19.06.2026

Augmented Details: Understanding Components Through AR Glasses

Building design

A group of people with a loaded luggage cart—photographed by Hassan Pasha in Dubai.

Building components that explain themselves? Welcome to the era of augmented details. While architects are still rotating their plans on screen, the next revolution is already underway outside: With AR glasses, building components are no longer just viewed, but directly experienced—as a digital layer of information superimposed on the built reality. What could this mean for the construction industry? A closer look at the opportunities, pitfalls, and the current state of affairs in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland.

Augmented Reality (AR) blurs the line between drawings and actual structures—building components are digitally augmented and explained within the space.
Innovative AR applications are transforming our understanding of details—from the planning stage all the way to the construction site.
Germany, Austria, and Switzerland are experimenting, but the major breakthrough has yet to come.
Digital component information, BIM, and AI are the driving forces—yet interfaces and standards are often lacking.
Sustainability benefits when material data and recycling potential become visible directly within their context.
Technical expertise is evolving: planners must master AR tools, data models, and new forms of communication.
The industry is debating: Is AR a helpful tool for the construction site or just a gimmick for tech geeks?
Internationally, pioneers are setting benchmarks—but governance, data protection, and intellectual property remain points of contention.
Conclusion: Those who ignore Augmented Details will miss out on the next evolutionary stage of construction.

Augmented Details: When Building Components Start to Speak

The blueprint is dead; long live the detail—but please, in 3D and with additional information. That’s roughly how one could describe the leap that augmented reality is currently triggering in the construction industry. With AR glasses on, static drawings suddenly become living, floating layers of information directly on the object. The mason looks at the masonry, and the software displays assembly instructions, material data, delivery times, or even assembly videos. On the construction site, the planner checks whether the steel column actually matches the planned drill holes—via an overlay, accurate to the millimeter. That sounds like a pipe dream, but in some respects it’s already a reality.

In practice, this means that detailed drawings, parts lists, maintenance instructions, and even certificates hover as digital annotations above the physical component. Incorrect assignments, lengthy confusion over interfaces, or material mix-ups? Ideally, AR glasses can prevent all of that. The error rate drops, and traceability increases. The famous gap between planning and execution shrinks because the flow of information no longer ends at the construction site gate. But the road ahead is rocky—and full of technical and cultural pitfalls.

Of course, it doesn’t stop at simply displaying information. As system intelligence increases, building components become interfaces: they report their status, request maintenance, or provide information on sustainability and recycling. AR glasses become a translator between the digital model and the built reality, a tool for everyone involved in the process—from the planner to the facility manager. That sounds like control, efficiency, and transparency. But it also sounds like surveillance, a flood of data, and the temptation of technocracy. Where is the line between assistance and digital overkill?

Internationally, the race is on. In the U.S. and Japan, AR-supported component details are already being used in large-scale projects: assembly procedures for facade elements, real-time tolerance checks, and maintenance histories for building services. Germany, Austria, and Switzerland? Here, testing, training, and skepticism are still the order of the day. The first pilot construction sites are up and running, and early adopters are raving—but this is still far from becoming the norm. Why is that, exactly?

These are the classic hurdles of digitalization: missing interfaces, fragmented data models, fear of errors, and liability risks. And yes, the profession’s pride also plays a role: Who wants to be told by a pair of glasses how a detail is supposed to work? Yet change is inevitable. Those who hesitate today will be overtaken tomorrow by colleagues who no longer just draw components, but think in terms of additional digital layers.

BIM, AR, and the New Culture of Detail: Where Do the DACH Region and the Global Landscape Stand?

Anyone talking about augmented details inevitably ends up at the ubiquitous magic word: BIM. Building Information Modeling provides the data foundation that brings AR to life. Without structured, consistent 3D models, any AR application remains nothing more than a nice gimmick—but with BIM, the digital twin becomes an interactive textbook for the construction site. While BIM has now taken hold in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland, it’s still far from truly mature. Too much data is still hidden away in PDFs, drawings, and Excel spreadsheets, and models are too rarely maintained in a truly “as-built” state. This slows down AR applications before they can even get off the ground.

The innovation leaders? They’re based (as always) in Scandinavia, the U.S., and parts of Asia. There, AR glasses have long been used as standard equipment on construction sites—not as an expensive gadget, but as a fundamental tool for quality assurance and communication. In Switzerland, the first pilot projects are underway in which structural engineers use AR overlays to inspect rebar, while in Vienna, the city administration is experimenting with ways to digitally display maintenance information for building services on-site. Germany? There, specifications still reign supreme, accompanied by data protection concerns and hesitations. The courage to embrace uncertainty—that is, to experiment—is rare.

Why is that? On the one hand, it’s due to the complexity of construction projects and the often-lacking willingness to question existing processes. On the other hand, it’s also due to the lack of standards: there’s no uniform way to prepare component data for AR applications. Every software provider does things their own way; open interfaces are the exception rather than the rule. But anyone who wants to use AR on a large scale on the construction site needs interoperability—otherwise, everything remains a patchwork. Work on this is now slowly underway in the DACH region, but progress is modest.

And then there’s the matter of money: AR hardware has become more affordable, but for many small and medium-sized design firms, getting started remains an investment that must first be justified. The ROI—that is, the return on innovation—is still difficult to quantify. However, those who have embraced it report fewer errors, better communication, and more satisfied clients. Perhaps that’s enough of an argument to get the next generation of planners excited about Augmented Details. Or does it first require pressure from international competition?

The bottom line is this: The DACH region is not bringing up the rear, but it’s not a pioneer either. Construction sites are digital, but mindsets are still analog. Those who want to grow must bring both together: technical excellence and cultural openness. Because the future of details is no longer two-dimensional—it is immersive, interactive, and data-driven.

Sustainability, the circular economy, and transparency: What AR can truly achieve

Beyond mere efficiency gains, AR promises real added value for sustainability and resource conservation. Building components that reveal their material composition, carbon footprint, or recycling potential via AR glasses could pave the way for circular construction. The vision: Every component becomes a digital passport that can be tracked and analyzed throughout its entire life cycle—from installation through maintenance to deconstruction. AR glasses thus become a tool for the circular economy. Sound like a dream? Initial projects show that it works—if the data is accurate.

The challenge lies in data quality. Without clean, complete, and standardized information, the AR overlay remains nothing more than a pretty picture without substance. Especially in existing buildings, there is often a lack of reliable information on materials, hazardous substances, and certifications. This is where combining AR with AI can help: algorithms recognize building components, cross-reference them with databases, and suggest actions. The construction site becomes a data lab, and the planner becomes a curator of information and innovation.

Transparency plays a dual role here. On the one hand, subcontractors, construction managers, or facility managers can check at any time exactly what was installed—including origin, maintenance history, and disposal instructions. On the other hand, the building owner is no longer left in the dark: decisions become traceable, and documentation is available at any time. This can prevent conflicts, strengthen trust, and open up new business models—such as lifetime maintenance contracts or take-back guarantees. The only question is: Do all stakeholders want this?

In Germany in particular, data protection and intellectual property are hot-button issues. Who is allowed to see what information? What happens if sensitive construction data ends up in the wrong hands? This requires clear governance, technical safeguards, and a shift in mindset regarding how data is handled. Openness and transparency are not a threat, but rather a prerequisite for sustainable innovation. But the road ahead is long, especially in an industry rooted in hierarchies and the preservation of the status quo.

The positive impact on sustainability, on the other hand, is undisputed. Those who understand building components can maintain them better, renovate them more effectively, and replace them in a way that conserves resources. AR makes “gray energy” visible, turning details into a tool for climate protection and resource efficiency. Perhaps this is the decisive lever to move the industry toward sustainable practices—not out of a sense of duty, but simply because it becomes more efficient and transparent.

Technical expertise, new roles, and unanswered questions: What planners need to learn now

Anyone who wants to use Augmented Details must be capable of more than just CAD and traditional construction management. The new world demands a technical understanding of data models, interfaces, and how AR hardware works. Planners are becoming data managers, translators, and facilitators between the virtual and real worlds. That sounds challenging, but it also opens up new opportunities: Those who speak the language of digital components can control processes, avoid errors, and drive innovation. The line between planning, execution, and operation is blurring—the new role is called “information architect.”

But the learning curve is steep. AR systems are complex; operating them requires training and patience. Those who make mistakes can quickly lose track of things—or, in the worst case, misassign components. Training courses, certifications, new job profiles? All of this will be necessary if the industry is serious about this transformation. Universities and professional associations face the task of finally teaching digital skills systematically—and not just as an elective in master’s programs.

Requirements are changing on construction sites, too. Construction managers, foremen, and tradespeople must be able to interpret AR overlays, identify errors, and feed feedback back into the system. This means more personal responsibility, but also more control. The construction site is becoming an interface—every participant is part of a digital feedback loop. Those who embrace this can optimize processes, share knowledge, and react more quickly. Those who don’t will remain spectators in their own trade.

A Step Back? Criticism of AR applications often comes from within the industry itself. “Too expensive, too complicated, not practical enough,” is the common refrain. That may be true—but the same criticism was leveled at the introduction of CAD, BIM, and smartphones as well. The question isn’t whether AR is coming, but how quickly and how intelligently the industry will integrate it. Those who invest in training and experimentation now will be at the forefront. Those who wait and see will be swept away by the next wave of digital innovation.

Questions remain: Who is liable for errors? Who owns the data? How will standards be set? The industry is at the beginning of a long process of change. But one thing is certain: Without technical know-how, openness, and the courage to embrace change, no one will be able to reap the benefits of Augmented Details. The future is digital—and it begins with the smallest component.

Debates, Visions, and Stumbling Blocks: AR Between Hype and Everyday Life

As is always the case with digital innovations, there are two camps: Some see AR as the savior of building culture, while others view it as an unnecessary gimmick. The truth lies—as is so often the case—somewhere in between. Yes, AR can prevent errors, speed up processes, and democratize knowledge. But no, it does not replace an eye for detail, craftsmanship, or on-site experience. The art lies in combining both: digital tools and analog expertise. Those who succeed in doing so can turn building components into true repositories of knowledge—and sustainably improve quality in construction.

Standardization remains a major issue. Without uniform data formats, open interfaces, and clear rules, AR will remain a patchwork of siloed solutions. The industry must learn to work together, share information, and set standards. This is uncomfortable, but necessary. International initiatives show that it’s possible—if the will is there. Perhaps a regulatory push is needed; perhaps market pressure will suffice. In any case, this development can no longer be stopped.

A second point of contention: the commercialization of AR applications. Who profits from the data? Who controls the interfaces? How open or proprietary should the systems be? This risks creating new monopolies, dependencies, and battles over distribution. The industry must be careful not to become dependent on a handful of tech conglomerates, but rather to promote its own open solutions. After all, true innovation arises where many players collaborate—not in the isolated ecosystems of individual providers.

And finally: cultural change. AR can make planning more transparent, construction sites more efficient, and buildings more sustainable—but only if people embrace it. That requires patience, persuasion, and sometimes a little nudge. The benefits are obvious, but the fears are real. Anyone who wants to shape this change must take both seriously: the hopes and the concerns. Then the hype will turn into innovation that works in everyday life.

A peek into the crystal ball? In a few years, AR glasses on construction sites will be as commonplace as smartphones are today. Building components will no longer just be manufactured and assembled, but also digitally explained, monitored, and documented. The details speak for themselves—if you listen to them. The question isn’t whether, but how we’ll make the leap into Augmented Building. Those who boldly lead the way now will write the next chapter in construction history. Those who hold back will be left behind by reality.

Conclusion: Those who don’t understand the details will be left behind by the building components

Augmented details are more than just a technical gimmick—they mark the beginning of a new era in construction. Building components become repositories of knowledge, and details become interfaces between planning, execution, and operation. AR glasses are the gateway to real-time information, error prevention, and a sustainable circular economy. The DACH region is moving forward cautiously, but international pressure is growing. Those who invest now in expertise, standards, and openness will be at the forefront. The others? They’ll watch as building components are soon no longer just built, but also digitally explained. Welcome to the future, where the details are no longer found on the blueprint but in the physical space itself.

22.01.2025

Project

Co-creation instead of participation

Building design

Management

Participation versus co-creation: Would the Superkilen work better today if citizens had been integrated into the process from the outset?

Superkilen in Copenhagen has failed. The citizens as a whole use the square more as a place to pass through than to linger, even though they were integrated into the planning process through participation – according to a long-term analysis by students at the Danish Institute for Study Abroad. During the design and development process, the Superkilen planners asked citizens to suggest artifacts from their countries of origin for the new city square. Holistic planning with co-creation and prototypes would have been one way of increasing acceptance of the square.

Co-creation

Co-creation originally comes from the business world, which began to involve consumers in the product development process in the 1990s. The Leading Cities research group defines co-creation in urban development as “the active flow of ideas and information between five sectors: government, business, academia, non-profit organizations and citizens that promotes participation, engagement and development.”

What is the difference to citizen participation? Public participation is a means for planners to learn more about the attitudes and opinions of local residents and to develop new ideas. They increase acceptance for a project. Co-creation, on the other hand, involves the most important sectors of society on an equal footing from the outset.

It therefore offers citizens and citizens’ organizations a better opportunity to be truly heard and gain more influence in planning processes. Co-creation views users as proactive citizens rather than consumers, and focuses on long-term cultural change and the whole community rather than individual user groups. Where citizen participation seeks to integrate citizens’ opinions into an already prescribed program, co-creation helps future users to shape and enforce their own decisions. Co-creation is an endless process in the best sense of the word, with regular exchanges taking place between those involved.

Co-creation has a number of advantages. The public provides input and feels equal, citizens feel they are taken seriously. They become much more aware of their living environment. In return, the government has to be much more responsive and responsive to citizens and other sectors. In return, however, it saves costs because only what is actually needed and used is implemented and the risk of a new project is correspondingly low.

Prototypes

In large design projects such as Superkilen, it is extremely important to test ideas in advance before they become a permanent part of the landscape or city. It is a long way from the abstract idea, analysis and public participation to the concrete installation. The prototype should be seen as a learning tool that can be optimized and changed in the next step. Prototypes are a democratic way of dealing with public space, they also reduce the risk of a failed project and unnecessary expenditure.

The holistic approach

Combining co-creation with the prototyping approach makes it easier to explore the potential of a space. This holistic approach leads to more sustainable and vibrant places in the city. However, the Superkilen started with an assumption that co-creation and prototyping would have led to a different design. Users would accept the space better and make it more their own. Perhaps a more critical examination of the initial idea would also have been achieved.

You can read Bianca Hermannsen’s current analysis of the square here.
Robert Schäfer visited Superkilen in 2012, directly after the opening. You can read his review of the new city square in Copenhagen here.
Watch the video here to see how BIG travels with local residents to their countries of origin to select artifacts for Superkilen.

19.12.2024

Design

Heavyweight with a message

Building design

The Globo Uovo sculpture is an impressive work by stone sculptor Marc Reist and is currently on display at the Dürrenmatt Center in Neuchâtel, Switzerland. The artist made the 6.5-ton “global egg” out of white marble. In an interview with STEIN, the Swiss artist explains what message he wants to convey with his sculpture, why he only uses white marble and […]

The Globo Uovo sculpture is an impressive work bystone sculptorMarc Reist and is currently on display at the Dürrenmatt Center in Neuchâtel, Switzerland. The artist made the 6.5-ton “global egg” out of white marble. In an interview with STEIN, the Swiss artist explains the message hewants to conveywith hissculpture, why he only works with white stone and why he launched an appeal to collect eggshells before the opening.

Marc Reist: It’s a logical consequence of my artistic work and how I reflect on my surroundings by observing them. I notice how certain rules and mechanisms are similar on both a small and large scale. I never consciously came up with the topic, it just developed. I think it started in 2005.

The Globo Uovo symbolizes the world and the origin of life. Was there a specific reason for this idea?

Yes, that was in 2011. I was invited by a newspaper in Switzerland to write a few columns. I started to write about resources and food in these texts and about what bothers me: the way we deal with food, the way we deal with our environment. And during this phase, I designed the globe and then the egg. The eggs actually always resonate with me. Regularly for my wife – I only mention this in passing – for her birthday, for Mother’s Day, there are always drawings of chicken and egg. I either start with the chicken or the egg, but the egg always resonates.

Do the many openings in the sculpture also have a meaning?

The openings were created by the lines of longitude and latitude. And I found them very special as soon as I was able to work in the egg. There is a feeling of protection when you are in your human egg and you can see the outside world through these openings. At the same time, it could also be a prison. These feelings arose in me when I was working in the egg.

From a professional point of view – I trained as a stone sculptor and also took the master craftsman’s examination – I know almost all the materials. But even so, I used to only work with black stone for my shapes. And now, for years, I’ve only been working in white. For the small sculptures I make, I use a bright white marble. There is no other solution for me and for my forms. I have never used any materials with textures. They are beautiful, but not for my shapes.

But the marble for the egg has a certain texture. Was a block of 55 tons in pure white not available?

For the Globo Uovo, the stone is a little more marbled. Because this size in pure white – that would have been almost impossible and would have meant such a long wait. And the egg in this size in pure white would almost be a little too beautiful(laughs), almost baroque. That’s impossible. Visually too, it’s almost not rock anymore.

So the egg also looks much more “alive”.

Exactly, that’s what I mean. This methamorphosis of the rock, this mountain, that has to resonate.

How did the change from black to white rock come about?

That’s an interesting question. I have to go back to that. I wanted to make a really big sculpture in the 1990s. I chose a large block in Carrara without knowing what I was going to do with it. I wanted to be inspired by the material, by the block. I normally proceed differently. I have a drawing or a model and then work on the stone. But now I wanted to be influenced by the block. At the time, it was 20 tons in size. And that put an enormous strain on me(laughs). I suddenly realized that the further north the block was transported from Italy, the greater the strain in my head became. I was very blocked! And suddenly I found the solution. I then worked out a light cloth from this block. That was probably my solution, to release this heaviness in me in relation to the block. And since then I’ve only worked with white stone.

Are there purely visual reasons why you like to work with marble a lot, or is it also because of its properties?

Both, actually. My sculptures are also a matter of light. Not only with the large egg, but also with the other sculptures. The way the light passes through the opening and the edges is what makes it so good. And the properties for working are a pleasant side effect. It is easy to work with because it is so even, so homogeneous. But I mainly use marble because light and shadow are important for my sculptures.

You also want to send out a message with your art objects.

Yes, absolutely. I think that’s the greatest task of an artist. That his work is seen and heard, as the case may be. Communication is important. It makes no sense at all if I make an egg like this just to have another beautiful sculpture in a park somewhere. That wouldn’t be enough. It needs a message.

What message is that?

We have great difficulties with resources in general. This is most sensitive when it comes to food. And I really want to draw attention to the fact that people need to deal with the issue of food and resources. That a small train of thought changes.

Your sculpture is currently on display at the Dürrenmatt Center in Neuchâtel, Switzerland. Before the exhibition began, you launched an appeal to collect eggshells. What was the reason?

We had planned a performance with a dancer for the vernissage. I needed a lot of eggshells for that. Over the course of a year, people collected around 35,000 eggshells, washed them and brought them to me. Something you would normally throw away. For the exhibition opening, we laid them out on the floor of the museum and cleared paths, like a labyrinth. The dancer danced her way through it. But every now and then she made missteps on the eggshells, causing them to crack. And at the same time, with every misstep, a part of her body died. Because the shells represent our resources and if they are destroyed, the person dies too. And so she danced through the labyrinth and gradually died a dramatic death after three or four missteps.

Find out more about the project and the natural stone work in the February issue of STEIN. You can also find more information at www.stein-magazin.de/skulptur-des-monats-globo-uovo.