Thesis Report - BIM in Local Construction Industry

ii

BUILDING INFORMATION MODELING IN LOCAL

CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY

HAMMAD DABO BABA

MA091165

A Project Report Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the

Requirements for the award of the degree of

Master of Science (Construction Management)

Faculty of Civil Engineering

Universiti Teknologi Malaysia

December, 2010

v

Dedicated to

My beloved children, Farouq, Amatullahi, Amaturrahman, Mahmood and Hafsah for

your endurance and care.

vi

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I will begin with thanking my creator, Allah S.W.T for giving me strength health

and inspiration to complete this work. It is verily a great pleasure to have

successfully completed this study. Alhamdulillah.

I would also like to extend my sincere appreciation to my project supervisor

Professor Dr. Muhammad Zaimi Bin Abdul Majid for his guidance and advice and

invaluable assistance and encouragement. Certainly, without his support, interest

and patience with me this project would not have been reached this stage.

Special thanks go to Dr. Garba Ibrahim, the Provost, College of Education Azare,

for his moral supports and to the college Management for my sponsorship to this

study. This will remain in my memory to the last minute of my life.

Moreover, I must knowledge the constant support and encouragement I received

from my blood brothers Srgt Baba Hammad of Nigerian Army and Bello Hammad

as well as colleagues and friends whom I accord respect such as Aliyu Garba Rishi,

Engr. Musa Babayo Yahaya, Engr. Mamud Abubakar and Bello Yusf Idi.

Finally, I will like to express my unending gratitude to my family for their support

and patience though this hard time of study abroad. I wish to thank you all.

vii

ABSTRACT

Building Information Modeling (BIM) is a new emerging approach to design,

construction, and facility management in which a digital representation of the

building process is being created to facilitate the exchange and interoperability of

information in digital format. Despite the advantages derived from this paradigm,

local construction industry is reluctant to deploy the technology in its service

delivery. The objectives of the study include identifying the level of BIM tools

utilization, identifying the barriers and strategies for the implementation of Building

information modeling (BIM) in the local construction industry. Structured

questionnaires were administered to 100 key players in the field of Architecture and

Engineering randomly selected from within Kuala Lumpur region. Twenty Nine (29)

respondents have appropriately answered and duly retuned the questionnaire. Data

collected was analyzed using Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) and the hypotheses

ware tested using t-test at 0.5% level of confidence. The study found that, BIM is

been accepted by a substantial number of construction professional (Architects and

Engineers). However, majority are still using AutoCAD in their design services.

Moreover there is high correlation in terms of BIM Usage among Architects and

Engineers but there is no correlation in the means responses of Architects and

Engineers on the barriers to BIM implementation. In conclusion, the study has

identified several strategies for Building Information modeling to be implemented

and utilized in construction service delivery.

viii

ABSTRAK

Building Information Modeling (BIM) adalah suatu pendekatan muncul baru untuk

desain, pembinaan, dan pengurusan kemudahan di mana perwakilan digital dari

proses pembangunan sedang dibuat untuk memudahkan pertukaran dan

Interoperabilitas maklumat dalam format digital. Walaupun keuntungan yang

diperolehi daripada paradigma ini, industri pembinaan tempatan enggan untuk

menggunakan teknologi dalam penyediaan perkhidmatan tersebut. Tujuan kajian ini

termasuk mengenalpasti tahap penggunaan alat BIM, mengenalpasti halangan dan

strategi untuk pelaksanaan pemodelan maklumat Bangunan (BIM) dalam industri

pembinaan tempatan. kuesioner terstruktur yang diberikan kepada 100 pemain kunci

di bidang Teknik Arsitektur dan dipilih secara rawak dari dalam kawasan Kuala

Lumpur. Dua puluh Sembilan (29) responden yang menjawab tepat dan telah

kembali lagi kuesioner. Data yang dikumpul dianalisis menggunakan Analisis

Varians (ANOVA) dan ware hipotesis diuji dengan menggunakan t-test pada tahap

0,5% dari kepercayaan. Kajian ini mendapati bahawa, BIM ini telah diterima oleh

sejumlah besar pembinaan profesional (Arkitek dan Jurutera). Namun, majoriti

masih menggunakan AutoCAD jasa desain mereka. Apalagi ada korelasi yang tinggi

dalam hal BIM Global antara Arkitek dan Jurutera tetapi tidak ada korelasi dalam

bererti tanggapan dari Arkitek dan Jurutera pada hambatan pelaksanaan

BIM.Sebagai kesimpulan, kajian telah mengenalpasti beberapa strategi untuk

pemodelan Maklumat Gedung untuk dilaksanakan dan digunakan dalam penyediaan

perkhidmatan pembinaan.

ix

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER TITLE PAGE

DECLARATION ii

DEDICATION iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT iv

ABSTRACT v

ABSTRAK vi

LIST OF TABLES vii

LIST OF FIGURES ix

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS x

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the study 1

1.2 Problem Statements 2

1.3 Aims and Objectives 3

1.4 Research Questions 4

1.5 Research Hypothesis 4

1.6 Scope of the Study 5

1.7 Significance of the study 5

1.8 Summary of the Chapters 7

x

2 LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction 9

2.2 The Concept of BIM 9

2.2.1 Definition of BIM According Vendors 12

2.2.3 Development of BIM 14

2.2.3.1 Parametric Library 16

2.2.3.2 The Capabilities of Parametric Modeling

in design

17

2.2.4 Potential Building Modeling Tools 17

2.2.4.1 AutoCAD Based Application 18

2.2.4.2 Autodesk Revit 19

2.2.4.3 Tekla 20

2.2.4.5 ArchiCAD 21

2.2.4.6 Bentley System 22

2.2.4.7 Google Sketch up 23

2.2.4.8 Navisworks 24

2.3 Phases to Integrate in Construction life cycle

2.3.1 Conceptual Phase Model 25

2.3.1.1 Site Planning and Site utilization 26

2.3.1.2 Space Planning 26

2.3.1.3 Environmental Analysis 27

2.3.2 Design Phase Model 27

2.3.2.1 Analysis and Simulation 29

2.3.2.2 Design Visualization 29

2.3.2.3 Integration of Contractors and supplier

Model

30

2.3.2.4 General Information attribution 31

2.3.3 Construction Phase Model 31

2.3.3.1 Design Assistance & Constructability 31

2.3.3.2 Scheduling and Sequencing 31

2.3.3.3 Cost Estimating 32

xi

2.3.3.4 System Coordination 32

2.3.3.5 Layout and Fieldwork 32

2.3.3.6 Clash detection 32

2.3.3.7 Prefabrication 33

2.3.3.8 Process simulation in building

Construction

33

2.3.4 Manage/Maintenance Phase Model 35

2.3.4.1 Model updating 35

2.3.4.2 Behavior simulation 36

2.3.4.3 Auto Alert 37

2.3.4.4 Project Visualization 37

2.3.4.5 Value intelligence 38

2.4.0 Implementation of BIM 41

2.4.1.1 Barriers to BIM in construction Industry 41

2.4.1.2 Interoperability 43

2.4.1.3 Client demand 45

2.4.1.4 Legal Issues 46

2.4.1.5 Issues of training and learning 47

2.4.1.6 Summary 47

3 METHODOLOGY

3.1 Introduction 48

3.2 Research Methodology 48

3.2.1 Literature Review 49

3.2.2 Study Population and Sample 49

3.3 Instrument for Data Collection 49

3.3.1 Questionnaire Survey Design 50

3.4 Method of Data Analysis 52

3.4.1 Frequency Analysis 52

3.4.2 Average Index 52

3.6.3 Correlation Coefficient 54

3.6.4 Hypothesis Testing 55

3.5 Summary 55

xii

4 DATA PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

4.1 Introduction 56

4.1.2 Respondents Area of Expertise 56

4.1.3 Respondents Qualification 57

4.1.4 Respondents‘ Firms 59

4.1.4 Respondents‘ Years of Experience 60

4.2. BIM Tools utilization

4.2.0 Introduction 62

4.2.1 Autodesk AutoCAD 62

4.2.2 Autodesk 3D MAX 63

4.2.3 Tekla Structures 63

4.2.4 Autodesk Revit MEP 64

4.2.5 Autodesk Revit Architecture 64

4.2.6 Autodesk Revit Structure 65

4.2.7 ArchiCAD 65

4.2.8 Bentley Microstation 66

4.2.9 Bentley Structures 66

4.2.10 Bentley HVAC 67

4.2.11 IntelliCAD 67

4.2.12 Google Sketch up 68

4.2.13 Nemetschek Vector Works 68

4.2.14 TuborCAD 69

4.2.15 Navisworks 69

4.2.16 Analysis of findings on BIM tools

utilization

70

4.2.17 Comparism of BIM tools usage between

Architects and Engineers

71

4.2.18 Correlation Testing of Hypothesis 73

4.2.29 Decision and Inference 75

4.3 Barriers to BIM utilization and implementation

xiii

4.3.0 Introduction 77

4.3.1 BIM learning Difficulty 77

4.3.2 Lack of legal backing from authority 78

4.3.3 Interoperability issues 78

4.3.4 Lack of skillful operators 79

4.3.5 Lack of request by client 80

4.3.6 Lack of request by other team members 80

4.3.7 Higher price of software 81

4.3.8 Non availability of parametric library 82

4.3.9 Long duration of model development 82

4.3.10 Readiness for organizational change 83

4.3.11 Analysis of Findings on barriers to BIM

implementation

84

4.4 Strategies for BIM implementation

4.4.1 Introduction 86

4.4.2 Interoperability efforts 88

4.4.3 Development of local parametric libraries 88

4.4.4 Provision of Legal Backing 89

4.4.5 Development of web portal 90

4.4.6 Training and retraining 91

4.4.7 Managing cultural change 92

4.4.8 Summary 92

5 SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Introduction 93

5.2 Conclusion 93

5.3 Recommendations to AEC Professionals 95

5.4 Recommendation For Further Study 96

REFERENCES 97

APPENDIX 101

xiv

LIST OF TABLE

TABLE NO TITLE PAGE

2.1 Differences between traditional 2D Construction

processes versus model Based process.

13

2.2 BIM Implementation Phases and BIM Product

Matrix

38

3.1 Classification of the Rating Scales in Section B 52

3.2 Classification of the Rating Scales in Section C 52

3.3 Classification of the Rating Scales in Section D 52

4.1 Distribution of Respondents According Area of

Expertise

55

4.2 Distribution of Respondents According to

Qualification

56

4.3 Names of firms that have responded to the study 58

4.4 Years of experience of the respondents 59

4.2.1 Autodesk AutoCAD 61

4.2.2 Autodesk 3D MAX 62

4.2.3 Tekla Structures 62

4.2.4 Autodesk Revit MEP 63

xv

4.2.5 Autodesk Revit Architecture 63

4.2.6 Autodesk Revit Structure 64

4.2.7 ArchiCAD 64

4.2.8 Bentley Microstation 65

4.2.9 Bentley Structures 65

4.2.10 Bently HVAC 66

4.2.11 IntelliCAD 66

4.2.12 Google sketch up 67

4.2.13 Nemetschek Vector Works 67

4.2.14 TuborCAD 68

4.2.15 Navisworks 67

4.2.16 Frequency of BIM Software usage in Local

Construction Industry

69

4.2.17 Summary output 72

4.3.1 Difficulty in learning BIM Tools 74

4.3.2 Lack of legal backing from Authority 75

4.3.3 Problems of interoperability 75

4.3.4 Lack of skilled BIM Software operators 76

4.3.5 Lack of request by client 77

4.3.6 Lack request by other team members 77

4.3.7 High price of software 78

4.3.8 Non availability of parametric library 79

xvi

4.3.9 Longer to develop a model 79

4.3.10 Redness for Organizational Change 80

4.3.11 Average index of response on Barriers to

implementation of Building Information Modeling

(BIM)

81

xvii

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE NO TITLE PAGE

1.1 Flowchart diagram of the research process 6

2.1 Islands of Automation in construction 10

2.2 BIM integrated BIM Model 12

2.3 Development of BIM from 70s to date 16

2.4 A screen shot of AutoCAD Architecture model

Windows

18

2.5 A screenshot of Autodesk Revit 3D Window 20

2.6 A screenshot of Google sketch up interface 23

2.7 Schematic diagram of integrated design process 28

2.8 Screen shot of various windows of BIM tools 30

2.9 3D geometric capabilities of BIM in Mechanical,

Electrical and Plumbing (MEP) coordination

35

2.10 BIM Implementation Model 41

2.11 Stages of Interoperability 43

2.12 Interoperability model between various software 44

2.13 Interrelationship between technology, people

and process in technology implementation

45

3.3 Rating scale of questionnaire responses 50

4.1 Respondents area of specialization 56

4.2 Respondents Qualification 57

xviii

4.3 Percentage of Respondents per Firm 58

4.4 Respondents‘ years of experience 60

4.5 Design software usage frequencies 71

4.6 Model for strategic implementation of

Building Information Modeling

84

4.7 Proposed National BIM server 88

xix

LIST OF ABBREVIATION

3D - Three Dimensional

ADT - Architectural Desktop

AEC - Architecture, Engineering and Construction

AECON - Architecture, Engineering, Construction and

Operation

AIA - American Institute of Architects

AGC - America General Contractors

BEM - Building Element Model

BIM - Building Information Modeling

BMP - Bitmap formatted image

CAD - Computer Aided Design

CAM - Computer Aided Manufacturing

CIM - Computer Information Manufacturing

DGN - Microstation Design File

DWF - Autodesk Web Design Format

DWG - AutoCAD and Open Design Format

DXF - Drawing Interchange File Format

GDL - Geometric Description Language

gbXML - Green Building Extensible Language

IFC - Industry Foundation Classes

JPG - Joint Photographic Experts Group

MEP - Mechanical Electrical and Plumbing

NBIMS - National Building Information Modeling Standards

RVT - Revit File Format

STEP - Standard for the Exchange of Product model data

1

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.0 Introduction

The study focuses on Building Information Modeling in local construction

industries in addition; the study seeks to identify the reasons behind slow

implementation of this solution in construction industry. In this chapter, a brief

overview of the study is presented. The chapter covers background, statement of the

problem, aims and objective, research question, hypothesis, scope, significance and

finally summarized the summary of the chapters.

1.1 Background

There was an eminent research effort on enabling and advancing information

technology to enhance work efficiency and collaboration among Architecture,

Construction and Engineering (ACE) stakeholders by providing mechanism

infrastructure to deliver pertinent information required for decision making in a

timely manner. According to Estaman et al 2005, Halfawy and Froese 2001, such an

2

technologies, and should facilitate information interchange between members of the

project team and across stages in the project lifecycle from construction to

inspection to maintenance. Khoury and Kamar 2009 suggested that the central

kernel of this communications infrastructure should be inhabited by a shared

construction project model in the form of integrated product models and project

database, these resulted to Building Information Modeling (BIM).

Building information modeling (BIM), is a modeling technology and associated set

of processes to produce, communicate and analyze building models (Estamsn et al

2008), is seen as an enabler that may help the building industry to improve its

productivity. Yet, although BIM has been on the market for a number of years, it has

not been adopted industry – wide to its full capacity. As of 2009 approximately half

of industry representatives do not use any BIM software on projects in the U.S

(McGrawHill 2009).

1.2 Statement of the Problems

The slow adoption of the BIM in the industry has been caused by several

technical and human barriers, these barriers can be categorized as internal or

external. In internal use of BIM, the main barriers are cost and human issues, mainly

the learning of new tools and processes. The learning process is significantly more

expensive than the actual costs of hardware and software. In the same vein,

Kivineimi et al (2008) posited that, high investment cost and the constant need to

upgrade hardware and software are seen as two major obstacles for firms. Moreover,

the unclear balance between the benefits and the costs and the fear that the actual

benefit go to another participants in the projects. Another internal barrier is fear of

lacking of features and flexibility of the modeling tools. Meanwhile, the external

barriers as described by Williams (2007) include legal aspect of implementing BIM

which have been an area of concern to many owners, A&Es (Architects and

Engineers), general contractors and sub-contractors. Issues related to model

3

ownership and responsibility for model accuracy as well as concerns about the

responsibility of cost of producing and managing the model, top the list of perceived

legal obstacle to embracing the BIM process.

Meanwhile, technical Issues related mainly to lack of sufficient and reliable

interoperability between software applications – are significant obstacles, although

perhaps not fully recognized by the industry yet, since most companies have no

experience of the use of shared BIM in the saying of Kiviniemi et al (2008).

In general the industry lacks agreement and common practice concerning how to use

integrated BIM, although in Nordic Countries the willingness to share BIM data

seems to be higher than elsewhere as advanced by Newton et al (2009). There are

claims that, the slow adoption of BIM in construction industry is attributed to lack of

awareness, technical complexity, and absence of interoperability between various

software that are been used in generating the Model. However, the degree and

variance of this factors has not been identified. Therefore there is need for research

to identify degree

1.3 Aims and Objective of the study

The aim of the study is to identify barriers to strategic implementation of Building

Information Modeling (BIM) within industry in Malaysia while the objectives are:

1. To identify the level of BIM tools utilization and implementation at the

design phase in local construction industry.

2. To identify the barriers to utilization and implementation of Building

Information Modeling (BIM) in Architectural and Engineering design.

3. To identify strategies that will enhance effective BIM implementation in

local construction industry.

4

1.4 Research Questions

1. What is the utilization level of BIM Tools in local construction industry?

2. What is the relation between Engineers and Architect in in terms of

utilization of BIM tools in local construction industry?

3. What are the possible strategies that will enhance effective implementation

of BIM tools in local Construction Industry?

1.5 Research Hypothesis

The study will be guided with the following hypotheses;

Ho There is no significant correlation between Architects and Engineers

in terms utilization and adoption of building Information Modeling

(BIM) in local construction industry

H1 There is a significant correlation between Architects and Engineers in

terms utilization and adoption of building Information Modeling

(BIM) in local construction industry

5

1.6 Scope of the Study

The study is limited to implementation of building information modeling

(BIM) at design phase, data collection is from Architectural Engineering and

Construction firms in Malaysia only. Moreover, the study is limited to a sample of

100 respondents from selected AEC firms located within Kuala Lumpur region.

Kuala Lumpur region was selected due to its high level of technology awareness and

high concentration of construction firms.

1.7 Significance of the Study

The study will contribute to the pool of knowledge in various facet of

academic and professional perspective. Academically, the study will generate a

statistical data that will show the current status of Building Information Modeling

(BIM) and the significance of competence in the implementation of BIM in

Malaysia as well as the perception of this new technology among practitioners in

Architecture, Engineering and Construction industry. Meanwhile, to professional‘s

circle, the study propose strategies for the implementation of BIM to harness the

numerous benefits of technology.

6

Figure 1.1 Flowchart diagram of the research process

1.8 Summary of the chapters

7

This works has been logically structured to five (5) chapters and below is the

summary of each chapter in the study as follows:

1. Chapter 1: Introduction

The first chapter of the study is a background of the study and it comprise of

introduction, background, statement of the problems, aims and objectives,

research questions, research hypothesis, scope of the study, significance of

the study, research methodology and the chapters organization.

2. Chapter 2 Literature Review

This chapter is based on literature reviews on the related topics related to the

study. The literature reviews are from books, journals articles, conference

papers and periodicals. The topics in this chapter include the concept of

Building Information Modeling (BIM), the phases to integrate in

construction life cycle and Barriers to BIM implementation.

3. Chapter 3 : Research Methodology

This chapter covers the main topics on how the study was conducted; the

subheadings are introduction, methodology, literature review, instruments for

data collection, study samples, method of data analysis and the summery of

the chapter.

8

4. Chapter 4: Data Presentation and Analysis

This chapter present results of the study and discusses the finding in a logical

manner. It treated each question individually and later present the summary

of the result. Moreover, finding on each objective has been clearly outlined.

Finally the hypothesis was also tested at 0.05 level of significance using

correlation coefficient.

5. Chapter 5: Summary and Conclusion.

This is the last chapter of this project report; it covers the conclusion of the

entire project report based on the answers to the research questions, it also

advance recommendations for further studies.

9

CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction

This chapter covers the basic information about Building information modeling.

These include, concept of building information modeling, the history, usage and the

phases to integrate in construction lifecycle. Besides that, the barriers to BIM

implementation such legal issues, interoperability, resistance to change, operators

competencies are also discussed. Moreover, strategies for the implementation of the

technology which include training, development of parametric library where also

presented in the chapter.

2.2 The Concept of BIM

The developments in computer and communication systems accelerated providing

the most intensive computer service in Architecture, Engineering and construction a

new wave of advancement with the advent of sophisticated CAD systems, where it

was possible to enrich the 3D models of buildings and structures with, in addition to

vectorial data, complementary data such as physical characteristics, unit costs,

quantity take-offs, etc. This methodology became known as the building information

model (BIM).

10

Although established in academia since then, the emergence of BIM in real-world

projects began only after the year 2000, in some pilot projects and lately in some

major projects. Nevertheless, it remains a rare approach in practical projects.

Figure 2.1 Islands of Automation in construction (Hannus 1998)

Various definitions have been advanced by various authors, some definition are

software based while some are broad to cover the concept in consideration to the

performance of the technology in re-engineering the entire construction business

process; the Building information modeling (BIM) is nothing more and nothing less

than a system approach to the design, construction, ownership, management,

operation, maintenance, use and demolition or reuse of building. BIM has intelligent

objects and distributing them makes sense. So by this definition, a building

11

information model is any compilation of reliable data in single or multiple electronic

data formats, however complete or incomplete that supports a system approach in an

in the lifecycle of a building. According to Succar (2009), it is an emerging

technological and procedural shift within the Architecture, Engineering, and

Construction and Operations (AECON) industry.

Meanwhile, according to Mindu and Arayici (2008) this seeks to integrate process

throughout the entire lifecycle by utilizing Building Information Modeling (BIM)

systems. The focus is to create and reuse consistent digital information by the

stakeholders throughout the life cycle. However, implementation and use of BIM

system require dramatic changes in the current business practices, bring new

challenges for stakeholders e.g., the emerging knowledge and skill gap.

According to the National BIM Standard Project Committee, ―Building Information

Modeling is a digital representation of physical and functional characteristics of a

facility; a shared knowledge resource for information about a facility forming a

reliable basis for decisions during its life-cycle information using open industry

standards to form business decision for realizing better value‖ (NBIMS 2007). BIM

represents a shared knowledge base where all the data about a project is available to

all team members. The modeling tools allow designers a creative outlet for

designing efficient, practical buildings. The owner is able to better visualize the final

product throughout all stages of development. The building team uses the model to

coordinate activities, takeoff material quantities, and detect possible clashes between

equipment and spaces. BIM is intended to be a storage area of information for the

facility operator to use and maintain throughout the life-cycle of the building.

So in a broader term as opined by Succar (2010) Building information modeling

(BIM) is a set of interacting policies, processes and technologies generating a

methodology to manage the essential building design and projects data in digital

format throughout the building‘s lifecycle. Figure 2.2 shows the integrated model of

BIM process, where various fields can jointly share a single model.

12

Visualization

Energy

Analysis

Specification

Owner

Contractor

MEP

Engineer

Structural

Engineer

Architects

BIM

Figure 2.2 BIM integrated BIM Model

2.2.1 Definition of BIM according to Vendors

Autodesk: A building design and documentation methodology characterized

by the creation and use of coordinated, internally consistent computable

information about a building in design and construction.

Bentley: A modeling of both graphical and non graphical as of the entire

building life cycle in federated database management system.

America Institute of Architects (AIA): Information use, reuse, and exchange

with integrated 3D-2D Model based technology, of which electronic

documents are just a single component.

13

ArchiCAD: A single repository including graphical documents – drawings

– and non-graphical documents – specification, schedules and other data.

Table 2.1 Differences between traditional 2D Construction processes versus model

Based process.

Task 2D Based Process Model Based Process

Design Linear, phased Concurrent, Iterative

Drawings Paper 2D Digital 3D Object Based tied to

intelligent data

Site Planing Unclear elevation Relief contours

Code Review Slow and detailed Expedited and automated

Design Validation Light table Clash detection with audit trails

Field Drawing 2D drawing 2D drawing and perspective

Scheduling Stand alone activities Activities linked to models

Sequence planning Limited scenarios

evaluated

Extensive scenarios evaluated

earlier in the process

Field Coordination Paper shop drawing Overlaying digital models using

collision detection software

Operation training Use manual Visual

Closeout Documents Assembled near

completion

Intelligent models for operation

and maintenance instructions:

constantly update during

construction

14

2.2.3 Development of BIM

Over the past few years there has been rapid development in idea relating to how

building information could be managed. Mokhtar et al (1998) developed an

information model intended to replace drawings as the main repository of design

information and principal communication media. Their research identified that

having several source for the same element of data, i.e. a collection of many

drawings drafted independently was significant cause of inconsistency in design

documentation. Essentially they proposed a central database containing all the

building information sufficiently to produce technical construction documents

suitable for the erection of building.

Zenaldin (2001) goes further in his research and proposed that it would be more

successful if used in a collaborative environment. The important conclusion being

that technology alone is not sufficient for success and that the relationships between

people must also evolved with technology in order to produce successful model

Moreover, there is a history of interest in managing information, and information

flows, to minimize design inconsistencies which have been promoted as one of the

advantages of BIM by software producers. Tse et al. (2005) discovered that the

reduction of design inconsistency was one of the most common reasons why

architects used BIM. The literature indicates that the concept of BIM is not new, but

rather that new technology is making the concept more viable than in the past.

Furthermore, Suter et al. (2007) developed an approach and prototype system to

reconstruct the building model based on ‗sensed object location information‘. Their

tag-based building representation is very easy to convert to boundary-based building

representation is very easy to convert to boundary-based building representation

using solid modeling routines and spatial queries. Borrmann & Rank (2009) reported

that the potential to to implement directional operators in a three dimensional spatial

15

query language to interpret the attribute-driven geometric information that is

simplicity contained in building information models.

Similarly, Succar (2009) proposed a BIM framework which aims to provide a

research and delivery foundation so that industry practitioners can have a better

understanding of underlying knowledge structures and from this is able to negotiate

implementation requirements. This is tri-axial model involving BIM stages, BIM

lenses, and BIM fields. The model also defines the interaction between policy,

technology and process is imperative for the implementation of BIM in the AEC

industry.

In recent years the BIM concept has been developed to include more information

relating to building objects; for example, the creation of 4D models in which time

has incorporated for the purpose of modeling the sequencing of the building in

construction. Further efforts have been made to expand the capabilities of BIM‘s

applications in which cost and other aspects are considered in the model. BIM

research and development for the architecture, engineering and construction in

general focuses on the provision of parametric 3D modeling software and on

achieving interoperability between various applications. Figure 2.3 is diagram

simulating the acceleration of BIM concept over the years, that is from 70s to 2010.

16

70s

Tracing Paper

Autodesk Vision

Mianframes

Design Methods

Structural/Energy

Analysis

80s

Layered Production

90s 00 10

Workstations

Graphic Rendering

PC/Plotting/ CA Drafting

Modeling

Collaboration

Draw/DrawVision

Tech 2000

BIM

buildingSMART

Workstations

Graphic RenderingWorkstations

Graphic Rendering

Custom Software

WorkstationsAutodesk Suite

PC on every Desk

WAN Internet

IAI Interoperable

PC

Net Pit Pen

Figure 2.3 Development of BIM from 70s to date

2.2.3.1 Parametric Library

Conceptually, building information modeling (BIM) tools are object oriented

parametric models with a predefined set of injects families, each having behaviors

programmed within them. According Esman et al, (2008) A building model

configuration is defined by the user as a dimensionally-controlled parametric

structure, using grids, floor levels, and other global references planes. Alternatively,

these can simply be floor planes wall centerlines or a combination of them. With

these embedded object instances and parametric settings, the model configuration

defines and instance of the building.

Parametric modeling is critical productivity capability, allowing low-level

changes to updates automatically; it is fair to say that 3D modeling would not be

productive in building design and production without the automatic update features

made possible by parametric capabilities. Each BIM tool differs with regard to the

17

parametric object families it provides, the rule embedded within it, and the resulting

design behaviour.

2.2.3.2 The Capabilities of Parametric Modeling in Design

Estman et al, (2008) lament that, parametric object modeling provides a

powerful way to create and edit geometry. Without it, model generation and design

will be extremely cumbersome and error-prone. Verily, designing a building that

contains a million or more objects would be impractical without a platform that

allows for effective low-level automatic design editing.

Putting a wall in a parametric model of a building, mean a automatically associating

the wall to its bounding surfaces, its base floor planes, the wall its end abut and any

wall butting it, and the ceiling surfaces trimming its height. It also bounds the spaces

on its two sides. Moreover, when window or door is being placed in the wall,

connection relation has been defined, whether connections are threaded, butt welded,

or flanges and bolts.

2.2.4 Potential Building Information Modeling Tools:

There several 3D tools or tools described as BIM software are in circulation.

However, not all are having BIM capabilities. Technically, 3D modeling software

are divided in to two viz, surface modeling and solid modeling tools. The surface

modelers are software with 3D capacities without ant parametric value in the

generated models, while, solid modelers are 3D modelers embed with a rich

parametric capabilities that will enable the model to depict the real final project. Few

modeling software are described below:

18

2.2.4.1 AutoCAD based Applications

Autodesk‘s premier building application on the AutoCAD platform is architectural

desktop (ADT). ADT was Autodesk Original 3D building modeling tool prior to the

acquisition of Revit. It is based on solid and surface modeling extension for

AutoCAD and provides a transition from 2D drafting to BIM. It has a predefined set

of architectural objects, and while not fully parametric, it provide much of the

functionality offered by parametric tools, including the ability to make custom

objects with adaptive behaviors. External Reference Files are useful for managing

large projects.

Figure 2.4. A screen shot of AutoCAD Architecture model Windows

19

2.2.4.2 Autodesk Revit

It was introduced in 2002 by Autodesk after the company acquired the

program from a start up. Revit is a family of integrated products that currently

include Revit Architecture, Revit Structure and Revit MEP. It includes: gbXML

interfaces for energy simulation and load analysis, direct interface to ROBOT and

RISA structural analyses and the ability to import models from a conceptual sketch

tools like sketch up and other system that exports DXF files. Viewing interfaces

include: DGN, DWG, DWF, DXF, IFC, , gbXML, BMP, JPG etc. According to

Tao-Chin Kenny (2004) Revit has 17 Families of predefined building objects listed

in the modeling pallets.

Revit has a broad set of object library developed by third parties. It is easy to

learn and due to its well organized functionality and well design user friendly

interface. Its bi-directional design supports allows for information generation and

management based on update from drawings and model views. It supports

concurrent operation on the same project and moreover, it has an excellent object

library that supports a multi user interface.

However, Revit is an in-memory system that slows down significantly for

project larger than 220MB. It also has a limitation on parametric rules dealing with

angles. It also does not support complex surfaces, which limits its ability to support

design with or reference to these types of surfaces. Figure 2. 4 is a screenshot

Autodesk Revit interface.

20

Figure 2.5. A screenshot of Autodesk Revit 3D Window

2.2.4.3 Tekla

Tekla Structures software is a BIM (building information modeling) tool that

streamlines the delivery process of design, detailing, manufacture, and

construction organizations. While integrating openly with architectural

models, the strength of this single-model environment lies in the contractor

end of the process. Tekla structures has a significant functionalities that

supports for structural analysis, direct links to finite-element analysis

packages (STAAD-Pro and ETABS), and an open application programming

interface were added. In 2004 the expanded software product was renamed

Tekla Structures to reflect its generic support for steel, precast, timber,

reinforced concrete, and for structural engineering.

21

The Modeling in Tekla is parametric; this means that the components of the

model can be customized and edited at any time to suit the requirements of

the project. Tekla supports interfaces with Industry Foundation Class (IFC),

DWG, CIS/2, DTSV, SDNF, DGN, and DXF file formats this make it to

effectively integrates into any best-of-breed software driven workflow, while

maintaining the highest levels of data integrity and accuracy. Such

collaborative workflows are the cornerstone to minimizing errors and

maximizing efficiency, resulting in high profitability and on-time project

completion. Tekla Structures encompasses specialized configurations for

structural engineers, steel detailers and fabricators, precast concrete detailers

and manufacturers, as well as contractors

2.2.4.5 ArchiCAD

According to Eastman et al (2008), ArchiCAD is one the oldest

continuously marketed BIM architectural design tool available today. It is

baing marketed by Grafisoft since 80s. ArchiCAD support a range of direct

interfaces. According to Tse et al (2005), in ArchiCAD, the modeling objects

are divided into construction elements and GDL (Geometric Description

Language) objects. Construction elements are basic objects, including walls,

columns, beams, slabs, roofs and meshes, for the construction of the building

carcases. These objects reside in the system and cannot be omitted. The

available settings are grouped into geometry and positioning, floor plan and

section, 3D model, listing and labelling. The other building objects, such as

doors and windows, are GDL objects that reside in external library files

(GraphiSoft 2004b). GDL is an open scriptable language that can be used to

create new objects with rich parametric information. In addition to the

settings as mentioned, other parameters can be defined when creating GDL

objects through the use of third-party GDL object editors (GDL 2004). As

such, GDL is the agent for adding an unlimited number of BIM objects into

ArchiCAD. Before placing a construction element or GDL object in a BIM,

the default parameters can be modified via ArchiCAD‘s ―Object Settings‖

22

dialogue boxes. Because there are more parameters, the dialogue boxes of

GDL objects have more settings available than those of the construction

elements

2.2.4.6 Bentley System

Bentley architecture one of the BIM software that addresses the

concept of integrated project delivery system (PDS) introduced in 2004.

Bentley is an evolution of Trifoma solutions. Currently Bentley Architecture

is integrated with Bentley structures, Bentley Building Mechanical system,

Bentley Building Electrical System, Bentley Facilities, Bentley PowerCivil

(for site planning) and Bentley generative components. Currently Bentley is

can interface with external applications such as Primavera and other

scheduling software, STAAD and RAM for structural analysis. It file formats

include DGN, DWG, PDF, STEP, IGES, STL and IFC. It also provide a

multi-user model repository called Bentley ProjectWise.

According Kymmell (2008) Bentley focuses on supporting its

product with a single comprehensive unchanging

It supports complex modeling and complex curved surfaces, including Bezier

and NURBS. In addition, it includes multiple levels of support for

developing custom parametric objects. Its parametric modeling plug-in,

Generative Components, enables definition of complex parametric geometry

assemblies and has been used several projects.

However, Bentley system has been confirmed to have a large and

non-integrated user interface that is had to learn and navigate. It also has less

extensive object libraries than similar products.

23

2.2.4.7 Google Sketch up

Sketch Up is a non-parametric surface modeling application for 3D

design exploration, which is targeted towards the conceptual phase of design

and has specifically been developed to be easy, intuitive, and fun to use.

Sketch Up has easy-to-learn interface, with most of the screen space

devoted to the drawing window. There are only eight toolbars with a limited

number of tools in each toolbar (Figure 2.6). There are no options associated

with every tool that need to be accessed in individual dialog boxes; a

Preferences dialog contains all the program preferences, and a Model Info

dialog contains all the model-specific settings. Additional palettes showing

materials, components, layers, and so on can be opened when needed. The

Status Bar at the base of the drawing window displays command prompts

and status messages and also contains a box for coordinate entry. The

emphasis on "less rather than more" makes it possible to get up and running

in Sketch Up very quickly compared to other CAD, BIM, and 3D modeling

applications.

Figure 2.6 A screenshot of Google sketch up interface

24

2.2.4.8 Navis works

Navisworks is a viewer of models and has many useful applications

in almost all phases of the use of BIM. It functions much as a video game,

and since it is not a modeler, it also limits the number of things tha can go

wrong in a BIM analysis. The main function of Navisworks is to provide 3D

model interoperability for the building design and construction field.

According to Kymmell (2008), many different software tools are being used

by many different discipline tha all produce 3D models in different file

formats. Most of these tools do not import or export one another‘s native file

format, so Navisworks has provided a model viewer that can read almost any

3D file format. A project team using BIM is faced with four major

challenges that Navisworks addresses; these are:

It can read different file format from various sources

It can handle huge files.

It will combine different file types in to the same file together

successfully,

It facilitates graphical communications across the entire project team.

Clash detection is the most popular functionalities of Navisworks. It is

capable of finding and identifying all instances where model parts clash (take

the same space in the model). The clashes no only are found and listed, but

also can be manage through the same software until they are resolved.

25

2.3 Phases to Models in Construction Life Cycle

BIM is a process by which digital representation of physical and functional

characteristics of a facility are built analyzed, documented, and assessed virtually,

then revised iteratively until the optimal ―model‖ is documented. The process then

continues through construction and construction as-built documentation and again

during the lifetime of the facility. As such, it serves as a shared knowledge resource

for information about a facility forming a reliable basis for decisions during its

lifecycle from inception onward. BIM is more than 3D modeling, although the 3D

model is the geometric platform on which BIM operates. The ability to assign

attributes and data to the objects in a 3D model is an important consideration in

differentiating a 3D model from a building information model. A building

information model may be best described by its key features The digital model are in

phases, the covered the usual construction phases of project life cycle. According to

Jernigan (2007), there are four (4) phases to model in construction process, these

phase are;

1. Conceptual Phase Model

2. Design Phase Model

3. Construction Phase Model

4. Maintenance Phase model

2.3.1 Conceptual Phase Model:

In this phase, data related to feasibility studies, environmental impact

assessment (EIA), traffic impact assessment (TIA), topography and survey, soil

condition are all integrated in to single models. Developing a schematic model prior

to generating a detailed building model allows for a more careful evaluation of the

proposed scheme to determine whether it meets the building‘s functional and

26

sustainable requirements. Early evaluation of design alternatives using

analysis/simulation tools increases the overall quality of building.

Similarly, during the conceptual phase the cost estimate can be assessed on a

conceptual level, and at a more detailed model level the cost estimate can also

become more detailed. This can facilitate the target value design approach that helps

to track the project cost in relation to the budget throughout the planning process.

The cost data linked to the evolving 3D model provide such cost tracking. The

flexibility of the cost data-model link permits a large variety of interpretations that

will yield almost any type of cost information from the model.

Moreover, design intent energy performance of a project can be

simulated/evaluated in BIM, and alternative materials can be studied in a

comparative analysis. A building‘s energy performance can thus be predicted and

adjusted in planning phase of the project. Therefore BIM is ideal for the study of the

life cycle cost of a project.

2.3.1.1 Site Planning and Site Utilization

BIM not use only to analyze a proposed building, but also to study known

and estimated site conditions. This includes existing and proposed underground

utilities, site access, safety issues, excavation, shoring and underpinning, dewatering,

placement of cranes, booms, hoists, and temporary ―laydown‖ storage zones for

various construction materials.

2.3.1.2 Space Planning

This involved organizing the spatial needs defined by the client and

expanding them to include storage, supports, mechanical and other ancillary support.

Moreover, space planning also includes a set of spatial needs by the programme,

27

describing the number and types of spaces that the clients expect, their respective

square footages, the environmental services they require and in some cases the

materials and surface desired.

2.3.1.3 Environmental Analysis

Common BIM tools use in Environmental analysis is IES Virtual Buildings,

Ecotect and Green building. These environmental analysis tools offer insight in to

the behavior associated with a given design and provide an early assessment of gross

energy, lighting used as well as estimated operating cost. Until now, such

performance assessment relied mainly on designers experience.

2.3.2 Design Phase Model:

As design development proceeds, details concerning the building‘s various

systems must be determined in order to validate earlier estimates and to specify the

systems for bidding, and installation. This detailing involves a wide range of

technical information. Figure 2.7 is a schematic diagram of integrated design

process. It shows how various design model can be linked together to generate a

federated single referral model that serves as a database to the whole building life

cycle.

28

Architectural

Design

Structural

Design

Mechanical

Shop Drawing

Plumbing Shop

Drawing

Electrical Shop

Drawing

Other Shop

Drawing

Architectural Model

Structural Model

Mechanical Model

Plumbing Model

Electrical Model

Other Model

BIM Linked

with

Construction

sequencing

COMPOSITE

MODEL

Figure 2.7 Schematic Diagram of Integrated Design Process. Contractors’

Guide to BIM (2009)

29

2.3.2.1 Analysis/Simulation:

At the core of BIM lies a digital database where objects, spaces, and facility

characteristics are each defined and stored. These characteristics make it possible to

use BIM as a virtual representative of a physical facility and are hence able to

perform qualitative and quantitative analyses. Hence, all buildings must satisfy

structural, environmental conditioning, fresh water distribution and waste water

removal, fire retarders, electrical and other power distribution, communication and

other basic functions. While each of these capabilities and the systems require to

supporting them may have been identified earlier, their function specification for

conformance to codes, certifications and client objectives require more detailed

definition. In addition, the spaces in a building are also systems circulation and

access, systems of organizational functions supported by the spatial configuration.

2.3.2.2 Design Visualization

BIM is often used by designers, and also by contractors, as a way to visualize

and communicate design intentions. Historically, this use of BIM exemplifies the

most common use of 3D in the AEC industry, visualizes the design using

stereoscopic projection tools to create an immersive experience. This makes design

decisions based on the spatial experience of these models, which can have huge

impact to costs of construction.

30

2.3.2.3 Integration of Subcontractor and Supplier Models:

BIM supports the whole collaborative process of design development,

detailing and integration. Much of the detailed data that is incorporated into BIM

comes from subcontractors, suppliers, and vendors who traditionally would supply

―shop drawings‖ that detail precisely how they would execute the design intent in

fabrication. Application of BIM in this way leads to highly detailed models and

extremely large datasets which must be visualized in real-time. Beyond these short

term impacts on productivity and quality, BIM enables fundamental process

changes, because it provides the power to manage the intense amount of information

required of ‗mass customization,‘ which is a key precept of lean production

(Womack and Jones 2003) in (Estman, Teicholz, Sacks and Liston (2008)

Figure 2.8 Screen shot of various windows of BIM tools, Autodesk Revit (2008)

31

2.3.2.4 General information attribution

3D objects can also be linked to a variety of source documents via

hyperlinks. This enables the model to function as a graphical information system

(GIS) for the building. Project correspondences, technical data, O&M records, and

links to manufactures‘ websites are all possible in this environment. Information

attributing via hyperlinks can add value to all phases but is typically associated with

facility management functions.

2.3.3 Construction Phase Models:

This focus on communication, cost control, and the fabrication and assembly of

the building components. To utilize the BIM across these phases of the project, it

will have to be well planned ahead of time. Just as the model function to help with

the visualization that resulted in the coordination of the various building systems,

the model can function at regular construction meetings to help with the

visualization and coordination of the installation requirements (and field condition

for the subcontractor).

2.3.3.1 Design Assistance & Constructability Review:

Beyond visualization, contractors use BIM as a way to provide assistance to

the design team and to provide a ―constructability review‖ in which various means

and methods are analyzed and tested to ensure the design can be built to meet a

targeted schedule and cost. Often, BIM exposes errors and omissions in the design,

and can help us recommend alternate solutions while preserving design intent.

2.3.3.2 Scheduling and Sequencing

The 3D model can be combined with a construction schedule to create a ―4D‖

model, using time as the fourth dimension. We do this to visualize the schedule and

32

to optimize sequencing on the construction site. Often, craft-workers who have

difficulty reading traditional drawings and schedules can easily understand and

participate in project scheduling when the BIM supports

2.3.3.3 Cost Estimating:

BIM can also be integrated with another factor, cost, to generate a ―5D‖

simulation. The BIM is used to facilitate a quantity survey of building materials and

components, and these quantities are linked directly to cost databases. With this

information, we can modify the building design, and understand its cost implications

in real-time.

2.3.3.4 Systems Coordination

Once all building systems are detailed in 3D and incorporated into BIM,

these systems can be coordinated. All equipment, fixtures, pipes, ducts, conduits,

structural members, and other building components are checked through ―clash

detection‖ tools to discover and resolve conflicts before systems are installed in the

field.

2.3.3.5 Layout and Fieldwork:

Once the design is fully coordinated, BIM data can be used to assist in layout

of materials and systems in the field. This includes the creation of ―lift drawings,‖

2D extractions in plan and section which describe the field work in detail, and

integrated with pertinent quality and safety information.

33

2.3.3.6 Clash detection

Since the 3D model represents virtual true space, a BIM process known as

―clash detection‖ can be utilized to check for interferences by searching for

intersecting volumes. It is often the case to use a third party application to not only

clash a single model but combine and clash multiple models from disparate sources

in a common environment.

2.3.3.7 Prefabrication:

BIM can also be used to assist in the prefabrication of building systems,

enabling faster field assembly of the building. This is a result of the integration of

many of the other uses described above: full contribution by subcontractors, full

integration and coordination of geometry, and accurate registration and field

installation.

2.3.3.8 Process Simulation in Building Construction

Process simulation creates a virtual feedback loop such that design and

construction coordination challenges including interface and sequence can be

identified prior to commitment of field resources. Simply stated, BIM identifies

changes at a time when changes are still inexpensive to make. Since the

construction supply chain is primarily horizontal and information is passed from one

party to the next in a linear fashion; it lacks an efficient feedback loop. This

condition has been exacerbated by the advent of the fast-track construction

approach. Presently problems that are identified during the erection or construction

phase are relayed back to the A/E for resolution - but at what cost? In addition to

the disruption, solutions at this stage are sub-optimal and mid-stream revisions are a

typical source of contract claims and disputes.

34

Often, the cost of field changes includes a significant non-value added

component that far exceeds the betterment value for the revised scope of work.

These non-value added costs include premium costs associated with change orders,

schedule delay, impact on other trades and the effort required to coordinate and

manage changes during the construction phase. It has been said that a construction

Project Manager‘s primary role is to solve problems. We believe it is possible to

reverse this role from a troubleshooter to a conductor whose energy is focused on

implementation of a well-rehearsed plan.

In short, process simulation enabled by BIM significantly increases

predictability in the project delivery process by compressing all pertinent project

data giving a single user a global and synoptic view of the project. This

predictability encompasses all major elements of the project including geometric

(visualization and physical conflicts), behavioral (engineering and operational

analysis), and temporal (phasing and scheduling) and cost (estimating and

budgeting). Traditional ―field level‖ issues are flagged earlier in the process at a

time when changes are still inexpensive to make.

35

2.3.4 Manage/Maintenance Phase Model

According to Kymmell 2008) models in this phase will frequently have

inherited from the planning and construction phases of the project and may need to

be adapted to their new purpose. Modeling the contents of the building for inventory

and tacking purpose are also achievable at this phase. Monitoring temperature and

energy consumption can be connected to the BIM. All these uses will require special

adaption for a BIM that was handed down from the design and construction project

team.

2.3.4.1 Model updating:

BIM can be updated during the construction of the facility to create an ―as-

built‖ record of construction conditions. Once this is complete, the geometry in the

BIM can be linked or associated with non-graphic information typically found in

equipment and facilities operations manuals. Data that are related to fire rating of

doors, construction materials‘ U Value e.t.c. are tracked. In this way, the BIM

becomes a complete and living record to support the facilities management.

36

Figure 2.9 shows the 3D Geometric Capabilities of BIM in Mechanical, Electrical

and Plumbing (MEP) coordination

2.3.4.2 Bahaviour Simulation:

Simulation allows standardized models of facilities to visualize and replicas

of real life system using ‗reactive objects‘ to predict possible situations. According

to Olatunji and Sher (2010) the use of avatar simulation in construction is new and

rapidly developing. Maher (2008) argues that the reliability of avatar applications in

predicting productivity and creativity in construction project design is increasing.

The implications of BIM based simulation in facility management are such that

components and objects are programmed to exhibits certain characterization in

varying environment. Such include visualization of presumed end-users‘ reactions to

energy consumption, environmental impacts and sustainability variables, flexibility

of use, responses to emergencies, situational impacts of comprehensive maintenance

operations like alteration, conversion, modernization and so on. With this method, it

is easier to reduce uncertainties and risk.

37

2.3.4.3 Auto Alert:

Building information modeling does not only provide appropriate platforms

for stakeholders to share information, it also allows all collaborating professionals to

sort all information they need in the project server and impute their discipline

specific information on the models. Information on intelligent objects of facilities‘

designs can include life span data, limit of use and modification, millstone for

procurement, planning and supply chain management, inventory control and match-

sequencing for corresponding alternatives. Olatunji and Sher (2010) added that,

given these variables, facility management professionals using BIM-based digital

procedures are confronted with fewer challenges regarding items to change, how,

where and who to execute the job. From one point source, design components like

furniture, services‘ equipments and fittings, lifts, wall, floors, roofs, door etc. could

tell the users and managers when they are over-stretched, underutilized or due for

special attention like maintenance replacement; and who is specifically scheduled to

execute such works. This can be extended using chip technology for location

tracking and security purpose.

2.3.4.4 Project Visualization:

Visualization allows clients and end users to review their intentions using

multiple options in ways that optimize, value generation in investments and

flexibility in (use and) management of facilities. Moreover, design conflicts and data

inconsistencies can be detected early. Furthermore, BIM-enabled project

visualization adds value to communication. With this technology it is now possible

to conduct off-site training on screen for purpose-made and general-need

maintenance and operation and the same time simulate the functions of project

components.

38

2.3.4.5 Value Intelligence:

Studies by Aranda et al, 2008, Gu et al 2008, Alfonso et al. 2008, have

presented with strong evidence on business gains and performance values that all

stake holders on facilities development and management could benefit from. On the

other hand, value analysis and management allows major stakeholders involved in

project development in facilities‘ life to further collaborate and facilitate

constructive pattern for justifying the relationship between components‘ value and

functional requirements in facilities‘ design, use and management (Barton, 2000). In

other words, while cost cost-in-use analysis is about creating value through optional

costing, value analysis and management creates pathway for defining essences that

justify the choice of particular components on the basis of functionality.

39

Table 2.2 BIM Implementation Phases and BIM Product Matrix

Phase 1 – Model

3D Parametric design elements

Design information

Documentation output

Conceptual design and analysis

Phase 2 – Leverage

Link models to analysis tools

Visualize real-world appearance

Model based assessment

processes

Phase 3 – Integrate

Convergence of models

Model-based communication

between disciplines

Lifecycle model utilization

Model-based fabrication

Architecture Revit Architecture, AutoCAD

Design accuracy and quality

Estimating opportunities

Productivity increases

Accurate, efficient and

documentation

Early evaluation of complex

constructability.

3ds Max Design, Ecotect Analysis

Assessment of design

performance for LEED and other

sustainable rating criteria

Performance optimization

Cinema quality design

visualization

Navisworks Manage, Revit

Structure, Revit MEP, Maya

collaborative project

Management, inventor

Construction and clash

detection

Reduced RFIs and change

order

IPD opportunities

More accurate building

component

MEP

Engineering

Revit MEP, AutoCAD

Leverage arch. Data to improve design

accuracy and quality

Improve system coordination

Ecotect Analysis

Assessments of design performance

for LEED and other sustainable

rating criteria

Revit Architecture, Revit Structure,

Navisworks Manage, Collaborative

project management

Coordination and clash detection

40

Achieve productivity increases

Facilitate preliminary analysis

Accurate, efficient documentation

Performance optimization

Reduced requedt for information

and change orders

IPD opportunities

Structural

Engineering

Revit structures, AutoCAD, Structural

Detailing

Leverage arch data to improve design

accuracy and quality

Improve system coordination

Achieve productivity increases

Facilitate preliminary analysis

Accurate, efficient documentation

Robot Structural Analysis

Assessments of design performance

Performance optimization

Revit Architecture, Navisworks

Manage, Collaborative project

management

Coordination and clash detection

Reduced request for information

and change orders

IPD opportunities

Civil

Engineering

Civil 3D, MAP 3D, Autocad

Design accuracy and quality

Calculate material quantities

Improve document coordination

Productivity increases

Accurate, efficient documentation

Ecotect Analysis, Robot Structural

Analysis, 3ds Max Design

Assessments of design for LEED,

other sustainable performance

criteria, structural performance

Performance optimization

Collaborate with internal teams

Cinema quality design visualization

Navisworks Manage, Collaborative

project management

Coordination and clash detection

Reduced RFIs and Cos

IPD Opportunities

Collaborate with external

companies on building team

Reduce risk and liability concern

Construction Revit Architecture, AutoCAD, Civil 3D,

Quantity take-off

Design accuracy and quality

Estimating opportunities

Productivity

Navisworks, Revit Structure

Assessment of design performance

for LEED and other sustainable

rating criteria

Increase schedule predictability

Performance optimization

Clash detection

Navisworks, collaborative Project

Management, Inventor

Coordination and clash detection

Reduced RFIs and Cos

IPD Opportunities

Collaborate with external

companies on building team

Easier integration of fabricated

components

41

2.4.0 Implementation of BIM

BSA (2009) reported that a number of completed building in the UK have

used BIM, including the extension to the Sanger Institute in Cambridge and the

Roche HQ in Welwyn. In Norway, every Statsbygg (the property service agency)

project will have to be design and built using BIM from 2010. Also since 2003 The

General Service Administration (GSA) in US has been exploring aspect of BIM

such energy simulation, material quantity analysis and construction scheduling on

pilot projects (Gonchar 2007). The GSA has implementing BIM in all its projects

since 2007. Construction Clients Group (2008) reported the practice in New Zealand

which moves BIM to the program (4D) and the cost plan (5D). These additional

dimension enable the project to track the project ‗virtually‘ forwards and backwards

in time, play out what if scenarios and get to grips with complex logistic and

buildability issues (Construction Clients Group 2008)

2.4.1 Barriers to BIM in Construction Industry

People and process are keys to change and improvement, while work

environment and IT infrastructure are enablers without which the first two elements

cannot be sustained (Bew and Underwood 2010) while Alshawi 2008 listed some

factors which he described as critical to Implementation of BIM in Construction

Industry. The factors are people, technology and the environment.

People needs will determine the technology, and the technology will define

the environment. So the kingpin in absorption of any technology is the people, But

Newton, Hampton and Drogemullar (2009) argued, if adequate software support is

missing, AEC projects cannot use integrated BIM, if the project do not use

integrated BIM, it is impossible to measure its benefits, if the evidence of benefits is

missing, the end users have no reason to demand integrated BIM tools, the software

42

vendors have no motivation to invest in the development of such tools which leads

back to the start of the loop (Figure 2.4.1) below.

Figure 2.10 BIM Implementation Model

Basic obstacles: No enough market demand Domain –specific software

Basic obstacles: Individual projects, fuzzy baseline, No adequate focus to test in wide scale

Basic obstacles: Difficulties in deployment: people, software, processes Not enough evidence of befits

Sufficient Market Demand

for integrated BIM

Sufficient Software support for

integrated BIM.

Measured

Benefits of

integrated BIM

43

According to (Nithamyong and Skibniewski 2006; O'Brien 2000)

success in technology depends on many factors including but not limited to

people‘s attitudes towards the technology, corporate culture, relationships

between companies, characteristics of the specific projects, industry wide

issues of legal precedents, communication density, organizational barriers,

and individual‘s resistance to change. Like any other new technology,

personal attitudes towards Building Information Modeling adoption are

shaped by the risks involved in using unproven means and methods; by the

difficulty in implementing BIM in particular settings; by financial risks

involved; and by the perception of other workers‘ attitudes towards new

technologies (Paulson and Fondahl 1980; Tatum 1989). Even when

companies commit the resources needed for technological change, project

participants do not necessarily participate.

2.4.2 Interoperability:

According to Lee et al (2005), Interoperability refers to smooth exchange

of electronic data, information and knowledge, in other word, it also refers to

the ability to exchange and manage electronic information seamlessly, and

the ability to comprehend and integrate this information across multiple

software systems. Another definition is ―an open standard for building data

exchanges.‖ Interoperability simply means that your system can ―talk‖ to

mine, and we can all ―talk‖ to the designers, contractors, subcontractors,

vendors, and owners‘ representatives in the same electronic language.

According to Lee et al (2005), there three (3) levels of interoperability:

Data interoperability

Application interoperability

Resource interoperability.

44

Figure 2.11 stages of interoperability

There is little interoperability in the AECO (architect, engineer,

contractor, owner) community today, but many organizations, recognizing its

importance, are aggressively attacking the problem—a problem not confined

to the design and construction communities. In practice, however, these

formats are rarely used, and most organizations use proprietary formats for

model exchange. For many owners this poses a risk to the short and long

term investments in any building information modeling efforts. Lee et al

(2005),

Data

Interoperability

Application

Interoperability

Resource

Interoperability

Requires

Requires

45

Integrated BIM Model

Architectural

Design Software

Structural

Design/Analysis

Software

Quantity Take-

up/Spcification

Quantity Take-

up/Specification

Software

Scheduling

SoftwareScheduling

Software

Analysis

Software

Energy

Analysis

Software

Mechanical/

Electrical and

Plumbing

Software

Figure 2.12 Interoperability model between various software

2.4.1.3 Client Demand

Many stake holders are scare of change, the consultants are effect a

change, while the clients believe that if they change the contract to require

new types of deliverable, specifically 3D or building Information Models,

they will not receive competitive bids, limiting their potential pool of bidders

and ultimately increasing the price of the project.

46

Figure 2.13 interrelationships between technology, people and process in

technology implementation

2.4.1.4 Legal Issues

Kymmell (2007) posited that, the legal aspect of implementing BIM

have been an area of concern to many owners, AECs (Architects, engineers

and contractors). Contractual and legal changes are required on several fronts

to facilitate the use of BIM and more collaborative project teams. Moreover,

contracts also did not address the sharing of the benefits or risk from the

additional efficiency and (reduced project risk) among the project team

members. Even the digital exchange of project information is sometimes

difficult today, and teams are often forced to exchange only paper drawing

and rely old-fashioned contracts. Public institutions faces even greater

challenges, since they are often govern by Laws that take considerable time

to change.

Technology

Process

People

47

Issues related to model ownership and responsibility for model

accuracy as well as concern about the responsibility for the cost of producing

and managing the model are some major obstacles to embracing the BIM

process. Current contracts for design and construction services rarely address

modeling issues.

2.4.1.5 Issue of Training and Learning

Implementation of new technology such as BIM technologies are

costly in terms of training and changing work flows and work processes. The

investment in software and hardware is typically exceeded by the training

cost and initial productivity losses. Often most services providers are not

willing to make such an investment unless the perceived the long term

benefit to their own organization and or/if the owner subsidizes the training

costs.

2.4.6 Summary

The chapter tried to review literature related to this study, it begins by

defining the BIM concept, the development of BIM and the phase to use

BIM in construction life cycle. The chapter conclude with the review of

some identified barriers to BIM implementation in the local construction

industry.

48

CHAPTER 3

METHODOLOGY

3.1 Introduction

This chapter elaborates on the methodologies used for the purpose of data

collection, discussion and analysis and reporting of findings and result of the study.

So in summary this chapter explains the methodologies used for the purposed of

conduction this study.

3.2 Research Methodology

In order to derive a logical result, the study has adopted three (3) approaches, these

are:

a) Literature Review

b) Data Collection

c) Data Analysis

d) Presentation of results and conclusion.

49

3.2.1 Literature Review:

This is an exercise in which the researcher tries to identify, locate read and

evaluate previous studies, observations, opinions and comments related to Building

Information Modeling. Under this exercise, concept, applications and the barriers to

implementation of building information modeling (BIM) in local construction

industry. So, the literature review provide guidance toward preparation of

questionnaire which is discussed in as follows:

3.2.3 Study Population and Sample

The target population of the study is all professionals involved in civil and

architectural design within Kuala Lumpur Region, while sample of One Hundred

were considered the sample to represent the Professionals in Architecture

Engineering and Construction (AEC) randomly selected from construction firms

located within the region.

3.3 Instrument for Data Collection

Primary data in this study was collected using 100 questionnaire survey forms

that where distributed to the targeted sample of respondents. A total of Thirty Two

(32) questionnaires were duly completed and return out of which three where

considered invalid as they have not specified their area of expertise. So the data

analyzed in this study is based on 29 valid questionnaires, which form 29% of the

total sample, 16 from Architects and 9 from Engineers and 4 from contractors

3.3.1 Questionnaire Survey Design

50

Survey research design was adopted for the study; the instrument for data

collection was a set of questionnaire. The questionnaire was divided into Four

Sections ( A – D) All questions are structured so as to enable a logical quantitative

analysis of the result. Moreover, each question is ranked on 5 level rating scale as

shown of figure 3.2.

a. Section A: The profile of the firm or construction company, which Includes,

Name of the Firm, Area of Expertise, available number of staff and

qualification of the respondent and his/her year of experience.

b. Section B: seek to identify the Building information modeling (BIM) tool

utilization level, therefore, sixteen (15) BIM Software were selected and

listed. Responses where ranked on five points Likert-type rating scale based

on frequency of usage.

c. Section C: seeks to identify the barriers to building information modeling

implementation in local construction industry. 12 identified barriers from

various literatures were listed and ranked on five (5) points Likert-type rating

scale based on degree of agreement.

d. Section D: deals with strategies for the implementation of building

Information modeling in local construction industry. This section consists of

ten (10) items among which a respondent is free to rank based on level

importance. The range of importance of each item has been ranked as shown

on figure 3.2.

51

Figure 3.3 Rating scale questionnaire responses

Ordinal Scale 1 to 5 in ascending Order

1 2 3 4 5

Increasing Degree of Frequency/Agreement and importance

Each scale represents the following rating:

1 = Never / Strongly Disagree / Unimportant

2 = Very Rarely / Disagree / of little importance

3 = Rarely /Undecided / Moderately Important

4 = Occasionally / Agree / Important

5 = Frequently / Strongly Agree / Very Important

52

3.4 Methods of Data analysis

The study used Three Methods in analyzing the data generated from the

questioner, thus, step one presents the data in a descriptive form, where responses on

each item was presented and described in percentage, means index and the

3.4.1 Frequency Analysis

This is used to represent the data analysis results of the respondents‘

frequency responses, in order to differentiate the variables in the questionnaire

survey. The result will be tabulated in the form of frequency number and

percentage according to the total respondents. The frequencies can be

represented in the form of tables, pie charts and bar charts for graphic

representation of result.

3.4.2 Average Index Analysis

The average Index analysis for each variable is calculated by using the

formula as shown (Abdul Majid and McCaffer 1998)

Average Index = aIXI

𝑋𝑖

Where

a1 = Constant expressing the weigh given to i

x = variables expressing the frequency of responses for 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 …n

53

Table 3.1 Classification of the Rating Scales in Section B

Rating Scale Average Index

Never 1.00 ≤ A1 < 1.50

Very Rarely 1.50 ≤ A1 < 2.50

Rarely 2.50 ≤ A1 < 3.50

Occasionally 3.50 ≤ A1 < 4.50

Frequently 4.50 ≤ A1 < 5.00

Table 3.2 Classification of the Rating Scales in Section C

Rating Scale Average Index

Strongly Disagree 1.00 ≤ A1 < 1.50

Disagree 1.50 ≤ A1 < 2.50

Undecided 2.50 ≤ A1 < 3.50

Agree 3.50 ≤ A1 < 4.50

Strongly Agree 4.50 ≤ A1 < 5.00

Table 3.3 Classification of the Rating Scales in Section D

Rating Scale Average Index

Not important 1.00 ≤ A1 < 1.50

Of little importance 1.50 ≤ A1 < 2.50

Moderately Important 2.50 ≤ A1 < 3.50

Important 3.50 ≤ A1 < 4.50

Very Important 4.50 ≤ A1 < 5.00

54

3.4.3 Correlation Coefficient

Spearman‘s correlation coefficient in order to test the stated hypotheses.

According to Naoum (2007), the Spearman correlation is a non-parametric test for

measuring the difference in ranking between two groups of respondent‘s scoring a

number of issues, attributes or factors

In order to get the correlation coefficient, from the data collected, the array data

will be computed using the following steps: Xi, Yi are converted to ranks xi, yi, and

the differences di = xi − yi between the ranks of each observation on the two

variables are calculated.

Equation 1

r =

xiyi xi

ni=1 yi

ni=1

n

𝑛

𝑖 =1

x2ni=1 −

xini−1 n

2

y2ni−1 −

yini=1 2

n

Using equation (1) we obtain

𝑟 = xi − x 𝑛

𝑖=1 y1 − y

xi − x 2 xni−1 𝑦𝑖=1 − 𝑦 2𝑛

𝑖−1

Where: r = Correlation Coefficient,

x= Sum of responses in variable 1

y= sum of responses in variable 2

n= sample size

55

To calculate the t value, then we can use the following formula;

𝑡𝑛−2 =𝑟

1 − 𝑟2

𝑛 − 2

Then value obtained will be compared to the value in student t test table at 0.05

significance level and inference can be drawn based on the obtained value.

3.5 Summary

The chapter present details of the methodology used in conducting this

study according to a defined format. The chapter begins by introduction and

proceeds with description of the methodology used which include; literature

review, data collection and the instrument for data collection. Detailed

explanation was offered on the structure of the instrument used and the

chapter was concluded with explanation of how the data collected was

analyzed to a logical conclusion.

56

CHAPTER 4

DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS

4.1 Introduction

This chapter presents and discussed the findings on Building Information Modeling

usage in Architecture, Engineering and Construction, the identified barriers to BIM

implementation and the strategies for the implementation of the BIM in local

construction industry. Moreover, analysis of the data generated is also presented in

order to drive a statistical inference that can be used to generalize the findings.

4.1.2 Findings and Analysis

Data collected from questionnaires has been presented using frequencies and

percentages.

Table 4.1 Distribution of Respondents According Area of Expertise

Frequency Percent Valid Percent

Cumulative

Percent

Valid Architecture 16 55.2 55.2 55.2

Engineering 9 31.0 31.0 86.2

Contractors 4 13.8 13.8 100.0

Total 29 100.0 100.0

57

Table 4.1.1 and Figure 4.1 above is showing the distribution of respondents

in respect of their area of expertise. 55.2% which form the majority of the

respondents are architects and engineers formed 31.0% of the respondents, while the

lowest number of respondents is from contractors who form 13.8 % only.

Table 4.2 Distribution of Respondents According to Qualification

Frequency Percent

Valid

Percent

Cumulative

Percent

Valid PhD 4 13.8 13.8 13.8

Msc/MEng 6 20.7 20.7 34.5

Bsc/BEng 17 58.6 58.6 93.1

Other 2 6.9 6.9 100.0

Total 29 100.0 100.0

55.2

31

13.8

Architects Engineers contractors

Respondents' area of specilization

% of Respondents

58

Table 4.2.2 and Figure 4.2 shows that, Bachelor Degree holders (Bsc/BEng)

formed the majority of the respondents with 58.6 % and Master Holders form the

second majority with 20.7 % while the lowest 13.8% of the respondents are PhD

holder and finally, other qualification holder carries 6.8%.

0

13.820

58.6

6.9

Qualification Phd Msc/Meng Bsc/Beng Others

Respondents Qualification

Series1 Series2

59

Table 4.3 Names of firms that have responded to the study.

Freq %

Valid

Percent

Cumulative

Percent

Valid AECOM Prunding Sdn Bhd 1 3.4 3.4 3.4

Astasoft Sdn Bhd 4 13.8 13.8 17.2

Building Consult Integrated Sdn Bhd 1 3.4 3.4 20.7

DBKL 1 3.4 3.4 24.1

Gogreen Industries Sdn Bhd 2 6.9 6.9 31.0

JKR Malaysia 5 17.2 17.2 48.3

KLIA Consultancy Services Sdn Bhd 4 13.8 13.8 62.1

Kumplan Kelken Sdn Bhd 5 17.2 17.2 79.3

Neuformation Architects Sdn Bhd 1 3.4 3.4 82.8

Pintar Jaya (M) Sdn Bhd 1 3.4 3.4 86.2

T. R. Hamza & Yeang Sdn Bhd 4 13.8 13.8 100.0

Total 29 100.0 100.0

3.4

13.8

3.4 3.46.9

17.213.8

17.2

3.4 3.4

13.8

% of respondents

% of respondents

60

Based on the responses collected in the questionnaire, Jabatan Kerja Raya

(JKR) that is the Public Works Department Malaysia and Kumplan Kelken Sdn Bhd

constitute the majority of the respondents with each having Five (5) representing

17.2% of the respondents. Astasoft Sdn Bhd, KLIA Consultancy Services Sdn Bhd

and T. R. Hamza & Yeang Sdn Bhd are the second majority each having Four (4)

representing 13.8 of the respondents. Two (2) respondents, that is 6.9% are from

Gogreen Industries Sdn Bhd, while AECOM Prunding Sdn Bhd, Building Consult

Integrated Sdn Bhd, DBKL, Neuformation Architects Sdn Bhd and Pintar Jaya (M)

Sdn Bhd are having One (1) respondent from each representing 3.4%.

Table 4.4 Years of experience of the respondents

Frequency Percent

Valid

Percent

Cumulative

Percent

Valid 1-5 6 20.7 20.7 20.7

6 - 10 1 3.4 3.4 24.1

11 - 15 4 13.8 13.8 37.9

16 - 20 9 31.0 31.0 69.0

21 - above 8 27.6 27.6 96.6

6 1 3.4 3.4 100.0

Total 29 100.0 100.0

61

Table 4.4 shows the years of experience of the respondents in

construction industry. Majority of the respondents have16 – 20 years of

experience representing 31.0% of the total respondents. Moreover, 27.6% of

the respondents are having 21 – above working experience, this shows that

majority of the respondents have adequate experience in the construction

industry.

20.7

3.4

13.8

3127.6

1-5 Years 6-10 Years 11-15 Years 16-20 Years 21 Years-above

Years of Experinece of the respondents

%

62

Objective 1: Identification of BIM Tools usage in local Construction Industry.

4.2.0 Introduction

This section presents the data on the utilization and implementation of

Building information modeling tools in construction industry. Discussion and

analysis covers the responses collected for each tools listed in the questionnaire and

the means of the responses were analyzed using Spearman Correlation Coefficients.

Finally the finding was concluded with testing of the hypothesis using t-test at

0.05% level of significance.

Table 4.2.1 Autodesk AutoCAD

Frequency Percent

Valid

Percent

Cumulative

Percent

Valid Rarely 5 17.2 17.2 17.2

Occasionally 11 37.9 37.9 55.2

Frequently 13 44.8 44.8 100.0

Total 29 100.0 100.0

The table 4.2.1 above has shown that 44.8% of the respondents are

frequently using AutoCAD for their design and 37.9% of the respondents are

occasionally using the software while only 17.2% are rarely using the

software for their design services.

63

Table 4.2.2 Autodesk 3D MAX

Frequency Percent

Valid

Percent

Cumulative

Percent

Valid 0 4 13.8 13.8 13.8

Never 6 20.7 20.7 34.5

Very Rarely 1 3.4 3.4 37.9

Rarely 5 17.2 17.2 55.2

Occasionally 8 27.6 27.6 82.8

Frequently 5 17.2 17.2 100.0

Total 29 100.0 100.0

Autodesk 3D Max is somehow popular more especially among architects

who use it in generating 3D models of project mainly for conceptual design. This

results on Table 2.2.2 above, has shown that 17.2 % of the respondents have been

using it frequently, 27.6% have been it occasionally while 20.7% have never use it.

Table 4.2.3 Tekla Structures

Frequency Percent

Valid

Percent

Cumulative

Percent

Valid 0 4 13.8 13.8 13.8

Never 6 20.7 20.7 34.5

Very Rarely 1 3.4 3.4 37.9

Rarely 4 13.8 13.8 51.7

Occasionally 9 31.0 31.0 82.8

Frequently 5 17.2 17.2 100.0

Total 29 100.0 100.0

Table 4.2.3 above has shown that, Tekla structures is occasionally being used

by 31.0% of the respondents and 20.7% have never used the software. Meanwhile

17% of the respondents have indicated that, they are using the software frequently.

64

Table 4.2.4 Autodesk Revit MEP

Frequency Percent

Valid

Percent

Cumulative

Percent

Valid 0 5 17.2 17.2 17.2

Never 10 34.5 34.5 51.7

Very Rarely 2 6.9 6.9 58.6

Rarely 3 10.3 10.3 69.0

Occasionally 6 20.7 20.7 89.7

Frequently 3 10.3 10.3 100.0

Total 29 100.0 100.0

Table 4.2.4 above has shown that, 34.5% of the respondents have never used

the Autodesk Revit MEP software and 20.7% are occasionally using the software.

Moreover, 10.3% are frequently using the software and 6.9% use it very rarely.

Table 4.2.5 Autodesk Revit Architecture

Frequency Percent

Valid

Percent

Cumulative

Percent

Valid 0 4 13.8 13.8 13.8

Never 10 34.5 34.5 48.3

Very Rarely 1 3.4 3.4 51.7

Rarely 8 27.6 27.6 79.3

Occasionally 5 17.2 17.2 96.6

Frequently 1 3.4 3.4 100.0

Total 29 100.0 100.0

65

Table 4.2.5 shows the frequency of using Autodesk Revit Architecture

among the respondents, only 3.4% of the respondents are using the software

frequently, but 27.6% and 17.2% of the respondents have shown that they are using

the software rarely and occasionally respectively. Meanwhile 10% of the

respondents have never use the software.

Table 4.2.6 Autodesk Revit Structure

Frequency Percent

Valid

Percent

Cumulative

Percent

Valid 0 6 20.7 20.7 20.7

Never 14 48.3 48.3 69.0

Rarely 5 17.2 17.2 86.2

Occasionally 4 13.8 13.8 100.0

Total 29 100.0 100.0

Table 4.2.6 above shows that 48 .3 % that majority of the respondents on the

question have never use Revit Structure software, 17.2% rarely use it and 13.8%

occasionally use. So the results have indicated that software is not being used may

be due to the fact that is new in the field of construction.

Table 4.2.7 ArchiCAD

Frequency Percent

Valid

Percent

Cumulative

Percent

Valid 0 6 20.7 20.7 20.7

Never 13 44.8 44.8 65.5

Very Rarely 1 3.4 3.4 69.0

Rarely 5 17.2 17.2 86.2

Occasionally 4 13.8 13.8 100.0

Total 29 100.0 100.0

66

Table 4.2.7 above shows that majority of the respondents (44.8%) have

never used ArchiCAD software in their design services and only 13.8% are

occasionally using the software. Furthermore, 5% rarely use the software

while 3.4% use the software very rarely.

Table 4.2.8 Bentley Micro station

Based on Table 4.2.8, majority of the respondents (58%) have never used

Bentley Micro station, while 20.7% are rarely use the software and the remaining

respondents have not responded to the question.

Table 4.2.9 Bentley Structure

Frequency Percent

Valid

Percent

Cumulative

Percent

Valid 0 5 17.2 17.2 17.2

Never 16 55.2 55.2 72.4

Rarely 5 17.2 17.2 89.7

Occasionally 2 6.9 6.9 96.6

Frequently 1 3.4 3.4 100.0

Total 29 100.0 100.0

Frequency Percent

Valid

Percent

Cumulative

Percent

Valid 0 6 20.7 20.7 20.7

Never 17 58.6 58.6 79.3

Rarely 6 20.7 20.7 100.0

Total 29 100.0 100.0

67

Table 4.2.9 shows that, majority of the respondents (55.2%) never used

Bentley Structure and 17.2% rarely used the software, 6.9% occasionally use it

while 3.4% of the respondents have been frequently using the software.

Table 4.2.10 Bentley HVAC

Frequency Percent

Valid

Percent

Cumulative

Percent

Valid 0 5 17.2 17.2 17.2

Never 17 58.6 58.6 75.9

Rarely 3 10.3 10.3 86.2

Occasionally 4 13.8 13.8 100.0

Total 29 100.0 100.0

Based on Table 4.2.10, majority that is 58.6% of the respondents have never

used Bentley HVAC software, 17.2% rarely use the software and 6.9% of the

respondents occasionally use the software. Moreover, 17.2% have not responded to

the question.

Table 4.2.11 IntelliCAD

Frequency Percent

Valid

Percent

Cumulative

Percent

Valid 0 5 17.2 17.2 17.2

Never 18 62.1 62.1 79.3

Rarely 3 10.3 10.3 89.7

Occasionally 3 10.3 10.3 100.0

Total 29 100.0 100.0

Table 4.2.11 above has shown that majority (62.1%) of the respondents have

never used the software and 17.2% of the respondents remain silent on the question.

Moreover, responses on occasional and rarely usage remain the same is culminating

to 10.3%

68

Table 4.2.12 Google sketch up

Table 4.2.12 above shows the frequency of using Google sketch up in

design services among the respondents and the result has shown that, 27.6 %

have never used the software, 20.7% are frequently using the software and

10.3% are rarely and very rarely use the software

Table 4.2.13 Nemetschek Vector Works

Frequency Percent

Valid

Percent

Cumulative

Percent

Valid 0 6 20.7 20.7 20.7

Never 18 62.1 62.1 82.8

Very Rarely 2 6.9 6.9 89.7

Rarely 2 6.9 6.9 96.6

Occasionally 1 3.4 3.4 100.0

Total 29 100.0 100.0

Based Table 4.2.13 above, 62.1% of the respondents have never used

the software, 20.7% remain silent on the question while 6.9% are rarely and

Frequency Percent

Valid

Percent

Cumulative

Percent

Valid 0 4 13.8 13.8 13.8

Never 8 27.6 27.6 41.4

Very Rarely 3 10.3 10.3 51.7

Rarely 3 10.3 10.3 62.1

Occasionally 5 17.2 17.2 79.3

Frequently 6 20.7 20.7 100.0

Total 29 100.0 100.0

69

very rarely using the software. It also clear from the data that 3.4% of the

respondents are occasionally using the software.

Table 4.2.14 TuborCAD

Frequency Percent

Valid

Percent

Cumulative

Percent

Valid 0 6 20.7 20.7 20.7

Never 17 58.6 58.6 79.3

Very Rarely 3 10.3 10.3 89.7

Rarely 3 10.3 10.3 100.0

Total 29 100.0 100.0

Table 4.2.14 has indicated that 58.6% of the respondents have never use

TuborCAD while 20.7% have not responded to the question. It is also clear that

10.3% are using the software rarely and very rarely.

Table 4.2.16 Navisworks

Frequency Percent

Valid

Percent

Cumulative

Percent

Valid 0 7 24.1 24.1 24.1

Never 18 62.1 62.1 86.2

Very Rarely 2 6.9 6.9 93.1

Rarely 2 6.9 6.9 100.0

Total 29 100.0 100.0

Table 4.2.16 shows the frequency of using Navisworks BIM software in

local construction Industry. The results has indicated that 62.5% which form the

majority of the respondents have never used the software. 24.1% remain silent on

the question while, 6.9% are rarely and very rarely using the solution.

70

4.2.17 Analysis of findings on BIM Tools Utilization

This section involved the data analysis of responses collected using question

on BIM tools utilization and implementation in the construction industry.

Correlation of BIM tools usage between Architects and Engineers has also been

presented in this section. Finally, a hypothesis was tested using t-test at 0.05 level of

significance.

Table 4.2.16 Frequency of BIM Software usage in Local Construction Industry

N Max Sum

Means

1. Autodesk AutoCAD 29 5 124 4.28

2. Autodesk 3D Max 29 5 80 2.76

3. Tekla Structures 29 5 61 2.10

4. Autodesk Revit MEP 29 4 51 1.76

5. Autodesk Revit Architecture 29 4 41 1.41

6. Autodesk Revit Structure 29 4 45 1.55

7. ArchiCAD 29 3 35 1.21

8. Bentley Micro station 29 5 44 1.52

9. Bentley Structure 28 4 39 1.39

10. Bentley HVAC 29 4 42 1.45

11. Sketch Up 29 5 74 2.55

12. Nemetschek Vector Works 29 4 32 1.10

13. TurboCAD 29 3 33 1.14

14. IntelliCAD 28 2 27 .96

15. Navis works 29 3 28 .97

Valid N (listwise) 27

71

The study has found that, despite the availability of numerous BIM software

and many identified benefits derived from this paradigm, local construction industry

is reluctant to deploy the technology in its service delivery. Based on the Table

4.2.17 above, Autodesk AutoCAD has the highest user responses with a total sum of

124 and a mean Index of 4.28 indicating that almost all the respondents are using

AutoCAD in their professional practices. It should be noted that AutoCAD is not a

BIM platform but only included in the study just to compare the user responses with

other Software. In addition, Autodesk 3D Max is found to be the second most used

design software in construction industry. 3D Max is mainly use in conceptual design

of models, it surface modeler, therefore, it doesn‘t carry any parametric value in it

component.

Moreover, this study has indentified that there are some few number of

professional firms that have started deploying Building information modeling in

design services only. Among the BIM software used, Tekla Structure is being used

mainly by engineers this may not be unconnected with compatibility of some long

available 2D analysis software like STAAD Pro. Furthermore, few architects have

indicated a negligible utilization of Revit Architecture.

One of the software found to be utilize as identified by this study is Google

Sketch up, substantial number of the respondent have indicated that they have been

using it in design. Table 4.2.17 shows a mean index 2.55 indicating a moderate level

of utilization. It should be noted that, Google sketch up can only be used for

sketches at the conceptual design phase.

72

This study have also identified that all the BIM software have a lower means

index and scored the lowest responses showing their degree of popularity or

unavailability in the local software market and may be of little relevance to design

services.

2.2.17 Comparism to BIM tools usage between Architects and Engineers

Figure 4.5 Comparative chart of BIM tools usage between Architects and Engineers

1413

11

11

11

13

10

1310

10

10

10

11

6

12 8

15

11

12

11

12

10

1387

11

9

8

9

7

116

0

5

10

15Autodesk AutoCAD

Autodesk 3D Max

Tekla Structures

Tekla Architecture

Autodesk Revit MEP

Autodesk Revit …

Autodesk Revit …

ArchiCAD

Bentley Micro station

Bentley Structure

Bentley HVAC

IntelliCAD

Nemetschek Vector …

TurboCAD

Sketchup

Navis works

Design Software usage frequencies

Architects Engineers

73

Figure 4.5 shows the frequencies of BIM software usage among Engineers

and Architects. The Radar diagram clearly illustrates that both Architects and

Engineers are using BIM software internally for their professional services. Hence,

the sample surveyed shows a utilization/ adoption of building information modeling

tools in Local Construction industry.

4.2.18 Correlation and testing of Hypothesis

This section involved the summary, correlation and t-test analysis of the result. A

multiple regression analysis has been used to generate the correlation coefficient, t-

value and the probability index with the aid of Ms Excel software.

74

TABLE 4.2.17 Summary output

Regression Statistics Multiple R 0.583 R Square 0.340 Adjusted R Square 0.293 Standard Error 2.060 Observations 16

ANOVA df SS MS F Significance F

Regression 1 30.594 30.594 7.210 0.018 Residual 14 59.406 4.243

Total 15 90

Coefficients Standard Error t Stat P-value Lower 95% Upper 95%

Lower 95.0%

Upper 95.0%

Intercept 2.307 2.911 0.793 0.441 -3.936 8.550 -3.936 8.550

X Variable 1 0.711 0.265 2.685 0.018 0.143 1.280 0.143 1.280

75

If a level of significance of 0.05 was selected therefore

𝑡𝑛−2 =r

1 − r2

n − 2

=0.583

1−(0.583 )2

16−2

t =0.583

0.217

Calculated t = +2.686

t = +2.686 > t = +2.1448, and t = 2.1448 obtainable from student t-table as well as the probability value p = 0.18 at 5% significance level.

If the calculated t-ratio is greater than the critical or table t-ratio, reject Ho in favour

of H1, otherwise do not reject Ho (Nworgu 1991).

4.2.10 Decision inference

The calculated t-ratio is 2.686 while the critical table t-ratio is 2.1448. Since

the calculated t-ratio exceeds the critical or table t-ratio, we therefore reject the null

hypothesis in favour of the alternative hypothesis. Based on the above decision, we

76

now conclude that, there is a significant correlation between architects and engineers

in using Building Information Modeling (BIM) in local construction industry.

77

Section C: Barriers to BIM utilization and Implementation

Section C: Objective 2: To identify the Barriers to Building Information

Modeling (BIM) implementation in the local Construction industry. Analysis of the

finding from the data generation from the question is presented in this section.

4.3.0 Introduction

This section presents the data collected using questionnaire from the

respondent on the barriers to BIM implementation in local construction industry. It

includes, discussion of numbers and percentages of responses on each question.

Table 4.3.1 BIM tools learning Difficulty

Frequency Percent

Valid

Percent

Cumulative

Percent

Valid 0 1 3.4 3.4 3.4

Disagree 4 13.8 13.8 17.2

Slightly Disagree 3 10.3 10.3 27.6

Slightly Agree 3 10.3 10.3 37.9

Agree 12 41.4 41.4 79.3

Strongly Agree 6 20.7 20.7 100.0

Total 29 100.0 100.0

Table 4.3.1 indicates that, 41.4% which formed majority of the respondents

agree that difficulty in learning the BIM software as a major obstacle to utilization

and implementation of the technology. Moreover, 20.7% strongly agree with

statement but only 13.8% and 10.3% disagree with the claim that difficulty in

learning the software is a barrier to it utilization.

78

Table 4.3.2 Lack of legal backing from Authority

Frequency Percent

Valid

Percent

Cumulative

Percent

Valid 0 2 6.9 6.9 6.9

Disagree 1 3.4 3.4 10.3

Slightly Disagree 3 10.3 10.3 20.7

Slightly Agree 7 24.1 24.1 44.8

Agree 13 44.8 44.8 89.7

Strongly Agree 3 10.3 10.3 100.0

Total 29 100.0 100.0

Based on Table 4.3.2 above, 44.8% of the respondents agree that, lack of legal

backing from authorities as the main factor that hinders the utilization and

implementation of building Information modeling in construction industry. In the

vain, 24.1% slightly agree that lack of legal backing as a factor. However, only 6.9

and 3.4 % disagree and slightly disagree respectively on the effect of lack of legal

backing.

Table 4.3.3 Problems of interoperability

Frequency Percent

Valid

Percent

Cumulative

Percent

Valid 0 1 3.4 3.4 3.4

Disagree 3 10.3 10.3 13.8

Slightly Disagree 3 10.3 10.3 24.1

Slightly Agree 7 24.1 24.1 48.3

Agree 13 44.8 44.8 93.1

Strongly Agree 2 6.9 6.9 100.0

Total 29 100.0 100.0

79

Table 4.3.3 indicates that, the majority (44.8%) of the respondents agree with the

claim that interoperability is a major factor that barred the use of BIM in design. In

the same vein, 24.1% slightly agree with the claim. Moreover, 10.3% of the

respondents equally disagree and slightly disagree with the assertion. While, 6.9%

strongly agree that interoperability is one of the problems that hinders the utilization

of Building Information Modeling (BIM) tool in building design.

Table 4.3.4 Lack of skilled BIM Software operators

Frequency Percent

Valid

Percent

Cumulative

Percent

Valid 0 1 3.4 3.4 3.4

Disagree 2 6.9 6.9 10.3

Slightly Disagree 1 3.4 3.4 13.8

Slightly Agree 5 17.2 17.2 31.0

Agree 10 34.5 34.5 65.5

Strongly Agree 10 34.5 34.5 100.0

Total 29 100.0 100.0

Table 4.3.4 above shows a distribution of responses on the level of agreement with

the statement that, lack competent operators is a factor that remain a barrier to BIM

utilization in local construction industry. Base on the findings, 34.5 % strongly agree

and equally agree with the claim. In other hand, 17.2 slightly agree while 6.9% and

3.4% of the respondents disagree and slightly disagree respectively with the

statement.

80

Table 4.3.5 Lack of request by client

Frequency Percent

Valid

Percent

Cumulative

Percent

Valid 0 1 3.4 3.4 3.4

Slightly Disagree 9 31.0 31.0 34.5

Slightly Agree 4 13.8 13.8 48.3

Agree 11 37.9 37.9 86.2

Strongly Agree 4 13.8 13.8 100.0

Total 29 100.0 100.0

Diffusion of nay technology depends on the level of request of the

technology by users, in the Table 4.3.5 above, 37.9% of the respondents agree with

the claim however 31.0% slightly disagree with the statement. Furthermore 13.8%

of the respondents slightly agree and equal percentage strongly agrees with the

claim. It can be said that according to the finding of this study, majority of the

respondents strongly that request by client to use BIM, will encourage the use and

adopting of the technology.

Table 4.3.6 Lack request by other team members

Frequency Percent

Valid

Percent

Cumulative

Percent

Valid 0 1 3.4 3.4 3.4

Disagree 2 6.9 6.9 10.3

Slightly Disagree 7 24.1 24.1 34.5

Slightly Agree 4 13.8 13.8 48.3

Agree 8 27.6 27.6 75.9

Strongly Agree 7 24.1 24.1 100.0

Total 29 100.0 100.0

81

Based on Table 4.3.6, above, 27.6% of the respondents agreed with the

assertion that lack of request by other team members as a contributing factor towards

lack of implementation and utilization of BIM tools in design services and 24.1%

strongly agree with the statement, yet, equally 24.1% slightly disagree with the

claim. Moreover, 13.8% slightly agree while only 6.9% disagree with the statement.

Table 4.3.7 High price of software

Frequency Percent

Valid

Percent

Cumulative

Percent

Valid 0 1 3.4 3.4 3.4

Disagree 1 3.4 3.4 6.9

Slightly Disagree 1 3.4 3.4 10.3

Slightly Agree 7 24.1 24.1 34.5

Agree 5 17.2 17.2 51.7

Strongly Agree 14 48.3 48.3 100.0

Total 29 100.0 100.0

Based on Table 4.3.7, majority of the respondents that is 48.3% strongly

agree that that expensive software is the major obstacle to utilization and subsequent

implementation of BIM tools. In the same vein, 24.1% slightly agree and 17.2%

agree with the statement while only 3.4% disagree and slightly disagree and equally

disagree with the statement.

82

Table 4.3.8 Non availability of parametric library

Frequency Percent

Valid

Percent

Cumulative

Percent

Valid Disagree 1 3.4 3.4 3.4

Slightly Disagree 1 3.4 3.4 6.9

Slightly Agree 12 41.4 41.4 48.3

Agree 13 44.8 44.8 93.1

Strongly Agree 2 6.9 6.9 100.0

Total 29 100.0 100.0

Table 4.3.7 indicates that 44.8% agree with the claim that non availability

parametric library as a contributing factor to non utilization of BIM tools,

furthermore, 41.4% slightly agree with the statement. Moreover, 6.9% strongly

agree with the statement. However, only 3.4% disagree and equally slightly disagree

with the claim. So, from the finding on this statement, majority of the respondents

agree that lack parametric library a factors that hinders the utilization and

implementation of BIM in design services.

Table 4.3.9 longer time to develop a model

Frequency Percent

Valid

Percent

Cumulative

Percent

Valid Disagree 1 3.4 3.4 3.4

Slightly Disagree 1 3.4 3.4 6.9

Slightly Agree 10 34.5 34.5 41.4

Agree 16 55.2 55.2 96.6

Strongly Agree 1 3.4 3.4 100.0

Total 29 100.0 100.0

83

Based on Table 4.3.9, Majority of the respondents that is representing 55.2%

have agreed with the claim that, taking longer time to develop a model is another

factor that affect the utilization and implementation of BIM in construction design

services. In addition, 34.5% slightly agree with the assertion and 3.4% strongly

agree with the statement. However only, 3.4% have slightly disagree and disagree

with the statement.

So considering the responses on the statement, it can be concluded that, designers

(engineers and architects) have equally agree that, the time it takes to develop a

model, has a direct effect on acceptance and utilization of BIM in construction

industry.

Table 4.3.10 Readiness for organization change

Frequency Percent

Valid

Percent

Cumulative

Percent

Valid Disagree 10 34.5 34.5 34.5

Slightly Disagree 8 27.6 27.6 62.1

Slightly Agree 7 24.1 24.1 86.2

Agree 4 13.8 13.8 100.0

Total 29 100.0 100.0

Table 4.3.10 above shows the level of agreement with the claim that,

professionals in the construction industry are not interested to implement BIM in

their firms or organization due to the reason that they don‘t want to change their

organizational structure. Based on the findings shown in the table, majority (34.5%)

disagrees and 27.6% slightly disagree with the claim. Meanwhile, 24.1% slightly

agree and only 13.8% agree with the statement..

84

4.3.1 Analysis of Findings on Barriers to BIM implementation

This section involved the analysis of major barriers to building information

modeling utilization in local construction industry. These barriers include and not

limited to difficulty in learning the software, unavailability of authority backing to

deploy the technology, lack of compatibility between the software and readiness to

change from traditional delivery method.

Table 4.3.11 Barriers to implementation of Building Information Modeling (BIM)

Valid Mean

Std.

Deviation Sum

1. Difficult to learn 29 3.34 1.471 97

2. Lack of legal backing from Authority 29 3.28 1.306 95

3. Problems of interoperability 29 3.17 1.256 92

4. Lack of competent staff to operate the

software

29 3.76 1.354 109

5. Not required by client 29 3.24 1.244 94

6. Never required by other team

members

29 3.28 1.437 95

7. Expensive software 29 3.93 1.334 114

8. Non availability of parametric library 29 3.48 .829 101

9. Takes longer time to develop a model 29 3.52 .785 102

10. Not ready to distort my normal

operational structure

29 2.17 1.071 63

.

Table 4.3.11 shows the means of agreement on barriers to implementation

building information modeling in local construction industry by both Engineers and

Architects. The result has shown that the expensive software has the highest means

85

index of 3.93 indicating that is the main barriers agreed to have slowed the

implementation of building information. Equally, the results have shown a

significance level of agreement that, lack of competent operators of the software is

another overwhelming problem, this may not be unconnected with the fact that BIM

is a new concept that has not diffused across many countries and Malaysia inclusive.

Another major problem that has been identified by many writers in the field

BIM, is interoperability, that is the ability of various software to share data among

themselves. The main objective of BIM is integration of various software used by

various stakeholders in construction delivery, therefore, if there is no interoperability

the whole effort will remain defeated

The finding of the study indicate clearly, that expensive software which can

be describe as lack of fund is what mainly agreed majority of the respondents to

have slowed the implementation of building information. While the last factor (10)

that is ―Organizational readiness for change was not accepted as a barrier to BIM

utilization and implementation. Equally, majority of the respondents have shown a

degree of acceptance of the technology by disagreeing with the claim. Therefore, the

respondents are ready for change in their organizational structure as against many

literatures considering construction industry as the most conservative industry.

One of the objectives of BIM is integration of lean philosophy in both design

and construction; however, this cannot be realized if building element models that

can be assembled to give quicker generation of project model are not available. Non

availability of building element models, designed with local building codes will

certainly hamper the effort of BIM software utilization and implementation in the

local construction industry.

86

4.4.0 Section D: objective 3: Strategies for BIM implementation in Local

Construction industry

4.4.1 Introduction:

Full implementation of Building Information Modeling (BIM) would have

required the wholesale disruption of exiting business practices, process,

organizational structures, contractual relationships, and even individual work habit.

Any technology that requires such a complete break with the status quo has high

probability of failure, regardless of its merits. The emerging distributed building

information model paradigm allows for a more flexible and orderly integration of

new technology without requiring an immediate and wholesale reordering of the

entire business culture.

However, According to Billal Sucar (2010) Organization attempting to migrate

towards BIM are typically at loss on how to priorities their actions and investment.

Many stakeholders identify the BIM abilities they would like to acquire (for instance

clash detection, Construction Sequencing, energy simulation, cost estimating or life

cycle assessment) but are either unable to or unaware of the requirements for the

successful achievement of these skills and abilities. This mismatch between

expected BIM deliverables and the unforeseen requirements to implement them put

many organization at risk of achieving mixed results, lowered standards and un-met

ROI projections.

The model describes in figure 4.4.1 below present a logical arrangement of

strategies for implementation of building information modeling in local construction

industry based on priority. The strategies include; improvement of interoperability,

development of local standard of building element models, enactment of legislative

backing to cater risk management in BIM Process, structured training to foster the

diffusion of the technology and internal mobilization to encouragement that may

lead to culture change by the actors.

87

Figure 4.6 Model for strategic implementation of Building Information

Modeling.

The identified strategies are

1. Issue of interoperability,

2. Local standard and parametric library

3. Legal/Legislative backing,

4. Development of portals

5. Training and Retraining

6. Managing culture change

• Training of Staff

• devlopment of portal• Demand by client

• Managing culture change.

• Legislative backing

• Development National BIM Guidlines

• Improved Interoperability

• Development of local standard parametric library

Software Provisder Government

Construction Firms

Clients and General Public

88

4.4.2 Interoperability efforts

This has been identifies as a demanding area and there is large effort going

into the development of standards to define interoperability between models. The

international Alliance for interoperability (AIA) has created a uniform platform

– file format – for software developers; this is called Industry Foundation Class

(IFC) Forma Kymmell (2008). This means that for a model to be able to be

compatible with models created by other tools, it is necessary for all of them to

be translatable into a uniform file format, so that the entire object‘s information

can be transferred correctly. In most cases it is a challenge for such a translation

to retain all the information that the model contained in its original native file

format.

4.4.3 Local parametric libraries.

BIM design tools provide different pre-defined libraries of fixed geometry

and parametric objects. These are typically generic objects based on standard

onsite construction practices that are appropriate for early stage design. As

design is developed, object definitions become more specific, elaborated with

expected or targeted performance, such as for energy, sound and cost etc., visual

features are also embedded to support rendering. Technical and performance

requirements can be outlined so that object definition specifies what the final

constructed product should achieve. Previously, different models or datasets

were hand-built for these different purposes and not integrated. Now it is

possible to define an object once and use it for multiple purposes. The challenge

is to develop an easy to use and consistent means for defining object instances

appropriate for the current stage of design and supporting the various uses

identified for the stage.

89

Building Element Models (BEMs) are 2D and 3D geometric representation

of physical products suc as doors, windows, equipment, furniture, fixtures, and

high level assemblies of walls, roofs, ceilings, and floors at the various levels of

details needed, including specific products. For design firms involved in

particular building types, parametric models of space types may also be carried

in libraries, such as for hospital operating suites or radiation treatment rooms, to

enable their re-use across project. Over time, the knowledge embedded in these

model libraries will become a strategic asset, they will represent ―best practices‘,

as firms incrementally improve and annotate them with information based on

project use and experiences. The risk for errors and omissions will decrease as

firms realized greater success in developing and using high quality models from

previous use.

4.4.4 Legal Backing

The emergence of BIM as a vehicle for dramatic change in design and

construction occurs in a legal environment that has not fully come to grips with

all the risk management implications of the underlying technology of electronic

representation, or transmission of documents of any type. Some concerns are

obvious—what are the liabilities associated with participating and collaborating

in the model? As the use of BIM expands, other concerns are only beginning to

be recognized Some fear that an excess of concern over all the potential

questions of liability, risk allocation, shifting and sharing associated with BIM

might inhibit many from experimenting with it, and in the process deny owners,

designers and constructors the opportunity to sort through the issues as they

experiment in the laboratory of the real world.

The issue of ―ownership of the model‖ can be worked out through the

contract, just as ownership of design documents is now addressed in the

traditional delivery mode. The issue of ownership of the model becomes much

more complex when the final ―model‖ is actually a gathering of the input of a

90

single model or of many models through the use of software that allows such a

roll-up process. Many parties will have contributed to the ―model‖ in a fully

modeled project and the issues of design input versus design responsibility will

need to be sorted out. In addition, the licensing and royalty requirements of

potentially ―selfish‖ members of the Building Team need to be discouraged in

standard form documents. Owners need to be particularly aware of the

implications of such issues and are expected to play an important role in

addressing them. Enactment of law based on inline with local or existing

contract bylaws will assist in accepting the technology.

4.4.5 Development of portal

Public portals provide content and promote community through forum and

indexes to resources. According to Estman et al (2009), the content tool

primarily supports hierarchically navigation, search, download and in some cases

upload for Building Element Models (BEM) files. Private portals permit objects

sharing between firms and their peers that subscribe to joint sharing

arrangement. Firms or group of firms that understand the value in BEM contents

and the value/cost relation in different applications may share BEM or jointly

support their development. Moreover, private portals enable firms to share

common content and also protect content that encodes specific, proprietary

design knowledge. Thus, development of portal with local BEM contents will

encourage practitioners or professional designers to accept and implement BIM

solution because of less risk, more predictability, less delay and more confidence

in design. Figure 4.6.3.1 shows the schematic network diagram of the proposed

National BIM Server. When fully implemented, subscribers can download and

upload building element designed to local specifications.

91

Figure 4.7 Proposed National BIM server

4.4.6 Training and Retraining

The current lack of trained personnel remains a barrier to BIM adoption,

forcing many companies to retrain experienced CAD operators in the new tools.

Because BIM requires different ways of thinking about how designs are

developed and building construction is managed, retraining requires not only

92

learning but the unlearning of old habits, which is difficult (Chuck Estman et al

2009). New graduates whose entire undergraduate experience was influenced by

their familiarity with BIM and its use for the full range of students‘ projects, are

likely to have a profound influence on the way companies of all kinds deploy

BIM. Inevitably, a good deal of innovation in work practices is to be expected.

Implementing new technology suc as BIM technologies is costly in terms of

training and changing work process and workflows.

4.4.7 Managing Cultural Change.

Cultural issues are difficult to resolve directly and it can be argued, a

fundamental change would not be desirable (Tizani 2007). This is because

construction projects are complex in nature and involved the interaction of deeply

specialized disciplines that cannot be fully integrated. An improvement strategy

should therefore concentrate on improving the interaction between these disciplines.

This can be done through providing better support for the interaction between the

declines by improving the technologies used.

4.4.8 Summary

The chapter presents in details, responses on each item based on the

respondents‘ choice. The data presented was structured based on 3 Sections

(objectives) to allow for logical analysis. At the end each sections, the major finding

on the objectives were discussed. Meanwhile, in section B (objective 1) a hypothesis

was tested at 0.05% level of significance to ascertain the correlation in BIM usage

between architects and Engineers. Finally, strategies for implementing BIM in the

local industry were highlighted.

93

CHAPTER 5

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

5.1 Introduction

This chapter being the last in this research, the conclusion is presented based

on the findings on each objective of the study. Besides that, various

recommendations were highlighted to AEC professionals and to pave way for more

research in the field.

5.2 Conclusion

Objective 1: This study identified that, local construction industry is

reluctant to deploy the technology in its service delivery. This study has indentified

that there are only few number of professional firms that have started deploying

Building information modeling in design services only. Among the BIM software

used, Tekla Structure is being used mainly by engineers while Revit Architecture is

being used by Architects. In another words, it is clear from the finding of this study,

that majority of design professionals keep their confidence to AutoCAD may be

because of its popularity or available competent users as against any other available

design software and most design professionals are mainly using Autodesk 3D Max

and Google Sketch-up in developing design visualization. Moreover, the study also

94

identify that, there is strong correlation in acceptance of the technology between the

two main design professionals (Architects and Engineers).

Objective 2: Identified barriers to implementation of Building Information

Modeling (BIM) include; expensive software, unavailability of skillful personnel to

operate the affordable ones, problems of interoperability, unclear legal backing and a

deliberate resistance by some construction professionals to adopt the technology.

However, the results have indicated that the respondents are ready to accept

the technology; this is contrary to the notion that professionals in construction are

not ready to accept changes as postulated in many literatures. But opinions differed

among Architects and Engineer on how the barriers affected the implementation of

the technology.

It should be noted that, no commercially available software application or

technology platform is capable of containing all of the information created about a

building throughout its useful life and making it accessible to appropriate

stakeholders in real time on demand. More significantly non is in development. The

trend in building information modeling software development is towards distributed

building information models created by highly specialized software tools that are

designed to work together. A number of factors may have contributed to this trend:

The entire building life cycle of business processes and workflows is too

complex to be modeled effectively within a single software application.

Business processes and workflows vary too much across the industry and

across the building life cycle to fit neatly within a single workflow paradigm.

95

Working within a single building model environment requires too great a

change of existing information management infrastructure and business

processes to support viable migration path from existing workflows to new

ones.

The cost and technical challenges of developing a software application

capable of meeting the needs of all users throughout the life cycle of a

building are prohibitive.

Objective 3: The study identified strategies for implementing BIM in local

construction industry by developing local guidelines that will include solving the

interoperability issues and enactment of legislative backing and development of

national BIM repository to enforce the adoption of the technology from higher level

(Government) to bottom (users). It is a known fact that, several software firms are

cashing in on the ―buzz‖ of BIM, and have programs to address certain quantitative

aspects of it, but they do not treat the process as a whole. Therefore, there is a need

to standardize the BIM process and to define the guidelines for its implementation.

This can only be achieved through cooperation between the stakeholders in

construction industry.

5.3 Recommendations to AEC Professionals

Study has shown that Building information modeling is getting a wider

acceptance and demand for the technology is fast across the world, therefore,

construction professionals in local construction should try to start deploying the

technology gradually in phases.

96

It should be noted that, Implementing BIM does not mean that all of the

information about a building must be compiled in to a single data file, reside in a

single physical location, or be maintained by a single business entity throughout the

life cycle of a building. The notion of a comprehensive lifecycle building

information model – while conceptually appealing – is problematic from business

point of view. However, gradually implementation will go a long way in preparing

the construction industry to improve from its present state of defragmentation.

5.3 Recommendation for further work.

Since this study has identified that there is a substantial number of professional in

construction industry testing the technology, it is there recommended that more

study be conducted in the following areas:

1. The benefits of implementation and adoption of the technology in terms of

time and financial gains. Positive result of the study will motivate more

construction professionals to venture into it.

2. Need Assessment for introduction of Building information Modeling (BIM)

within architecture and construction management curriculum in local

Universities.

97

REFERENCE

Alshawi M. (2007) Rethinking IT in construction and Engineering

Organizational Readiness.

Associated General Contractors of America (AGC), The Contractors‘ guide

to BIM,‖ 1ST

ed AGC Research Foundation, Las Vegas, NV, p 1-5

Arto Kiviniemi (2009), Building Information Model: Technology, Design

and Process innovation in the Built Environment. Ed by Peter Newton, Keith

Hampson and Robin Drogmuller. Spoons press London.

Bew M; Underwood J; (2010) Delivering BIM to the UK Market, Handbook

of Building Information Modeling and Construction Informatics pg 30 – 36.

Bjork, B-C (2010) ―The Perceived Value of Building Information Modeling

in the US Building Industry‖ Journal of Information Technology in

construction. (ITcon) Vol. 15, pg 185-201, http://www.itcon.org/2010/15

Bornmann., A., & Rank E., (2009). Specification and Implementation of

directional Operators in 3D spatial query language for Building Information

Models. Advanced Engineering Informatics, 23, 32-

44.doi:10:1016/j.aei.2008.06.005

BSA. (2009); National BIM standards. Building SmartAlliance. Retrieved

March 2009, from http://www.buildingsmartalliance.org/index.php

Campbell, D. A. (2007); Building Information Modeling: The Web3D

Application for AEC. ACM 978-1-59593-652-3/07/0004. Perugia, Italy.

98

Construction Client‘s Group. (2008). Pathfinder Project. Retrieved May, 21,

2010 from http://www.constructing.co.nz/files/pathfinder.

Dossick C. S. (2009); Organizational divisions in BIM-enabled commercial

Construction. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management,

doi:10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000109.

Eastman C; Teicholz P; Sacks R; Liston K (2008). BIM Handbook: A guide

to Building Information Modeling for owners, designers, Engineers and

Contractors. John Wiley and Sons

Fischer M; Hymaker J; Liston K (2003) ―Benefits of 3D and 4D Models for

Facility Managers and AEC Service Providers. 4D CAD and Visualization

in Construction: Developments and Application Ed Issah R .A, Flood Ian

and O‘Brien. University of Florida Gainesville, USA.

Hannus, M. (1998) Islands of automation in construction

http://cic.vtt.fi/hannus/islands/index.htm

Jernigan, F; (2007); BIG BIM little bim The Practical approach to Building

Information Modeling Integrated Practice done the right Way. 4site Press

USA.

Kymmell W (2008); Building Information Modeling; A planning and

Managing Construction Projects with 4D CAD and Simulation

Leman F. G; Mary L. M. (2009), Understanding Collaborative Design

Environment: Technology, Design and Process innovation in the Built

Environment. Ed by Peter Newton, Keith Hampson and Robin Drogmuller.

Spoons press London. p154 - 160

99

Martin Fischer and Robin Drogemuller (2009), Virtual Design and

Construction: Technology, Design and Process innovation in the Built

Environment. Ed by Peter Newton, Keith Hampson and Robin Drogmuller.

Spoons press London. p293 – 318.

McGrawHill (2009) Smart Market Report, Building Information Modeling:

Getting information modeling to the bottom line

Mokhtar., A., Bedard, C., & Fazio, P (1998). Information Model for

Managing Design Changes in Collaborative Environment. Journal of

Computing in Civil Engineering, 12(2), 82-92.doi:10.106/(ASCE)0887-

3801(1998)12:2(82)

Noum S. G. (2007). Dissertation Research & Writing for Construction

Students. (Second Edition).Elsevier Ltd. UK.

Nworgu B. G. (1991); Educational Research, Basic Issues and Methodology.

Wisdom Publishers Limited Owerri, Nigeria.

Salman Azhar et al (2008), Building Information Modeling (BIM): A New

Paradigm for Visual Interactive Modeling and Simulation for Construction

Projects. First International Conference on Construction in Developing

Countries (ICCIDC–I)“Advancing and Integrating Construction Education,

Research & Practice‖ Karachi, Pakistan

Succar, B. (2009). "Building information modeling framework: A research

and delivery foundation for industry stakeholders." Automation in

Construction 18(3): 357-375.

Succar, B. (2009). "Building information modeling Maturity Index;

Handbook of Research on Building Information Modeling and Construction

Informatics: Concepts and Technologies, pg 65 – 102..

100

Suter G., Brunner, K., & Mahdavi, A , (2007). Building Model Construction

based on sensed object location information. Automation in Construction,

16(1), 2-12 doi:101016/j.autocon.2005.10.011

Tizani Walid (2007) Engineering Design, Constructing the Future: ND

Modeling. Ed Ghassan Aouad, Angela Lee and Song WU.Taylor and Francis

Tse, et al (2005). The Utilization of Building Information Models in Nd

Modeling: A Study of data Interfacing and Adoption Barriers. Journal of

Information Technology in Construction ITcon vol 10, pg 85-110

Underwood J; and Isikdag U (Ed) (2010), Handbook of Research on

Building Information Modeling and Construction Informatics: Concepts and

Technologies. Informatics Science Reference.

Yang, Z, and Wand G; (2009) ―Cooperation between Building Information

Modeling and Integrated Project delivery Method leads to Paradigm Shift of

AEC Industry‘ China Architecture Press P 10 -16.

Zaneldin, E. (2001) Improving Design Coordination for Building Projects. II:

A Collaborative System. Journal of Construction Engineering and

Management, 124(4), 330-336.doi:10.106/(ASCE)0733-

9364(2001)127:4(330)

i

APPENDIX

DEPARTMENT OF MATERIAL AND STRUCTURES Faculty of Civil Engineering,

University Technology Malaysia (UTM)

81310 Skudai,

Johor, Darul Ta‘azim

22nd

July, 2010

Dear Sir,

I am inviting you to participate in a research project to study Barriers to

Implementation of Building Information Modeling (Bim) in Architecture,

Engineering and Construction (AEC) Industry in Malaysia. This research project is a

requirement for the award of Master Degree in Construction management. Along

with this letter is a short questionnaire that asks a variety of questions about BIM

implementation. I am requesting you to look over the questionnaire and complete it

and return it back to me. It should take you about 5 minutes to complete.

The results of this project will be for academic purpose only. Through your

participation I hope to understand the Barriers to Implementation Building

Information Modeling (BIM) in AEC Industry in Malaysia. I hope that the results

of the survey will be useful to stakeholders in the industry and I hope to share my

results by publishing them in an academic Journal for viewing and diffusion of

knowledge.

Thanks,

Hammad Dabo Baba

Msc (Construction Management) Student.

ii

FACULTY OF CIVIL ENGINEERING SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING

DEPARTMENT OF STRUCTURES AND MATERIALS

PRIVATE & CONFIDENTIAL

QUESTIONNAIRE SURVEY

RESEARCH TOPIC:

BUILDING INFORMATION MODELING IN LOCAL CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY

Name : HAMMAD DABO BABA

Course : Msc (Construction Management)

Metric No. : MA091165

Passport No : A00495478

Supervisor : Prof. Dr. Muh’d Zaimi Bin Abd Majid

iii

RESEARCH OBJECTIVES:

1. To identify the utilization level of Building Information Modeling BIM in project Design.

2. To identify the barriers to adoption and utilization of Building Information Modeling (BIM) in Architecture, Engineering and construction industry (AEC).

3. To identify strategies for the implementation of integrated BIM in AEC Industry.

SECTION A – RESPONDENT PARTICULAR

Name of Firm : _______________________________________

Area of Expertise : _______________________________________

Qualification: PhD [ ] Msc/MEng [ ] Bsc/BEng [ ] Diploma [ ] Others [ ]

Years of Experience: 1- 5 [ ] 6 -10 [ ] 11 -15 [ ] 16 – 20 [ ] 20–Above [ ]

iv

SECTION B – FREQUENCY BIM TOOLS UTILIZATION

Instruction:

Please circle at the appropriate box alongside each statement given to show your

frequency of using the under listed software (On the scale: 1 to 5).

o 1 – Never – Did not use

o 2 – Very Rarely – Use only once or seldom

o 3 – Rarely – Use some times

o 4 – Occasionally – Use in many cases but not frequently

o 5 – Frequently – Always uses the software

A Software in use FREQUENCY LEVEL

1 Autodesk AutoCAD 1 2 3 4 5

2 Autodesk 3D Studio MAX 1 2 3 4 5

3 Tekla Structure 1 2 3 4 5

4 Autodesk Revit MEP 1 2 3 4 5

5 Autodesk Revit Architecture 1 2 3 4 5

6 Autodesk Revit Structure 1 2 3 4 5

7 ArchiCAD 1 2 3 4 5

8 Bentley Micro station 1 2 3 4 5

9 Bentley Structure 1 2 3 4 5

10 Bentley HVAC 1 2 3 4 5

11 Sketch up 1 2 3 4 5

12 Nemetschek Vector Works 1 2 3 4 5

13 TurboCAD 1 2 3 4 5

14 IntelliCAD 1 2 3 4 5

15 Navis works 1 2 3 4 5

v

SECTION C – BARRIERS TO IMPLEMENTATION OF BIM

Please circle at the appropriate box alongside each statement given to show your

level of agreement (On the scale: 1 to 5).

o 1 – Strongly Disagree

o 2 – Disagree

o 3 – Moderate

o 4 – Agree

o 5 – Strongly Agree

NO.

Barriers to Adopting BIM

AGREEMENT LEVEL

1. Not required by client

Client are requesting for the use

of BIM software from Engineers

and Architects in developing

architectural and engineering

designs and analysis

1 2 3 4 5

2. Lack of legal backing from

Authority

No legal backing as to who own

the Model and how the model to

be exchange among the team

members

1 2 3 4 5

3. Never required by other team

members

Team members are requesting

the use of BIM to develop a

project design model or extract

information from models, or

suggested the use of model in

service delivery

1 2 3 4 5

4. Expensive Software

Software prices are two high to

the extent that only mega firms

can afford a license

1 2 3 4 5

vi

5. Not ready to distort my normal

operational structure.

Already established organization

structure with 2D CAD, and the

structure is functioning well

therefore no need to opt for

new delivery method.

1 2 3 4 5

6. Difficult to learn

It takes time to learn the all the

tools in BIM software and it is

difficult to understand the

function of various menus on

the software

1 2 3 4 5

7. Non availability of parametric

library

Parametric object library that

will enhance easier

development of model using

local building standard code

1 2 3 4 5

8. Takes longer time to develop a

model

More time is spent developing a

model that just using 2D CAD

1 2 3 4 5

9 Problems of interoperability

Even if the model is developed,

there is not available exchange

protocol that will enable sharing

of the model among team

members.

1 2 3 4 5

10. Lack of competent staff to

operate the software

Majority of the available

personnel are not conversant

with BIM, and those who are

competent are not easy to

reach, and are very expensive to

hire or employ.

1 2 3 4 5

vii

SECTION D – STRATEGIES FOR THE IMPLEMENT BIM

Please circle at the appropriate box alongside each statement given to show your

level of agreement (On the scale: 1 to 5).

o 1 – Unimportant

o 2 – of little Importance

o 3 – Moderately Important

o 4 – Important

o 5 – Very Important

NO.

Strategies for Adopting BIM

IMPORTANCE LEVEL

1. Mobilizing clients on the importance of BIM. Service providers should embark on mass organization of workshops, seminars and symposium on BIM

1 2 3 4 5

2. Provision of legislation on BIM usage Government should private a policy that will encourage and subsequently force professionals to make all designs in BIM format

1 2 3 4 5

3. Training of construction staff In house training and short course should encourage by firms.

1 2 3 4 5

4. Introduction of BIM in University Curriculum. Teaching BIM in Undergraduate , and Postgraduates of Architecture and construction Management

1 2 3 4 5

5. Provision of Trial Software Vendors should develop a trail software for three (3) to Six (6) Months in order diffuse the technology at no cost

1 2 3 4 5

viii

6. Subsiding the price of BIM software Government and authors of the software can subsidize the software, so that it will be affordable not only to mega firms but even to starters.

1 2 3 4 5

7. More efforts on interoperability Development of local parametric library Imbedded in a national BIM server accessible to subscribing professionals through a real-time portal.

1 2 3 4 5

- PRIVATE & CONFIDENTIAL –

Thank you for your participation in this questionnaire