Mohammad Ahmad, A; Rodriguez Trejo, S; Hafeez, M A; Dawood, N; Kassem, M and Naji, K K (2023) Drivers for energy analysis towards a BIM-enabled information flow. Smart and Sustainable Built Environment, 12(3), pp. 507-533. ISSN 2046-6099
Abstract
Purpose: Energy analysis (EA) within a building information modelling (BIM) enables consistent data integration in central repositories and eases information exchange, reducing rework. However, data loss during information exchange from different BIM uses or disciplines is frequent. Therefore, a holistic approach for different BIM uses enables a coherent life cycle information flow. The life cycle information flow drives the reduction of data loss and model rework and enhances the seamless reuse of information. The latter requires a specification of the EA key performance indicators (KPIs) and integrating those in the process. Design/methodology/approach: The paper presents a set of KPIs extracted from the developed EA process maps and interviews with expert stakeholders. These KPIs stem from the literature review and link to the benefits of EA through industry expert review. The study includes (1) development and validation of EA process maps adjusted to requirements from different stakeholders. (2) KPIs aligned with the EA process map, (3) identification of the drivers that can facilitate life cycle information exchange and (4) opportunities and obstacles for EA within BIM-enabled projects. Findings: This paper depicts a viable alternative for EA process maps and KPIs in a BIM-enabled AEC design industry. The findings of this paper showcase the need for an EA within BIM with these KPIs integrated for a more effective process conforming to the current Open BIM Alliance guidance and contributing towards sustainable life cycle information flow. Research limitations/implications: The limitation of the research is the challenge of generalising the developed EA process maps; however, it can be adjusted to fit defined organisational use. The findings deduced from the developed EA process map only show KPIs to have the ability to facilitate adequate information flow during EA. Practical implications: The AEC industry will benefit from the findings of this primary research as the industry will be able to contrast its process maps and KPIs to those developed in the paper. Social implications: This paper benefits the societal values in EA for the built environment in the design stages. The subsequent life cycle information flow will help achieve a consistent information set and decarbonised built environment. Originality/value: The paper offers a practical overview of process maps and KPIs to embed EA into BIM, reducing the information loss and rework needed in the practice of this integration. The applicability of the solution is contrasted by consultation with experts and literature.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | AEC; BIM; energy analysis; kpi; life cycle information flow; process maps |
| Index terms: | methodology, integration, validation, design stage, interview, maps, specification, literature review, rework, information flow, information exchange, built environment, energy analysis, holistic approach, building information modelling, key performance indicator, life cycle |
| Subjects: | information systems, infrastructure and transport systems, engineering analysis, organizational analysis, professional development, contractual condition, research methods, spatial and geospatial analysis, project delivery, data analysis and analytics, data science, professional practice, operations management, value management, business, data collection methods |
| Topics: | Organizational Design, Contract Administration, Design Practice, Digital Applications, Urban Studies, Project Management, Research Practice, Information Management, Business Strategy |
| 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