Hosseini, M R; Jupp, J; Papadonikolaki, E; Mumford, T; Joske, W and Nikmehr, B (2021) Position paper: Digital engineering and building information modelling in Australia. Smart and Sustainable Built Environment, 10(3), pp. 331-344. ISSN 2046-6099
Abstract
This position paper urges a drive towards clarity in the key definitions, terminologies and habits of speech associated with digital engineering and building information modelling (BIM). The ultimate goal of the paper is to facilitate the move towards arriving at an ideal definition for both concepts. This paper takes the "explanation building" review approach in providing prescriptive guidelines to researchers and industry practitioners. The aim of the review is to draw upon existing studies to identify, describe and find application of principles in a real-world context. The paper highlights the definitional challenges surrounding digital engineering and BIM in Australia, to evoke a debate on BIM and digital engineering boundaries, how and why these two concepts may be linked, and how they relate to emerging concepts. This is the first scholarly attempt to clarify the definition of digital engineering and address the confusion between the concepts of BIM and digital engineering.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | building information model; industry 4.0; virtual design and construction; technological change; collaboration; modelling; productivity; building management systems; information management; Australia |
| Index terms: | building information modelling, industry 4.0, productivity, Australia, technological change, modelling, virtual design and construction, building management system, collaboration, practitioner, boundaries, habit |
| Subjects: | information systems, management, digital design, Geography, analytical methods, property law, technology adoption, mechanical systems, health behaviours and lifestyles, practitioner, innovation studies |
| Topics: | Roles and Professions, Business Strategy, Engineering Principles, Research Practice, Geographical Context, Organizational Design, Digital Applications, Legal Issues |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
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