Vapor-Permeable OSB: An Overview of the Basics and Requirements

Building design
A structural detail of the building related to OSB with open diffusion
Construction workers at work on a building—a glimpse of construction in action during the day. Photo: jramos10

OSB panels are among the most widely used wood-based materials in modern timber construction, and few terms are as frequently misunderstood as “diffusion-open.” When designers, carpenters, and builders refer to an “OSB panel that is diffusion-open,” they mean an OSB panel that allows water vapor to pass through its layered structure to a degree controlled by building physics, without losing its structural function as a stiffening element or an airtight layer. Behind this seemingly simple attribute lies a complex interplay of material physics, standards, construction principles, and moisture management—all of which are of fundamental importance to the durability of wood-frame structures and solid wood buildings.

  • What OSB panels are, how they are manufactured, and the different types defined by the standard
  • What “diffusion openness” means in physical terms and how the sd-value functions as a parameter
  • Why standard OSB panels act as diffusion barriers and what consequences this has for wall construction
  • Which products and construction principles are considered OSB-diffusion-open and what distinguishes them from conventional panels
  • How the Glaser verification method and dynamic simulation procedures evaluate vapor permeability in the cross-section of a building component
  • Which standards, approvals, and regulations are relevant for the use of diffusion-open OSB panels
  • What typical errors occur during planning and execution, and how they can be avoided
  • How diffusion-open OSB panels are integrated into the overall concept of building moisture management

What OSB panels are: structure, manufacturing, and standard types

OSB stands for Oriented Strand Board. It is a wood-based material made from long, flat wood strands that are glued together in multiple layers under pressure and heat using binders. Its defining characteristic is the specific orientation of the strands: in the outer layers, they run parallel to the board’s longitudinal axis, while in the core layer, they run perpendicular to it. This cross-layered structure gives OSB panels high bending stiffness and shear strength, making them ideal for load-bearing and bracing applications in wood-frame and solid wood construction.

The binders used are primarily melamine-urea-formaldehyde resins (MUF) and phenol-formaldehyde resins (PF), as well as isocyanates (PMDI). The choice of binder influences not only the board’s mechanical properties and moisture resistance but also its vapor diffusion characteristics. Panels with a high resin content and a dense pressed structure generally exhibit higher diffusion resistance than those with a lower binder content and a more open pore structure.

The European product standard EN 300 classifies OSB panels into four types: OSB/1 for general purposes and interior finishing in dry climates, OSB/2 as a load-bearing panel for dry climates, OSB/3 as a load-bearing panel for humid climates, and OSB/4 as a heavy-duty load-bearing panel for humid climates. In structural timber construction, OSB/3 and OSB/4 are the standard types, as they meet the requirements for load-bearing capacity and moisture stability. However, the standard classification does not provide any direct information about the panels’ vapor diffusion properties, which often leads to misunderstandings in practice.

Vapor Permeability: Physical Principles and the sd Value as a Key Parameter

Vapor diffusion refers to the transport of water vapor through a building component as a result of a partial pressure gradient. Water vapor always moves from areas of higher vapor pressure to areas of lower vapor pressure—that is, during the heating season, typically from the inside to the outside. Every material offers resistance to this transport, which is described by the diffusion resistance factor My (Greek: µ). The µ-value is dimensionless and indicates how much more a material inhibits vapor transport than a stationary layer of air of the same thickness.

In building practice, the equivalent air layer thickness sd is calculated from the µ value and the layer thickness: sd = µ times the layer thickness in meters. The sd value, measured in meters, is the key parameter for assessing the vapor permeability of a building component or layer. Layers with an sd value below 0.5 m are considered diffusion-open; layers between 0.5 m and 1.5 m are considered semi-permeable to diffusion; layers between 1.5 m and 10 m are considered diffusion-inhibiting; and layers above 10 m are considered vapor-barrier. This classification follows the system outlined in DIN 4108-3, the German standard for moisture protection in building construction.

For standard OSB/3 panels, µ-values between 30 and 200 are cited in the literature and in manufacturer specifications, depending on panel thickness, resin content, and test conditions. A 15-mm-thick OSB/3 panel with an average µ-value of 100 thus achieves an sd-value of 1.5 m, which places it on the boundary between diffusion-permeable and diffusion-inhibiting. For thicker panels or higher µ values, the sd value can be well over 2 m, which clearly places the panel in the diffusion-inhibiting range. This is precisely where the structural problem lies: An OSB panel used as interior sheathing or as a bracing element in a wood-frame wall can impede moisture transport to such an extent that condensation forms within the wall cross-section.

The Structural Dilemma: Why Standard OSB Poses a Risk to Wall Construction

In wood-frame construction, OSB panels are frequently used on the interior side as an airtight layer and simultaneously as a stiffening element. The logic of a structurally sound wall assembly requires that the vapor diffusion resistance decrease from the inside to the outside: The inner layer should act as a vapor retarder or vapor barrier, while the outer layer should be as permeable to moisture as possible so that any moisture that has penetrated can dry out to the outside. In technical terminology, this principle is referred to as the ratio of internal to external vapor diffusion resistance, and experts speak of the requirement for a favorable sd ratio, which should generally be at least 5:1.

A standard OSB/3 panel with an sd value of 1.5 m or more on the interior side initially fulfills this function as a vapor barrier well. The problem arises when there is also a diffusion-inhibiting layer on the exterior side, such as an additional OSB layer as exterior sheathing or a facade membrane with an sd value that is too high. In this case, the wall cross-section is enclosed on both sides; moisture cannot escape either inward or outward, and temperature fluctuations or moisture ingress due to condensation or driving rain can cause damage to the wood structure. Rot and mold growth are the typical consequences.

The situation is exacerbated in constructions that rely on drying reserves. If a wall is supposed to dry out toward the interior in the summer—because the exterior side is more diffusion-resistant than the interior side due to a facade membrane or a layer of plaster—the OSB panel on the interior side must have a sufficiently low sd value. This is precisely where the need for a diffusion-open OSB arises: a panel that meets the mechanical requirements as a stiffening element while also having an sd-value that does not impede the drying reserve toward the interior.

Diffusion-Open OSB: Products, Concepts, and Structural Solutions

The term “diffusion-open OSB” is not a standardized product term, but rather a functional description that encompasses various approaches. Basically, three approaches can be distinguished: first, the use of specially developed OSB panels with reduced diffusion resistance; second, the combination of a standard OSB panel with a moisture-adaptive vapor barrier; and third, the structural decoupling of the bracing function from the vapor barrier layer.

Some manufacturers offer OSB panels that achieve lower µ-values through modified binder formulations, reduced press densities, or targeted modifications to the chip structure. Such products are marketed under various names, such as “breathable OSB” or “diffusion-open OSB.” For the designer, the proven sd value for the relevant panel thickness is always the decisive factor—not the marketing label. Manufacturer specifications should be substantiated by test certificates in accordance with EN ISO 12572, the European test method for determining the water vapor permeability of building materials.

Moisture-adaptive vapor barriers, also known as climate-adaptive or variable vapor barriers, are films whose sd-value changes depending on the surrounding relative humidity. In dry winter climates, they have a high sd value and protect the structure from moisture ingress from the indoor air. In humid summer climates, their sd value drops significantly, allowing moisture to dry out toward the interior. When such a film is combined with a standard OSB panel, the film acts as the vapor barrier, while the OSB panel provides structural reinforcement and airtightness. The overall construction then functions like a diffusion-open OSB panel, without the panel itself needing to have a low µ-value.

The third solution, structural decoupling, involves using the OSB panel as the outer sheathing of the wood frame and implementing the vapor barrier layer on the interior side using a separate membrane or a wood fiber insulation board with a suitable sd value. In this case, the OSB panel is located on the cold side of the insulation layer, which makes its diffusion properties less critical from a building physics perspective, since moisture transport from the interior to the exterior does not reach the OSB panel until it has passed through the insulation layer. This construction method is widely used in German wood-frame construction and is described as a standard solution in the relevant codes and standards, particularly the Wood-Frame Construction Technical Note published by the Informationsdienst Holz.

Standards, Verification, and Evaluation Methods

In Germany, the building physics evaluation of wall assemblies with OSB panels is primarily carried out in accordance with DIN 4108-3, which describes the simplified Glaser method for calculating condensation in the cross-section of a building component. The Glaser method is a steady-state calculation method that operates with constant boundary conditions for winter and summer climates. It provides a conservative estimate of condensation and the evaporation reserve, but is unable to accurately model dynamic moisture transport processes, sorption effects in wood-based materials, or the moisture-adaptive properties of variable vapor barriers.

For more complex wall assemblies, particularly those with moisture-adaptive layers or wood-based materials that exhibit pronounced hygroscopic properties, experts recommend the use of dynamic simulation methods. The best-known of these is WUFI (Transient Heat and Moisture Transport), a program developed at the Fraunhofer Institute for Building Physics that simulates transient moisture and heat transport processes over multi-year climatic periods. WUFI calculations provide a significantly more realistic picture of the moisture balance within the cross-section of a building component and are indispensable when planning special structures or renovating existing buildings with OSB sheathing.

For the use of OSB panels as load-bearing components in Germany, CE marking in accordance with EN 300, in conjunction with the Construction Products Regulation, is mandatory. Panels used in load-bearing structures must declare the performance characteristics specified in EN 300, which include bending strength, transverse tensile strength, and shear strength. Diffusion properties are not regulated in EN 300 and must be documented separately through manufacturer specifications or test certificates in accordance with EN ISO 12572. Anyone wishing to include diffusion-open OSB in a design verification process must rely on these manufacturer-specific test values.

Typical Design and Construction Errors

The most common error in practice is the use of a standard OSB/3 panel as interior sheathing in a wood-frame wall without separately and correctly installing the vapor barrier layer. Many contractors assume that the OSB panel itself functions as a sufficient vapor barrier, which is theoretically possible for panels with a high sd value but requires a careful review of the entire wall assembly. If a diffusion-resistant layer is also installed on the exterior side, the described entrapment problem arises.

Another common mistake concerns the joints and connections between OSB panels. Even if the panel has a suitable sd-value, the airtightness of the construction is only guaranteed if joints, penetrations, and connections to adjacent components are carefully taped or sealed with Kompriband. Air leaks in the interior sheathing pose a greater risk in terms of moisture physics than a slightly too high or too low sd-value of the panel itself, because convective moisture transport through air gaps generates moisture flows many times greater than diffusion through the panel material.

Confusing airtightness with vapor barrier performance is also a common misconception. An OSB panel can be airtight—that is, prevent airflow through joints and cracks—while simultaneously exhibiting high vapor diffusion resistance. These are two distinct physical properties that, although they often occur together, must be evaluated separately. A diffusion-open OSB panel with a low sd value can be airtight if its joints are properly sealed, and it can simultaneously exhibit low diffusion resistance, which ensures the structure’s drying reserve.

Integration into Building Moisture Management: Overall Concept and Planning Responsibility

The decision for or against a vapor-permeable OSB is not an isolated product decision, but rather part of an overall concept for moisture protection of the building envelope. A coherent moisture management strategy begins with defining the functional layers in the wall cross-section: Where is the thermal insulation layer, where is the airtightness layer, where is the vapor barrier layer, and how do these layers relate to one another in terms of diffusion resistance and drying reserve? These questions must be answered during the planning phase, not on the construction site.

For wood-frame construction, a standard wall construction has become established in Germany that includes the following layers from the inside out: Interior sheathing, utility layer, vapor barrier or vapor-retardant OSB panel, stud framing with insulation, exterior OSB sheathing or wood fiber insulation board, and a ventilated facade. In this construction, the OSB panel is on the outside and is thus on the cold side of the insulation layer, which makes its diffusion properties inconsequential. If, on the other hand, the OSB panel is used on the interior side, its sd-value must be carefully matched to the overall construction.

Experts in building physics, timber construction design, and building services engineering who incorporate these considerations into the planning from the outset can avoid the typical damage resulting from faulty wall constructions. Choosing a diffusion-open OSB panel is just one tool among many that is effective only when combined with properly executed connections, suitable facade membranes, and a coherent overall design concept. Anyone who selects OSB panels based solely on mechanical properties and considers diffusion properties to be of secondary importance risks long-term damage that only becomes apparent years later in the form of discoloration, rot, or mold—and which must then be remedied at considerable expense.

Timber construction has experienced a remarkable renaissance in recent decades, and OSB panels are an indispensable part of this development. Understanding their diffusion properties is not an academic detail, but a fundamental skill for both craftsmen and designers. Those who understand what sd values mean, how the Glaser method works, and when a diffusion-open OSB panel is the right choice can build wooden structures that function reliably not only structurally but also in terms of moisture behavior over the long term.

YOU MAY ALSO LIKE

Permaculture as a Principle for Urban Open Space Planning

Building design
concrete-house-on-calm-water-on-the-day-HsNLzllzW58
Modern, sustainable concrete house on a still body of water in Switzerland, photographed by Aswathy N

Permaculture in urban planning? To many, that sounds like a self-sufficient idyll or a romanticized vision of the wilderness. But behind the term lies a highly relevant, systemic principle that has long since found its way into urban open-space planning—and has the potential to make cities more sustainable, climate-resilient, and socially inclusive. It’s high time to take permaculture seriously as a toolkit and conceptual framework for the city of tomorrow.

  • Definition and Origins of Permaculture—More Than Just Gardening for Advanced Practitioners
  • Permaculture Principles and Their Applicability to Urban Open-Space Planning
  • Practical examples from Germany, Austria, and Switzerland: From community gardens to urban sponge areas
  • Systemic Thinking: How Permaculture Creates Synergies Between Ecology, Society, and Urban Development
  • Planning tools, participation, and governance—what professionals need to know
  • Challenges and Limitations in Integrating Permaculture into Municipal Planning Practice
  • How Permaculture Can Help Make Cities Climate-Resilient and Livable
  • Innovative Approaches to Land Management, Biodiversity, and Social Participation
  • Conclusion: Permaculture as a Source of Inspiration for a New Generation of Urban Planners and Landscape Architects

What Is Permaculture? From Agriculture to Urban System Innovation

The term “permaculture” is a portmanteau derived from the English phrases “permanent agriculture” and “permanent culture.” Originally developed in the 1970s by Bill Mollison and David Holmgren in Australia, the focus was on creating permanently functional and sustainable agricultural systems. But it soon became clear that the principles of permaculture could be applied far beyond the farm—to gardens, neighborhoods, cities, and even entire societies.

Permaculture is based on the recognition that natural ecosystems are highly complex, resilient, and efficient because they rely on diversity, circular thinking, and cooperation. Instead of working against nature, human settlements and open spaces should be designed to work in harmony with natural processes. The goal: to create living spaces that conserve resources, prevent waste, save energy, and promote social cohesion.

In practice, this means much more than just a few raised beds or wildflower meadows. Permaculture is a methodological toolkit that encompasses design principles such as “Observe and interact,” “Use edges,” and “Design from patterns to details.” These principles are remarkably universal—and can be applied to open-space planning, urban development, and landscape architecture.

More and more cities around the world are discovering permaculture as a source of innovation. In New York and San Francisco, public parks are being created based on permaculture concepts; in Copenhagen and Zurich, entire neighborhoods are being developed using permaculture designs. But interest is also growing rapidly in German-speaking countries, and the first pilot projects show that permaculture and the city are not a contradiction, but rather a productive alliance.

Perhaps the most important difference from traditional planning is that permaculture does not think in terms of individual measures, but rather in terms of relationships, interactions, and processes. It asks: How can a space store water, promote biodiversity, facilitate social interaction, and at the same time be climate-resilient? This makes permaculture a systemic innovation strategy that playfully transcends traditional disciplinary boundaries.

For professionals in urban and open-space planning, this means that those who understand the principles of permaculture expand their methodological repertoire and can design urban spaces that are resilient, multifunctional, and sustainable. It is therefore worth taking a closer look at how permaculture works in practice in the city—and what opportunities and challenges this presents.

Permaculture Principles for Urban Open Space Planning—Systems Thinking Meets Urban Space

Applying permaculture principles to the city is anything but trivial—but it’s also anything but impossible. The first step is to understand the essential design principles and adapt them to the urban context. Permaculture traditionally operates on a set of fundamental principles, such as observation, circular economy, multifunctionality, the use of synergies, and the principle that “every part serves multiple functions.”

In the context of urban open spaces, this means, for example, that a rainwater garden can not only retain water and promote evaporation but also serve as a place to gather, a learning space, and a habitat for insects. A green strip is not merely seen as a divider between traffic areas, but as a productive edge zone that promotes biodiversity, produces food, and facilitates social interaction. Multifunctionality is the magic word here—and a clear counterpoint to traditional, monofunctional land-use zoning.

Another key principle is thinking in terms of cycles. Instead of consuming resources linearly and producing waste, permaculture focuses on closing material cycles. In urban practice, this means: on-site composting of organic waste, rainwater harvesting in parks, the integration of urban vegetable gardening, and the use of “waste” such as leaves, pruning clippings, or graywater as a resource. Urban open-space planning can thus become not only more sustainable but also significantly more efficient.

Creating synergies between different systems is another central concern. For example, an urban community garden can be designed not only to produce vegetables but also to serve as a learning space for schools, promote social integration, and increase biodiversity in the neighborhood. This is where the strength of permaculture thinking lies: space is designed not as the sum of individual functions, but as a network of complementary relationships.

Finally, permaculture relies on participatory processes. The involvement of the urban community is not a decorative afterthought but an integral part of the planning process. Users become co-creators, local knowledge is incorporated into the design, and responsibility is shared. For planners, this means that participation is not merely relegated to the “participation table,” but is part of the entire planning process—from analysis and design through to maintenance and further development.

The challenge lies in applying these principles within the context of existing planning routines, regulations, and administrative structures. This requires a pioneering spirit, creativity, and sometimes even a dash of civil disobedience. Yet the experiences of recent years show that where permaculture succeeds in the city, it creates not only a new quality in public spaces but also in social interaction.

Practical Examples: Permaculture in German, Austrian, and Swiss Cities

The theory sounds convincing—but what does permaculture in the city actually look like? A look at selected projects in German-speaking countries shows just how diverse the approaches are and what innovations become possible when permaculture principles are specifically integrated into open-space planning.

One flagship project is the “Prinzessinnengarten” in Berlin. On a former brownfield site, an urban garden was developed here in cooperation with residents, initiatives, and planners—a space that not only produces vegetables but also serves as an educational, social, and cultural hub. Composting, rainwater harvesting, biodiversity, and social integration are its cornerstones—and make the site an exemplary testing ground for permaculture in the big city.

In Vienna, too, permaculture-inspired open spaces are increasingly emerging. For example, a public park was developed in the Sonnwendviertel neighborhood based on the principles of the circular economy and biodiversity. Rainwater is collected and used for irrigation; there are community garden beds, insect-friendly plantings, and thoughtfully designed border areas. Maintenance is partly carried out by cooperating neighborhood initiatives, thereby strengthening social participation and responsibility.

In Basel, Switzerland, the “Urban Agriculture Basel” project focuses on integrating permaculture principles into neighborhood management. Here, rooftops, courtyards, and open spaces are systematically designed as productive, multifunctional areas. The goal: to develop food sovereignty, climate adaptation, and social innovation hand in hand. Particularly exciting is the close collaboration with local stakeholders and the integration of urban development, education, and open-space design.

In medium-sized German cities such as Göttingen and Freiburg, more and more “edible cities” are emerging. Here, urban green spaces are systematically enriched with edible plants that citizens are allowed to harvest. The land-use management strategy is based on permaculture principles: utilizing peripheral areas, promoting diversity, and linking ecological, social, and cultural goals. Even traditional parks and recreation departments are increasingly discovering the potential of permaculture interventions, such as “sponge city” elements, species-rich wildflower meadows, or multifunctional rainwater gardens.

These examples show that permaculture is not a niche phenomenon for alternative gardening groups, but rather an innovation strategy that has taken center stage in urban development. It is crucial that these projects be integrated into overall planning not just as isolated initiatives, but as systemic building blocks. Where permaculture becomes a planning principle, resilient, vibrant, and socially just urban spaces emerge that go far beyond ecological benefits.

Strategies, Tools, and Governance: Permaculture in Planning Practice

Integrating permaculture into urban open-space planning requires new planning strategies, tools, and governance models. First and foremost, a fundamental understanding of systems thinking is needed. Traditional instruments such as land-use plans or zoning plans reach their limits when the goal is to create multifunctional, adaptive, and participatory spaces. This calls for flexible planning tools that are oriented toward dynamic processes—such as adaptive master plans, cooperative maintenance agreements, or temporary land-use models.

A key tool is participatory analysis and planning. Methods such as mapping, future workshops, or co-creative design processes help to identify local knowledge and needs. Permaculture design processes often rely on intensive observation and site analysis to identify and strategically harness a location’s potential. Digital tools such as GIS can help visualize spatial synergies and model interactions between land use, the water cycle, and biodiversity.

Governance plays a key role. Traditional top-down management quickly reaches its limits in permaculture projects. Instead, cooperative models are needed in which government, civil society, and local stakeholders share responsibility. Contracting models, public sponsorships, or cooperatives can help ensure the long-term maintenance and further development of permaculture spaces. Transparency is crucial here: Who makes the decisions, who benefits, and who bears responsibility?

Integrating permaculture approaches into existing planning and funding structures remains a challenge. Many funding programs are tailored to traditional green spaces or “investment measures”; securing funding for participatory processes, maintenance, or educational work is often difficult. This calls for a shift in political thinking and new funding instruments that recognize and support the long-term social and ecological benefits of permaculture projects.

Finally, permaculture also presents a communication challenge. Its principles are complex and often require explanation. Professional public relations, transparent communication, and educational programs are therefore essential for gaining acceptance among administrative bodies, policymakers, and the urban community. Anyone who wants to successfully establish permaculture in the city must be persuasive not only in technical terms but also in terms of communication and politics.

For planners, landscape architects, and urban developers, permaculture offers a rich treasure trove of methods—but also the challenge of questioning routines and daring to try something new. The reward: open spaces that set new standards not only ecologically but also socially and culturally.

Perspectives: Opportunities and Limits of Permaculture in the City of Tomorrow

Permaculture is not a panacea, but it is a powerful tool for 21st-century urban development. Its greatest strength lies in its systemic approach: rather than promoting isolated projects, it integrates ecology, economy, and social aspects into a holistic development model. In this way, cities can become not only more climate-resilient, but also more livable, equitable, and innovative.

The opportunities are enormous: Permaculture can help reduce urban heat islands, increase biodiversity, strengthen local food sovereignty, and promote social participation. Cities become more resilient to extreme weather, resources are used more efficiently, and new spaces for education, social interaction, and innovation emerge. Last but not least, permaculture can help optimize land management and design open spaces to be multifunctional.

But there are also limitations. Not every area is suitable for permaculture; conflicts with other land-use demands—such as transportation or housing development—are inevitable. Integrating permaculture into existing legal and planning structures requires patience, creativity, and often political support. Furthermore, there is a risk that permaculture will be misused as a “fig leaf” for greenwashing rather than actually driving systemic change.

The greatest challenge remains the cultural shift in planning and administration. Permaculture demands a new understanding of roles: planners become facilitators, administrative bodies become enablers, and citizens become co-creators. This is unfamiliar, but it also presents an enormous opportunity for innovation and social cohesion. Those who embrace this change will be rewarded with resilient, vibrant, and sustainable cities.

The future of permaculture in the city depends on whether we succeed in permanently integrating its principles into planning and decision-making structures. This requires courage, openness, and a willingness to experiment—but also clear political frameworks and innovative funding models. Permaculture is not an end in itself, but a tool for transforming the city in the Anthropocene. Those who start today can make a difference tomorrow.

The next generation of urban planners and landscape architects faces the challenge of viewing permaculture not as a niche but as an integral part of urban development. The tools and knowledge are there—it’s up to us to use them.

Summary:
Permaculture as a principle for urban open-space planning offers a fascinating, systemic response to many of today’s challenges: climate adaptation, biodiversity, social participation, and sustainable resource use. The principles of permaculture can be successfully applied to urban spaces, as numerous projects in German-speaking countries demonstrate. However, integration into planning processes, governance models, and urban society is crucial—this is where the true innovative power lies. Those who seriously engage with permaculture open up new paths toward a resilient, vibrant, and equitable city. The future of urban open spaces is multifunctional, participatory—and perhaps a little bit permacultural.

Uzin Utz presents its BIM construction database at Digitalbau

Building design

With the floor planning plug-in for ArchiCAD and Revit, planners can integrate the construction chemicals supplier’s systems into their digital processes. Uzin Utz provided information about its BIM application in floor planning at the newly created Digitalbau trade fair in Cologne from February 11 to 13, 2020. At the joint stand with Heinze, visitors were able to test the plug-in with ArchiCAD and Revit. BIM […]

With the floor planning plug-in for ArchiCAD and Revit, planners can integrate the construction chemicals supplier’s systems into their digital processes.

Uzin Utz provided information about its BIM application in floor planning at the newly created Digitalbau trade fair in Cologne from February 11 to 13, 2020. At the joint stand with Heinze, visitors were able to test the plug-in with ArchiCAD and Revit.

Users can use it to select the desired system components via a material query and upload them on a project-specific basis. Concrete ceilings, screed constructions for different loads, tile constructions etc. – around 3,000 parts in total – are output via structured online queries. With the help of the plug-in, all components can be updated automatically and collectively. “BIM will continue to gain in importance due to its benefits such as cost and execution security – for building owners, investors, architects and planners, the building materials industry, the building materials trade, construction companies and specialist tradespeople,” said Philipp Utz on the company’s digitalization strategy.