and TOPSIS are adopted to retrieve cases. AHP-TOPSIS is a The positive ideal solution Z + and the negative ideal solution Z
common technique for multi-attribute decision making and case- can be defined as Z + equals (max(r 1 ′),max(r 2 ′)...max(r ′)) and i i in

based reasoning (Salman et al., 2017; Zyoud and Hunusch, Z − equals (min(r 1 ′),min(r 2 ′)...min(r ′)) , respectively.
i i in

2017). The key factors obtained by the inference of ontology- The Euclidean distances from the measured object to the

−6− KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering

 An Efficient Design Support System based on Automatic Rule Checking and Case-based Reasoning

Fig. 5. The Illustrative Example: (a) Case 3D Model, (b) Space Arrangement

positive ideal solution and the negative ideal solution can be Table 1. The BIM Components and Their Parameters related to
calculated through Eq. (4): Fire Code
Name Fire related parameters
m m
D +i = ∑ ( Z ij max − Z ij ) 2 and D -i =
j =1
∑ ( Z ij min − Z ij ) 2 . (4)
Wall
Fire-resistant limit; flammability; fire partition;
Classes of wall: Firewall \ bearing wall \ inner wall \ outer
j =1
wall…
At last, using Eq. (5) to calculate the close degree between each Floor Fire-resistant limit; flammability
case and ranking the cases: Roof Fire-resistant limit; flammability
Beam Fire-resistant limit; flammability; structural beam
D−
L = i
(5) Column Fire-resistant limit; flammability; structural column
D + D−
+
i

i i Fire-resistant limit; flammability;

Stair
Geometry of stairs: Net width\slope\ height armrest…
Fire rating; direction of opening door;
4. Illustrative Example performance of smoke control; fire-resisting time;
Door
Geometry of door: Door width \ door height \ door thickness…;
4.1 Case Background Classes of wall: Fire door \ emergency door \ auto-door…
This study adopts a school building in China as an example, as Fire rating; fire integrity; fixation;
Window
Classes of wall: External windows\ inner window…
shown in Fig. 5. China Code of Building Fire Protection (China Fire alarm
National Standards, 2014) is used to be tested. This case covers a Device properties
system
floor area of 7,319 m2 and has three fire prevention zones. As
shown in Fig. 5, there are 141 rooms including 53 office rooms,
43 administration rooms, 45 classrooms and 6 equipment labs.

4.2 Results of ARC based on Building Fire Protection Code

Using the model information checker developed in this study,
it can be seen if the fire information associated with the project
has been completely added. The results are shown in Fig. 6.

Fig. 6. Model Information Checker Fig. 7. Automatic Rule Check Report

−7−
 Pin-Chan Lee, Tzu-Ping Lo, Ming-Yang Tian, and Danbing Long

the problem type of quantity in space, the system will circle the
position and explain, as shown in Fig. 8.

4.3 Results of Alternative Recommendation

Taking the first check result as an example and using DSS for
design to search and recommend fire door.
According to the ontology of BIM family expressed in ifcOWL
and the ontology-semantic web of fire protection as shown in
Fig. 9, the system determines 6 key factors for the calculated
attribute of the DSS, including door thickness, fire-resisting time,
price, material quality, performance of smoke control and supplier
evaluation.
Fig. 8. Revision of Wrong Space Design
Firstly, the target layer, the criterion layer and index layer
should be selected to form the AHP structure. The optimal
According to the fire code, Table 1 illustrates the BIM solution may be varied from different scenarios, so a weighting
components and their parameters required by rule check. The system satisfied consistency check is established to assign weight
components and parameters also become a model standard and to each index based on certain requirements. Then, defining the
need to ensure their completeness. distance between solutions from cases library and the determined
Based on the fire code, this system points out two problems standard answer using quantitative parameters and quantified
during building fire safety design. One is that the fire door qualitative ones. Next, sorting the judgment objects by the
designed in the fire partition is rated as Class B, violating Code calculated distance between the positive ideal and the negative
6.4.10: “The normally-opened fire doors install in the fire zone ideal solution to the multi-objective decision problem. The most
should be Class A”. The other is that there is no fire elevator appropriate solution is picked when all the positive ideal solutions
designed in the 3−3 fire zone, violating Code 7.3.2: “Fire are optimal, and TOPSIS uses close degree to represent the
elevators should be installed in different fire zones, and each fire result, that is, the optimal solution is of the maximum close
zone should not be less than 1”. These two issues are highlighted degree.
in the textual check report, as shown in Fig. 7. Under the code, indices of the criteria layer include door
These two kinds of problems have different forms of visual thickness ( f1), fire-resisting time ( f2), price ( f3), material quality
feedback in the BIM model. The check results of the component ( f4), performance of smoke control ( f5), and supplier evaluation
class are fed back by automatically adding red cloud line and ( f6). By the method of AHP, the attribute weights are calculated
corresponding annotations to the wrong component. Regarding as:

Fig. 9. Ontology Semantics Web of the Example

−8− KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering

 An Efficient Design Support System based on Automatic Rule Checking and Case-based Reasoning

Table 2. Data of Recommended Cases resisting time ( f2), performance of smoke control ( f5), material
f1 f2 f3 f4 f5 f6 quality ( f4), door thickness ( f1), supplier evaluation ( f6), and
C0 55 1.5 2500 (6, 7) (7, 8) (5, 6) price ( f3).
C1 52 1.7 3000 (8, 9) (6, 8) (7, 9) There are 5 families of fire door in the case base and set them
C2 45 1.0 1700 (5, 7) (6, 7) (4, 6) as case 1 (C1) to 5 (C5) in the project hierarchy. The concrete data
C3 40 0.5 1000 (3, 5) (4, 6) (5, 7) of these cases and the standard solution (C0) are shown in
C4 46 1.1 1400 (4, 6) (5, 6) (4, 6) Table 2.
C5 58 1.4 2400 (7, 9) (3, 5) (5, 7) According to the comprehensive ranking calculation, the close
degree of each case and the best solution is calculated as:
L1 = 0.801, L2 = 0.605, L3 = 0.131, L4 = 0.624, L5 = 0.694 (7)
Wf = (0.094, 0.453, 0.025, 0.162, 0.227, 0.039)T (6)
The maximum close degree between the best solution and
and the consistency ratio is CR = 0.096 < 0.1 which within
cases is 80.1% which belongs to Case 1 (C1). Therefore, the
satisfactory consistency. The key factors of fire door are: fire-
system will give priority to C1 and the specific recommendation
list is shown in Fig. 10.
Click on the “Apply” button to select the first case as a
modified design. The fire door in the BIM model is automatically
replaced, as shown in Fig. 11.
Designers can also customize the parameters and create a new
design if the recommended solution does not meet the design
requirements. Meanwhile, the applied case is added to the case
base to realize the accumulation and reuse of design experience
in the CBR cycle.

5. Conclusions

This study proposes a building design support system based on

ARC and CBR, which is applied to the building design stage to
support the designers to perform automatic design checking
Fig. 10. Platform of the Design Support System

Fig. 11. Result of the Optimizing

−9−
 Pin-Chan Lee, Tzu-Ping Lo, Ming-Yang Tian, and Danbing Long

accurately and efficiently. Taking a project as an example and the 168.

feasibility and application value of this system is verified China National Standards (2014). Code for fire protection design of
through it. buildings, GB 50016-2014, General Administration of Quality
Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine of People's Republic of
In the proposed system, ARC can realize automatic rules checking
China & Standardization Administration of China, Beijing, China.
and CBR successfully gives relevant cases recommendation. Delis, E. A. (1995). “Automatic fire-code checking using expert-system
TOPSIS is employed to detect the best alternative and supply a technology.” Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering, Vol. 9, No. 2,
ranking list. Users can make personalized choices according to pp. 141-156, DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)0887-3801(1995)9:2(141).
the actual situation. AHP gives reasonable weight to all selected Ding, L. Y., Zhong, B. T., Wu, S., and Luo, H. B. (2016). “Construction
factors to make the rank more accurate and humanized. risk knowledge management in BIM using ontology and semantic
Automated rule checking and automatic design optimization can web technology.” Safety Science, Vol. 87, pp. 202-213, DOI:
enrich rules and case bases based on professional or phase 10.1016/j.ssci.2016.04.008.
Eastman, C., Lee, J. M., and Jesong, Y. S. (2009). “Automatic rule-
characteristics and have potential application in other areas of the
based checking of building designs.” Automation in Construction,
AEC industry. Vol. 18, No. 8, pp. 1011-1033, DOI: 10.1016/j.autcon.2009.07.002.
Using this system, rule checkers can easily find discrepancies Erdogan, S. A., Šaparauskas, J. and Turskis Z. (2017). “Decision making
between the BIM model and the design rules, which greatly in construction management: AHP and expert choice approach.”
reduce the load of workers. Besides, the efficiency and accuracy Procedia Engineering, Vol. 172, pp. 270-276, DOI: 10.1016/j.proeng.
of rules checking are greatly improved. More importantly, 2017.02.111.
designers, even a newer, can correct the errors based on the GhaffarianHoseini, A., Zhang, T., Nwadigo, O., GhaffarianHoseini, A.,
recommendations, they can also select different plans according Naismith, N., Tookey, J., and Raahemifar, K. (2017). “Application
of nD BIM integrated knowledge-based building management
to the reality and personal preference. Furthermore, BIM-based
system (BIM-IKBMS) for inspecting post-construction energy
ARC method can ensure the completeness and consistency of the efficiency.” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Vol. 72,
built model. Besides, the limitation of this paper is not yet to pp. 935-949, DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2016.12.061.
handle the uncertain information, only clear requirements are Hwang, C. L. and Yoon, K. (1981). “Methods for multiple attribute
transferred into rules. Fuzzy numbers can be further employed to decision making.” Multiple Attribute Decision Making, Springer-
enhance the flexibility of automatic rule checking. Verlag, Heidelberg, Germany.
However, there are also limitations remain to be disposed. Ji, Y. and Leite, F. (2018). “Automated tower crane planning: Leveraging 4-
Firstly, only exact requirements are transferred into rules, the dimensional BIM and rule-based checking.” Automation in
Construction, Vol. 93, pp. 78-90, DOI: 0.1016/j.autcon.2018.05.003.
uncertain information fails to deal with. Furthermore, the fuzziness
Khalil, N., Kamaruzzaman, S. N., and Baharum, M. R. (2016). “Ranking
of the information and the randomness of the evaluation are also the indicators of building performance and the users’ risk via
important affecting factors. Further research will optimize the analytical hierarchy process (AHP): Case of Malaysia.” Ecological
AHP-TOPSIS method using fuzzy theory or another. Besides, Indicators, Vol. 71, pp. 567-576, DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2016.07.032.
the uncertain information needs further excavation. Lee, J. K., Eastman, C. M., and Lee, Y. C. (2015). “Implementation of a
BIM domain-specific language for the building environment rule
References and analysis.” Journal of Intelligent & Robotic Systems, Vol. 79,
Nos. 3-4, pp. 507-522, DOI: 10.1007/s10846-014-0117-7.
Abdulsalam, K. A., Ighravwe, D. E., and Babatunde, M. O. (2018). “A Ma, Z. and Liu, Z. (2018). “Ontology- and freeware-based platform for
fuzzy-TOPSIS approach for techno-economic viability of lighting rapid development of BIM applications with reasoning support.”
energy efficiency measure in public building projects.” Journal of Automation in Construction, Vol. 90, pp. 1-8, DOI: 10.1016/j.autcon.
Project Management, Vol. 3, No. 4, pp. 197-206, DOI: 3.10.5267/ 2018.02.004.
j.jpm.2018.4.001. Mikulakova, E., König, M., Tauscher, E., and Beuckec, K. (2010).
Byun, H. S. and Lee, K. H. (2005). “A decision support system for the “Knowledge-based schedule generation and evaluation.” Advanced
selection of a rapid prototyping process using the modified TOPSIS Engineering Informatics, Vol. 24, No. 4, pp. 389-403, DOI: 10.1016/
method.” Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol., Vol. 26, Nos. 11-12, pp. 1338- j.aei.2010.06.010.
1347, DOI: 10.1007/s00170-004-2099-2. Motawa, I. and Almarshad, A. (2013). “A knowledge-based BIM
Carrillo, P. and Chinowsky, P. (2006). “Exploiting knowledge management: system for building maintenance.” Automation in Construction,
The engineering and construction perspective.” Journal of Management Vol. 29, pp. 173-182, DOI: 10.1016/j.autcon.2012.09.008.
in Engineering, Vol. 22, pp. 2-10, DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)0742-597X Motawa, I. and Almarshad, A. (2015). “Case-based reasoning and BIM
(2006)22:1(2). systems for asset management.” Built Environment Project and
Chen, L. R., Liu, K. H., Lai, F. P., Chang, S. S., and Lee, K. Y. (2017). Asset Management, Vol. 5, pp. 233-247, DOI: 10.1108/BEPAM-02-
“Measuring the quality of financial electronic payment system: 2014-0006.
Combined with fuzzy AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS.” Proc. 17th International Patil, S. K. and Kant R. (2014). “A fuzzy AHP-TOPSIS framework for
Conference on Electronic Business, ICEB, Dubai, UAE, pp. 146- ranking the solutions of Knowledge Management adoption in Supply
160. Chain to overcome its barriers.” Expert Systems with Applications,
Cheng, J. C. P. and Das, M. (2014). “A BIM-based web service framework Vol. 41, No. 2, pp. 679-693, DOI: 10.1016/j.eswa.2013.07.093.
for green building energy simulation and code checking.” Journal of Pauwels, P., Zhang, S., and Lee, Y. C. (2017). “Semantic web technologies
Information Technology in Construction, Vol. 19, No. 8, pp. 150- in AEC industry: A literature overview.” Automation in Construction,

− 10 − KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering

 An Efficient Design Support System based on Automatic Rule Checking and Case-based Reasoning

Vol. 73, pp. 145-165, DOI: 10.1016/j.autcon. 2016.10.003. 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9364(2006)132:6(626).

Quattrini, R., Pierdicca, R., and Morbidoni, C. (2017). “Knowledge- Yu, W. D., Chiu, C. T., Cheng, S. T., Chang, C. C., Wu, C. M., and Lin,
based data enrichment for HBIM: Exploring high-quality models C. C. (2016). “Application of Building Information Modeling (BIM)
using the semantic-web.” Journal of Cultural Heritage, Vol. 28, to automated fall-protection safety inspection of building construction
pp. 129-139, DOI: 10.1016/j.culher.2017.05.004. openings.” Journal of the Chinese Institute of Civil and Hydraulic
Salman, N. S., Sina, M. N., and Ayyub, A. (2017). “A fuzzy decision Engineering, Vol. 28, pp. 21-31, DOI: 10.6652/JoCICHE.
making methodology based on fuzzy AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS with a Yurdakul, M. and Tansel, Y. (2018). “Development of a multi-level
case study for information systems outsourcing decisions.” Journal of performance measurement model for manufacturing companies using a
Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems, Vol. 32, No. 6, pp. 3921-3943, DOI: modified version of the fuzzy TOPSIS approach.” Soft Computing,
10.3233/JIFS-12495. Vol. 22, pp. 7491-7503, DOI: 10.1007/s00500-018-3449-6.
Solihin, W. and Eastman, C. (2015). “Classification of rules for automated Zhang, S., Sulankivi, K., Kiviniemi, M., Romo, I., Eastmand, C. M., and
BIM rule checking development.” Automation in Construction, Teizere, J. (2015). “BIM-based fall hazard identification and prevention
Vol. 53, pp. 69-82, DOI: 10.1016/j.autcon.2015.03.003. in construction safety planning.” Safety Science, Vol. 72, pp. 31-45,
Sun, C. C. (2010). “A performance evaluation model by integrating fuzzy DOI: 10.1016/j.ssci.2014.08.001.
AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS methods.” Expert Systems with Applications, Zhang, S., Teizer, J., Lee, J. K., Eastman, C. M., and Venugopal, M. (2013).
Vol. 37, No. 12, pp. 7745-7754, DOI: 10.1016/j.eswa. 2010.04.066. “Building Information Modeling (BIM) and safety: Automatic
Wong, J. K. W. and Li, H. (2008). “Application of the analytic hierarchy safety checking of construction models and schedules.” Automation
process (AHP) in multi-criteria analysis of the selection of intelligent in Construction, Vol. 29, pp. 183-195, DOI: 10.1016/j.autcon.2012.
building systems.” Building and Environment, Vol. 43, No. 1, 05.006.
pp. 108-125, DOI: 10.1016/j.buildenv.2006.11.019. Zyoud, S. H. and Hunusch, D. F. (2017). “A bibliometric-based survey
Yi, K. J. and Langford, D. (2006). “Scheduling-based risk estimation on AHP and TOPSIS techniques.” Expert Systems with Applications,
and safety planning for construction projects.” Journal of Construction Vol. 78, pp. 158-181, DOI: 10.1016/j.eswa.2017.02.016.
Engineering and Management, Vol. 132, No. 6, pp. 626-635, DOI:

− 11 −