What Is BIM LOD 300?

BIM LOD 300 means a model element is drawn with enough size, shape, location, and orientation to be reliable for design, coordination, and documentation. It is a level-of-development grade from the AIA G202 standard and the BIMForum LOD specification, sitting above LOD 200 (approximate, generic geometry) and below LOD 350 (detailed enough to coordinate connections between trades). For existing-conditions and scan-to-BIM work, LOD 300 usually describes a model built from measured laser-scan data where walls, openings, levels, and visible structure are placed where the scan shows them. The catch: “LOD 300” on its own is not a scope. Two teams can both promise LOD 300 and deliver very different work unless the model categories and intended use are written down first. That gap is where most disputes start.

What LOD 300 actually describes

LOD is often read as “level of detail.” It is more useful to read it as level of development: how much you are allowed to trust an element for a given decision. An LOD 300 wall is modeled in its measured location with real thickness and real openings; an LOD 300 door has a recognizable panel and a correct opening size. Neither carries manufacturer data, hardware schedules, or fire ratings; that information lives at higher LOD or in separate asset deliverables.

So LOD is tied to a use, not to a number you pick in isolation. A generic door at LOD 300 is plenty for a renovation background but too light for a fabrication package that needs frame type, hardware, and a manufacturer model number. Before you approve LOD 300, the real question is what decision the model has to support: early design, permit drawings, clash review, owner record, estimating, or construction layout. The answer changes which categories matter and how far each one needs to go.

Mixed LOD across one building is normal and usually the smart choice. You might carry walls at LOD 300, ceiling zones at LOD 200, and leave small-bore plumbing unmodeled. Paying for uniform high LOD on categories nobody will use is the most common way scan-to-BIM budgets get wasted.

LOD is not the same as accuracy

This is the distinction that separates a real scope from a marketing label, and the one most buyers miss. LOD (level of development, per AIA and BIMForum) describes how an element is modeled. LOA (level of accuracy, per the USIBD Level of Accuracy specification) describes how closely that modeled element matches measured reality. They are independent. You can place a richly detailed Revit family from weak field data, or place simple geometry very precisely from strong scan evidence.

A serious scope names both. A wall can be a standard Revit wall type at LOD 300, but you still have to define the acceptable deviation from the point cloud. Historic plaster walls are wavy; the model represents the general plane, not every ripple, and the tolerance has to be agreed up front. Accuracy depends on scanner type, field setup, registration quality, line of sight, point density, and modeling tolerance. WeAre Capture captures field data with a Trimble X7, which gives the modeling team dense, registered evidence to interpret, but the LOA target still has to be written into the scope rather than assumed. For the longer version, see LOD 200 vs LOD 300 for scan-to-BIM.

What a scan-built LOD 300 model includes, and what it does not

In scan-to-BIM, an LOD 300 model is built from registered point cloud data: the scan supplies the spatial evidence, and a modeler interprets it into Revit or CAD elements. A typical LOD 300 architectural scope covers exterior walls, interior partitions, doors and windows, floors and levels, roof planes where visible, stairs and ramps, columns, major beams or exposed framing, and ceiling grids where requested.

MEP is where LOD 300 gets expensive fast. A visible duct trunk, a large pipe main, or a packaged rooftop unit is one thing; a fully categorized MEP system with fittings, connectors, insulation, and concealed routing is a much heavier scope. Structure behaves the same way: exposed steel is straightforward, but framing hidden above a hard ceiling or inside a wall is not something the scan can confirm.

That is the real limit of any scan-based model. The scanner records only what it can see, not behind walls, inside chases, above inaccessible ceilings, under flooring, or behind stored materials. The point cloud shows the face of a wall, not the stud condition inside it. LOD 300 does not make the building fully knowable, does not trace every pipe, does not attach asset data to every object, and does not replace field verification. If a project needs COBie-style asset data, equipment tagging, or fabrication-level families, scope that separately.

Write the scope by category, not by label

Because “LOD 300” alone cannot be priced or reviewed, the fix is to state the requested treatment category by category. A scope written this way protects both sides: the client knows what they are buying, and the modeling team can estimate effort without guessing.

A proposal line built from that table is far stronger than “LOD 300 BIM model.” It names the modeled categories, marks visible MEP mains only, excludes concealed systems and furniture, and lists deliverables: RVT, registered RCP/RCS point cloud, E57 on request, and QA notes. To pin this down further, see scan-to-BIM modeling scope and the scan-to-BIM LOD guide.

How LOD 300 affects price

There is no neutral per-square-foot benchmark for scan-to-BIM, and anyone quoting one without seeing your categories is guessing. Cost tracks element density and LOD, not floor area: a sparse warehouse shell and a dense mechanical room of the same square footage are not comparable jobs. Standards like USIBD LOA and GSA criteria define accuracy, not price. The reliable way to a real number is to hand a modeler the category scope above and let them estimate against it.

When LOD 300 is the right call

LOD 300 fits when a team needs a dependable existing-conditions model for design and coordination but does not need fabrication-level data: renovation planning, tenant improvements, adaptive reuse, MEP routing studies, owner record models, and facade documentation. It is too heavy for quick massing or test-fit work, and too light for fabrication, asset management, or detailed construction sequencing. When the use is clear and the categories are named, the model becomes easier to price, review, and use.

If you are scoping a project and want a category-level LOD 300 quote rather than a vague label, tell us about the building and request a quote; we scan the existing conditions and our modeling partners build to the agreed scope.

FAQ

What is scan-to-BIM?
Scan-to-BIM captures a site with a 3D laser scanner, registers the scans into one coordinated point cloud, and models that data into a BIM file such as Revit. The scan provides measured evidence; a modeler interprets it into building elements at an agreed LOD. See our scan-to-BIM services.

How much does scan-to-BIM cost?
There is no single per-square-foot rate. Price tracks element density and target LOD, not floor area, so a clear category scope is what produces a real number. Field scanning is often billed by the day or hour and modeling separately, or as a turnkey package. For the factors that move a quote, see scan-to-BIM cost factors.

How do I import a point cloud into Revit?
Register and index the scan data (commonly to RCP/RCS, Autodesk’s point cloud format), then link the RCP into Revit so it appears as a measurable background for modeling. The full workflow is in import a point cloud into Revit.

Is LOD 300 the same as model accuracy?
No. LOD describes how an element is developed; LOA describes how closely it matches measured conditions. A model can be detailed but loosely placed, or simple but precise. Define both.

Last reviewed: May 2026.