Jiang, L (2016) A constructability review ontology to support automated rule checking leveraging building information models. PhD thesis, Pennsylvania State University, USA.
Abstract
Constructability review has been an ongoing area of research to support integrated design and construction processes for decades. Computer-based tools, knowledge-based systems and quantitative analysis systems, have been developed to facilitate the review process and constructability implementation. Limited by technological capabilities, the scope of analysis, timing of constructability knowledge input, and visual representation of design restrain the application value of those tools. As the evolution of Building Information-modeling (BIM) shows great potential to motivate integrated design and delivery, the current manual review process, which is time-consuming and error-prone, is facing a transformation with the adoption of advanced technology in a more collaborative environment. The current work applies a BIM-enabled rule-based approach to automate a constructability review through the support of the enabled rule-based approach to automate a constructability review through the support of the enabled rule-based approach to automate a constructability review through the support of the feedback for more informed design decision-making. To achieve the transformation of a constructability review, this study presents four stages of development: exploratory study, knowledge elicitation, ontology development, and validation. As primarily qualitative research, research techniques include document analysis, interviews, information modeling, and rule-based checking. Together with an in-depth literature review, the feasibility and the requirements for the automated constructability review were investigated through a case study. Focusing on reinforced concrete structural elements, constructability knowledge was captured to develop a constructability ontology to provide the foundation for automating the constructability review. Underlying interdependencies between design and construction were identified, along with the associated information requirements to pursue automated constructability reasoning. The constructability relationships with associated information requirements and its applicability were validated through a series of expert interviews and a case study. The expectations and the challenges of the automated constructability review are also presented. This study contributes by: (1) developing an ontology-based approach to capture and define the interdependencies between design and construction information; (2) defining the constructability relationships with associated information at different levels of detail; (3) prototyping constructability relationships with available model content for automated reasoning, and (4) enabling the transformation of the currently manual constructability review process into an automated process.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Leicht, R M |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | constructability; reasoning; reinforced concrete; building information modeling; decision making; design decision; feedback; quantitative analysis; case study; document analysis; qualitative research; validation; building information model; interview |
| Index terms: | information modelling, transformation, document analysis, knowledge-based system, automated process, case study, building information modelling, constructability, modelling, implementation, design and construction, ontology, exploratory study, literature review, integrated design and construction, interview, reasoning, design decision, quantitative analysis, reinforced concrete, validation, technological capability, evolution, decision-making, qualitative research, prototyping |
| Subjects: | business, research design and methodology, data collection methods, building materials, data science, artificial intelligence, data analysis and analytics, construction integration, design practice, education and knowledge transfer, professional development, decision analysis, information systems, analytical methods, innovation and technology management, contractual arrangements, environmental science, research methods, digital design, automation and robotics, cognitive psychology |
| Topics: | Engineering Principles, Risk Management, Procurement, Sustainability, Design Practice, Digital Applications, Business Strategy, Research Practice, Construction Materials, Information 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