3.9 Article

Exploring the status, benefits, barriers and opportunities of using BIM for advancing prefabrication practice

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT
Volume 20, Issue 2, Pages 146-156

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/15623599.2018.1484555

Keywords

BIM; prefabrication; housing; Australian construction industry; construction technology

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Building information modelling (BIM) has significantly influenced the construction industry. However, the existing BIM tools and frameworks within prefabricated buildings are minimal. This research study aims to identify the opportunities and barriers of integrating BIM in the Australian prefabrication industry. The research was carried out using a mixed method of literature review and questionnaire survey with 30 indudstry professionals. The literature review identified the key challenges associated with prefabricated buildings including construction discipline-specific, fabrication-specific issues and communication-specific issues. The survey results proved that the most significant BIM opportunities are minimizing design errors and discrepancy of final product model between designers and manufacturers and increasing mass customization. The study revealed that seamless and timely information exchange among key project stakeholders via a BIM system was identified as the most critical success factor to adopt BIM in the prefabrication industry. This research provides practical insights into how to utilize BIM effectively for prefabrication in the housing sector. The survey results document the opportunities and barriers to BIM integration and provide professional insights on how BIM can benefit the prefabrication. The study contributes to the body of knowledge on enhancing the productivity/practice of prefabrication through BIM integration within the Australian housing context.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.9
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available