ii
BUILDING INFORMATION MODELING IN LOCAL
CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY
HAMMAD DABO BABA
MA091165
A Project Report Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the award of the degree of
Master of Science (Construction Management)
Faculty of Civil Engineering
Universiti Teknologi Malaysia
December, 2010
v
Dedicated to
My beloved children, Farouq, Amatullahi, Amaturrahman, Mahmood and Hafsah for
your endurance and care.
vi
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I will begin with thanking my creator, Allah S.W.T for giving me strength health
and inspiration to complete this work. It is verily a great pleasure to have
successfully completed this study. Alhamdulillah.
I would also like to extend my sincere appreciation to my project supervisor
Professor Dr. Muhammad Zaimi Bin Abdul Majid for his guidance and advice and
invaluable assistance and encouragement. Certainly, without his support, interest
and patience with me this project would not have been reached this stage.
Special thanks go to Dr. Garba Ibrahim, the Provost, College of Education Azare,
for his moral supports and to the college Management for my sponsorship to this
study. This will remain in my memory to the last minute of my life.
Moreover, I must knowledge the constant support and encouragement I received
from my blood brothers Srgt Baba Hammad of Nigerian Army and Bello Hammad
as well as colleagues and friends whom I accord respect such as Aliyu Garba Rishi,
Engr. Musa Babayo Yahaya, Engr. Mamud Abubakar and Bello Yusf Idi.
Finally, I will like to express my unending gratitude to my family for their support
and patience though this hard time of study abroad. I wish to thank you all.
vii
ABSTRACT
Building Information Modeling (BIM) is a new emerging approach to design,
construction, and facility management in which a digital representation of the
building process is being created to facilitate the exchange and interoperability of
information in digital format. Despite the advantages derived from this paradigm,
local construction industry is reluctant to deploy the technology in its service
delivery. The objectives of the study include identifying the level of BIM tools
utilization, identifying the barriers and strategies for the implementation of Building
information modeling (BIM) in the local construction industry. Structured
questionnaires were administered to 100 key players in the field of Architecture and
Engineering randomly selected from within Kuala Lumpur region. Twenty Nine (29)
respondents have appropriately answered and duly retuned the questionnaire. Data
collected was analyzed using Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) and the hypotheses
ware tested using t-test at 0.5% level of confidence. The study found that, BIM is
been accepted by a substantial number of construction professional (Architects and
Engineers). However, majority are still using AutoCAD in their design services.
Moreover there is high correlation in terms of BIM Usage among Architects and
Engineers but there is no correlation in the means responses of Architects and
Engineers on the barriers to BIM implementation. In conclusion, the study has
identified several strategies for Building Information modeling to be implemented
and utilized in construction service delivery.
viii
ABSTRAK
Building Information Modeling (BIM) adalah suatu pendekatan muncul baru untuk
desain, pembinaan, dan pengurusan kemudahan di mana perwakilan digital dari
proses pembangunan sedang dibuat untuk memudahkan pertukaran dan
Interoperabilitas maklumat dalam format digital. Walaupun keuntungan yang
diperolehi daripada paradigma ini, industri pembinaan tempatan enggan untuk
menggunakan teknologi dalam penyediaan perkhidmatan tersebut. Tujuan kajian ini
termasuk mengenalpasti tahap penggunaan alat BIM, mengenalpasti halangan dan
strategi untuk pelaksanaan pemodelan maklumat Bangunan (BIM) dalam industri
pembinaan tempatan. kuesioner terstruktur yang diberikan kepada 100 pemain kunci
di bidang Teknik Arsitektur dan dipilih secara rawak dari dalam kawasan Kuala
Lumpur. Dua puluh Sembilan (29) responden yang menjawab tepat dan telah
kembali lagi kuesioner. Data yang dikumpul dianalisis menggunakan Analisis
Varians (ANOVA) dan ware hipotesis diuji dengan menggunakan t-test pada tahap
0,5% dari kepercayaan. Kajian ini mendapati bahawa, BIM ini telah diterima oleh
sejumlah besar pembinaan profesional (Arkitek dan Jurutera). Namun, majoriti
masih menggunakan AutoCAD jasa desain mereka. Apalagi ada korelasi yang tinggi
dalam hal BIM Global antara Arkitek dan Jurutera tetapi tidak ada korelasi dalam
bererti tanggapan dari Arkitek dan Jurutera pada hambatan pelaksanaan
BIM.Sebagai kesimpulan, kajian telah mengenalpasti beberapa strategi untuk
pemodelan Maklumat Gedung untuk dilaksanakan dan digunakan dalam penyediaan
perkhidmatan pembinaan.
ix
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER TITLE PAGE
DECLARATION ii
DEDICATION iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT iv
ABSTRACT v
ABSTRAK vi
LIST OF TABLES vii
LIST OF FIGURES ix
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS x
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background of the study 1
1.2 Problem Statements 2
1.3 Aims and Objectives 3
1.4 Research Questions 4
1.5 Research Hypothesis 4
1.6 Scope of the Study 5
1.7 Significance of the study 5
1.8 Summary of the Chapters 7
x
2 LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Introduction 9
2.2 The Concept of BIM 9
2.2.1 Definition of BIM According Vendors 12
2.2.3 Development of BIM 14
2.2.3.1 Parametric Library 16
2.2.3.2 The Capabilities of Parametric Modeling
in design
17
2.2.4 Potential Building Modeling Tools 17
2.2.4.1 AutoCAD Based Application 18
2.2.4.2 Autodesk Revit 19
2.2.4.3 Tekla 20
2.2.4.5 ArchiCAD 21
2.2.4.6 Bentley System 22
2.2.4.7 Google Sketch up 23
2.2.4.8 Navisworks 24
2.3 Phases to Integrate in Construction life cycle
2.3.1 Conceptual Phase Model 25
2.3.1.1 Site Planning and Site utilization 26
2.3.1.2 Space Planning 26
2.3.1.3 Environmental Analysis 27
2.3.2 Design Phase Model 27
2.3.2.1 Analysis and Simulation 29
2.3.2.2 Design Visualization 29
2.3.2.3 Integration of Contractors and supplier
Model
30
2.3.2.4 General Information attribution 31
2.3.3 Construction Phase Model 31
2.3.3.1 Design Assistance & Constructability 31
2.3.3.2 Scheduling and Sequencing 31
2.3.3.3 Cost Estimating 32
xi
2.3.3.4 System Coordination 32
2.3.3.5 Layout and Fieldwork 32
2.3.3.6 Clash detection 32
2.3.3.7 Prefabrication 33
2.3.3.8 Process simulation in building
Construction
33
2.3.4 Manage/Maintenance Phase Model 35
2.3.4.1 Model updating 35
2.3.4.2 Behavior simulation 36
2.3.4.3 Auto Alert 37
2.3.4.4 Project Visualization 37
2.3.4.5 Value intelligence 38
2.4.0 Implementation of BIM 41
2.4.1.1 Barriers to BIM in construction Industry 41
2.4.1.2 Interoperability 43
2.4.1.3 Client demand 45
2.4.1.4 Legal Issues 46
2.4.1.5 Issues of training and learning 47
2.4.1.6 Summary 47
3 METHODOLOGY
3.1 Introduction 48
3.2 Research Methodology 48
3.2.1 Literature Review 49
3.2.2 Study Population and Sample 49
3.3 Instrument for Data Collection 49
3.3.1 Questionnaire Survey Design 50
3.4 Method of Data Analysis 52
3.4.1 Frequency Analysis 52
3.4.2 Average Index 52
3.6.3 Correlation Coefficient 54
3.6.4 Hypothesis Testing 55
3.5 Summary 55
xii
4 DATA PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS
4.1 Introduction 56
4.1.2 Respondents Area of Expertise 56
4.1.3 Respondents Qualification 57
4.1.4 Respondents‘ Firms 59
4.1.4 Respondents‘ Years of Experience 60
4.2. BIM Tools utilization
4.2.0 Introduction 62
4.2.1 Autodesk AutoCAD 62
4.2.2 Autodesk 3D MAX 63
4.2.3 Tekla Structures 63
4.2.4 Autodesk Revit MEP 64
4.2.5 Autodesk Revit Architecture 64
4.2.6 Autodesk Revit Structure 65
4.2.7 ArchiCAD 65
4.2.8 Bentley Microstation 66
4.2.9 Bentley Structures 66
4.2.10 Bentley HVAC 67
4.2.11 IntelliCAD 67
4.2.12 Google Sketch up 68
4.2.13 Nemetschek Vector Works 68
4.2.14 TuborCAD 69
4.2.15 Navisworks 69
4.2.16 Analysis of findings on BIM tools
utilization
70
4.2.17 Comparism of BIM tools usage between
Architects and Engineers
71
4.2.18 Correlation Testing of Hypothesis 73
4.2.29 Decision and Inference 75
4.3 Barriers to BIM utilization and implementation
xiii
4.3.0 Introduction 77
4.3.1 BIM learning Difficulty 77
4.3.2 Lack of legal backing from authority 78
4.3.3 Interoperability issues 78
4.3.4 Lack of skillful operators 79
4.3.5 Lack of request by client 80
4.3.6 Lack of request by other team members 80
4.3.7 Higher price of software 81
4.3.8 Non availability of parametric library 82
4.3.9 Long duration of model development 82
4.3.10 Readiness for organizational change 83
4.3.11 Analysis of Findings on barriers to BIM
implementation
84
4.4 Strategies for BIM implementation
4.4.1 Introduction 86
4.4.2 Interoperability efforts 88
4.4.3 Development of local parametric libraries 88
4.4.4 Provision of Legal Backing 89
4.4.5 Development of web portal 90
4.4.6 Training and retraining 91
4.4.7 Managing cultural change 92
4.4.8 Summary 92
5 SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 Introduction 93
5.2 Conclusion 93
5.3 Recommendations to AEC Professionals 95
5.4 Recommendation For Further Study 96
REFERENCES 97
APPENDIX 101
xiv
LIST OF TABLE
TABLE NO TITLE PAGE
2.1 Differences between traditional 2D Construction
processes versus model Based process.
13
2.2 BIM Implementation Phases and BIM Product
Matrix
38
3.1 Classification of the Rating Scales in Section B 52
3.2 Classification of the Rating Scales in Section C 52
3.3 Classification of the Rating Scales in Section D 52
4.1 Distribution of Respondents According Area of
Expertise
55
4.2 Distribution of Respondents According to
Qualification
56
4.3 Names of firms that have responded to the study 58
4.4 Years of experience of the respondents 59
4.2.1 Autodesk AutoCAD 61
4.2.2 Autodesk 3D MAX 62
4.2.3 Tekla Structures 62
4.2.4 Autodesk Revit MEP 63
xv
4.2.5 Autodesk Revit Architecture 63
4.2.6 Autodesk Revit Structure 64
4.2.7 ArchiCAD 64
4.2.8 Bentley Microstation 65
4.2.9 Bentley Structures 65
4.2.10 Bently HVAC 66
4.2.11 IntelliCAD 66
4.2.12 Google sketch up 67
4.2.13 Nemetschek Vector Works 67
4.2.14 TuborCAD 68
4.2.15 Navisworks 67
4.2.16 Frequency of BIM Software usage in Local
Construction Industry
69
4.2.17 Summary output 72
4.3.1 Difficulty in learning BIM Tools 74
4.3.2 Lack of legal backing from Authority 75
4.3.3 Problems of interoperability 75
4.3.4 Lack of skilled BIM Software operators 76
4.3.5 Lack of request by client 77
4.3.6 Lack request by other team members 77
4.3.7 High price of software 78
4.3.8 Non availability of parametric library 79
xvi
4.3.9 Longer to develop a model 79
4.3.10 Redness for Organizational Change 80
4.3.11 Average index of response on Barriers to
implementation of Building Information Modeling
(BIM)
81
xvii
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE NO TITLE PAGE
1.1 Flowchart diagram of the research process 6
2.1 Islands of Automation in construction 10
2.2 BIM integrated BIM Model 12
2.3 Development of BIM from 70s to date 16
2.4 A screen shot of AutoCAD Architecture model
Windows
18
2.5 A screenshot of Autodesk Revit 3D Window 20
2.6 A screenshot of Google sketch up interface 23
2.7 Schematic diagram of integrated design process 28
2.8 Screen shot of various windows of BIM tools 30
2.9 3D geometric capabilities of BIM in Mechanical,
Electrical and Plumbing (MEP) coordination
35
2.10 BIM Implementation Model 41
2.11 Stages of Interoperability 43
2.12 Interoperability model between various software 44
2.13 Interrelationship between technology, people
and process in technology implementation
45
3.3 Rating scale of questionnaire responses 50
4.1 Respondents area of specialization 56
4.2 Respondents Qualification 57
xviii
4.3 Percentage of Respondents per Firm 58
4.4 Respondents‘ years of experience 60
4.5 Design software usage frequencies 71
4.6 Model for strategic implementation of
Building Information Modeling
84
4.7 Proposed National BIM server 88
xix
LIST OF ABBREVIATION
3D - Three Dimensional
ADT - Architectural Desktop
AEC - Architecture, Engineering and Construction
AECON - Architecture, Engineering, Construction and
Operation
AIA - American Institute of Architects
AGC - America General Contractors
BEM - Building Element Model
BIM - Building Information Modeling
BMP - Bitmap formatted image
CAD - Computer Aided Design
CAM - Computer Aided Manufacturing
CIM - Computer Information Manufacturing
DGN - Microstation Design File
DWF - Autodesk Web Design Format
DWG - AutoCAD and Open Design Format
DXF - Drawing Interchange File Format
GDL - Geometric Description Language
gbXML - Green Building Extensible Language
IFC - Industry Foundation Classes
JPG - Joint Photographic Experts Group
MEP - Mechanical Electrical and Plumbing
NBIMS - National Building Information Modeling Standards
RVT - Revit File Format
STEP - Standard for the Exchange of Product model data
1
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.0 Introduction
The study focuses on Building Information Modeling in local construction
industries in addition; the study seeks to identify the reasons behind slow
implementation of this solution in construction industry. In this chapter, a brief
overview of the study is presented. The chapter covers background, statement of the
problem, aims and objective, research question, hypothesis, scope, significance and
finally summarized the summary of the chapters.
1.1 Background
There was an eminent research effort on enabling and advancing information
technology to enhance work efficiency and collaboration among Architecture,
Construction and Engineering (ACE) stakeholders by providing mechanism
infrastructure to deliver pertinent information required for decision making in a
timely manner. According to Estaman et al 2005, Halfawy and Froese 2001, such an
2
technologies, and should facilitate information interchange between members of the
project team and across stages in the project lifecycle from construction to
inspection to maintenance. Khoury and Kamar 2009 suggested that the central
kernel of this communications infrastructure should be inhabited by a shared
construction project model in the form of integrated product models and project
database, these resulted to Building Information Modeling (BIM).
Building information modeling (BIM), is a modeling technology and associated set
of processes to produce, communicate and analyze building models (Estamsn et al
2008), is seen as an enabler that may help the building industry to improve its
productivity. Yet, although BIM has been on the market for a number of years, it has
not been adopted industry – wide to its full capacity. As of 2009 approximately half
of industry representatives do not use any BIM software on projects in the U.S
(McGrawHill 2009).
1.2 Statement of the Problems
The slow adoption of the BIM in the industry has been caused by several
technical and human barriers, these barriers can be categorized as internal or
external. In internal use of BIM, the main barriers are cost and human issues, mainly
the learning of new tools and processes. The learning process is significantly more
expensive than the actual costs of hardware and software. In the same vein,
Kivineimi et al (2008) posited that, high investment cost and the constant need to
upgrade hardware and software are seen as two major obstacles for firms. Moreover,
the unclear balance between the benefits and the costs and the fear that the actual
benefit go to another participants in the projects. Another internal barrier is fear of
lacking of features and flexibility of the modeling tools. Meanwhile, the external
barriers as described by Williams (2007) include legal aspect of implementing BIM
which have been an area of concern to many owners, A&Es (Architects and
Engineers), general contractors and sub-contractors. Issues related to model
3
ownership and responsibility for model accuracy as well as concerns about the
responsibility of cost of producing and managing the model, top the list of perceived
legal obstacle to embracing the BIM process.
Meanwhile, technical Issues related mainly to lack of sufficient and reliable
interoperability between software applications – are significant obstacles, although
perhaps not fully recognized by the industry yet, since most companies have no
experience of the use of shared BIM in the saying of Kiviniemi et al (2008).
In general the industry lacks agreement and common practice concerning how to use
integrated BIM, although in Nordic Countries the willingness to share BIM data
seems to be higher than elsewhere as advanced by Newton et al (2009). There are
claims that, the slow adoption of BIM in construction industry is attributed to lack of
awareness, technical complexity, and absence of interoperability between various
software that are been used in generating the Model. However, the degree and
variance of this factors has not been identified. Therefore there is need for research
to identify degree
1.3 Aims and Objective of the study
The aim of the study is to identify barriers to strategic implementation of Building
Information Modeling (BIM) within industry in Malaysia while the objectives are:
1. To identify the level of BIM tools utilization and implementation at the
design phase in local construction industry.
2. To identify the barriers to utilization and implementation of Building
Information Modeling (BIM) in Architectural and Engineering design.
3. To identify strategies that will enhance effective BIM implementation in
local construction industry.
4
1.4 Research Questions
1. What is the utilization level of BIM Tools in local construction industry?
2. What is the relation between Engineers and Architect in in terms of
utilization of BIM tools in local construction industry?
3. What are the possible strategies that will enhance effective implementation
of BIM tools in local Construction Industry?
1.5 Research Hypothesis
The study will be guided with the following hypotheses;
Ho There is no significant correlation between Architects and Engineers
in terms utilization and adoption of building Information Modeling
(BIM) in local construction industry
H1 There is a significant correlation between Architects and Engineers in
terms utilization and adoption of building Information Modeling
(BIM) in local construction industry
5
1.6 Scope of the Study
The study is limited to implementation of building information modeling
(BIM) at design phase, data collection is from Architectural Engineering and
Construction firms in Malaysia only. Moreover, the study is limited to a sample of
100 respondents from selected AEC firms located within Kuala Lumpur region.
Kuala Lumpur region was selected due to its high level of technology awareness and
high concentration of construction firms.
1.7 Significance of the Study
The study will contribute to the pool of knowledge in various facet of
academic and professional perspective. Academically, the study will generate a
statistical data that will show the current status of Building Information Modeling
(BIM) and the significance of competence in the implementation of BIM in
Malaysia as well as the perception of this new technology among practitioners in
Architecture, Engineering and Construction industry. Meanwhile, to professional‘s
circle, the study propose strategies for the implementation of BIM to harness the
numerous benefits of technology.
6
Figure 1.1 Flowchart diagram of the research process
1.8 Summary of the chapters
7
This works has been logically structured to five (5) chapters and below is the
summary of each chapter in the study as follows:
1. Chapter 1: Introduction
The first chapter of the study is a background of the study and it comprise of
introduction, background, statement of the problems, aims and objectives,
research questions, research hypothesis, scope of the study, significance of
the study, research methodology and the chapters organization.
2. Chapter 2 Literature Review
This chapter is based on literature reviews on the related topics related to the
study. The literature reviews are from books, journals articles, conference
papers and periodicals. The topics in this chapter include the concept of
Building Information Modeling (BIM), the phases to integrate in
construction life cycle and Barriers to BIM implementation.
3. Chapter 3 : Research Methodology
This chapter covers the main topics on how the study was conducted; the
subheadings are introduction, methodology, literature review, instruments for
data collection, study samples, method of data analysis and the summery of
the chapter.
8
4. Chapter 4: Data Presentation and Analysis
This chapter present results of the study and discusses the finding in a logical
manner. It treated each question individually and later present the summary
of the result. Moreover, finding on each objective has been clearly outlined.
Finally the hypothesis was also tested at 0.05 level of significance using
correlation coefficient.
5. Chapter 5: Summary and Conclusion.
This is the last chapter of this project report; it covers the conclusion of the
entire project report based on the answers to the research questions, it also
advance recommendations for further studies.
9
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Introduction
This chapter covers the basic information about Building information modeling.
These include, concept of building information modeling, the history, usage and the
phases to integrate in construction lifecycle. Besides that, the barriers to BIM
implementation such legal issues, interoperability, resistance to change, operators
competencies are also discussed. Moreover, strategies for the implementation of the
technology which include training, development of parametric library where also
presented in the chapter.
2.2 The Concept of BIM
The developments in computer and communication systems accelerated providing
the most intensive computer service in Architecture, Engineering and construction a
new wave of advancement with the advent of sophisticated CAD systems, where it
was possible to enrich the 3D models of buildings and structures with, in addition to
vectorial data, complementary data such as physical characteristics, unit costs,
quantity take-offs, etc. This methodology became known as the building information
model (BIM).
10
Although established in academia since then, the emergence of BIM in real-world
projects began only after the year 2000, in some pilot projects and lately in some
major projects. Nevertheless, it remains a rare approach in practical projects.
Figure 2.1 Islands of Automation in construction (Hannus 1998)
Various definitions have been advanced by various authors, some definition are
software based while some are broad to cover the concept in consideration to the
performance of the technology in re-engineering the entire construction business
process; the Building information modeling (BIM) is nothing more and nothing less
than a system approach to the design, construction, ownership, management,
operation, maintenance, use and demolition or reuse of building. BIM has intelligent
objects and distributing them makes sense. So by this definition, a building
11
information model is any compilation of reliable data in single or multiple electronic
data formats, however complete or incomplete that supports a system approach in an
in the lifecycle of a building. According to Succar (2009), it is an emerging
technological and procedural shift within the Architecture, Engineering, and
Construction and Operations (AECON) industry.
Meanwhile, according to Mindu and Arayici (2008) this seeks to integrate process
throughout the entire lifecycle by utilizing Building Information Modeling (BIM)
systems. The focus is to create and reuse consistent digital information by the
stakeholders throughout the life cycle. However, implementation and use of BIM
system require dramatic changes in the current business practices, bring new
challenges for stakeholders e.g., the emerging knowledge and skill gap.
According to the National BIM Standard Project Committee, ―Building Information
Modeling is a digital representation of physical and functional characteristics of a
facility; a shared knowledge resource for information about a facility forming a
reliable basis for decisions during its life-cycle information using open industry
standards to form business decision for realizing better value‖ (NBIMS 2007). BIM
represents a shared knowledge base where all the data about a project is available to
all team members. The modeling tools allow designers a creative outlet for
designing efficient, practical buildings. The owner is able to better visualize the final
product throughout all stages of development. The building team uses the model to
coordinate activities, takeoff material quantities, and detect possible clashes between
equipment and spaces. BIM is intended to be a storage area of information for the
facility operator to use and maintain throughout the life-cycle of the building.
So in a broader term as opined by Succar (2010) Building information modeling
(BIM) is a set of interacting policies, processes and technologies generating a
methodology to manage the essential building design and projects data in digital
format throughout the building‘s lifecycle. Figure 2.2 shows the integrated model of
BIM process, where various fields can jointly share a single model.
12
Visualization
Energy
Analysis
Specification
Owner
Contractor
MEP
Engineer
Structural
Engineer
Architects
BIM
Figure 2.2 BIM integrated BIM Model
2.2.1 Definition of BIM according to Vendors
Autodesk: A building design and documentation methodology characterized
by the creation and use of coordinated, internally consistent computable
information about a building in design and construction.
Bentley: A modeling of both graphical and non graphical as of the entire
building life cycle in federated database management system.
America Institute of Architects (AIA): Information use, reuse, and exchange
with integrated 3D-2D Model based technology, of which electronic
documents are just a single component.
13
ArchiCAD: A single repository including graphical documents – drawings
– and non-graphical documents – specification, schedules and other data.
Table 2.1 Differences between traditional 2D Construction processes versus model
Based process.
Task 2D Based Process Model Based Process
Design Linear, phased Concurrent, Iterative
Drawings Paper 2D Digital 3D Object Based tied to
intelligent data
Site Planing Unclear elevation Relief contours
Code Review Slow and detailed Expedited and automated
Design Validation Light table Clash detection with audit trails
Field Drawing 2D drawing 2D drawing and perspective
Scheduling Stand alone activities Activities linked to models
Sequence planning Limited scenarios
evaluated
Extensive scenarios evaluated
earlier in the process
Field Coordination Paper shop drawing Overlaying digital models using
collision detection software
Operation training Use manual Visual
Closeout Documents Assembled near
completion
Intelligent models for operation
and maintenance instructions:
constantly update during
construction
14
2.2.3 Development of BIM
Over the past few years there has been rapid development in idea relating to how
building information could be managed. Mokhtar et al (1998) developed an
information model intended to replace drawings as the main repository of design
information and principal communication media. Their research identified that
having several source for the same element of data, i.e. a collection of many
drawings drafted independently was significant cause of inconsistency in design
documentation. Essentially they proposed a central database containing all the
building information sufficiently to produce technical construction documents
suitable for the erection of building.
Zenaldin (2001) goes further in his research and proposed that it would be more
successful if used in a collaborative environment. The important conclusion being
that technology alone is not sufficient for success and that the relationships between
people must also evolved with technology in order to produce successful model
Moreover, there is a history of interest in managing information, and information
flows, to minimize design inconsistencies which have been promoted as one of the
advantages of BIM by software producers. Tse et al. (2005) discovered that the
reduction of design inconsistency was one of the most common reasons why
architects used BIM. The literature indicates that the concept of BIM is not new, but
rather that new technology is making the concept more viable than in the past.
Furthermore, Suter et al. (2007) developed an approach and prototype system to
reconstruct the building model based on ‗sensed object location information‘. Their
tag-based building representation is very easy to convert to boundary-based building
representation is very easy to convert to boundary-based building representation
using solid modeling routines and spatial queries. Borrmann & Rank (2009) reported
that the potential to to implement directional operators in a three dimensional spatial
15
query language to interpret the attribute-driven geometric information that is
simplicity contained in building information models.
Similarly, Succar (2009) proposed a BIM framework which aims to provide a
research and delivery foundation so that industry practitioners can have a better
understanding of underlying knowledge structures and from this is able to negotiate
implementation requirements. This is tri-axial model involving BIM stages, BIM
lenses, and BIM fields. The model also defines the interaction between policy,
technology and process is imperative for the implementation of BIM in the AEC
industry.
In recent years the BIM concept has been developed to include more information
relating to building objects; for example, the creation of 4D models in which time
has incorporated for the purpose of modeling the sequencing of the building in
construction. Further efforts have been made to expand the capabilities of BIM‘s
applications in which cost and other aspects are considered in the model. BIM
research and development for the architecture, engineering and construction in
general focuses on the provision of parametric 3D modeling software and on
achieving interoperability between various applications. Figure 2.3 is diagram
simulating the acceleration of BIM concept over the years, that is from 70s to 2010.
16
70s
Tracing Paper
Autodesk Vision
Mianframes
Design Methods
Structural/Energy
Analysis
80s
Layered Production
90s 00 10
Workstations
Graphic Rendering
PC/Plotting/ CA Drafting
Modeling
Collaboration
Draw/DrawVision
Tech 2000
BIM
buildingSMART
Workstations
Graphic RenderingWorkstations
Graphic Rendering
Custom Software
WorkstationsAutodesk Suite
PC on every Desk
WAN Internet
IAI Interoperable
PC
Net Pit Pen
Figure 2.3 Development of BIM from 70s to date
2.2.3.1 Parametric Library
Conceptually, building information modeling (BIM) tools are object oriented
parametric models with a predefined set of injects families, each having behaviors
programmed within them. According Esman et al, (2008) A building model
configuration is defined by the user as a dimensionally-controlled parametric
structure, using grids, floor levels, and other global references planes. Alternatively,
these can simply be floor planes wall centerlines or a combination of them. With
these embedded object instances and parametric settings, the model configuration
defines and instance of the building.
Parametric modeling is critical productivity capability, allowing low-level
changes to updates automatically; it is fair to say that 3D modeling would not be
productive in building design and production without the automatic update features
made possible by parametric capabilities. Each BIM tool differs with regard to the
17
parametric object families it provides, the rule embedded within it, and the resulting
design behaviour.
2.2.3.2 The Capabilities of Parametric Modeling in Design
Estman et al, (2008) lament that, parametric object modeling provides a
powerful way to create and edit geometry. Without it, model generation and design
will be extremely cumbersome and error-prone. Verily, designing a building that
contains a million or more objects would be impractical without a platform that
allows for effective low-level automatic design editing.
Putting a wall in a parametric model of a building, mean a automatically associating
the wall to its bounding surfaces, its base floor planes, the wall its end abut and any
wall butting it, and the ceiling surfaces trimming its height. It also bounds the spaces
on its two sides. Moreover, when window or door is being placed in the wall,
connection relation has been defined, whether connections are threaded, butt welded,
or flanges and bolts.
2.2.4 Potential Building Information Modeling Tools:
There several 3D tools or tools described as BIM software are in circulation.
However, not all are having BIM capabilities. Technically, 3D modeling software
are divided in to two viz, surface modeling and solid modeling tools. The surface
modelers are software with 3D capacities without ant parametric value in the
generated models, while, solid modelers are 3D modelers embed with a rich
parametric capabilities that will enable the model to depict the real final project. Few
modeling software are described below:
18
2.2.4.1 AutoCAD based Applications
Autodesk‘s premier building application on the AutoCAD platform is architectural
desktop (ADT). ADT was Autodesk Original 3D building modeling tool prior to the
acquisition of Revit. It is based on solid and surface modeling extension for
AutoCAD and provides a transition from 2D drafting to BIM. It has a predefined set
of architectural objects, and while not fully parametric, it provide much of the
functionality offered by parametric tools, including the ability to make custom
objects with adaptive behaviors. External Reference Files are useful for managing
large projects.
Figure 2.4. A screen shot of AutoCAD Architecture model Windows
19
2.2.4.2 Autodesk Revit
It was introduced in 2002 by Autodesk after the company acquired the
program from a start up. Revit is a family of integrated products that currently
include Revit Architecture, Revit Structure and Revit MEP. It includes: gbXML
interfaces for energy simulation and load analysis, direct interface to ROBOT and
RISA structural analyses and the ability to import models from a conceptual sketch
tools like sketch up and other system that exports DXF files. Viewing interfaces
include: DGN, DWG, DWF, DXF, IFC, , gbXML, BMP, JPG etc. According to
Tao-Chin Kenny (2004) Revit has 17 Families of predefined building objects listed
in the modeling pallets.
Revit has a broad set of object library developed by third parties. It is easy to
learn and due to its well organized functionality and well design user friendly
interface. Its bi-directional design supports allows for information generation and
management based on update from drawings and model views. It supports
concurrent operation on the same project and moreover, it has an excellent object
library that supports a multi user interface.
However, Revit is an in-memory system that slows down significantly for
project larger than 220MB. It also has a limitation on parametric rules dealing with
angles. It also does not support complex surfaces, which limits its ability to support
design with or reference to these types of surfaces. Figure 2. 4 is a screenshot
Autodesk Revit interface.
20
Figure 2.5. A screenshot of Autodesk Revit 3D Window
2.2.4.3 Tekla
Tekla Structures software is a BIM (building information modeling) tool that
streamlines the delivery process of design, detailing, manufacture, and
construction organizations. While integrating openly with architectural
models, the strength of this single-model environment lies in the contractor
end of the process. Tekla structures has a significant functionalities that
supports for structural analysis, direct links to finite-element analysis
packages (STAAD-Pro and ETABS), and an open application programming
interface were added. In 2004 the expanded software product was renamed
Tekla Structures to reflect its generic support for steel, precast, timber,
reinforced concrete, and for structural engineering.
21
The Modeling in Tekla is parametric; this means that the components of the
model can be customized and edited at any time to suit the requirements of
the project. Tekla supports interfaces with Industry Foundation Class (IFC),
DWG, CIS/2, DTSV, SDNF, DGN, and DXF file formats this make it to
effectively integrates into any best-of-breed software driven workflow, while
maintaining the highest levels of data integrity and accuracy. Such
collaborative workflows are the cornerstone to minimizing errors and
maximizing efficiency, resulting in high profitability and on-time project
completion. Tekla Structures encompasses specialized configurations for
structural engineers, steel detailers and fabricators, precast concrete detailers
and manufacturers, as well as contractors
2.2.4.5 ArchiCAD
According to Eastman et al (2008), ArchiCAD is one the oldest
continuously marketed BIM architectural design tool available today. It is
baing marketed by Grafisoft since 80s. ArchiCAD support a range of direct
interfaces. According to Tse et al (2005), in ArchiCAD, the modeling objects
are divided into construction elements and GDL (Geometric Description
Language) objects. Construction elements are basic objects, including walls,
columns, beams, slabs, roofs and meshes, for the construction of the building
carcases. These objects reside in the system and cannot be omitted. The
available settings are grouped into geometry and positioning, floor plan and
section, 3D model, listing and labelling. The other building objects, such as
doors and windows, are GDL objects that reside in external library files
(GraphiSoft 2004b). GDL is an open scriptable language that can be used to
create new objects with rich parametric information. In addition to the
settings as mentioned, other parameters can be defined when creating GDL
objects through the use of third-party GDL object editors (GDL 2004). As
such, GDL is the agent for adding an unlimited number of BIM objects into
ArchiCAD. Before placing a construction element or GDL object in a BIM,
the default parameters can be modified via ArchiCAD‘s ―Object Settings‖
22
dialogue boxes. Because there are more parameters, the dialogue boxes of
GDL objects have more settings available than those of the construction
elements
2.2.4.6 Bentley System
Bentley architecture one of the BIM software that addresses the
concept of integrated project delivery system (PDS) introduced in 2004.
Bentley is an evolution of Trifoma solutions. Currently Bentley Architecture
is integrated with Bentley structures, Bentley Building Mechanical system,
Bentley Building Electrical System, Bentley Facilities, Bentley PowerCivil
(for site planning) and Bentley generative components. Currently Bentley is
can interface with external applications such as Primavera and other
scheduling software, STAAD and RAM for structural analysis. It file formats
include DGN, DWG, PDF, STEP, IGES, STL and IFC. It also provide a
multi-user model repository called Bentley ProjectWise.
According Kymmell (2008) Bentley focuses on supporting its
product with a single comprehensive unchanging
It supports complex modeling and complex curved surfaces, including Bezier
and NURBS. In addition, it includes multiple levels of support for
developing custom parametric objects. Its parametric modeling plug-in,
Generative Components, enables definition of complex parametric geometry
assemblies and has been used several projects.
However, Bentley system has been confirmed to have a large and
non-integrated user interface that is had to learn and navigate. It also has less
extensive object libraries than similar products.
23
2.2.4.7 Google Sketch up
Sketch Up is a non-parametric surface modeling application for 3D
design exploration, which is targeted towards the conceptual phase of design
and has specifically been developed to be easy, intuitive, and fun to use.
Sketch Up has easy-to-learn interface, with most of the screen space
devoted to the drawing window. There are only eight toolbars with a limited
number of tools in each toolbar (Figure 2.6). There are no options associated
with every tool that need to be accessed in individual dialog boxes; a
Preferences dialog contains all the program preferences, and a Model Info
dialog contains all the model-specific settings. Additional palettes showing
materials, components, layers, and so on can be opened when needed. The
Status Bar at the base of the drawing window displays command prompts
and status messages and also contains a box for coordinate entry. The
emphasis on "less rather than more" makes it possible to get up and running
in Sketch Up very quickly compared to other CAD, BIM, and 3D modeling
applications.
Figure 2.6 A screenshot of Google sketch up interface
24
2.2.4.8 Navis works
Navisworks is a viewer of models and has many useful applications
in almost all phases of the use of BIM. It functions much as a video game,
and since it is not a modeler, it also limits the number of things tha can go
wrong in a BIM analysis. The main function of Navisworks is to provide 3D
model interoperability for the building design and construction field.
According to Kymmell (2008), many different software tools are being used
by many different discipline tha all produce 3D models in different file
formats. Most of these tools do not import or export one another‘s native file
format, so Navisworks has provided a model viewer that can read almost any
3D file format. A project team using BIM is faced with four major
challenges that Navisworks addresses; these are:
It can read different file format from various sources
It can handle huge files.
It will combine different file types in to the same file together
successfully,
It facilitates graphical communications across the entire project team.
Clash detection is the most popular functionalities of Navisworks. It is
capable of finding and identifying all instances where model parts clash (take
the same space in the model). The clashes no only are found and listed, but
also can be manage through the same software until they are resolved.
25
2.3 Phases to Models in Construction Life Cycle
BIM is a process by which digital representation of physical and functional
characteristics of a facility are built analyzed, documented, and assessed virtually,
then revised iteratively until the optimal ―model‖ is documented. The process then
continues through construction and construction as-built documentation and again
during the lifetime of the facility. As such, it serves as a shared knowledge resource
for information about a facility forming a reliable basis for decisions during its
lifecycle from inception onward. BIM is more than 3D modeling, although the 3D
model is the geometric platform on which BIM operates. The ability to assign
attributes and data to the objects in a 3D model is an important consideration in
differentiating a 3D model from a building information model. A building
information model may be best described by its key features The digital model are in
phases, the covered the usual construction phases of project life cycle. According to
Jernigan (2007), there are four (4) phases to model in construction process, these
phase are;
1. Conceptual Phase Model
2. Design Phase Model
3. Construction Phase Model
4. Maintenance Phase model
2.3.1 Conceptual Phase Model:
In this phase, data related to feasibility studies, environmental impact
assessment (EIA), traffic impact assessment (TIA), topography and survey, soil
condition are all integrated in to single models. Developing a schematic model prior
to generating a detailed building model allows for a more careful evaluation of the
proposed scheme to determine whether it meets the building‘s functional and
26
sustainable requirements. Early evaluation of design alternatives using
analysis/simulation tools increases the overall quality of building.
Similarly, during the conceptual phase the cost estimate can be assessed on a
conceptual level, and at a more detailed model level the cost estimate can also
become more detailed. This can facilitate the target value design approach that helps
to track the project cost in relation to the budget throughout the planning process.
The cost data linked to the evolving 3D model provide such cost tracking. The
flexibility of the cost data-model link permits a large variety of interpretations that
will yield almost any type of cost information from the model.
Moreover, design intent energy performance of a project can be
simulated/evaluated in BIM, and alternative materials can be studied in a
comparative analysis. A building‘s energy performance can thus be predicted and
adjusted in planning phase of the project. Therefore BIM is ideal for the study of the
life cycle cost of a project.
2.3.1.1 Site Planning and Site Utilization
BIM not use only to analyze a proposed building, but also to study known
and estimated site conditions. This includes existing and proposed underground
utilities, site access, safety issues, excavation, shoring and underpinning, dewatering,
placement of cranes, booms, hoists, and temporary ―laydown‖ storage zones for
various construction materials.
2.3.1.2 Space Planning
This involved organizing the spatial needs defined by the client and
expanding them to include storage, supports, mechanical and other ancillary support.
Moreover, space planning also includes a set of spatial needs by the programme,
27
describing the number and types of spaces that the clients expect, their respective
square footages, the environmental services they require and in some cases the
materials and surface desired.
2.3.1.3 Environmental Analysis
Common BIM tools use in Environmental analysis is IES Virtual Buildings,
Ecotect and Green building. These environmental analysis tools offer insight in to
the behavior associated with a given design and provide an early assessment of gross
energy, lighting used as well as estimated operating cost. Until now, such
performance assessment relied mainly on designers experience.
2.3.2 Design Phase Model:
As design development proceeds, details concerning the building‘s various
systems must be determined in order to validate earlier estimates and to specify the
systems for bidding, and installation. This detailing involves a wide range of
technical information. Figure 2.7 is a schematic diagram of integrated design
process. It shows how various design model can be linked together to generate a
federated single referral model that serves as a database to the whole building life
cycle.
28
Architectural
Design
Structural
Design
Mechanical
Shop Drawing
Plumbing Shop
Drawing
Electrical Shop
Drawing
Other Shop
Drawing
Architectural Model
Structural Model
Mechanical Model
Plumbing Model
Electrical Model
Other Model
BIM Linked
with
Construction
sequencing
COMPOSITE
MODEL
Figure 2.7 Schematic Diagram of Integrated Design Process. Contractors’
Guide to BIM (2009)
29
2.3.2.1 Analysis/Simulation:
At the core of BIM lies a digital database where objects, spaces, and facility
characteristics are each defined and stored. These characteristics make it possible to
use BIM as a virtual representative of a physical facility and are hence able to
perform qualitative and quantitative analyses. Hence, all buildings must satisfy
structural, environmental conditioning, fresh water distribution and waste water
removal, fire retarders, electrical and other power distribution, communication and
other basic functions. While each of these capabilities and the systems require to
supporting them may have been identified earlier, their function specification for
conformance to codes, certifications and client objectives require more detailed
definition. In addition, the spaces in a building are also systems circulation and
access, systems of organizational functions supported by the spatial configuration.
2.3.2.2 Design Visualization
BIM is often used by designers, and also by contractors, as a way to visualize
and communicate design intentions. Historically, this use of BIM exemplifies the
most common use of 3D in the AEC industry, visualizes the design using
stereoscopic projection tools to create an immersive experience. This makes design
decisions based on the spatial experience of these models, which can have huge
impact to costs of construction.
30
2.3.2.3 Integration of Subcontractor and Supplier Models:
BIM supports the whole collaborative process of design development,
detailing and integration. Much of the detailed data that is incorporated into BIM
comes from subcontractors, suppliers, and vendors who traditionally would supply
―shop drawings‖ that detail precisely how they would execute the design intent in
fabrication. Application of BIM in this way leads to highly detailed models and
extremely large datasets which must be visualized in real-time. Beyond these short
term impacts on productivity and quality, BIM enables fundamental process
changes, because it provides the power to manage the intense amount of information
required of ‗mass customization,‘ which is a key precept of lean production
(Womack and Jones 2003) in (Estman, Teicholz, Sacks and Liston (2008)
Figure 2.8 Screen shot of various windows of BIM tools, Autodesk Revit (2008)
31
2.3.2.4 General information attribution
3D objects can also be linked to a variety of source documents via
hyperlinks. This enables the model to function as a graphical information system
(GIS) for the building. Project correspondences, technical data, O&M records, and
links to manufactures‘ websites are all possible in this environment. Information
attributing via hyperlinks can add value to all phases but is typically associated with
facility management functions.
2.3.3 Construction Phase Models:
This focus on communication, cost control, and the fabrication and assembly of
the building components. To utilize the BIM across these phases of the project, it
will have to be well planned ahead of time. Just as the model function to help with
the visualization that resulted in the coordination of the various building systems,
the model can function at regular construction meetings to help with the
visualization and coordination of the installation requirements (and field condition
for the subcontractor).
2.3.3.1 Design Assistance & Constructability Review:
Beyond visualization, contractors use BIM as a way to provide assistance to
the design team and to provide a ―constructability review‖ in which various means
and methods are analyzed and tested to ensure the design can be built to meet a
targeted schedule and cost. Often, BIM exposes errors and omissions in the design,
and can help us recommend alternate solutions while preserving design intent.
2.3.3.2 Scheduling and Sequencing
The 3D model can be combined with a construction schedule to create a ―4D‖
model, using time as the fourth dimension. We do this to visualize the schedule and
32
to optimize sequencing on the construction site. Often, craft-workers who have
difficulty reading traditional drawings and schedules can easily understand and
participate in project scheduling when the BIM supports
2.3.3.3 Cost Estimating:
BIM can also be integrated with another factor, cost, to generate a ―5D‖
simulation. The BIM is used to facilitate a quantity survey of building materials and
components, and these quantities are linked directly to cost databases. With this
information, we can modify the building design, and understand its cost implications
in real-time.
2.3.3.4 Systems Coordination
Once all building systems are detailed in 3D and incorporated into BIM,
these systems can be coordinated. All equipment, fixtures, pipes, ducts, conduits,
structural members, and other building components are checked through ―clash
detection‖ tools to discover and resolve conflicts before systems are installed in the
field.
2.3.3.5 Layout and Fieldwork:
Once the design is fully coordinated, BIM data can be used to assist in layout
of materials and systems in the field. This includes the creation of ―lift drawings,‖
2D extractions in plan and section which describe the field work in detail, and
integrated with pertinent quality and safety information.
33
2.3.3.6 Clash detection
Since the 3D model represents virtual true space, a BIM process known as
―clash detection‖ can be utilized to check for interferences by searching for
intersecting volumes. It is often the case to use a third party application to not only
clash a single model but combine and clash multiple models from disparate sources
in a common environment.
2.3.3.7 Prefabrication:
BIM can also be used to assist in the prefabrication of building systems,
enabling faster field assembly of the building. This is a result of the integration of
many of the other uses described above: full contribution by subcontractors, full
integration and coordination of geometry, and accurate registration and field
installation.
2.3.3.8 Process Simulation in Building Construction
Process simulation creates a virtual feedback loop such that design and
construction coordination challenges including interface and sequence can be
identified prior to commitment of field resources. Simply stated, BIM identifies
changes at a time when changes are still inexpensive to make. Since the
construction supply chain is primarily horizontal and information is passed from one
party to the next in a linear fashion; it lacks an efficient feedback loop. This
condition has been exacerbated by the advent of the fast-track construction
approach. Presently problems that are identified during the erection or construction
phase are relayed back to the A/E for resolution - but at what cost? In addition to
the disruption, solutions at this stage are sub-optimal and mid-stream revisions are a
typical source of contract claims and disputes.
34
Often, the cost of field changes includes a significant non-value added
component that far exceeds the betterment value for the revised scope of work.
These non-value added costs include premium costs associated with change orders,
schedule delay, impact on other trades and the effort required to coordinate and
manage changes during the construction phase. It has been said that a construction
Project Manager‘s primary role is to solve problems. We believe it is possible to
reverse this role from a troubleshooter to a conductor whose energy is focused on
implementation of a well-rehearsed plan.
In short, process simulation enabled by BIM significantly increases
predictability in the project delivery process by compressing all pertinent project
data giving a single user a global and synoptic view of the project. This
predictability encompasses all major elements of the project including geometric
(visualization and physical conflicts), behavioral (engineering and operational
analysis), and temporal (phasing and scheduling) and cost (estimating and
budgeting). Traditional ―field level‖ issues are flagged earlier in the process at a
time when changes are still inexpensive to make.
35
2.3.4 Manage/Maintenance Phase Model
According to Kymmell 2008) models in this phase will frequently have
inherited from the planning and construction phases of the project and may need to
be adapted to their new purpose. Modeling the contents of the building for inventory
and tacking purpose are also achievable at this phase. Monitoring temperature and
energy consumption can be connected to the BIM. All these uses will require special
adaption for a BIM that was handed down from the design and construction project
team.
2.3.4.1 Model updating:
BIM can be updated during the construction of the facility to create an ―as-
built‖ record of construction conditions. Once this is complete, the geometry in the
BIM can be linked or associated with non-graphic information typically found in
equipment and facilities operations manuals. Data that are related to fire rating of
doors, construction materials‘ U Value e.t.c. are tracked. In this way, the BIM
becomes a complete and living record to support the facilities management.
36
Figure 2.9 shows the 3D Geometric Capabilities of BIM in Mechanical, Electrical
and Plumbing (MEP) coordination
2.3.4.2 Bahaviour Simulation:
Simulation allows standardized models of facilities to visualize and replicas
of real life system using ‗reactive objects‘ to predict possible situations. According
to Olatunji and Sher (2010) the use of avatar simulation in construction is new and
rapidly developing. Maher (2008) argues that the reliability of avatar applications in
predicting productivity and creativity in construction project design is increasing.
The implications of BIM based simulation in facility management are such that
components and objects are programmed to exhibits certain characterization in
varying environment. Such include visualization of presumed end-users‘ reactions to
energy consumption, environmental impacts and sustainability variables, flexibility
of use, responses to emergencies, situational impacts of comprehensive maintenance
operations like alteration, conversion, modernization and so on. With this method, it
is easier to reduce uncertainties and risk.
37
2.3.4.3 Auto Alert:
Building information modeling does not only provide appropriate platforms
for stakeholders to share information, it also allows all collaborating professionals to
sort all information they need in the project server and impute their discipline
specific information on the models. Information on intelligent objects of facilities‘
designs can include life span data, limit of use and modification, millstone for
procurement, planning and supply chain management, inventory control and match-
sequencing for corresponding alternatives. Olatunji and Sher (2010) added that,
given these variables, facility management professionals using BIM-based digital
procedures are confronted with fewer challenges regarding items to change, how,
where and who to execute the job. From one point source, design components like
furniture, services‘ equipments and fittings, lifts, wall, floors, roofs, door etc. could
tell the users and managers when they are over-stretched, underutilized or due for
special attention like maintenance replacement; and who is specifically scheduled to
execute such works. This can be extended using chip technology for location
tracking and security purpose.
2.3.4.4 Project Visualization:
Visualization allows clients and end users to review their intentions using
multiple options in ways that optimize, value generation in investments and
flexibility in (use and) management of facilities. Moreover, design conflicts and data
inconsistencies can be detected early. Furthermore, BIM-enabled project
visualization adds value to communication. With this technology it is now possible
to conduct off-site training on screen for purpose-made and general-need
maintenance and operation and the same time simulate the functions of project
components.
38
2.3.4.5 Value Intelligence:
Studies by Aranda et al, 2008, Gu et al 2008, Alfonso et al. 2008, have
presented with strong evidence on business gains and performance values that all
stake holders on facilities development and management could benefit from. On the
other hand, value analysis and management allows major stakeholders involved in
project development in facilities‘ life to further collaborate and facilitate
constructive pattern for justifying the relationship between components‘ value and
functional requirements in facilities‘ design, use and management (Barton, 2000). In
other words, while cost cost-in-use analysis is about creating value through optional
costing, value analysis and management creates pathway for defining essences that
justify the choice of particular components on the basis of functionality.
39
Table 2.2 BIM Implementation Phases and BIM Product Matrix
Phase 1 – Model
3D Parametric design elements
Design information
Documentation output
Conceptual design and analysis
Phase 2 – Leverage
Link models to analysis tools
Visualize real-world appearance
Model based assessment
processes
Phase 3 – Integrate
Convergence of models
Model-based communication
between disciplines
Lifecycle model utilization
Model-based fabrication
Architecture Revit Architecture, AutoCAD
Design accuracy and quality
Estimating opportunities
Productivity increases
Accurate, efficient and
documentation
Early evaluation of complex
constructability.
3ds Max Design, Ecotect Analysis
Assessment of design
performance for LEED and other
sustainable rating criteria
Performance optimization
Cinema quality design
visualization
Navisworks Manage, Revit
Structure, Revit MEP, Maya
collaborative project
Management, inventor
Construction and clash
detection
Reduced RFIs and change
order
IPD opportunities
More accurate building
component
MEP
Engineering
Revit MEP, AutoCAD
Leverage arch. Data to improve design
accuracy and quality
Improve system coordination
Ecotect Analysis
Assessments of design performance
for LEED and other sustainable
rating criteria
Revit Architecture, Revit Structure,
Navisworks Manage, Collaborative
project management
Coordination and clash detection
40
Achieve productivity increases
Facilitate preliminary analysis
Accurate, efficient documentation
Performance optimization
Reduced requedt for information
and change orders
IPD opportunities
Structural
Engineering
Revit structures, AutoCAD, Structural
Detailing
Leverage arch data to improve design
accuracy and quality
Improve system coordination
Achieve productivity increases
Facilitate preliminary analysis
Accurate, efficient documentation
Robot Structural Analysis
Assessments of design performance
Performance optimization
Revit Architecture, Navisworks
Manage, Collaborative project
management
Coordination and clash detection
Reduced request for information
and change orders
IPD opportunities
Civil
Engineering
Civil 3D, MAP 3D, Autocad
Design accuracy and quality
Calculate material quantities
Improve document coordination
Productivity increases
Accurate, efficient documentation
Ecotect Analysis, Robot Structural
Analysis, 3ds Max Design
Assessments of design for LEED,
other sustainable performance
criteria, structural performance
Performance optimization
Collaborate with internal teams
Cinema quality design visualization
Navisworks Manage, Collaborative
project management
Coordination and clash detection
Reduced RFIs and Cos
IPD Opportunities
Collaborate with external
companies on building team
Reduce risk and liability concern
Construction Revit Architecture, AutoCAD, Civil 3D,
Quantity take-off
Design accuracy and quality
Estimating opportunities
Productivity
Navisworks, Revit Structure
Assessment of design performance
for LEED and other sustainable
rating criteria
Increase schedule predictability
Performance optimization
Clash detection
Navisworks, collaborative Project
Management, Inventor
Coordination and clash detection
Reduced RFIs and Cos
IPD Opportunities
Collaborate with external
companies on building team
Easier integration of fabricated
components
41
2.4.0 Implementation of BIM
BSA (2009) reported that a number of completed building in the UK have
used BIM, including the extension to the Sanger Institute in Cambridge and the
Roche HQ in Welwyn. In Norway, every Statsbygg (the property service agency)
project will have to be design and built using BIM from 2010. Also since 2003 The
General Service Administration (GSA) in US has been exploring aspect of BIM
such energy simulation, material quantity analysis and construction scheduling on
pilot projects (Gonchar 2007). The GSA has implementing BIM in all its projects
since 2007. Construction Clients Group (2008) reported the practice in New Zealand
which moves BIM to the program (4D) and the cost plan (5D). These additional
dimension enable the project to track the project ‗virtually‘ forwards and backwards
in time, play out what if scenarios and get to grips with complex logistic and
buildability issues (Construction Clients Group 2008)
2.4.1 Barriers to BIM in Construction Industry
People and process are keys to change and improvement, while work
environment and IT infrastructure are enablers without which the first two elements
cannot be sustained (Bew and Underwood 2010) while Alshawi 2008 listed some
factors which he described as critical to Implementation of BIM in Construction
Industry. The factors are people, technology and the environment.
People needs will determine the technology, and the technology will define
the environment. So the kingpin in absorption of any technology is the people, But
Newton, Hampton and Drogemullar (2009) argued, if adequate software support is
missing, AEC projects cannot use integrated BIM, if the project do not use
integrated BIM, it is impossible to measure its benefits, if the evidence of benefits is
missing, the end users have no reason to demand integrated BIM tools, the software
42
vendors have no motivation to invest in the development of such tools which leads
back to the start of the loop (Figure 2.4.1) below.
Figure 2.10 BIM Implementation Model
Basic obstacles: No enough market demand Domain –specific software
Basic obstacles: Individual projects, fuzzy baseline, No adequate focus to test in wide scale
Basic obstacles: Difficulties in deployment: people, software, processes Not enough evidence of befits
Sufficient Market Demand
for integrated BIM
Sufficient Software support for
integrated BIM.
Measured
Benefits of
integrated BIM
43
According to (Nithamyong and Skibniewski 2006; O'Brien 2000)
success in technology depends on many factors including but not limited to
people‘s attitudes towards the technology, corporate culture, relationships
between companies, characteristics of the specific projects, industry wide
issues of legal precedents, communication density, organizational barriers,
and individual‘s resistance to change. Like any other new technology,
personal attitudes towards Building Information Modeling adoption are
shaped by the risks involved in using unproven means and methods; by the
difficulty in implementing BIM in particular settings; by financial risks
involved; and by the perception of other workers‘ attitudes towards new
technologies (Paulson and Fondahl 1980; Tatum 1989). Even when
companies commit the resources needed for technological change, project
participants do not necessarily participate.
2.4.2 Interoperability:
According to Lee et al (2005), Interoperability refers to smooth exchange
of electronic data, information and knowledge, in other word, it also refers to
the ability to exchange and manage electronic information seamlessly, and
the ability to comprehend and integrate this information across multiple
software systems. Another definition is ―an open standard for building data
exchanges.‖ Interoperability simply means that your system can ―talk‖ to
mine, and we can all ―talk‖ to the designers, contractors, subcontractors,
vendors, and owners‘ representatives in the same electronic language.
According to Lee et al (2005), there three (3) levels of interoperability:
Data interoperability
Application interoperability
Resource interoperability.
44
Figure 2.11 stages of interoperability
There is little interoperability in the AECO (architect, engineer,
contractor, owner) community today, but many organizations, recognizing its
importance, are aggressively attacking the problem—a problem not confined
to the design and construction communities. In practice, however, these
formats are rarely used, and most organizations use proprietary formats for
model exchange. For many owners this poses a risk to the short and long
term investments in any building information modeling efforts. Lee et al
(2005),
Data
Interoperability
Application
Interoperability
Resource
Interoperability
Requires
Requires
45
Integrated BIM Model
Architectural
Design Software
Structural
Design/Analysis
Software
Quantity Take-
up/Spcification
Quantity Take-
up/Specification
Software
Scheduling
SoftwareScheduling
Software
Analysis
Software
Energy
Analysis
Software
Mechanical/
Electrical and
Plumbing
Software
Figure 2.12 Interoperability model between various software
2.4.1.3 Client Demand
Many stake holders are scare of change, the consultants are effect a
change, while the clients believe that if they change the contract to require
new types of deliverable, specifically 3D or building Information Models,
they will not receive competitive bids, limiting their potential pool of bidders
and ultimately increasing the price of the project.
46
Figure 2.13 interrelationships between technology, people and process in
technology implementation
2.4.1.4 Legal Issues
Kymmell (2007) posited that, the legal aspect of implementing BIM
have been an area of concern to many owners, AECs (Architects, engineers
and contractors). Contractual and legal changes are required on several fronts
to facilitate the use of BIM and more collaborative project teams. Moreover,
contracts also did not address the sharing of the benefits or risk from the
additional efficiency and (reduced project risk) among the project team
members. Even the digital exchange of project information is sometimes
difficult today, and teams are often forced to exchange only paper drawing
and rely old-fashioned contracts. Public institutions faces even greater
challenges, since they are often govern by Laws that take considerable time
to change.
Technology
Process
People
47
Issues related to model ownership and responsibility for model
accuracy as well as concern about the responsibility for the cost of producing
and managing the model are some major obstacles to embracing the BIM
process. Current contracts for design and construction services rarely address
modeling issues.
2.4.1.5 Issue of Training and Learning
Implementation of new technology such as BIM technologies are
costly in terms of training and changing work flows and work processes. The
investment in software and hardware is typically exceeded by the training
cost and initial productivity losses. Often most services providers are not
willing to make such an investment unless the perceived the long term
benefit to their own organization and or/if the owner subsidizes the training
costs.
2.4.6 Summary
The chapter tried to review literature related to this study, it begins by
defining the BIM concept, the development of BIM and the phase to use
BIM in construction life cycle. The chapter conclude with the review of
some identified barriers to BIM implementation in the local construction
industry.
48
CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGY
3.1 Introduction
This chapter elaborates on the methodologies used for the purpose of data
collection, discussion and analysis and reporting of findings and result of the study.
So in summary this chapter explains the methodologies used for the purposed of
conduction this study.
3.2 Research Methodology
In order to derive a logical result, the study has adopted three (3) approaches, these
are:
a) Literature Review
b) Data Collection
c) Data Analysis
d) Presentation of results and conclusion.
49
3.2.1 Literature Review:
This is an exercise in which the researcher tries to identify, locate read and
evaluate previous studies, observations, opinions and comments related to Building
Information Modeling. Under this exercise, concept, applications and the barriers to
implementation of building information modeling (BIM) in local construction
industry. So, the literature review provide guidance toward preparation of
questionnaire which is discussed in as follows:
3.2.3 Study Population and Sample
The target population of the study is all professionals involved in civil and
architectural design within Kuala Lumpur Region, while sample of One Hundred
were considered the sample to represent the Professionals in Architecture
Engineering and Construction (AEC) randomly selected from construction firms
located within the region.
3.3 Instrument for Data Collection
Primary data in this study was collected using 100 questionnaire survey forms
that where distributed to the targeted sample of respondents. A total of Thirty Two
(32) questionnaires were duly completed and return out of which three where
considered invalid as they have not specified their area of expertise. So the data
analyzed in this study is based on 29 valid questionnaires, which form 29% of the
total sample, 16 from Architects and 9 from Engineers and 4 from contractors
3.3.1 Questionnaire Survey Design
50
Survey research design was adopted for the study; the instrument for data
collection was a set of questionnaire. The questionnaire was divided into Four
Sections ( A – D) All questions are structured so as to enable a logical quantitative
analysis of the result. Moreover, each question is ranked on 5 level rating scale as
shown of figure 3.2.
a. Section A: The profile of the firm or construction company, which Includes,
Name of the Firm, Area of Expertise, available number of staff and
qualification of the respondent and his/her year of experience.
b. Section B: seek to identify the Building information modeling (BIM) tool
utilization level, therefore, sixteen (15) BIM Software were selected and
listed. Responses where ranked on five points Likert-type rating scale based
on frequency of usage.
c. Section C: seeks to identify the barriers to building information modeling
implementation in local construction industry. 12 identified barriers from
various literatures were listed and ranked on five (5) points Likert-type rating
scale based on degree of agreement.
d. Section D: deals with strategies for the implementation of building
Information modeling in local construction industry. This section consists of
ten (10) items among which a respondent is free to rank based on level
importance. The range of importance of each item has been ranked as shown
on figure 3.2.
51
Figure 3.3 Rating scale questionnaire responses
Ordinal Scale 1 to 5 in ascending Order
1 2 3 4 5
Increasing Degree of Frequency/Agreement and importance
Each scale represents the following rating:
1 = Never / Strongly Disagree / Unimportant
2 = Very Rarely / Disagree / of little importance
3 = Rarely /Undecided / Moderately Important
4 = Occasionally / Agree / Important
5 = Frequently / Strongly Agree / Very Important
52
3.4 Methods of Data analysis
The study used Three Methods in analyzing the data generated from the
questioner, thus, step one presents the data in a descriptive form, where responses on
each item was presented and described in percentage, means index and the
3.4.1 Frequency Analysis
This is used to represent the data analysis results of the respondents‘
frequency responses, in order to differentiate the variables in the questionnaire
survey. The result will be tabulated in the form of frequency number and
percentage according to the total respondents. The frequencies can be
represented in the form of tables, pie charts and bar charts for graphic
representation of result.
3.4.2 Average Index Analysis
The average Index analysis for each variable is calculated by using the
formula as shown (Abdul Majid and McCaffer 1998)
Average Index = aIXI
𝑋𝑖
Where
a1 = Constant expressing the weigh given to i
x = variables expressing the frequency of responses for 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 …n
53
Table 3.1 Classification of the Rating Scales in Section B
Rating Scale Average Index
Never 1.00 ≤ A1 < 1.50
Very Rarely 1.50 ≤ A1 < 2.50
Rarely 2.50 ≤ A1 < 3.50
Occasionally 3.50 ≤ A1 < 4.50
Frequently 4.50 ≤ A1 < 5.00
Table 3.2 Classification of the Rating Scales in Section C
Rating Scale Average Index
Strongly Disagree 1.00 ≤ A1 < 1.50
Disagree 1.50 ≤ A1 < 2.50
Undecided 2.50 ≤ A1 < 3.50
Agree 3.50 ≤ A1 < 4.50
Strongly Agree 4.50 ≤ A1 < 5.00
Table 3.3 Classification of the Rating Scales in Section D
Rating Scale Average Index
Not important 1.00 ≤ A1 < 1.50
Of little importance 1.50 ≤ A1 < 2.50
Moderately Important 2.50 ≤ A1 < 3.50
Important 3.50 ≤ A1 < 4.50
Very Important 4.50 ≤ A1 < 5.00
54
3.4.3 Correlation Coefficient
Spearman‘s correlation coefficient in order to test the stated hypotheses.
According to Naoum (2007), the Spearman correlation is a non-parametric test for
measuring the difference in ranking between two groups of respondent‘s scoring a
number of issues, attributes or factors
In order to get the correlation coefficient, from the data collected, the array data
will be computed using the following steps: Xi, Yi are converted to ranks xi, yi, and
the differences di = xi − yi between the ranks of each observation on the two
variables are calculated.
Equation 1
r =
xiyi xi
ni=1 yi
ni=1
n
𝑛
𝑖 =1
x2ni=1 −
xini−1 n
2
y2ni−1 −
yini=1 2
n
Using equation (1) we obtain
𝑟 = xi − x 𝑛
𝑖=1 y1 − y
xi − x 2 xni−1 𝑦𝑖=1 − 𝑦 2𝑛
𝑖−1
Where: r = Correlation Coefficient,
x= Sum of responses in variable 1
y= sum of responses in variable 2
n= sample size
55
To calculate the t value, then we can use the following formula;
𝑡𝑛−2 =𝑟
1 − 𝑟2
𝑛 − 2
Then value obtained will be compared to the value in student t test table at 0.05
significance level and inference can be drawn based on the obtained value.
3.5 Summary
The chapter present details of the methodology used in conducting this
study according to a defined format. The chapter begins by introduction and
proceeds with description of the methodology used which include; literature
review, data collection and the instrument for data collection. Detailed
explanation was offered on the structure of the instrument used and the
chapter was concluded with explanation of how the data collected was
analyzed to a logical conclusion.
56
CHAPTER 4
DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS
4.1 Introduction
This chapter presents and discussed the findings on Building Information Modeling
usage in Architecture, Engineering and Construction, the identified barriers to BIM
implementation and the strategies for the implementation of the BIM in local
construction industry. Moreover, analysis of the data generated is also presented in
order to drive a statistical inference that can be used to generalize the findings.
4.1.2 Findings and Analysis
Data collected from questionnaires has been presented using frequencies and
percentages.
Table 4.1 Distribution of Respondents According Area of Expertise
Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid Architecture 16 55.2 55.2 55.2
Engineering 9 31.0 31.0 86.2
Contractors 4 13.8 13.8 100.0
Total 29 100.0 100.0
57
Table 4.1.1 and Figure 4.1 above is showing the distribution of respondents
in respect of their area of expertise. 55.2% which form the majority of the
respondents are architects and engineers formed 31.0% of the respondents, while the
lowest number of respondents is from contractors who form 13.8 % only.
Table 4.2 Distribution of Respondents According to Qualification
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid PhD 4 13.8 13.8 13.8
Msc/MEng 6 20.7 20.7 34.5
Bsc/BEng 17 58.6 58.6 93.1
Other 2 6.9 6.9 100.0
Total 29 100.0 100.0
55.2
31
13.8
Architects Engineers contractors
Respondents' area of specilization
% of Respondents
58
Table 4.2.2 and Figure 4.2 shows that, Bachelor Degree holders (Bsc/BEng)
formed the majority of the respondents with 58.6 % and Master Holders form the
second majority with 20.7 % while the lowest 13.8% of the respondents are PhD
holder and finally, other qualification holder carries 6.8%.
0
13.820
58.6
6.9
Qualification Phd Msc/Meng Bsc/Beng Others
Respondents Qualification
Series1 Series2
59
Table 4.3 Names of firms that have responded to the study.
Freq %
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid AECOM Prunding Sdn Bhd 1 3.4 3.4 3.4
Astasoft Sdn Bhd 4 13.8 13.8 17.2
Building Consult Integrated Sdn Bhd 1 3.4 3.4 20.7
DBKL 1 3.4 3.4 24.1
Gogreen Industries Sdn Bhd 2 6.9 6.9 31.0
JKR Malaysia 5 17.2 17.2 48.3
KLIA Consultancy Services Sdn Bhd 4 13.8 13.8 62.1
Kumplan Kelken Sdn Bhd 5 17.2 17.2 79.3
Neuformation Architects Sdn Bhd 1 3.4 3.4 82.8
Pintar Jaya (M) Sdn Bhd 1 3.4 3.4 86.2
T. R. Hamza & Yeang Sdn Bhd 4 13.8 13.8 100.0
Total 29 100.0 100.0
3.4
13.8
3.4 3.46.9
17.213.8
17.2
3.4 3.4
13.8
% of respondents
% of respondents
60
Based on the responses collected in the questionnaire, Jabatan Kerja Raya
(JKR) that is the Public Works Department Malaysia and Kumplan Kelken Sdn Bhd
constitute the majority of the respondents with each having Five (5) representing
17.2% of the respondents. Astasoft Sdn Bhd, KLIA Consultancy Services Sdn Bhd
and T. R. Hamza & Yeang Sdn Bhd are the second majority each having Four (4)
representing 13.8 of the respondents. Two (2) respondents, that is 6.9% are from
Gogreen Industries Sdn Bhd, while AECOM Prunding Sdn Bhd, Building Consult
Integrated Sdn Bhd, DBKL, Neuformation Architects Sdn Bhd and Pintar Jaya (M)
Sdn Bhd are having One (1) respondent from each representing 3.4%.
Table 4.4 Years of experience of the respondents
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 1-5 6 20.7 20.7 20.7
6 - 10 1 3.4 3.4 24.1
11 - 15 4 13.8 13.8 37.9
16 - 20 9 31.0 31.0 69.0
21 - above 8 27.6 27.6 96.6
6 1 3.4 3.4 100.0
Total 29 100.0 100.0
61
Table 4.4 shows the years of experience of the respondents in
construction industry. Majority of the respondents have16 – 20 years of
experience representing 31.0% of the total respondents. Moreover, 27.6% of
the respondents are having 21 – above working experience, this shows that
majority of the respondents have adequate experience in the construction
industry.
20.7
3.4
13.8
3127.6
1-5 Years 6-10 Years 11-15 Years 16-20 Years 21 Years-above
Years of Experinece of the respondents
%
62
Objective 1: Identification of BIM Tools usage in local Construction Industry.
4.2.0 Introduction
This section presents the data on the utilization and implementation of
Building information modeling tools in construction industry. Discussion and
analysis covers the responses collected for each tools listed in the questionnaire and
the means of the responses were analyzed using Spearman Correlation Coefficients.
Finally the finding was concluded with testing of the hypothesis using t-test at
0.05% level of significance.
Table 4.2.1 Autodesk AutoCAD
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid Rarely 5 17.2 17.2 17.2
Occasionally 11 37.9 37.9 55.2
Frequently 13 44.8 44.8 100.0
Total 29 100.0 100.0
The table 4.2.1 above has shown that 44.8% of the respondents are
frequently using AutoCAD for their design and 37.9% of the respondents are
occasionally using the software while only 17.2% are rarely using the
software for their design services.
63
Table 4.2.2 Autodesk 3D MAX
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 0 4 13.8 13.8 13.8
Never 6 20.7 20.7 34.5
Very Rarely 1 3.4 3.4 37.9
Rarely 5 17.2 17.2 55.2
Occasionally 8 27.6 27.6 82.8
Frequently 5 17.2 17.2 100.0
Total 29 100.0 100.0
Autodesk 3D Max is somehow popular more especially among architects
who use it in generating 3D models of project mainly for conceptual design. This
results on Table 2.2.2 above, has shown that 17.2 % of the respondents have been
using it frequently, 27.6% have been it occasionally while 20.7% have never use it.
Table 4.2.3 Tekla Structures
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 0 4 13.8 13.8 13.8
Never 6 20.7 20.7 34.5
Very Rarely 1 3.4 3.4 37.9
Rarely 4 13.8 13.8 51.7
Occasionally 9 31.0 31.0 82.8
Frequently 5 17.2 17.2 100.0
Total 29 100.0 100.0
Table 4.2.3 above has shown that, Tekla structures is occasionally being used
by 31.0% of the respondents and 20.7% have never used the software. Meanwhile
17% of the respondents have indicated that, they are using the software frequently.
64
Table 4.2.4 Autodesk Revit MEP
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 0 5 17.2 17.2 17.2
Never 10 34.5 34.5 51.7
Very Rarely 2 6.9 6.9 58.6
Rarely 3 10.3 10.3 69.0
Occasionally 6 20.7 20.7 89.7
Frequently 3 10.3 10.3 100.0
Total 29 100.0 100.0
Table 4.2.4 above has shown that, 34.5% of the respondents have never used
the Autodesk Revit MEP software and 20.7% are occasionally using the software.
Moreover, 10.3% are frequently using the software and 6.9% use it very rarely.
Table 4.2.5 Autodesk Revit Architecture
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 0 4 13.8 13.8 13.8
Never 10 34.5 34.5 48.3
Very Rarely 1 3.4 3.4 51.7
Rarely 8 27.6 27.6 79.3
Occasionally 5 17.2 17.2 96.6
Frequently 1 3.4 3.4 100.0
Total 29 100.0 100.0
65
Table 4.2.5 shows the frequency of using Autodesk Revit Architecture
among the respondents, only 3.4% of the respondents are using the software
frequently, but 27.6% and 17.2% of the respondents have shown that they are using
the software rarely and occasionally respectively. Meanwhile 10% of the
respondents have never use the software.
Table 4.2.6 Autodesk Revit Structure
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 0 6 20.7 20.7 20.7
Never 14 48.3 48.3 69.0
Rarely 5 17.2 17.2 86.2
Occasionally 4 13.8 13.8 100.0
Total 29 100.0 100.0
Table 4.2.6 above shows that 48 .3 % that majority of the respondents on the
question have never use Revit Structure software, 17.2% rarely use it and 13.8%
occasionally use. So the results have indicated that software is not being used may
be due to the fact that is new in the field of construction.
Table 4.2.7 ArchiCAD
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 0 6 20.7 20.7 20.7
Never 13 44.8 44.8 65.5
Very Rarely 1 3.4 3.4 69.0
Rarely 5 17.2 17.2 86.2
Occasionally 4 13.8 13.8 100.0
Total 29 100.0 100.0
66
Table 4.2.7 above shows that majority of the respondents (44.8%) have
never used ArchiCAD software in their design services and only 13.8% are
occasionally using the software. Furthermore, 5% rarely use the software
while 3.4% use the software very rarely.
Table 4.2.8 Bentley Micro station
Based on Table 4.2.8, majority of the respondents (58%) have never used
Bentley Micro station, while 20.7% are rarely use the software and the remaining
respondents have not responded to the question.
Table 4.2.9 Bentley Structure
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 0 5 17.2 17.2 17.2
Never 16 55.2 55.2 72.4
Rarely 5 17.2 17.2 89.7
Occasionally 2 6.9 6.9 96.6
Frequently 1 3.4 3.4 100.0
Total 29 100.0 100.0
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 0 6 20.7 20.7 20.7
Never 17 58.6 58.6 79.3
Rarely 6 20.7 20.7 100.0
Total 29 100.0 100.0
67
Table 4.2.9 shows that, majority of the respondents (55.2%) never used
Bentley Structure and 17.2% rarely used the software, 6.9% occasionally use it
while 3.4% of the respondents have been frequently using the software.
Table 4.2.10 Bentley HVAC
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 0 5 17.2 17.2 17.2
Never 17 58.6 58.6 75.9
Rarely 3 10.3 10.3 86.2
Occasionally 4 13.8 13.8 100.0
Total 29 100.0 100.0
Based on Table 4.2.10, majority that is 58.6% of the respondents have never
used Bentley HVAC software, 17.2% rarely use the software and 6.9% of the
respondents occasionally use the software. Moreover, 17.2% have not responded to
the question.
Table 4.2.11 IntelliCAD
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 0 5 17.2 17.2 17.2
Never 18 62.1 62.1 79.3
Rarely 3 10.3 10.3 89.7
Occasionally 3 10.3 10.3 100.0
Total 29 100.0 100.0
Table 4.2.11 above has shown that majority (62.1%) of the respondents have
never used the software and 17.2% of the respondents remain silent on the question.
Moreover, responses on occasional and rarely usage remain the same is culminating
to 10.3%
68
Table 4.2.12 Google sketch up
Table 4.2.12 above shows the frequency of using Google sketch up in
design services among the respondents and the result has shown that, 27.6 %
have never used the software, 20.7% are frequently using the software and
10.3% are rarely and very rarely use the software
Table 4.2.13 Nemetschek Vector Works
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 0 6 20.7 20.7 20.7
Never 18 62.1 62.1 82.8
Very Rarely 2 6.9 6.9 89.7
Rarely 2 6.9 6.9 96.6
Occasionally 1 3.4 3.4 100.0
Total 29 100.0 100.0
Based Table 4.2.13 above, 62.1% of the respondents have never used
the software, 20.7% remain silent on the question while 6.9% are rarely and
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 0 4 13.8 13.8 13.8
Never 8 27.6 27.6 41.4
Very Rarely 3 10.3 10.3 51.7
Rarely 3 10.3 10.3 62.1
Occasionally 5 17.2 17.2 79.3
Frequently 6 20.7 20.7 100.0
Total 29 100.0 100.0
69
very rarely using the software. It also clear from the data that 3.4% of the
respondents are occasionally using the software.
Table 4.2.14 TuborCAD
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 0 6 20.7 20.7 20.7
Never 17 58.6 58.6 79.3
Very Rarely 3 10.3 10.3 89.7
Rarely 3 10.3 10.3 100.0
Total 29 100.0 100.0
Table 4.2.14 has indicated that 58.6% of the respondents have never use
TuborCAD while 20.7% have not responded to the question. It is also clear that
10.3% are using the software rarely and very rarely.
Table 4.2.16 Navisworks
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 0 7 24.1 24.1 24.1
Never 18 62.1 62.1 86.2
Very Rarely 2 6.9 6.9 93.1
Rarely 2 6.9 6.9 100.0
Total 29 100.0 100.0
Table 4.2.16 shows the frequency of using Navisworks BIM software in
local construction Industry. The results has indicated that 62.5% which form the
majority of the respondents have never used the software. 24.1% remain silent on
the question while, 6.9% are rarely and very rarely using the solution.
70
4.2.17 Analysis of findings on BIM Tools Utilization
This section involved the data analysis of responses collected using question
on BIM tools utilization and implementation in the construction industry.
Correlation of BIM tools usage between Architects and Engineers has also been
presented in this section. Finally, a hypothesis was tested using t-test at 0.05 level of
significance.
Table 4.2.16 Frequency of BIM Software usage in Local Construction Industry
N Max Sum
Means
1. Autodesk AutoCAD 29 5 124 4.28
2. Autodesk 3D Max 29 5 80 2.76
3. Tekla Structures 29 5 61 2.10
4. Autodesk Revit MEP 29 4 51 1.76
5. Autodesk Revit Architecture 29 4 41 1.41
6. Autodesk Revit Structure 29 4 45 1.55
7. ArchiCAD 29 3 35 1.21
8. Bentley Micro station 29 5 44 1.52
9. Bentley Structure 28 4 39 1.39
10. Bentley HVAC 29 4 42 1.45
11. Sketch Up 29 5 74 2.55
12. Nemetschek Vector Works 29 4 32 1.10
13. TurboCAD 29 3 33 1.14
14. IntelliCAD 28 2 27 .96
15. Navis works 29 3 28 .97
Valid N (listwise) 27
71
The study has found that, despite the availability of numerous BIM software
and many identified benefits derived from this paradigm, local construction industry
is reluctant to deploy the technology in its service delivery. Based on the Table
4.2.17 above, Autodesk AutoCAD has the highest user responses with a total sum of
124 and a mean Index of 4.28 indicating that almost all the respondents are using
AutoCAD in their professional practices. It should be noted that AutoCAD is not a
BIM platform but only included in the study just to compare the user responses with
other Software. In addition, Autodesk 3D Max is found to be the second most used
design software in construction industry. 3D Max is mainly use in conceptual design
of models, it surface modeler, therefore, it doesn‘t carry any parametric value in it
component.
Moreover, this study has indentified that there are some few number of
professional firms that have started deploying Building information modeling in
design services only. Among the BIM software used, Tekla Structure is being used
mainly by engineers this may not be unconnected with compatibility of some long
available 2D analysis software like STAAD Pro. Furthermore, few architects have
indicated a negligible utilization of Revit Architecture.
One of the software found to be utilize as identified by this study is Google
Sketch up, substantial number of the respondent have indicated that they have been
using it in design. Table 4.2.17 shows a mean index 2.55 indicating a moderate level
of utilization. It should be noted that, Google sketch up can only be used for
sketches at the conceptual design phase.
72
This study have also identified that all the BIM software have a lower means
index and scored the lowest responses showing their degree of popularity or
unavailability in the local software market and may be of little relevance to design
services.
2.2.17 Comparism to BIM tools usage between Architects and Engineers
Figure 4.5 Comparative chart of BIM tools usage between Architects and Engineers
1413
11
11
11
13
10
1310
10
10
10
11
6
12 8
15
11
12
11
12
10
1387
11
9
8
9
7
116
0
5
10
15Autodesk AutoCAD
Autodesk 3D Max
Tekla Structures
Tekla Architecture
Autodesk Revit MEP
Autodesk Revit …
Autodesk Revit …
ArchiCAD
Bentley Micro station
Bentley Structure
Bentley HVAC
IntelliCAD
Nemetschek Vector …
TurboCAD
Sketchup
Navis works
Design Software usage frequencies
Architects Engineers
73
Figure 4.5 shows the frequencies of BIM software usage among Engineers
and Architects. The Radar diagram clearly illustrates that both Architects and
Engineers are using BIM software internally for their professional services. Hence,
the sample surveyed shows a utilization/ adoption of building information modeling
tools in Local Construction industry.
4.2.18 Correlation and testing of Hypothesis
This section involved the summary, correlation and t-test analysis of the result. A
multiple regression analysis has been used to generate the correlation coefficient, t-
value and the probability index with the aid of Ms Excel software.
74
TABLE 4.2.17 Summary output
Regression Statistics Multiple R 0.583 R Square 0.340 Adjusted R Square 0.293 Standard Error 2.060 Observations 16
ANOVA df SS MS F Significance F
Regression 1 30.594 30.594 7.210 0.018 Residual 14 59.406 4.243
Total 15 90
Coefficients Standard Error t Stat P-value Lower 95% Upper 95%
Lower 95.0%
Upper 95.0%
Intercept 2.307 2.911 0.793 0.441 -3.936 8.550 -3.936 8.550
X Variable 1 0.711 0.265 2.685 0.018 0.143 1.280 0.143 1.280
75
If a level of significance of 0.05 was selected therefore
𝑡𝑛−2 =r
1 − r2
n − 2
=0.583
1−(0.583 )2
16−2
t =0.583
0.217
Calculated t = +2.686
t = +2.686 > t = +2.1448, and t = 2.1448 obtainable from student t-table as well as the probability value p = 0.18 at 5% significance level.
If the calculated t-ratio is greater than the critical or table t-ratio, reject Ho in favour
of H1, otherwise do not reject Ho (Nworgu 1991).
4.2.10 Decision inference
The calculated t-ratio is 2.686 while the critical table t-ratio is 2.1448. Since
the calculated t-ratio exceeds the critical or table t-ratio, we therefore reject the null
hypothesis in favour of the alternative hypothesis. Based on the above decision, we
76
now conclude that, there is a significant correlation between architects and engineers
in using Building Information Modeling (BIM) in local construction industry.
77
Section C: Barriers to BIM utilization and Implementation
Section C: Objective 2: To identify the Barriers to Building Information
Modeling (BIM) implementation in the local Construction industry. Analysis of the
finding from the data generation from the question is presented in this section.
4.3.0 Introduction
This section presents the data collected using questionnaire from the
respondent on the barriers to BIM implementation in local construction industry. It
includes, discussion of numbers and percentages of responses on each question.
Table 4.3.1 BIM tools learning Difficulty
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 0 1 3.4 3.4 3.4
Disagree 4 13.8 13.8 17.2
Slightly Disagree 3 10.3 10.3 27.6
Slightly Agree 3 10.3 10.3 37.9
Agree 12 41.4 41.4 79.3
Strongly Agree 6 20.7 20.7 100.0
Total 29 100.0 100.0
Table 4.3.1 indicates that, 41.4% which formed majority of the respondents
agree that difficulty in learning the BIM software as a major obstacle to utilization
and implementation of the technology. Moreover, 20.7% strongly agree with
statement but only 13.8% and 10.3% disagree with the claim that difficulty in
learning the software is a barrier to it utilization.
78
Table 4.3.2 Lack of legal backing from Authority
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 0 2 6.9 6.9 6.9
Disagree 1 3.4 3.4 10.3
Slightly Disagree 3 10.3 10.3 20.7
Slightly Agree 7 24.1 24.1 44.8
Agree 13 44.8 44.8 89.7
Strongly Agree 3 10.3 10.3 100.0
Total 29 100.0 100.0
Based on Table 4.3.2 above, 44.8% of the respondents agree that, lack of legal
backing from authorities as the main factor that hinders the utilization and
implementation of building Information modeling in construction industry. In the
vain, 24.1% slightly agree that lack of legal backing as a factor. However, only 6.9
and 3.4 % disagree and slightly disagree respectively on the effect of lack of legal
backing.
Table 4.3.3 Problems of interoperability
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 0 1 3.4 3.4 3.4
Disagree 3 10.3 10.3 13.8
Slightly Disagree 3 10.3 10.3 24.1
Slightly Agree 7 24.1 24.1 48.3
Agree 13 44.8 44.8 93.1
Strongly Agree 2 6.9 6.9 100.0
Total 29 100.0 100.0
79
Table 4.3.3 indicates that, the majority (44.8%) of the respondents agree with the
claim that interoperability is a major factor that barred the use of BIM in design. In
the same vein, 24.1% slightly agree with the claim. Moreover, 10.3% of the
respondents equally disagree and slightly disagree with the assertion. While, 6.9%
strongly agree that interoperability is one of the problems that hinders the utilization
of Building Information Modeling (BIM) tool in building design.
Table 4.3.4 Lack of skilled BIM Software operators
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 0 1 3.4 3.4 3.4
Disagree 2 6.9 6.9 10.3
Slightly Disagree 1 3.4 3.4 13.8
Slightly Agree 5 17.2 17.2 31.0
Agree 10 34.5 34.5 65.5
Strongly Agree 10 34.5 34.5 100.0
Total 29 100.0 100.0
Table 4.3.4 above shows a distribution of responses on the level of agreement with
the statement that, lack competent operators is a factor that remain a barrier to BIM
utilization in local construction industry. Base on the findings, 34.5 % strongly agree
and equally agree with the claim. In other hand, 17.2 slightly agree while 6.9% and
3.4% of the respondents disagree and slightly disagree respectively with the
statement.
80
Table 4.3.5 Lack of request by client
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 0 1 3.4 3.4 3.4
Slightly Disagree 9 31.0 31.0 34.5
Slightly Agree 4 13.8 13.8 48.3
Agree 11 37.9 37.9 86.2
Strongly Agree 4 13.8 13.8 100.0
Total 29 100.0 100.0
Diffusion of nay technology depends on the level of request of the
technology by users, in the Table 4.3.5 above, 37.9% of the respondents agree with
the claim however 31.0% slightly disagree with the statement. Furthermore 13.8%
of the respondents slightly agree and equal percentage strongly agrees with the
claim. It can be said that according to the finding of this study, majority of the
respondents strongly that request by client to use BIM, will encourage the use and
adopting of the technology.
Table 4.3.6 Lack request by other team members
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 0 1 3.4 3.4 3.4
Disagree 2 6.9 6.9 10.3
Slightly Disagree 7 24.1 24.1 34.5
Slightly Agree 4 13.8 13.8 48.3
Agree 8 27.6 27.6 75.9
Strongly Agree 7 24.1 24.1 100.0
Total 29 100.0 100.0
81
Based on Table 4.3.6, above, 27.6% of the respondents agreed with the
assertion that lack of request by other team members as a contributing factor towards
lack of implementation and utilization of BIM tools in design services and 24.1%
strongly agree with the statement, yet, equally 24.1% slightly disagree with the
claim. Moreover, 13.8% slightly agree while only 6.9% disagree with the statement.
Table 4.3.7 High price of software
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 0 1 3.4 3.4 3.4
Disagree 1 3.4 3.4 6.9
Slightly Disagree 1 3.4 3.4 10.3
Slightly Agree 7 24.1 24.1 34.5
Agree 5 17.2 17.2 51.7
Strongly Agree 14 48.3 48.3 100.0
Total 29 100.0 100.0
Based on Table 4.3.7, majority of the respondents that is 48.3% strongly
agree that that expensive software is the major obstacle to utilization and subsequent
implementation of BIM tools. In the same vein, 24.1% slightly agree and 17.2%
agree with the statement while only 3.4% disagree and slightly disagree and equally
disagree with the statement.
82
Table 4.3.8 Non availability of parametric library
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid Disagree 1 3.4 3.4 3.4
Slightly Disagree 1 3.4 3.4 6.9
Slightly Agree 12 41.4 41.4 48.3
Agree 13 44.8 44.8 93.1
Strongly Agree 2 6.9 6.9 100.0
Total 29 100.0 100.0
Table 4.3.7 indicates that 44.8% agree with the claim that non availability
parametric library as a contributing factor to non utilization of BIM tools,
furthermore, 41.4% slightly agree with the statement. Moreover, 6.9% strongly
agree with the statement. However, only 3.4% disagree and equally slightly disagree
with the claim. So, from the finding on this statement, majority of the respondents
agree that lack parametric library a factors that hinders the utilization and
implementation of BIM in design services.
Table 4.3.9 longer time to develop a model
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid Disagree 1 3.4 3.4 3.4
Slightly Disagree 1 3.4 3.4 6.9
Slightly Agree 10 34.5 34.5 41.4
Agree 16 55.2 55.2 96.6
Strongly Agree 1 3.4 3.4 100.0
Total 29 100.0 100.0
83
Based on Table 4.3.9, Majority of the respondents that is representing 55.2%
have agreed with the claim that, taking longer time to develop a model is another
factor that affect the utilization and implementation of BIM in construction design
services. In addition, 34.5% slightly agree with the assertion and 3.4% strongly
agree with the statement. However only, 3.4% have slightly disagree and disagree
with the statement.
So considering the responses on the statement, it can be concluded that, designers
(engineers and architects) have equally agree that, the time it takes to develop a
model, has a direct effect on acceptance and utilization of BIM in construction
industry.
Table 4.3.10 Readiness for organization change
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid Disagree 10 34.5 34.5 34.5
Slightly Disagree 8 27.6 27.6 62.1
Slightly Agree 7 24.1 24.1 86.2
Agree 4 13.8 13.8 100.0
Total 29 100.0 100.0
Table 4.3.10 above shows the level of agreement with the claim that,
professionals in the construction industry are not interested to implement BIM in
their firms or organization due to the reason that they don‘t want to change their
organizational structure. Based on the findings shown in the table, majority (34.5%)
disagrees and 27.6% slightly disagree with the claim. Meanwhile, 24.1% slightly
agree and only 13.8% agree with the statement..
84
4.3.1 Analysis of Findings on Barriers to BIM implementation
This section involved the analysis of major barriers to building information
modeling utilization in local construction industry. These barriers include and not
limited to difficulty in learning the software, unavailability of authority backing to
deploy the technology, lack of compatibility between the software and readiness to
change from traditional delivery method.
Table 4.3.11 Barriers to implementation of Building Information Modeling (BIM)
Valid Mean
Std.
Deviation Sum
1. Difficult to learn 29 3.34 1.471 97
2. Lack of legal backing from Authority 29 3.28 1.306 95
3. Problems of interoperability 29 3.17 1.256 92
4. Lack of competent staff to operate the
software
29 3.76 1.354 109
5. Not required by client 29 3.24 1.244 94
6. Never required by other team
members
29 3.28 1.437 95
7. Expensive software 29 3.93 1.334 114
8. Non availability of parametric library 29 3.48 .829 101
9. Takes longer time to develop a model 29 3.52 .785 102
10. Not ready to distort my normal
operational structure
29 2.17 1.071 63
.
Table 4.3.11 shows the means of agreement on barriers to implementation
building information modeling in local construction industry by both Engineers and
Architects. The result has shown that the expensive software has the highest means
85
index of 3.93 indicating that is the main barriers agreed to have slowed the
implementation of building information. Equally, the results have shown a
significance level of agreement that, lack of competent operators of the software is
another overwhelming problem, this may not be unconnected with the fact that BIM
is a new concept that has not diffused across many countries and Malaysia inclusive.
Another major problem that has been identified by many writers in the field
BIM, is interoperability, that is the ability of various software to share data among
themselves. The main objective of BIM is integration of various software used by
various stakeholders in construction delivery, therefore, if there is no interoperability
the whole effort will remain defeated
The finding of the study indicate clearly, that expensive software which can
be describe as lack of fund is what mainly agreed majority of the respondents to
have slowed the implementation of building information. While the last factor (10)
that is ―Organizational readiness for change was not accepted as a barrier to BIM
utilization and implementation. Equally, majority of the respondents have shown a
degree of acceptance of the technology by disagreeing with the claim. Therefore, the
respondents are ready for change in their organizational structure as against many
literatures considering construction industry as the most conservative industry.
One of the objectives of BIM is integration of lean philosophy in both design
and construction; however, this cannot be realized if building element models that
can be assembled to give quicker generation of project model are not available. Non
availability of building element models, designed with local building codes will
certainly hamper the effort of BIM software utilization and implementation in the
local construction industry.
86
4.4.0 Section D: objective 3: Strategies for BIM implementation in Local
Construction industry
4.4.1 Introduction:
Full implementation of Building Information Modeling (BIM) would have
required the wholesale disruption of exiting business practices, process,
organizational structures, contractual relationships, and even individual work habit.
Any technology that requires such a complete break with the status quo has high
probability of failure, regardless of its merits. The emerging distributed building
information model paradigm allows for a more flexible and orderly integration of
new technology without requiring an immediate and wholesale reordering of the
entire business culture.
However, According to Billal Sucar (2010) Organization attempting to migrate
towards BIM are typically at loss on how to priorities their actions and investment.
Many stakeholders identify the BIM abilities they would like to acquire (for instance
clash detection, Construction Sequencing, energy simulation, cost estimating or life
cycle assessment) but are either unable to or unaware of the requirements for the
successful achievement of these skills and abilities. This mismatch between
expected BIM deliverables and the unforeseen requirements to implement them put
many organization at risk of achieving mixed results, lowered standards and un-met
ROI projections.
The model describes in figure 4.4.1 below present a logical arrangement of
strategies for implementation of building information modeling in local construction
industry based on priority. The strategies include; improvement of interoperability,
development of local standard of building element models, enactment of legislative
backing to cater risk management in BIM Process, structured training to foster the
diffusion of the technology and internal mobilization to encouragement that may
lead to culture change by the actors.
87
Figure 4.6 Model for strategic implementation of Building Information
Modeling.
The identified strategies are
1. Issue of interoperability,
2. Local standard and parametric library
3. Legal/Legislative backing,
4. Development of portals
5. Training and Retraining
6. Managing culture change
• Training of Staff
• devlopment of portal• Demand by client
• Managing culture change.
• Legislative backing
• Development National BIM Guidlines
• Improved Interoperability
• Development of local standard parametric library
Software Provisder Government
Construction Firms
Clients and General Public
88
4.4.2 Interoperability efforts
This has been identifies as a demanding area and there is large effort going
into the development of standards to define interoperability between models. The
international Alliance for interoperability (AIA) has created a uniform platform
– file format – for software developers; this is called Industry Foundation Class
(IFC) Forma Kymmell (2008). This means that for a model to be able to be
compatible with models created by other tools, it is necessary for all of them to
be translatable into a uniform file format, so that the entire object‘s information
can be transferred correctly. In most cases it is a challenge for such a translation
to retain all the information that the model contained in its original native file
format.
4.4.3 Local parametric libraries.
BIM design tools provide different pre-defined libraries of fixed geometry
and parametric objects. These are typically generic objects based on standard
onsite construction practices that are appropriate for early stage design. As
design is developed, object definitions become more specific, elaborated with
expected or targeted performance, such as for energy, sound and cost etc., visual
features are also embedded to support rendering. Technical and performance
requirements can be outlined so that object definition specifies what the final
constructed product should achieve. Previously, different models or datasets
were hand-built for these different purposes and not integrated. Now it is
possible to define an object once and use it for multiple purposes. The challenge
is to develop an easy to use and consistent means for defining object instances
appropriate for the current stage of design and supporting the various uses
identified for the stage.
89
Building Element Models (BEMs) are 2D and 3D geometric representation
of physical products suc as doors, windows, equipment, furniture, fixtures, and
high level assemblies of walls, roofs, ceilings, and floors at the various levels of
details needed, including specific products. For design firms involved in
particular building types, parametric models of space types may also be carried
in libraries, such as for hospital operating suites or radiation treatment rooms, to
enable their re-use across project. Over time, the knowledge embedded in these
model libraries will become a strategic asset, they will represent ―best practices‘,
as firms incrementally improve and annotate them with information based on
project use and experiences. The risk for errors and omissions will decrease as
firms realized greater success in developing and using high quality models from
previous use.
4.4.4 Legal Backing
The emergence of BIM as a vehicle for dramatic change in design and
construction occurs in a legal environment that has not fully come to grips with
all the risk management implications of the underlying technology of electronic
representation, or transmission of documents of any type. Some concerns are
obvious—what are the liabilities associated with participating and collaborating
in the model? As the use of BIM expands, other concerns are only beginning to
be recognized Some fear that an excess of concern over all the potential
questions of liability, risk allocation, shifting and sharing associated with BIM
might inhibit many from experimenting with it, and in the process deny owners,
designers and constructors the opportunity to sort through the issues as they
experiment in the laboratory of the real world.
The issue of ―ownership of the model‖ can be worked out through the
contract, just as ownership of design documents is now addressed in the
traditional delivery mode. The issue of ownership of the model becomes much
more complex when the final ―model‖ is actually a gathering of the input of a
90
single model or of many models through the use of software that allows such a
roll-up process. Many parties will have contributed to the ―model‖ in a fully
modeled project and the issues of design input versus design responsibility will
need to be sorted out. In addition, the licensing and royalty requirements of
potentially ―selfish‖ members of the Building Team need to be discouraged in
standard form documents. Owners need to be particularly aware of the
implications of such issues and are expected to play an important role in
addressing them. Enactment of law based on inline with local or existing
contract bylaws will assist in accepting the technology.
4.4.5 Development of portal
Public portals provide content and promote community through forum and
indexes to resources. According to Estman et al (2009), the content tool
primarily supports hierarchically navigation, search, download and in some cases
upload for Building Element Models (BEM) files. Private portals permit objects
sharing between firms and their peers that subscribe to joint sharing
arrangement. Firms or group of firms that understand the value in BEM contents
and the value/cost relation in different applications may share BEM or jointly
support their development. Moreover, private portals enable firms to share
common content and also protect content that encodes specific, proprietary
design knowledge. Thus, development of portal with local BEM contents will
encourage practitioners or professional designers to accept and implement BIM
solution because of less risk, more predictability, less delay and more confidence
in design. Figure 4.6.3.1 shows the schematic network diagram of the proposed
National BIM Server. When fully implemented, subscribers can download and
upload building element designed to local specifications.
91
Figure 4.7 Proposed National BIM server
4.4.6 Training and Retraining
The current lack of trained personnel remains a barrier to BIM adoption,
forcing many companies to retrain experienced CAD operators in the new tools.
Because BIM requires different ways of thinking about how designs are
developed and building construction is managed, retraining requires not only
92
learning but the unlearning of old habits, which is difficult (Chuck Estman et al
2009). New graduates whose entire undergraduate experience was influenced by
their familiarity with BIM and its use for the full range of students‘ projects, are
likely to have a profound influence on the way companies of all kinds deploy
BIM. Inevitably, a good deal of innovation in work practices is to be expected.
Implementing new technology suc as BIM technologies is costly in terms of
training and changing work process and workflows.
4.4.7 Managing Cultural Change.
Cultural issues are difficult to resolve directly and it can be argued, a
fundamental change would not be desirable (Tizani 2007). This is because
construction projects are complex in nature and involved the interaction of deeply
specialized disciplines that cannot be fully integrated. An improvement strategy
should therefore concentrate on improving the interaction between these disciplines.
This can be done through providing better support for the interaction between the
declines by improving the technologies used.
4.4.8 Summary
The chapter presents in details, responses on each item based on the
respondents‘ choice. The data presented was structured based on 3 Sections
(objectives) to allow for logical analysis. At the end each sections, the major finding
on the objectives were discussed. Meanwhile, in section B (objective 1) a hypothesis
was tested at 0.05% level of significance to ascertain the correlation in BIM usage
between architects and Engineers. Finally, strategies for implementing BIM in the
local industry were highlighted.
93
CHAPTER 5
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
5.1 Introduction
This chapter being the last in this research, the conclusion is presented based
on the findings on each objective of the study. Besides that, various
recommendations were highlighted to AEC professionals and to pave way for more
research in the field.
5.2 Conclusion
Objective 1: This study identified that, local construction industry is
reluctant to deploy the technology in its service delivery. This study has indentified
that there are only few number of professional firms that have started deploying
Building information modeling in design services only. Among the BIM software
used, Tekla Structure is being used mainly by engineers while Revit Architecture is
being used by Architects. In another words, it is clear from the finding of this study,
that majority of design professionals keep their confidence to AutoCAD may be
because of its popularity or available competent users as against any other available
design software and most design professionals are mainly using Autodesk 3D Max
and Google Sketch-up in developing design visualization. Moreover, the study also
94
identify that, there is strong correlation in acceptance of the technology between the
two main design professionals (Architects and Engineers).
Objective 2: Identified barriers to implementation of Building Information
Modeling (BIM) include; expensive software, unavailability of skillful personnel to
operate the affordable ones, problems of interoperability, unclear legal backing and a
deliberate resistance by some construction professionals to adopt the technology.
However, the results have indicated that the respondents are ready to accept
the technology; this is contrary to the notion that professionals in construction are
not ready to accept changes as postulated in many literatures. But opinions differed
among Architects and Engineer on how the barriers affected the implementation of
the technology.
It should be noted that, no commercially available software application or
technology platform is capable of containing all of the information created about a
building throughout its useful life and making it accessible to appropriate
stakeholders in real time on demand. More significantly non is in development. The
trend in building information modeling software development is towards distributed
building information models created by highly specialized software tools that are
designed to work together. A number of factors may have contributed to this trend:
The entire building life cycle of business processes and workflows is too
complex to be modeled effectively within a single software application.
Business processes and workflows vary too much across the industry and
across the building life cycle to fit neatly within a single workflow paradigm.
95
Working within a single building model environment requires too great a
change of existing information management infrastructure and business
processes to support viable migration path from existing workflows to new
ones.
The cost and technical challenges of developing a software application
capable of meeting the needs of all users throughout the life cycle of a
building are prohibitive.
Objective 3: The study identified strategies for implementing BIM in local
construction industry by developing local guidelines that will include solving the
interoperability issues and enactment of legislative backing and development of
national BIM repository to enforce the adoption of the technology from higher level
(Government) to bottom (users). It is a known fact that, several software firms are
cashing in on the ―buzz‖ of BIM, and have programs to address certain quantitative
aspects of it, but they do not treat the process as a whole. Therefore, there is a need
to standardize the BIM process and to define the guidelines for its implementation.
This can only be achieved through cooperation between the stakeholders in
construction industry.
5.3 Recommendations to AEC Professionals
Study has shown that Building information modeling is getting a wider
acceptance and demand for the technology is fast across the world, therefore,
construction professionals in local construction should try to start deploying the
technology gradually in phases.
96
It should be noted that, Implementing BIM does not mean that all of the
information about a building must be compiled in to a single data file, reside in a
single physical location, or be maintained by a single business entity throughout the
life cycle of a building. The notion of a comprehensive lifecycle building
information model – while conceptually appealing – is problematic from business
point of view. However, gradually implementation will go a long way in preparing
the construction industry to improve from its present state of defragmentation.
5.3 Recommendation for further work.
Since this study has identified that there is a substantial number of professional in
construction industry testing the technology, it is there recommended that more
study be conducted in the following areas:
1. The benefits of implementation and adoption of the technology in terms of
time and financial gains. Positive result of the study will motivate more
construction professionals to venture into it.
2. Need Assessment for introduction of Building information Modeling (BIM)
within architecture and construction management curriculum in local
Universities.
97
REFERENCE
Alshawi M. (2007) Rethinking IT in construction and Engineering
Organizational Readiness.
Associated General Contractors of America (AGC), The Contractors‘ guide
to BIM,‖ 1ST
ed AGC Research Foundation, Las Vegas, NV, p 1-5
Arto Kiviniemi (2009), Building Information Model: Technology, Design
and Process innovation in the Built Environment. Ed by Peter Newton, Keith
Hampson and Robin Drogmuller. Spoons press London.
Bew M; Underwood J; (2010) Delivering BIM to the UK Market, Handbook
of Building Information Modeling and Construction Informatics pg 30 – 36.
Bjork, B-C (2010) ―The Perceived Value of Building Information Modeling
in the US Building Industry‖ Journal of Information Technology in
construction. (ITcon) Vol. 15, pg 185-201, http://www.itcon.org/2010/15
Bornmann., A., & Rank E., (2009). Specification and Implementation of
directional Operators in 3D spatial query language for Building Information
Models. Advanced Engineering Informatics, 23, 32-
44.doi:10:1016/j.aei.2008.06.005
BSA. (2009); National BIM standards. Building SmartAlliance. Retrieved
March 2009, from http://www.buildingsmartalliance.org/index.php
Campbell, D. A. (2007); Building Information Modeling: The Web3D
Application for AEC. ACM 978-1-59593-652-3/07/0004. Perugia, Italy.
98
Construction Client‘s Group. (2008). Pathfinder Project. Retrieved May, 21,
2010 from http://www.constructing.co.nz/files/pathfinder.
Dossick C. S. (2009); Organizational divisions in BIM-enabled commercial
Construction. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management,
doi:10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000109.
Eastman C; Teicholz P; Sacks R; Liston K (2008). BIM Handbook: A guide
to Building Information Modeling for owners, designers, Engineers and
Contractors. John Wiley and Sons
Fischer M; Hymaker J; Liston K (2003) ―Benefits of 3D and 4D Models for
Facility Managers and AEC Service Providers. 4D CAD and Visualization
in Construction: Developments and Application Ed Issah R .A, Flood Ian
and O‘Brien. University of Florida Gainesville, USA.
Hannus, M. (1998) Islands of automation in construction
http://cic.vtt.fi/hannus/islands/index.htm
Jernigan, F; (2007); BIG BIM little bim The Practical approach to Building
Information Modeling Integrated Practice done the right Way. 4site Press
USA.
Kymmell W (2008); Building Information Modeling; A planning and
Managing Construction Projects with 4D CAD and Simulation
Leman F. G; Mary L. M. (2009), Understanding Collaborative Design
Environment: Technology, Design and Process innovation in the Built
Environment. Ed by Peter Newton, Keith Hampson and Robin Drogmuller.
Spoons press London. p154 - 160
99
Martin Fischer and Robin Drogemuller (2009), Virtual Design and
Construction: Technology, Design and Process innovation in the Built
Environment. Ed by Peter Newton, Keith Hampson and Robin Drogmuller.
Spoons press London. p293 – 318.
McGrawHill (2009) Smart Market Report, Building Information Modeling:
Getting information modeling to the bottom line
Mokhtar., A., Bedard, C., & Fazio, P (1998). Information Model for
Managing Design Changes in Collaborative Environment. Journal of
Computing in Civil Engineering, 12(2), 82-92.doi:10.106/(ASCE)0887-
3801(1998)12:2(82)
Noum S. G. (2007). Dissertation Research & Writing for Construction
Students. (Second Edition).Elsevier Ltd. UK.
Nworgu B. G. (1991); Educational Research, Basic Issues and Methodology.
Wisdom Publishers Limited Owerri, Nigeria.
Salman Azhar et al (2008), Building Information Modeling (BIM): A New
Paradigm for Visual Interactive Modeling and Simulation for Construction
Projects. First International Conference on Construction in Developing
Countries (ICCIDC–I)“Advancing and Integrating Construction Education,
Research & Practice‖ Karachi, Pakistan
Succar, B. (2009). "Building information modeling framework: A research
and delivery foundation for industry stakeholders." Automation in
Construction 18(3): 357-375.
Succar, B. (2009). "Building information modeling Maturity Index;
Handbook of Research on Building Information Modeling and Construction
Informatics: Concepts and Technologies, pg 65 – 102..
100
Suter G., Brunner, K., & Mahdavi, A , (2007). Building Model Construction
based on sensed object location information. Automation in Construction,
16(1), 2-12 doi:101016/j.autocon.2005.10.011
Tizani Walid (2007) Engineering Design, Constructing the Future: ND
Modeling. Ed Ghassan Aouad, Angela Lee and Song WU.Taylor and Francis
Tse, et al (2005). The Utilization of Building Information Models in Nd
Modeling: A Study of data Interfacing and Adoption Barriers. Journal of
Information Technology in Construction ITcon vol 10, pg 85-110
Underwood J; and Isikdag U (Ed) (2010), Handbook of Research on
Building Information Modeling and Construction Informatics: Concepts and
Technologies. Informatics Science Reference.
Yang, Z, and Wand G; (2009) ―Cooperation between Building Information
Modeling and Integrated Project delivery Method leads to Paradigm Shift of
AEC Industry‘ China Architecture Press P 10 -16.
Zaneldin, E. (2001) Improving Design Coordination for Building Projects. II:
A Collaborative System. Journal of Construction Engineering and
Management, 124(4), 330-336.doi:10.106/(ASCE)0733-
9364(2001)127:4(330)
i
APPENDIX
DEPARTMENT OF MATERIAL AND STRUCTURES Faculty of Civil Engineering,
University Technology Malaysia (UTM)
81310 Skudai,
Johor, Darul Ta‘azim
22nd
July, 2010
Dear Sir,
I am inviting you to participate in a research project to study Barriers to
Implementation of Building Information Modeling (Bim) in Architecture,
Engineering and Construction (AEC) Industry in Malaysia. This research project is a
requirement for the award of Master Degree in Construction management. Along
with this letter is a short questionnaire that asks a variety of questions about BIM
implementation. I am requesting you to look over the questionnaire and complete it
and return it back to me. It should take you about 5 minutes to complete.
The results of this project will be for academic purpose only. Through your
participation I hope to understand the Barriers to Implementation Building
Information Modeling (BIM) in AEC Industry in Malaysia. I hope that the results
of the survey will be useful to stakeholders in the industry and I hope to share my
results by publishing them in an academic Journal for viewing and diffusion of
knowledge.
Thanks,
Hammad Dabo Baba
Msc (Construction Management) Student.
ii
FACULTY OF CIVIL ENGINEERING SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING
DEPARTMENT OF STRUCTURES AND MATERIALS
PRIVATE & CONFIDENTIAL
QUESTIONNAIRE SURVEY
RESEARCH TOPIC:
BUILDING INFORMATION MODELING IN LOCAL CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY
Name : HAMMAD DABO BABA
Course : Msc (Construction Management)
Metric No. : MA091165
Passport No : A00495478
Supervisor : Prof. Dr. Muh’d Zaimi Bin Abd Majid
iii
RESEARCH OBJECTIVES:
1. To identify the utilization level of Building Information Modeling BIM in project Design.
2. To identify the barriers to adoption and utilization of Building Information Modeling (BIM) in Architecture, Engineering and construction industry (AEC).
3. To identify strategies for the implementation of integrated BIM in AEC Industry.
SECTION A – RESPONDENT PARTICULAR
Name of Firm : _______________________________________
Area of Expertise : _______________________________________
Qualification: PhD [ ] Msc/MEng [ ] Bsc/BEng [ ] Diploma [ ] Others [ ]
Years of Experience: 1- 5 [ ] 6 -10 [ ] 11 -15 [ ] 16 – 20 [ ] 20–Above [ ]
iv
SECTION B – FREQUENCY BIM TOOLS UTILIZATION
Instruction:
Please circle at the appropriate box alongside each statement given to show your
frequency of using the under listed software (On the scale: 1 to 5).
o 1 – Never – Did not use
o 2 – Very Rarely – Use only once or seldom
o 3 – Rarely – Use some times
o 4 – Occasionally – Use in many cases but not frequently
o 5 – Frequently – Always uses the software
A Software in use FREQUENCY LEVEL
1 Autodesk AutoCAD 1 2 3 4 5
2 Autodesk 3D Studio MAX 1 2 3 4 5
3 Tekla Structure 1 2 3 4 5
4 Autodesk Revit MEP 1 2 3 4 5
5 Autodesk Revit Architecture 1 2 3 4 5
6 Autodesk Revit Structure 1 2 3 4 5
7 ArchiCAD 1 2 3 4 5
8 Bentley Micro station 1 2 3 4 5
9 Bentley Structure 1 2 3 4 5
10 Bentley HVAC 1 2 3 4 5
11 Sketch up 1 2 3 4 5
12 Nemetschek Vector Works 1 2 3 4 5
13 TurboCAD 1 2 3 4 5
14 IntelliCAD 1 2 3 4 5
15 Navis works 1 2 3 4 5
v
SECTION C – BARRIERS TO IMPLEMENTATION OF BIM
Please circle at the appropriate box alongside each statement given to show your
level of agreement (On the scale: 1 to 5).
o 1 – Strongly Disagree
o 2 – Disagree
o 3 – Moderate
o 4 – Agree
o 5 – Strongly Agree
NO.
Barriers to Adopting BIM
AGREEMENT LEVEL
1. Not required by client
Client are requesting for the use
of BIM software from Engineers
and Architects in developing
architectural and engineering
designs and analysis
1 2 3 4 5
2. Lack of legal backing from
Authority
No legal backing as to who own
the Model and how the model to
be exchange among the team
members
1 2 3 4 5
3. Never required by other team
members
Team members are requesting
the use of BIM to develop a
project design model or extract
information from models, or
suggested the use of model in
service delivery
1 2 3 4 5
4. Expensive Software
Software prices are two high to
the extent that only mega firms
can afford a license
1 2 3 4 5
vi
5. Not ready to distort my normal
operational structure.
Already established organization
structure with 2D CAD, and the
structure is functioning well
therefore no need to opt for
new delivery method.
1 2 3 4 5
6. Difficult to learn
It takes time to learn the all the
tools in BIM software and it is
difficult to understand the
function of various menus on
the software
1 2 3 4 5
7. Non availability of parametric
library
Parametric object library that
will enhance easier
development of model using
local building standard code
1 2 3 4 5
8. Takes longer time to develop a
model
More time is spent developing a
model that just using 2D CAD
1 2 3 4 5
9 Problems of interoperability
Even if the model is developed,
there is not available exchange
protocol that will enable sharing
of the model among team
members.
1 2 3 4 5
10. Lack of competent staff to
operate the software
Majority of the available
personnel are not conversant
with BIM, and those who are
competent are not easy to
reach, and are very expensive to
hire or employ.
1 2 3 4 5
vii
SECTION D – STRATEGIES FOR THE IMPLEMENT BIM
Please circle at the appropriate box alongside each statement given to show your
level of agreement (On the scale: 1 to 5).
o 1 – Unimportant
o 2 – of little Importance
o 3 – Moderately Important
o 4 – Important
o 5 – Very Important
NO.
Strategies for Adopting BIM
IMPORTANCE LEVEL
1. Mobilizing clients on the importance of BIM. Service providers should embark on mass organization of workshops, seminars and symposium on BIM
1 2 3 4 5
2. Provision of legislation on BIM usage Government should private a policy that will encourage and subsequently force professionals to make all designs in BIM format
1 2 3 4 5
3. Training of construction staff In house training and short course should encourage by firms.
1 2 3 4 5
4. Introduction of BIM in University Curriculum. Teaching BIM in Undergraduate , and Postgraduates of Architecture and construction Management
1 2 3 4 5
5. Provision of Trial Software Vendors should develop a trail software for three (3) to Six (6) Months in order diffuse the technology at no cost
1 2 3 4 5
viii
6. Subsiding the price of BIM software Government and authors of the software can subsidize the software, so that it will be affordable not only to mega firms but even to starters.
1 2 3 4 5
7. More efforts on interoperability Development of local parametric library Imbedded in a national BIM server accessible to subscribing professionals through a real-time portal.
1 2 3 4 5
- PRIVATE & CONFIDENTIAL –
Thank you for your participation in this questionnaire