Building Information Modeling in Architecture

Building Information Modeling in Architecture, Engineering, and Construction: Emerging Research Directions and Trends Burcin Becerik-Gerber, A.M.ASCE1; and Karen Kensek2 Abstract: Currently, the architecture, engineering, and construction industry is facing enormous technological and institutional changes and challenges including the proliferation of information technology and appropriate application of sustainable practices. The 21st century engineer and architect must be able to deal with a rapid pace of technological change, a highly interconnected world, and complex problems that require multidisciplinary solutions. This paper focuses on research directions and trends around building information modeling 共BIM兲 through interdisciplinary endeavors: how BIM research topics could be explored; their relevancy; and their potential future impact. It identifies BIM research topics that are considered to be important to a wide range of practitioners and future practitioners, both architecture and engineering students. It also assesses the relevance of current research projects to the industry and categorizes future BIM research topics. It aims to formulate research ideas and methodologies to pursue them and to explore how an industry/academic partnership for exploring exciting research opportunities could be established. DOI: 10.1061/共ASCE兲EI.1943-5541.0000023 CE Database subject headings: Sustainable development; Construction industry; Research; Information technology; Buildings. Author keywords: Building information modeling; Sustainable development; Construction industry; Research; Information technology; Virtual design and construction.

Introduction The architecture, engineering, and construction 共AEC兲 industry, often acknowledged as a low-technology and an inefficient industry 共Gallaher et al. 2004兲, is the largest industry in the United States 共Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis 2004兲 and one of the largest in the world accounting for one-tenth of the world’s gross domestic product 共Murie 2007兲. Currently, the industry is facing enormous technological and institutional transformations with their resultant difficulties and challenges. One very important instrument to such change is the use of information technology and application of sustainable practices. Several scholars recognize these two major trends in their research and publications. According to Adeli 共2009兲, civil and environmental engineering programs in many U.S. universities should promote sustainability, embrace technology, focus on environment and infrastructure, think cross disciplinary, and advocate an intelligent system approach to keep their momentum in attracting students and resources. According to Levitt 共2007兲 three emerging trends suggest the need to broaden the frame of future construc1

Assistant Professor, Sonny Astani Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Viterbi School of Engineering, USC, 3620 S. Vermont Ave., KAP 224C, Los Angeles, CA 90089-2531 共corresponding author兲. E-mail: [email protected] 2 Assistant Professor, School of Architecture, Watt Hall, USC, WAH 204, Los Angeles, CA 90089-0291. E-mail: [email protected] Note. This manuscript was submitted on June 15, 2009; approved on December 1, 2009; published online on December 4, 2009. Discussion period open until December 1, 2010; separate discussions must be submitted for individual papers. This paper is part of the Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice, Vol. 136, No. 3, July 1, 2010. ©ASCE, ISSN 1052-3928/2010/3-139–147/$25.00.

tion engineering and management research in several ways: better integrated delivery of construction; new governance structures for projects that can support a more global construction industry; and enhanced sustainability through new approaches, methods, and information technology. Bakens 共1997兲 suggested that growing partnership between research community and industry, internationalization of competition and collaboration in the research community, growing emphasis on integrated topics and approaches in research, information technology in construction, electronic collaboration, and sustainable development and construction are the six international research trends and priorities in the construction industry. Turk 共2007兲 outlined topics and agendas for construction informatics in European research in four categories: common infrastructures; communication and coordination technologies; processes supporting information and communication technologies; and supporting themes such as business process reengineering. The 21st century engineer and architect must be able to deal with a rapid pace of technological change, a highly interconnected world, and complex problems that require multidisciplinary solutions. Both architecture and engineering professions are embracing new modes of interdisciplinary information sharing and focusing on two emerging and fast growing concepts: building information modeling 共BIM兲 and integrated project delivery 共IPD兲. A mutually beneficial industry/academia collaboration will lead to a growth in strategic research and also would address concerns of Issa and Anumba 共2007兲 about computing and information technology research in civil engineering and architecture being self-fulfilling rather than industry transforming. While there is a wide range of definitions for BIM 关Associated General Contractors of America 共AGC兲 2006; General Services Administration 共GSA兲 2007; BuildingSmart Alliance 共bSa兲共2006兲兴, in the context of this paper, the following definition is used: a modeling technology and associated set of processes to

JOURNAL OF PROFESSIONAL ISSUES IN ENGINEERING EDUCATION AND PRACTICE © ASCE / JULY 2010 / 139

Downloaded 16 Jun 2010 to 68.181.161.228. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visithttp://www.ascelibrary.org

Construction Management

Architect

Civil Engineering Consultant

Building Science

Contractor

Architecture Mechanical Engineering

Technology Provider

Business Administration Engineer

Policy Planning and Development Structural Engineering

Developer

Electrical Engineering

Other

Aerospace Engineering Owner

Systems Engineering 0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

Fig. 1. Firm profiles of respondents of the first survey. “Other” included project management and design/build firms. Several respondents self-categorized themselves in multiple firm groups 共for example, architect and contractor兲.

produce, communicate, and analyze building models 共Eastman et al. 2008兲 and interfaces, methods, and applications that are pertinent to BIM technology, including but not limited to the following: sustainable practices, management and organizational issues around technology, and assisting technologies and methods.

Research Objectives and Scope The objective of this research is to identify innovative research topics and trends in the area of BIM in AEC through interdisciplinary endeavors. One of the main goals is to bring together academic and professional expertise from multiple disciplines to discuss current problems and speculate on new solutions for the future and identify research topics that could advance the state of the art. There are methodological differences between this study and the much larger road mapping projects such as the project of ROADCON 共2003兲共Strategic Roadmap toward KnowledgeDriven Sustainable Construction兲, project of ICCI 共2004兲共Innovation, Coordination Transfer and Deployment through Networked Cooperation in the Construction Industry兲, and Capital Project Technology Roadmap project of FIATECH 共2009兲. The focus of this research project is limited to BIM; it does not look for an industry-wide consensus; and unlike these other studies, it investigates the research questions from the industry’s and students’ perspectives while exploring the role of research community in leading collaborative projects with practitioners. The paper continues with an explanation of the research approach and methodology. Then, it discusses the data that were gathered through three online surveys, a research workshop with practitioners, and student input through a final report. Next, it presents and discusses the research directions and trends including how BIM research topics could be explored, their relevancy, and potential future impact. A discussion for future research and education follows.

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

Fig. 2. Student majors

Surveys Three online surveys were conducted to assess the interest of the industry and student body on various BIM research topics. The objective of the first survey was to gather a list of potential research topics while developing a list of practitioners, who would be interested in participating in interdisciplinary research projects. The first survey was sent to a total of 110 practitioners. The list was developed based on writers’ personal contacts and their schools’ connections with the industry. It was not the writers’ intent to survey an extremely large selection of practitioners. Instead, the selection of practitioners to be invited to take the survey was based on two criteria: 共1兲 demonstrated strong interest in the area of research and 共2兲 demonstrated interest in applying construction related research. A total of 54 responses was received from February 20, 2009 to April 17, 2009 共Fig. 1兲. Based on the responses to the first survey, a second survey was developed and distributed from March 13, 2009 to April 17, 2009 to a total of 44 participants. The second survey was automatically sent to the respondents who indicated their interest in participating in research in the first survey. The goal of the second survey was to identify specific research topic areas. Based on the second survey, as well as the students’ opinion about the most important topics when they graduate, three sessions and four panels for each session 共a total of 12 panels兲 were identified: “BIM for project life cycle” 关for design and engineering, for construction, and for facility management 共FM兲兴, “BIM and sustainable practices” 共sustainable practices in architecture, engineering, and construction, linking BIM to analysis tools, sustainability during construction, and afterward energy innovations兲, and “building information management” 共IPD, interoperability, changes to practice, BIM best practices兲. In an attempt to compare industry’s research interests to the students’ understanding of the profession, a third survey was designed and distributed to students at the School of Architecture and Department of Civil Engineering of the University of Southern California via course lists. An attempt was made to send the survey not to all students but to those who had some knowledge of the field. A total of 79 students completed the survey from April 7, 2009 to April 17, 2009. Student majors and years were spread throughout appropriate engineering and architecture majors as shown in Figs. 2 and 3.

Research Approach and Methodology A mixed research methodology, including a series of online surveys, a research workshop, and student reports, was implemented to gather and analyze data.

Workshop The research workshop was held on April 21, 2009. Specifically, its mission was have the participants formulate research ideas,

140 / JOURNAL OF PROFESSIONAL ISSUES IN ENGINEERING EDUCATION AND PRACTICE © ASCE / JULY 2010


PhD

Masters

Building Information Technology and Management

43%

Integrated Project Delivery

42%

BIM for Sustainable Design/ Construction 24%

Construction Automation and Simulation Junior

50% 53% 46%

13%

Post-occupancy Evaluation

Freshman 0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Other

4%

I don't know

4% 2%

40

0%

determine methodologies to pursue them, and explore how an industry/academic partnership for exploring exciting research opportunities could be established. Main goals for this workshop were to 1. identify the most promising avenues of BIM research; 2. discuss with practitioners the practical implementation and application issues; 3. identify and develop linkages between the 12 research areas/ panels; and 4. promote industry/academic collaboration on all aspects of AEC related research. A total of 30 participants, who expressed interest in a one-day research workshop in the second survey, from 26 companies attended the workshop. The breakdown for firm profiles is as follows: six architecture, six engineering, six technology providers, and eight builders. Overall, the participants are considered leaders in the field, who are well acquainted with the technology from direct experience in their firms. Interdisciplinary panels of six to eight participants focused on a particular topic; these panels were arranged to provide a broad interdisciplinary mixing of professionals. Each panel discussion lasted about 45 min with a 5-min summary that was presented to the entire audience at the end. Specific questions and topic areas to discuss were provided to each panel. These included the following: describing an innovative research idea; providing at least three research questions and goals for the idea proposed; proposing a methodology to overcome barriers to accomplish these goals; listing potential research outcomes and deliverables to allow for the adoption of these research outcomes by the industry and their potential to move computing in AEC forward in a meaningful way; and to project what the research idea’s significance would be for current and future researches. Student Reports In parallel to the research workshop, as part of a class project, students were asked to contribute their insight and opinions to the same research topics. However, the student reports used a different method to gather student ideas on research topics in BIM. Students had two weeks to explore the same questions and provide a written document back to the instructor. The work was not collaborative; all students initiated and researched the topic idea themselves. Most of the 24 students were upper division 共2 were in the Bachelor of Architecture program兲 or a graduate student in architecture 共8 were in Master of Building Science and 11 were in Master of Architecture兲. The remaining three students were a senior in Construction Management and two Master of Construction

31%

13%

25%

Students

Fig. 3. Student levels

83%

59%

20%

Energy Innovations

Sophmore

87% 58%

BIM and Fabrication

Senior (4th and 5th year)

89%

50%

75%

100%

Practitioners

Fig. 4. Areas of research that practitioners are interested in and areas of research that students think that will be most important in their profession when they graduate

Management students. Although students knew of the topic areas, they could write about any research topic that was BIM related, innovative, and that could improve the current practice in the AEC industry.

Research Directions and Trends Fig. 4 shows research areas practitioners are interested in 共based on the first survey兲 and students’ answers to the question of what areas will be most important in their profession when they graduate 共based on the third survey兲. Building information technology and management 共89%兲, IPD 共87%兲, and BIM for sustainable design and construction 共83%兲 were the top three choices of practitioners. The “other” category for practitioner answers included integrated structural analysis, real estate/portfolio analysis, webenabled technologies, field BIM, interoperability, BIM quality assurance, and code compliance. Students placed BIM for sustainable design and construction and energy innovations at the top of their importance level. BIM technology and management and IPD related research topics followed as the third and fourth choices of students. The other category for student answers included leadership in energy and environmental design 共LEED兲, a certification system used in the United States to categorize the level of environmentally sustainable buildings, estimation, and management of the construction process. IPD, a key topic of concern by professionals, was fourth choice of students, at 42%. In light of the surveys conducted, results of the workshop, and the student reports, research areas are categorized into three areas: BIM for project life cycle, BIM and sustainable practices, and building information management. Figs. 5–7 show the practitio-

BIM for Design & Engineering (S) BIM for Design & Engineering (P) BIM for Construction (S)

ranked 1

BIM for Construction (P)

ranked 2 ranked 3

BIM for Facilities Management (S)

ranked 4 BIM for Facilities Management (P) 0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Fig. 5. Practitioners’ and students’ rankings of topics based on the relative importance of research—BIM for project life cycle



Sustainability in AEC (S) Sustainability in AEC (P) Linking BIM to analysis tools (S) Linking BIM to analysis tools (P)

ranked 1

Sustainability during constr. & afterwards (S) Sustainability during constr. & afterwards (P)

ranked 2 ranked 3 ranked 4

Energy Innovations (S) Energy Innovations (P) 0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Fig. 6. Practitioners’ and students’ rankings of topics based on the relative importance of research—BIM and sustainable practices

ners’ 共based on the second survey兲 and students’ 共based on the third survey兲 rankings weighing of the relative importance of topics. IPD was considered a crucial research topic area, with BIM for construction by both practitioners and students. When second choices are included, linking BIM to analysis tools is one of the top choices for practitioners and BIM best practices and is one of the top choices from students. Energy innovation topics are considered as an important research area in the second rank tier and, for students, tied for top overall. Sustainable practice category showed the greatest spread in the students’ perception of relative importance of these areas. The results confirm that the students are aware of IPD and its importance. Of all the 12 topics, “changes to practice” and “BIM for FM” are listed as the least interesting topics for both practitioners and students when first and second choices are included. The later could be attributed to the fact that owners did not respond to the surveys as enthusiastically as the rest of the groups although a comparable sample size of owners was invited to participate. Tables 1–3 summarize topics of interests, research priority, research questions, and barriers identified by the practitioners and students. It is useful to summarize the students’ choice of research topics for their reports. The top four choices were interoperability 共25%兲, BIM for construction 共16.7%兲, linking BIM to analysis tools 共12.5%兲, and BIM for design and engineering 共8.3%兲.

Discussion on Research and Education Needs The following common themes for future research and education have been identified as being critical to the development and implementation of BIM in the AEC profession: the concept of one virtual database versus linked information; coordination with sus-

IPD (S) IPD (P) Interoperability (S) ranked 1

Interoperability (P)

ranked 2

Changes to practice (S)

ranked 3 Changes to practice (P)

ranked 4

BIM best practices (S) BIM best practices (P) 0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Fig. 7. Practitioners’ and students’ rankings of topics based on the relative importance of research—building information management

tainable design; rethinking of IPD as a method to promote BIM; educational ramifications; return on investment; and management issues throughout the life cycle of the project. One BIM throughout the project life cycle or multiple views. The need to maintain a single project information database from project conception through fabrication and installation and into operation and maintenance was raised both by practitioners and students multiple times. However, more research needs to be accomplished to fully realize the potential of fully integrated graphic and nongraphic databases that describes the building and incorporates appropriate information at every stage of its life. The topic of interoperability has received remarkable attention both from the industry and academia, but there are widely varying opinions as to how this will actually happen 共from a single BIM model to a multilayered system based heavily on IFC, which is the only public standard for building model data exchange that includes geometry, object structure, and material and performance attributes兲共Jeong et al. 2009兲. Many practitioners believe that the integration 共or lack thereof兲 of the software is currently a barrier in the present implementation of BIM. With multiple vendors developing modeling products with proprietary file formats, the sharing of information creates challenges with respect to accuracy and dependability of the models. The solution, whether it is one BIM for project life cycle or multiple interoperable views for different specialties, should enable 共1兲 information sharing beyond the exchange of three-dimensional geometry; 共2兲 the longterm archiving of BIMs in a format that can be repurposed throughout the building life cycle; and 共3兲 breaking up the model so that it can be used and updated transparently by many applications and users. Coordination with sustainable practices. Students’ interest in sustainability was overwhelming in the survey and in the topics discussed. Part of this can be attributed to the concern for sustainable practices being emphasized at the university. Students indicated that they strongly believe in delivering the best possible product in the least possible time, with the least harm to the environment. This area of research also received the high interest from practitioners. The consensus was whether it is through the use of smarter materials or a more user-friendly system of measuring building performance, simulation is the most critical step to creating a more sustainable environment. There is an agreement that how to best achieve sustainable buildings is a crucial research topic and BIM may be able to accomplish this. One example is the use of BIM as the gateway to LEED requirements where synergies exist: i.e., day lighting, water consumption, and reuse and recyclable material tracking 共Haynes 2008兲. Rethinking of IPD to promote BIM. IPD is a predesign to construction method that creates a collaborative environment required for the most comprehensive use of BIM by aligning the incentives and goals of all team members; it addresses the problems associated with traditional delivery methods and provides another alternative. The consensus was that while BIM is gaining momentum, except for a few notable exceptions, IPD is slower to catch on. According to the practitioners, some owners believe that by using an IPD contract, some of the creative tension between the architect and the contractor could be lost. With that in mind, practitioners discussed what IPD means and what their IPD experience is. Although many of the practitioners indicated that they have been on IPD-like projects, they did not have direct IPD project experience. They indicated that IPD as the most important topic as a methodology to support using BIM. IPD was the most mentioned research topic area by the students as well. Students expressed that seamless integration of BIM use across the indus-



Table 1. Topics, Research Priority, Questions, and Barriers Identified by the Practitioners and Students for BIM for Project Life-Cycle Areas Area BIM for design and engineering


BIM for construction

BIM for FM

Topics of interests identified by practitioners

Topics of interests identified by students

共1兲 Use of BIM for master planning, feasibility studies 共cost, performance, and coordination兲, plan checking, and conceptual design; 共2兲 effect of BIM on innovation; and 共3兲 role of BIM in decision making 共structural configuration, system choice, and building performance兲共1兲 Model based scheduling, material tracking, constructability, and direct fabrication; 共2兲 transition of visualization to the field; and 共3兲 integration of BIM to multisensor technologies to produce accurate existing condition assessments

共1兲 Use of BIM for existing buildings, real estate portfolio analysis, master planning, and feasibility; 共2兲 integrating BIM with FM and operation software

Research priority

Research questions

Barriers

共1兲 Development of a parametric engine that generates design alternatives based on project information 共site conditions, weather data, geography, building codes, and “kind of architecture preferred”兲 to find the “best” possible design given the constraints

Object oriented and independent database that is software agnostic and global as it hosts data not only for design and engineering but also for all project team members’ requirements and needs for the project life cycle

What kinds of databases exist today; what are the methods and techniques to host all project information; what kind of activities should be supported; and what levels of extensibility exist?

Legal contracts; lack of interoperability

共1兲 Development of a coordinated model to be used across all phases of the project; 共2兲 training of field staff; and 共3兲 field capable hardware and software, specific to the construction industry

Standardized, user-friendly, and cross-cultural field staff training and user-interface/hardware development for transfer of BIMs to the field staff

Attitude 共resistance to change兲, training 共investment and loss of productivity兲, language barriers 共associated with the field staff performing the work兲; lack of rewards, and increased risk associated with changing work processes to adopt model-centric processes 共1兲 Development of a framework for Determination and definition of core How to leverage the value that BIM Lack of software continuity in the flow of information sets of data that are common elements brings to a project to benefit end interoperability; in a coordinated/comprehensive for FM and postoccupancy operations users; how BIM can be used to resistance to manner; 共2兲 development of a that can eventually become part of improve building performance? fundamental change by method for updates and maintenance contract language large institutions; and checks; and 共3兲 linking large lack of objective and manuals and important documents scientific studies that with BIM quantify the value of BIM for FM Who owns the coordinated model; who generates, produces, and organizes the effort; what are the methods of delivery to trades; and what should the interface for the field personnel be like?



Table 2. Topics, Research Priority, Questions, and Barriers Identified by the Practitioners and Students for BIM and Sustainable Practice Areas Area Sustainable practices in the AEC industry

Topics of interests identified by practitioners


Research priority

共1兲 Modeling entire built environment to investigate impact of buildings and their surroundings; 共2兲 exploring systems to minimize material use and energy consumption; and 共3兲 standardization of carbon databases 共1兲 Investigation of the gaps in the type of data project team members use throughout project life cycle; 共2兲 one model that can accommodate multiple schemas or a multimodel solution; and 共3兲 interoperability between BIM and energy simulation programs

共1兲 Design schemes 共such as innovative envelopes兲 to reduce energy consumption; 共2兲 energy efficient city design; 共3兲 designing net-zero energy buildings; 共4兲 biomimicry; and 共5兲 use of BIM in adaptive reuse projects

Development of a list of best practices for the industry, sustainable metrics, training programs, and education tools; a knowledge base that focuses on the overall carbon footprint of a building over its life cycle

What are the best practices for sustainability; how does BIM assist with innovative AEC sustainable practices?

Accuracy of as-built models to be used for life cycle sustainability; lack of energy monitoring over a building’s life cycle; and lack of tools designed specifically for owners

Identification of criteria for the development of an associated database that eliminates the need for multiple models 共architectural, analytical, and structural兲 and enables real-time environmental analysis

How can real-time performance and sustainability feedback from/within BIM be achieved; are there better ways to use intuitive programs to quantify sustainable solutions; and what are the attributes the database would have to include?

Autonomous technology development that does not support a nonproprietary database; interoperability

Development of an open standard that software providers can comply with and that can be written into legal documents

What are the data needed from project team to be used postoccupancy by the FM groups; what are the specific case histories or project examples?

Technology related issues such as how to create a seamless interface between FM software and BIM; intellectual property concerns; client expectations; and appealing to smaller versus larger institutions/ owners

Development of specifications and fluid standards to link analysis packages to BIM packages for multiobjective, physically based, real-time decision making

How BIM can be used to reduce energy consumption of buildings by studying early design strategies, new materials, and mechanical equipment?

Interoperability; lack of industry motivation

共1兲 Developing a library of sustainable design objects that are exact digital representations of physical objects; 共2兲 developing direct connections with mechanical system manufacturers for access to product information, pricing, and lifetime energy performance Sustainability 共1兲 Reducing waste by optimizing 共1兲 Building automation systems during materials, fabrication, that can control building systems construction and construction sequence, and automatically based on indoor/ afterward durations with the use of BIM; outdoor climate and human 共2兲 linking a live model to comfort levels; 共2兲 postoccupancy building management systems for energy modeling verification; and energy conservation and 共3兲 identification of reasons that monitoring cause buildings to underperform Energy innovations 共1兲 Use of BIM in achieving 共1兲 Efficient building envelopes multiobjective optimization; 共2兲 that produce energy; 共2兲 using trade-off analysis of competing recycled building materials; 共3兲 sustainability parameters; and 共3兲 providing cost-effective solutions real-time information processing where return on investment is for decision making high; and 共4兲 developing regulations that would indirectly create economies of scale Linking BIM to analysis tools

Research questions


Barriers

Table 3. Topics, Research Priority, Questions, and Barriers Identified by the Practitioners and Students for Building Information Management Areas Area IPD


Interoperability

Changes to practice

BIM best practices

Topics of interests identified by practitioners 共1兲 Exploration of contracts, risks, relationships, insurance, frameworks, and best practices to fully integrate BIM and IPD; 共2兲 demonstration of the benefits of IPD to the owners; and 共3兲 collecting best practice IPD case studies 共1兲 Research into the existing BIM standards and how they are being used and to which extend they are successfully adopted; 共2兲 research how the software industry can agree on and develop true interoperability functionality 共1兲 Fee allocations, schedule/ phase durations, coordination of consultants, and training junior/ senior staff; 共2兲 forensic studies on past projects to determine successful and unsuccessful methods; and 共3兲 in-depth comparisons of traditional versus collaborative projects 共1兲 Setting BIM workflows from design to postoccupancy; 共2兲 maintaining a single BIM throughout project phases 共or not兲; 共3兲 managing large models; and 共4兲 clear definitions for BIM deliverables


Research priority

Research questions

Barriers

共1兲 Using cutting edge technologies within an IPD framework that can create an integrated team approach, streamline the construction process, and enable an overall quicker building delivery

Development of best practice IPD case studies so that professionals who are not familiar with using IPD can get assurance of how the profits have played out both on successful and nonsuccessful examples

Which of the underlying problems that block widespread adoption of IPD can actually be improved and/or eliminated; can one solve some of these problems through BIM technology?

Liability insurance and current contractual models; current public procurement policy and the emphasis on first year costs

共1兲 Effectiveness of the IFC and GBxml; 共2兲 a data interactive BIM microapplication; and 共3兲 assessing the feasibility and functionality of creating the entire world’s built environment in digital format to unite geographic/ semantic info *Most of the students did have much to comment on the issue of changes to practice although it is this generation of students that is at the cusp of the paradigm shift*

Specifications for a product life-cycle management platform that integrates all disciplines’ analytical and physical objects for simulation and performance

Is true interoperable necessary between software programs or is it possible to have a middle server, which is software independent and can provide the appropriate model to the appropriate user?

Lack of software provider motivation; lack of standards and too many standards

Identification of the new fee allocation when designing and building with BIM and new management practices

What are the additional services; when and what to charge for them; what are some of the best practices in these areas; and what are contract structures that support these services?

Lack of knowledge on the owners’ side; difficulty in comparing project programs; and resistance to sharing proprietary data

Means and methods for realization of the model as a true construct of collaboration and contract

When should BIM be Lack of legal support/definitions; implemented and why; what level highly fragmented industry of information is needed at each stage and who is responsible for it; and how to work collaboratively on the model共s兲?

共1兲 A case study that has the potential to serve as a role model for future BIM projects; 共2兲 survey of the legal and technical aspects of BIM implementation; and 共3兲 thorough research into the specific BIM software available


try is extremely important to overcome and might alleviate communication issues among project team members. Students believe that poor communication across project team members leads to strained relationships, animosity, and delay, all of which can negatively impact project outcomes. Educational ramifications. Not only do these projects have to span across the “trades” but also academic disciplines. New partnerships need to be forged and ways of educating students should be modified. Advanced uses of BIM should be more heavily incorporated in AEC management curriculums. Using this technology at an early stage of education can help prepare future professionals to practice efficient methods. Degree programs need to address IPD, BIM, and sustainability topics in the undergraduate programs, in more sophisticated Master level courses, and as prime research objectives for doctoral students. An integrated studio concept, using real life case studies, and thinking beyond the current state of the industry to image and prototype new tools for the profession with their input and direction should be considered. As building industry shifts toward adopting IPD, the education system should take a more collaborative approach in teaching. Students from different schools could produce required drawings, documents, and studies needed to realize a building using the AIA’s definition of the IPD process 共AIA California Council 2007兲. Furthermore, organized educational efforts focusing not only on future practitioners but also on current practitioners are a must. Although concepts discussed in this paper are sweeping through the AEC industry, there is still some degree of skepticism and sometimes the inclination to wait and see what happens with other firms first. Return on investment. Although this topic did not appear as a topic itself, research on BIM/IPD return on investment was another topic that was discussed by the practitioners. The construction industry needs more research to be conducted to substantiate the anecdotes that BIM reduces costs. How investing in BIM software can lessen and control costs over the life cycle of a project is a very important question that requires ample hard data to coax nonparticipant, skeptical builders, architects, owners, and developers into solidifying the foundation to this concept 共Becerik-Gerber and Rice 2010兲. Readily available, easy-to-read, well-formatted, and reputable research reports are essential. Managerial and organizational issues. There appears to be a disconnect in the profession between what some parties think is happening and what is actually happening. The practitioners agreed that BIM hype is huge, but the actual reality is that the goals and integration of BIM are being achieved on a very limited basis and not in a comprehensive way in many cases. Although the goal of having an integrated model 共or several integrated models兲 from cradle to grave has been clearly stated, details of accomplishing this are often not clearly stated. This is especially true at critical key turnover points of the digital model, i.e., from the architect to contractor, architect to consultants, contractor to subcontractors, and architect to facility manager or owner. Although there is a general agreement that BIM is the future for the AEC industry, there are still several managerial and operational issues that need to be resolved for a long-lasting success.

Conclusions BIM, vertical enterprise integration 共or IPD兲, and sustainability are three symbiotic forces that are sweeping through the AEC industry. All are achievable to some extent on their own, but maximizing the potential of any of these items will require the use

of the others. These new concepts and other related processes and technologies could assist a virtual vertical integration in the AEC industry both at the project and enterprise levels. Results demonstrated commonality in the goals of the major participants in the building process while highlighting some smaller differences between the views of the practitioners and students. This paper demonstrates that research topic for BIM is a significant topic for the AEC industry, that the industry has matured beyond sweeping generalizations about the usefulness of BIM, and that leaders in the profession would like to see very specific research goals identified and developed by both the profession and the academy together.

Acknowledgments The writers would like to acknowledge and thank three important groups: the USC Viterbi School of Engineering’s assistance and financial support in organizing the AEC Leadership Research Workshop, the practitioners and students, who took the time to answer and put sincere efforts in completing three consequent surveys and student reports, and the workshop attendees, without them this study would not be possible.

References Adeli, H. 共2009兲. “Vision for civil and environmental engineering departments in the 21st century.” J. Profl. Issues Eng. Educ. Pract., 135共11兲, 1–3. AIA California Council. 共2007兲. “Integrated project delivery: A working definition.” 具http://www.ipd-ca.net/images/Integrated%20Project%20 Delivery%20Definition.pdf典共Jul. 2, 2009兲. Associated General Contractors of America 共AGC兲. 共2006兲. “The contractors’ guide to BIM.” 具www.agcnebuilders.com/documents/BIM Guide.pdf典共Nov. 24, 2009兲. Bakens, W. 共1997兲. “International trends in building and construction research.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 123共2兲, 102–104. Becerik-Gerber, B., and Rice, S. 共2010兲. “The perceived value of building information modeling in the U.S. building industry.” J. Information Technology in Construction (ITcon), 15, 185–201. BuildingSmart Alliance 共bSa兲. 共2006兲. “About the national BIM standard.” 具http://www.buildingsmartalliance.org/index.php/nbims/about/典共Nov. 24, 2009兲. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis. 共2004兲. “2002 economic census: Table 1. Advance summary statistics for the united states.” 具http://www.census.gov/econ/census02/advance/TABLE 1.HTM典共Jun. 11, 2009兲. Eastman, C., Teicholz, P., Sacks, R., and Liston, K. 共2008兲. BIM handbook: A guide to building information modeling for owners, managers, designers, engineers, and contractors, Wiley, Hoboken, N.J. FIATECH. 共2009兲. “Capital projects technology roadmap overview.” 具http://fiatech.org/tech-roadmap/roadmap-overview.html典共Jun. 11, 2009兲. Gallaher, M. P., O’Connor, A. C., Dettbarn, J. L., and Gilday, L. T. 共2004兲. “Cost analysis of inadequate interoperability in the U.S. capital facilities industry.” National Institute of Standards and Technology, 具www.bfrl.nist.gov/oae/publications/gcrs/04867.pdf典共Jun. 11, 2009兲. General Services Administration 共GSA兲. 共2007兲. GSA Building Information Modeling Guide Series 01, 具http://www.gsa.gov/graphics/pbs/ GSA_BIM_Guide_v0_60_Series01_Overview_05_14_07.pdf典共Nov. 24, 2009兲. Haynes, D. 共2008兲. “LEEDing the way.” 具http://au.autodesk.com/?nd ⫽class&session_id⫽2940典共Apr. 22, 2010兲. ICCI. 共2004兲. “Innovation co-ordination, transfer and deployment through networked co-operation in the construction industry.” 具http://



cic.vtt.fi/projects/icci/public.html典共Jun. 11, 2009兲. Issa, R., and Anumba, C. 共2007兲. “Computing and information technology 共IT兲 research in civil engineering—Self fulfilling or industry transforming.” J. Comput. Civ. Eng., 21共5兲, 301–302. Jeong, Y.-S., Eastman, C., Sacks, R., and Kaner, I. 共2009兲. “Benchmark tests for BIM data exchanges of precast concrete.” Autom. Constr., 18共4兲, 469–484. Levitt, R. 共2007兲. “CEM research for the next 50 years: Maximizing economic, environmental, societal value of the built environment.” J.

Constr. Eng. Manage., 133共9兲, 619–628. Murie, F. 共2007兲. “Building safety—An international perspective.” Int. J. Occup. Environ. Health, 13, 5–11. ROADCON. 共2003兲. “Strategic roadmap towards knowledge-driven sustainable construction.” 具http://cic.vtt.fi/projects/roadcon/public.html典共Jun. 11, 2009兲. Turk, Z. 共2007兲. “Construction informatics in European research: Topics and agendas.” J. Comput. Civ. Eng., 21共3兲, 211–219.

