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
1
TITLE
PAGE
DECLARATION
ii
DEDICATION
iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
iv
ABSTRACT
v
ABSTRAK
vi
LIST OF TABLES
vii
LIST OF FIGURES
ix
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
x
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
17
in design 2.2.4
2.3
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
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
27
Design Phase Model
2.3.2.1 Analysis and Simulation
29
2.3.2.2 Design Visualization
29
2.3.2.3 Integration of Contractors and supplier
30
Model 2.3.2.4 General Information attribution 2.3.3 Construction Phase Model
31 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
33
Construction 2.3.4 Manage/Maintenance Phase Model 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
3
35
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
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
3.4
3.5
Instrument for Data Collection
49
3.3.1
50
Questionnaire Survey Design
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
Summary
55
xii
4
DATA PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS 4.1
4.2.
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
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
70
utilization 4.2.17
Comparism of BIM tools usage between
71
Architects and Engineers
4.3
4.2.18
Correlation Testing of Hypothesis
73
4.2.29
Decision and Inference
75
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
84
implementation 4.4
5
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
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
2.1
PAGE
Differences between traditional 2D Construction 13 processes versus model Based process.
2.2
BIM Implementation Phases and BIM Product
38
Matrix 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
55
Expertise 4.2
Distribution of Respondents According to
56
Qualification 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
69
Construction Industry
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
81
implementation of Building Information Modeling (BIM)
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 18 Windows
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, 35 Electrical and Plumbing (MEP) coordination
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 45 and process in technology implementation
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 84 Building Information Modeling
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
Architects Structural Engineer
Visualization
Energy Analysis
BIM
Specification
MEP Engineer
Contractor Owner
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
Extensive scenarios evaluated
evaluated
earlier in the process
Paper shop drawing
Overlaying digital models using
Field Coordination
collision detection software Operation training
Use manual
Visual
Closeout Documents
Assembled near
Intelligent models for operation
completion
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
80s
90s
00
10
PC
Tracing Paper
Layered Production
Net
Pit
Pen
PC/Plotting/ CA Drafting Modeling
Autodesk Vision
Collaboration
Mianframes Design Methods Structural/Energy Analysis
Workstations Workstations Graphic Rendering Graphic Rendering
Workstations Graphic Rendering
Draw/DrawVision Tech 2000 BIM Custom Software Workstations
buildingSMART Autodesk Suite PC on every Desk WAN Internet IAI Interoperable
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
Architectural Model
Structural Design
Structural Model
Mechanical Shop Drawing
Mechanical Model
Plumbing Shop Drawing
Plumbing Model
Electrical Shop Drawing
Electrical Model
Other Shop Drawing
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 ―asbuilt‖ 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 matchsequencing 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
Architecture
MEP Engineering
Phase 1 – Model
Phase 2 – Leverage
Phase 3 – Integrate
3D Parametric design elements Design information Documentation output Conceptual design and analysis
Link models to analysis tools Visualize real-world appearance Model based assessment processes
Revit Architecture, AutoCAD
3ds Max Design, Ecotect Analysis
Design accuracy and quality Estimating opportunities Productivity increases Accurate, efficient and documentation Early evaluation of complex constructability.
Assessment of design performance for LEED and other sustainable rating criteria Performance optimization Cinema quality design visualization
Revit MEP, AutoCAD
Ecotect Analysis
Leverage arch. Data to improve design accuracy and quality Improve system coordination
Assessments of design performance for LEED and other sustainable rating criteria
Convergence of models Model-based communication between disciplines Lifecycle model utilization Model-based fabrication
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 Revit Architecture, Revit Structure, Navisworks Manage, Collaborative project management Coordination and clash detection
40
Structural Engineering
Civil Engineering
Achieve productivity increases Facilitate preliminary analysis Accurate, efficient documentation 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 Civil 3D, MAP 3D, Autocad
Design accuracy and quality Calculate material quantities Improve document coordination Productivity increases Accurate, efficient documentation
Construction Revit Architecture, AutoCAD, Civil 3D, Quantity take-off Design accuracy and quality Estimating opportunities Productivity
Performance optimization
Robot Structural Analysis Assessments of design performance Performance optimization
Reduced requedt for information and change orders IPD opportunities Revit Architecture, Navisworks Manage, Collaborative project management Coordination and clash detection Reduced request for information and change orders IPD opportunities
Ecotect Analysis, Robot Structural Analysis, 3ds Max Design
Navisworks Manage, Collaborative project management
Assessments of design for LEED, other sustainable performance criteria, structural performance Performance optimization Collaborate with internal teams Cinema quality design visualization Navisworks, Revit Structure
Assessment of design performance for LEED and other sustainable rating criteria Increase schedule predictability Performance optimization Clash detection
Coordination and clash detection Reduced RFIs and Cos IPD Opportunities Collaborate with external companies on building team Reduce risk and liability concern 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.
Sufficient Market Demand for integrated BIM Basic obstacles: Difficulties in deployment: people, software, processes Not enough evidence of befits
Basic obstacles: Individual projects, fuzzy baseline, No adequate focus to test in wide scale
Basic obstacles: No enough market demand Domain –specific software
Measured Benefits of integrated BIM
Figure 2.10 BIM Implementation Model
Sufficient Software support for 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
Resource Interoperability Requires
Application Interoperability Requires
Data Interoperability
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),
45
Structural Design/Analysis Software QuantityTakeTakeQuantity up/Specification up/Spcification
Architectural Design Software
Software
Integrated BIM Model
Mechanical/ Electrical and Plumbing Software
Scheduling Scheduling Software Software Energy Analysis Analysis Software 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
People
Process Technology
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.
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
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
Figure 3.3 Rating scale questionnaire responses
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
𝑛
n i=1 xi
xi yi
n
n i=1 yi
𝑖 =1
r= n 2 i=1 x
−
2 n i−1 xi
n
n 2 i−1 y
−
n 2 i=1 yi
n
Using equation (1) we obtain 𝑟=
Where:
r=
𝑛 𝑖=1 n i−1
xi − x
xi − x
2
x
y1 − y 𝑛 𝑖−1
𝑦𝑖=1 − 𝑦
Correlation Coefficient, x=
Sum of responses in variable 1
y=
sum of responses in variable 2
n=
sample size
2
55
To calculate the t value, then we can use the following formula; 𝑟 𝑡𝑛−2 = 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
Percent
Cumulative Valid Percent Percent
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
Frequency Valid
57
Respondents' area of specilization % of Respondents 55.2
31 13.8
Architects
Engineers
contractors
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
Valid PhD Msc/MEng Bsc/BEng Other Total
Frequency 4 6 17 2 29
Percent 13.8 20.7 58.6 6.9 100.0
Valid Percent 13.8 20.7 58.6 6.9 100.0
Cumulative Percent 13.8 34.5 93.1 100.0
58
Respondents Qualification Series1
Series2 58.6
20 13.8 6.9 0 Qualification
Phd
Msc/Meng
Bsc/Beng
Others
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%.
59
Table 4.3 Names of firms that have responded to the study.
Freq 1
% 3.4
Valid Percent 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
Valid AECOM Prunding Sdn Bhd
Cumulative Percent 3.4
% of respondents % of respondents 17.2 13.8
17.2 13.8
13.8
6.9 3.4
3.4
3.4
3.4
3.4
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 Valid 1-5 6 - 10 11 - 15 16 - 20 21 - above 6 Total
6 1 4 9 8 1 29
Percent 20.7 3.4 13.8 31.0 27.6 3.4 100.0
Valid Percent 20.7 3.4 13.8 31.0 27.6 3.4 100.0
Cumulative Percent 20.7 24.1 37.9 69.0 96.6 100.0
61
Years of Experinece of the respondents % 31 27.6 20.7 13.8
3.4
1-5 Years
6-10 Years
11-15 Years
16-20 Years
21 Years-above
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.
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
Valid
Rarely Occasionally Frequently Total
Frequency Percent 5 17.2 11 13 29
37.9 44.8 100.0
Valid Cumulative Percent Percent 17.2 17.2 37.9 44.8 100.0
55.2 100.0
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
Valid
0 Never Very Rarely Rarely Occasionally Frequently Total
Frequency 4 6 1 5 8 5 29
Valid Cumulative Percent Percent 13.8 13.8 20.7 34.5 3.4 37.9 17.2 55.2 27.6 82.8 17.2 100.0 100.0
Percent 13.8 20.7 3.4 17.2 27.6 17.2 100.0
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
Valid
0 Never Very Rarely Rarely Occasionally Frequently Total
Frequency Percent 4 13.8 6 20.7 1 3.4 4 13.8 9 31.0 5 29
17.2 100.0
Valid Cumulative Percent Percent 13.8 13.8 20.7 34.5 3.4 37.9 13.8 51.7 31.0 82.8 17.2 100.0
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
Valid
Frequency Percent 5 17.2
0 Never Very Rarely Rarely Occasionally Frequently Total
10 2 3 6 3 29
34.5 6.9 10.3 20.7 10.3 100.0
Valid Cumulative Percent Percent 17.2 17.2 34.5 6.9 10.3 20.7 10.3 100.0
51.7 58.6 69.0 89.7 100.0
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
Valid
0 Never Very Rarely Rarely Occasionally Frequently Total
Frequency Percent 4 13.8 10 34.5 1 3.4 8 27.6 5 17.2 1 3.4 29 100.0
Valid Cumulative Percent Percent 13.8 13.8 34.5 48.3 3.4 51.7 27.6 79.3 17.2 96.6 3.4 100.0 100.0
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
Valid
0 Never Rarely Occasionally Total
Frequency 6 14 5 4 29
Valid Cumulative Percent Percent 20.7 20.7 48.3 69.0 17.2 86.2 13.8 100.0 100.0
Percent 20.7 48.3 17.2 13.8 100.0
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
Valid
0 Never Very Rarely Rarely Occasionally Total
Frequency Percent 6 20.7 13 44.8 1 3.4 5 17.2 4 13.8 29 100.0
Valid Percent 20.7 44.8 3.4 17.2 13.8 100.0
Cumulative Percent 20.7 65.5 69.0 86.2 100.0
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
Valid
0 Never Rarely Total
Frequency Percent 6 20.7 17 58.6 6 20.7 29 100.0
Valid Percent 20.7 58.6 20.7 100.0
Cumulative Percent 20.7 79.3 100.0
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
Valid 0 Never Rarely Occasionally Frequently Total
Frequency Percent 5 17.2 16 5 2 1 29
55.2 17.2 6.9 3.4 100.0
Valid Cumulative Percent Percent 17.2 17.2 55.2 17.2 6.9 3.4 100.0
72.4 89.7 96.6 100.0
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
Valid Percent
0 Never Rarely Occasionally
5 17 3 4
17.2 58.6 10.3 13.8
17.2 58.6 10.3 13.8
Total
29
100.0
100.0
Cumulative Percent 17.2 75.9 86.2 100.0
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
Valid
0 Never Rarely Occasionally Total
Frequency Percent 5 17.2 18 62.1 3 10.3 3 29
10.3 100.0
Valid Cumulative Percent Percent 17.2 17.2 62.1 79.3 10.3 89.7 10.3 100.0
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
Valid
0 Never Very Rarely Rarely Occasionally Frequently Total
Frequency Percent 4 13.8 8 27.6 3 10.3 3 10.3 5 6 29
Valid Percent 13.8 27.6 10.3 10.3
Cumulative Percent 13.8 41.4 51.7 62.1
17.2 20.7 100.0
79.3 100.0
17.2 20.7 100.0
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
Valid 0 Never Very Rarely Rarely Occasionally Total
Frequency 6 18 2
Percent 20.7 62.1 6.9
2 1 29
6.9 3.4 100.0
Valid Cumulative Percent Percent 20.7 20.7 62.1 82.8 6.9 89.7 6.9 3.4 100.0
96.6 100.0
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
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
Valid
0 Never Very Rarely Rarely Total
Frequency Percent 6 20.7 17 58.6 3 3 29
10.3 10.3 100.0
Valid Percent 20.7 58.6
Cumulative Percent 20.7 79.3
10.3 10.3 100.0
89.7 100.0
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
Valid 0 Never Very Rarely Rarely Total
Frequency Percent 7 24.1 18 62.1 2 6.9 2 6.9 29 100.0
Valid Percent 24.1 62.1 6.9 6.9 100.0
Cumulative Percent 24.1 86.2 93.1 100.0
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
1. Autodesk AutoCAD
29
5
124
Means 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
Design Software usage frequencies Architects
Engineers
15 Autodesk14AutoCAD 13 Navis works 15 Autodesk 3D Max 11 Sketchup12 12Tekla Structures 810 11 11 6 TurboCAD 11 Tekla Architecture 5 76 Nemetschek Vector …11 9
1112Autodesk Revit MEP
0
8 IntelliCAD 10 Bentley HVAC
109
10 Autodesk Revit… 13 7
8
10
Autodesk Revit… 13 10 11 10 Bentley Structure ArchiCAD 13 Bentley Micro station
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, tvalue and the probability index with the aid of Ms Excel software.
74
TABLE 4.2.17 Summary output Regression Statistics Multiple R R Square Adjusted R Square Standard Error Observations
0.583 0.340 0.293 2.060 16
ANOVA df Regression Residual Total
Intercept X Variable 1
SS 1 14 15
Coefficients 2.307 0.711
30.594 59.406 90
Standard Error 2.911 0.265
MS 30.594 4.243
t Stat 0.793 2.685
F 7.210
P-value 0.441 0.018
Significance F 0.018
Upper Lower 95% 95% -3.936 8.550 0.143 1.280
Lower 95.0% -3.936 0.143
Upper 95.0% 8.550 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 ttable 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
Valid 0 Disagree Slightly Disagree Slightly Agree Agree Strongly Agree Total
Frequency Percent 1 3.4 4 13.8 3 10.3 3 10.3 12 41.4 6 20.7 29 100.0
Valid Cumulative Percent Percent 3.4 3.4 13.8 17.2 10.3 27.6 10.3 37.9 41.4 79.3 20.7 100.0 100.0
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
Valid 0 Disagree Slightly Disagree Slightly Agree Agree Strongly Agree
Frequency 2 1 3 7 13 3
Percent 6.9 3.4 10.3 24.1 44.8 10.3
29
100.0
Total
Valid Cumulative Percent Percent 6.9 6.9 3.4 10.3 10.3 20.7 24.1 44.8 44.8 89.7 10.3 100.0 100.0
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
Valid 0 Disagree Slightly Disagree Slightly Agree Agree Strongly Agree Total
Frequency Percent 1 3.4 3 10.3 3 10.3 7 13 2 29
24.1 44.8 6.9 100.0
Valid Percent 3.4 10.3 10.3
Cumulative Percent 3.4 13.8 24.1
24.1 44.8 6.9 100.0
48.3 93.1 100.0
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 0 Disagree Slightly Disagree Slightly Agree Agree Strongly Agree Total
1 2 1 5 10 10 29
3.4 6.9 3.4 17.2 34.5 34.5 100.0
Valid Percent
Cumulative Percent
3.4 6.9 3.4 17.2 34.5 34.5 100.0
3.4 10.3 13.8 31.0 65.5 100.0
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
Valid 0 Slightly Disagree Slightly Agree Agree Strongly Agree Total
Frequency 1 9 4 11 4 29
Percent 3.4 31.0 13.8 37.9 13.8 100.0
Valid Percent 3.4 31.0 13.8 37.9 13.8 100.0
Cumulative Percent 3.4 34.5 48.3 86.2 100.0
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
Valid 0 Disagree Slightly Disagree Slightly Agree Agree Strongly Agree Total
Frequency 1 2 7 4 8 7 29
Valid Cumulative Percent Percent Percent 3.4 3.4 3.4 6.9 6.9 10.3 24.1 24.1 34.5 13.8 27.6 24.1 100.0
13.8 27.6 24.1 100.0
48.3 75.9 100.0
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
Valid 0 Disagree Slightly Disagree Slightly Agree Agree Strongly Agree Total
Frequency 1 1 1 7 5 14
Percent 3.4 3.4 3.4 24.1 17.2 48.3
29
100.0
Valid Cumulative Percent Percent 3.4 3.4 3.4 6.9 3.4 10.3 24.1 34.5 17.2 51.7 48.3 100.0 100.0
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
Valid Disagree Slightly Disagree Slightly Agree Agree Strongly Agree Total
Frequency 1 1 12 13 2
Percent 3.4 3.4 41.4 44.8 6.9
29
100.0
Valid Cumulative Percent Percent 3.4 3.4 3.4 6.9 41.4 48.3 44.8 93.1 6.9 100.0 100.0
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
Valid Disagree Slightly Disagree Slightly Agree Agree Strongly Agree Total
Frequency Percent 1 3.4 1 3.4 10 16 1 29
34.5 55.2 3.4 100.0
Valid Cumulative Percent Percent 3.4 3.4 3.4 6.9 34.5 55.2 3.4 100.0
41.4 96.6 100.0
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
Valid
Disagree Slightly Disagree Slightly Agree Agree Total
Frequency Percent 10 34.5 8 27.6 7 24.1 4 13.8 29 100.0
Valid Cumulative Percent Percent 34.5 34.5 27.6 62.1 24.1 86.2 13.8 100.0 100.0
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
Std. Mean 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
29
3.76
1.354
109
5. Not required by client
29
3.24
1.244
94
6. Never required by other team
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
29
2.17
1.071
63
software
members
operational structure
.
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
• Improved Interoperability • Development of local standard parametric library
• Legislative backing • Development National BIM Guidlines Software Provisder
Clients and General Public
• Demand by client • Managing culture change.
Figure 4.6
Government
Construction Firms
• Training of Staff • devlopment of portal
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
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, 3244.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)08873801(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)07339364(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 [
Years of Experience: 1- 5 [
] 6 -10 [
] Bsc/BEng [
] 11 -15 [
] Diploma [
] 16 – 20 [
] Others [
] 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 1
Software in use Autodesk AutoCAD
FREQUENCY LEVEL 2 3 4
1
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
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
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
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
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
Expensive Software Software prices are two high to the extent that only mega firms can afford a license
1
2
3
4
5
2.
3.
4.
AGREEMENT LEVEL
vi
5.
6.
7.
8.
9
10.
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
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
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
Takes longer time to develop a model More time is spent developing a model that just using 2D CAD
1
2
3
4
5
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
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
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
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
Training of construction staff In house training and short course should encourage by firms.
1
2
3
4
5
Introduction of BIM in University Curriculum. Teaching BIM in Undergraduate , and Postgraduates of Architecture and construction Management
1
2
3
4
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
2.
3.
4.
5.
IMPORTANCE LEVEL
viii
6.
7.
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
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
