Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
International Journal of Civil, Environmental, Structural, Construction and Architectural Engineering Vol:10, No:1, 2016
International Science Index, Civil and Environmental Engineering Vol:10, No:1, 2016 waset.org/Publication/10003701
I. INTRODUCTION
81
scholar.waset.org/1999.3/10003701
International Science Index, Civil and Environmental Engineering Vol:10, No:1, 2016 waset.org/Publication/10003701
3.
4.
82
scholar.waset.org/1999.3/10003701
International Science Index, Civil and Environmental Engineering Vol:10, No:1, 2016 waset.org/Publication/10003701
83
scholar.waset.org/1999.3/10003701
International Science Index, Civil and Environmental Engineering Vol:10, No:1, 2016 waset.org/Publication/10003701
TABLE II
SUMMARY DEMOGRAPHICS
Civil
Arch.
Mech.
Degree:
Respondents:
12
8
2
55%
36%
9%
Project Manager
Site Supervisor
Quantity Surveyor
Function:
Respondents*:
7
2
0
32%
9%
0
<2years
2<years<5
5<years< 10
Industry experience:
Respondents:
5
2
5
23%
9%
23%
<2years
2<years<5
5<years<10
BIM experience:
Respondents:
0
11
5
0
50%
23%
Design
Detailing
Element fabrication
BIM usage (stage):
Respondents:
7
1
3
32%
5%
14%
0-15%
16-30%
31-60%
BIM usage (time):
respondents:
4
7
4
18%
32%
18%
None / self
Industry led
In house
BIM training:
Respondents:
9
5
7
41%
23%
32%
Design-Bid-Build
Design-Build
Gen. Con. /Con. Man.
Delivery Methods:
Respondents:**
8
14
5
28%
48%
17%
(* 6 (27%) Structural Engineers; ** multiple choices possible)
Elec.
0
0
Draftsperson
0
0
10<years<15
5
23%
10<years<15
6
27%
Project construction
11
50%
61-90%
4
18%
College
1
5%
Cost reimbursable
2
7%
Petrol.
0
0
Designer
7
32%
>15 years
5
23%
>15 years
0
0
Facility Man.
0
0
91-100%
3
14%
Other
0
0
84
scholar.waset.org/1999.3/10003701
International Science Index, Civil and Environmental Engineering Vol:10, No:1, 2016 waset.org/Publication/10003701
TABLE IV
ASSESSMENT OF MAIN ADVANTAGES
Increased Reduced
Better
Less defective Improved site
Advantages:
production
cost
communication
work
layout
Mean:
4.32
4.05
4.45
4.18
4.14
Standard Deviation:
0.62
0.81
0.64
0.81
0.61
Ranking:
2
6
1
4
5
TABLE V
MAIN BARRIERS TO BIM APPLICATION (OPEN RESPONSES)
Frequency
Answer
[% of all answers]
First most common answer:
Lack of Knowledge
50%
Second most common
Resistance to Change
17%
answer:
Third most common answer: Lack of Client Demand
17%
Cost of Investing in
Other answers:
17%
Software, Misuse of BIM
Barriers:
TABLE VI
ASSESSMENT OF MAIN BARRIERS
Lack of Time to Cost of
Cost of Not enough Lack of
client train new training investing stakeholders knowledge
demand
users new users
in
use BIM
software
Mean:
3.18
3.36
3.18
3.77
3.41
4.32
Standard
Deviation:
0.87
0.96
1.05
0.83
0.64
0.80
Ranking:
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
VI. CONCLUSION
The purpose of this study was to identify the perception of
construction professionals regarding main advantages and
main barriers regarding the implementation of BIM in the
State of Kuwait. Based on questionnaire based interviews, it
was identified that the most important main advantage of
applying BIM to construction projects lies in improved
communication between the stakeholders that has potential to
contribute to timely design and construction processes. The
two most important main barriers that could be identified were
a lack of knowledge regarding the full potential of
implementing BIM and, secondly, a lack of demand from the
client side.
Based on this exploratory study, more data will be collected
in order to carry out a more comprehensive analysis of the
situation in Kuwait. Anecdotal evidence shows that these
results are representative to some extent for the whole region.
REFERENCES
[1]
[10]
[11]
[12]
[13]
[14]
[15]
[16]
[17]
85
Improved
construction process
4.23
0.65
3
Improved
safety
3.18
0.87
7
scholar.waset.org/1999.3/10003701
[18]
[19]
[20]
[21]
International Science Index, Civil and Environmental Engineering Vol:10, No:1, 2016 waset.org/Publication/10003701
[22]
Construction and Architectural Management, vol. 14, no. 6, pp. 519531, 2007.
W. Lu, Y. Peng, Q. P. Shen, and H. Li, Generic model for measuring
benefits of BIM as a learning tool in construction tasks, Journal of
Construction Engineering and Management, vol. 139, no. 2, pp. 195203, 2013.
F. K. Y. Arayici, Roadmap for implementation of BIM in the UK
construction industry, Engineering, Construction and Architectural
Management, vol. 19, no. 6, pp. 610 635, 2012.
S. Rizal, Changing roles of the clients, architects and contractors
through BIM, Engineering, Construction and Architectural
Management, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 176 187, 2011.
L. J. Cronbach, Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests,
Psychometrika, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 297-334, 1951.
L. Cohen, L. Manion, and K. Morrison, Research Methods in Education,
Oxon, UK: Routledge, 2011, p. 640.
86
scholar.waset.org/1999.3/10003701