Cost-benefit analysis of BIM-enabled design clash detection and resolution

Abstract

Building Information Modelling (BIM) is increasingly deployed as part of the processes in Architecture, Engineering and Construction (AEC) industry projects. While the benefits of BIM have been extensively proclaimed, explicit justification in terms of direct cost savings for BIM implementation on real-life projects, particularly for clash detection BIM workstream, are not well documented. This paper proposes and demonstrates a methodology to prove how BIM-based clash detection leads to cost savings. A schema is developed based on literature review and industrial expertise to quantify cost savings achieved by the utilisation of BIM-based clash detection and resolution. This paper provides validation of the proposed schema on a major infrastructure project. The developed schema includes the categorisation of identified clashes based on stakeholder involvement and required actions. The validation used the estimated cost of clashes were those not resolved before site operations took place. This schema simplifies both the categorisation and cost estimation of clashes in design. Estimated savings yielded 20% of contract value using the schema, for the multi-million-dollar project case study, thus extending evidence of BIM savings and benefits. The schema improves the existing process and valorises clash detection, thus allowing stakeholders to conduct a cost-benefit analysis. In addition, the categorisation methodology allows prioritising on the most costly clashes, and draw lessons learnt for further projects. This schema opens the path towards a systematic methodology to appraise the benefits of different BIM uses or processes.

Modelling the Impact of Building Information Modelling (BIM) Implementation Drivers and Awareness on Project Lifecycle

“…In summary, BIM in the design stage not only enables visualisation of the project and design but also enhances the project by reducing the cost without affecting the quality. Chahrour, et al [51] expressed that BIM offers cost savings through early clash detection in design before the project execution. It has also been viewed as a tool that facilitates a smart contract-automation process and effective collaboration among team members [52,53].…”

Assessing the Duration of the Lead Appointed Party Coordination Tasks and Evaluating the Appropriate Team Composition on BIM Projects

“…Santos and Ferreira have studied productivity comparing 2D and 3D BIM coordination [21]. Cost-benefit analysis of BIM-enabled design clash detection and resolution was conducted in [22], while Said and Reginato [23] analyzed the time spent on BIM design-related activities for professions and especially electrical designers. Duration of incorporation of BIM project changes required by the client and the so-called "Change Ripple Effect" (a chain reaction where one change affects other results in a row that also need to be changed) was evaluated by Moayeri et al [24].…”

Lean Contributions to BIM Processes: The Case of Clash Management in Highways Design

“…The clash detection or interference checking process refers to the practice of identifying clashes in a federated BIM model, which can be defined as waste in the production system (Tommelein and Gholami 2012). It is one of the many quality checks conducted by the design team before they release the product (Chahrour et al 2021), and it is a "necessary non-value adding activity". Design conflicts must be made visible, characterised, and have root causes identified, as a way to improve efficiencies and reduce wastes (Tommelein and Gholami 2012).…”

“…Few studies explored clash detection considering the process and investigating the root causes of clashes in building information models. Chahrour et al (2021) proposed a clash categorisation, considering the change impact and dependency on the stakeholders involved. Tommelein and Gholami (2012) identified the causes for hard and soft clashes, e.g.…”

“…It should consider (i) the clash detection prerequisites, tolerances, rules, and methods; (ii) frequency of cycles; and (iii) how the resolution of clashes will be carried out, considering the stakeholders, actions, and root causes. The key root causes identified in this exploration represent a first step in the improvement of the existing taxonomies (Chahrour et al 2021;Tommelein and Gholami 2012). Also, the identification of "intentional clashes" in practice is worth mentioning and calls for further investigation.…”