Jafari, K G; Nozhat Sadat Ghazi, S and Noorzai, E (2021) BIM-based integrated solution for analysis and management of mismatches during construction. Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology, 19(1), pp. 81-102. ISSN 1726-0531
Abstract
Prompt and effective responses to incompatibilities between as-designed and as-built drawings prevent cost and time overruns and material waste. This paper aims to provide an efficient framework to handle mismatches between these two models with the least negative impact on the whole project. First, 11 most frequent mismatches were identified through questionnaires. Also, the respondents were asked to determine the mismatches' roots and solutions and the impact of applying solutions on the whole project. Afterward, the process to present the optimum solution to one of these mismatches was modeled. After running the application programming interface developed in Navisworks software, decision-makers access a form, showing mismatches, their causes and solutions, as well as the solutions' effect. To finalize the optimal solution, a platform was provided on whether to accept the system solution or to propose an alternative. To empirically validate the reliability of the proposed framework, two projects were investigated. Two different approaches to dealing with the same mismatch occurred in these projects were compared in terms of time, cost and material required. The results showed that addressing the mismatches through the proposed framework can efficiently enhance time, cost and material consumption, in comparison with the traditional approach. There is currently no building information modeling-based holistic framework for managing mismatches between as-designed and as-built drawings. The results of this research can help contractors to make the best decision, saving project resources, when setting about a mismatch during construction.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | liability; programming; reliability; contractor |
| Index terms: | consumption, as-built drawing, questionnaire, programming, liability, mismatch, integrated solution, building information modelling, time overrun, platform |
| Subjects: | digital design, liability law, information systems, project controls, programming, consumer economics, innovation studies, engineering problems, data collection methods, technical documentation |
| Topics: | Time Control, Design Practice, Legal Issues, Digital Applications, Stakeholder Management, Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Business Strategy |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCA |
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