Whyte, A and Donaldson, J (2015) Digital model data distribution in civil engineering contracts. Built Environment Project and Asset Management, 5(3), pp. 248-260. ISSN 2044-124X
Abstract
Purpose - The use of digital-models to communicate civil-engineering design continues to generate debate; this pilot-work reviews technology uptake towards data repurposing and assesses digital (vs traditional) design-preparation timelines and fees for infrastructure. The paper aims to discuss these issues. Design/methodology/approach - Extending (building-information-modelling) literature, distribution-impact is investigated across: quality-management, technical-applications and contractual-liability. Project case-study scenarios were developed and validated with resultant modelling-application timeline/fees examined, in conjunction with qualitative semi-structured interviews with 11 prominent stakeholder companies. Findings - Results generated to explore digital-model data-distribution/usage identify: an 8 per cent time/efficiency improvement at the design-phase, and a noteworthy cost-saving of 0.7 per cent overall. Fragmented opinion regarding modelling utilisation exists across supply-chains, with concerns over liability, quality-management and, the lack of Australian-Standard contract-clause(s) dealing directly with digital-model document hierarchy/clarification/reuse. Research limitations/implications - Representing a small-scale/snapshot industrial-study, findings suggest that (model-distribution) must emphasise checking-procedures within quality-systems and, seek precedence clarification for dimensioned documentation. Similarly, training in specific file-formatting (digital-model-addenda) techniques, CAD-file/hard-copy continuity, and digital-visualisation software, can better regulate model dissemination/reuse. Time/cost savings through digital-model data-distribution in civil-engineering contracts are available to enhance provision of society’s infrastructure. Originality/value - This work extends knowledge of 3D-model distribution for roads/earthworks/drainage, and presents empirical evidence that (alongside appropriate consideration of general-conditions-of-contract and specific training to address revision-document continuity), industry may achieve tangible benefits from digital-model data as a means to communicate civil-engineering design.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | asset management; civil-engineering; data-distribution; digital-modelling; maintaining-information; managing-information |
| Index terms: | documentation, digital-modelling, asset management, society, data-distribution, liability, interview, earthwork, efficiency, drainage, cost saving, visualization, modelling, evidence, dissemination, engineering design, methodology |
| Subjects: | analytical methods, construction methods, evaluation and assessment methods, data collection methods, liability law, infrastructure and transport systems, communities and social development, asset management, digital design, knowledge translation, design process, professional development, performance management, economics, data exchange, research methods, design practice |
| Topics: | Stakeholder Management, Engineering Principles, Information Management, Research Practice, Cost Management, Business Strategy, Quality Management, Digital Applications, Legal Issues, Design Practice |
| 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