3.9 Article

Impacts of 4D BIM on construction project performance

期刊

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/15623599.2019.1580832

关键词

Project performance; 4D BIM; project schedule; project reliability; project diagnostics

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigated the impacts of 4D building information modeling (BIM) on construction projects and found significant benefits in terms of project reliability, monitoring, and diagnosis. However, issues such as lack of shared responsibility, limited understanding and training regarding 4D BIM, and complexity in effective implementation were also highlighted.
A significant proportion of construction projects are failing to achieve their deadline finish dates. This advocate for solutions that could address the root causes of time impacting risks, leading to the use of 4D building information modeling (BIM) for project planning. This study investigates the impacts of 4D BIM on construction projects. An exploratory sequential mixed method research was conducted to initially explore the topic via interviews and literature review, and, subsequently, the themes derived were put into questionnaires to elicit expert knowledge on a wider industry scale. The data were analyzed using thematic analysis, reliability analysis, Kruskal-Wallis test and factor analysis. Across the objectives around the impacts of 4D BIM on project reliability, monitoring and diagnosis, the findings presented eight key ways the 4D BIM support project performance. Examples of component factors that were raised was planning efficiency to enhance planner output, assessment and directive with a better comparison of planned and actual progress, and thorough/comprehensive risk reflection to cover wide ranges of issues. Upon further reflection, the finding highlighted the issues of the lack of shared responsibility outside of the planner and BIM coordinator, severe lack of understanding and training regarding 4D BIM and complexity of carrying out the process effectively.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.9
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据