Mahamood, S Z H and Fathi, M S (2022) Seismic building design work process using building information modeling (BIM) technology for Malaysian government projects. International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment, 13(2), pp. 211-232. ISSN 1759-5916
Abstract
Purpose: This paper aims to improve the seismic building design (SBD) work process for Malaysian Government projects. Design/methodology/approach: Semi-structured interviews were virtually conducted to a small sample size of internal and external stakeholders from the Malaysian Government technical agency. There were seven of them, comprising Structural Engineers, an Architect, a Quantity Surveyor and consultants-linked government projects. The respondents have at least five years of experience in building design and construction. Findings: The paper evaluates the current SBD work process in the government technical agency. There were four main elements that appear to need to be improved, specifically in the design stage: limitations in visualization, variation of works, data management and coordination. Research limitations/implications: This study was limited to Malaysian Government building projects and covered a small sample size. Therefore, further research is recommended to extend to other government agencies or ministries to obtain better results. Furthermore, the findings and proposal for improvements to the SBD work process can also be replicated for other similar disasters resilience projects. Practical implications: The findings and proposal for improvements to the SBD work process can also be replicated for other similar disasters resilience projects. Social implications: This study was limited to government building projects and covered a small sample size. Therefore, further research is recommended to extend to other government agencies or ministries to obtain better results. Furthermore, the findings and proposal for improvements to the SBD work process can also be replicated for other similar disasters resilience projects. Originality/value: This study provides an initial step to introduce the potential of building information modeling for SBD in implementing Malaysian Government projects. It will be beneficial both pre-and post-disaster and is a significant step toward a resilient infrastructure and community.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | BIM; building design; building information modeling; disaster; disaster prevention; earthquakes; resilience; seismic; seismic design |
| Index terms: | proposal, seismic design, interview, disaster prevention, government agency, visualization, external stakeholder, agency, variation, methodology, structural engineer, design stage, sample size, data management, government project, building information modelling, quantity surveying, building design, coordination, earthquake, architect |
| Subjects: | administrative law, environmental hazards, information systems, data management, sociology, contractual condition, financial risk, management, design practice, structural engineering, research methods, professional practice, project planning, architectural design, data collection methods, profession, research design and methodology |
| Topics: | Contract Administration, Organizational Design, Digital Applications, Legal Issues, Design Practice, Sustainability, Stakeholder Management, Roles and Professions, Engineering Principles, Research Practice, Project Management, Cost Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here