Abstract
Digital transformation in the architecture industry encounters challenges such as data silos within design stages, between design and construction, and across the entire industry chain, including BIM and project management. This study introduces a pioneering approach for seamlessly integrating building information modeling (BIM) and product lifecycle management (PLM) within the management framework and collaborative workflows of architectural design and construction. The proposed methodology was implemented in two major projects, namely, the Wuhan Next-Generation Weather Radar Construction Project and the Hubei Center for Disease Control and Prevention Comprehensive Capacity Enhancement Project (Phase I), with the former being China’s first end-to-end digitally integrated construction project. Compared with traditional projects, these implementations achieved improvements of 24.39% and 38.04%, respectively, in objective function values. The findings highlight the unique advantages of BIM–PLM integration in optimizing lifecycle management, enhancing cross-disciplinary, cross-enterprise, and cross-regional collaboration, improving project design efficiency and quality, and reducing costs and waste. This integration provides valuable insights into the digital advancement of the construction industry.
Supplementary Information
The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1038/s41598-024-75940-x.
Subject terms: Engineering, Civil engineering
Introduction
The construction industry is undergoing a digital transformation; however, it continues to face significant barriers due to the persistence of data silos. These silos hinder collaboration, limit data flow, and obstruct overall progress in the field1. One major challenge lies in the lack of comprehensive interdisciplinary collaboration during the design phase, where different disciplines often fail to seamlessly integrate their workflows2. Furthermore, the persistent separation between the architectural design and construction phases not only limits coordination but also results in inconsistencies and inefficiencies. The lack of model accuracy, particularly compared with the manufacturing sector’s precision standards, creates barriers to seamless data flow and inhibits the industry’s capacity to deliver high-quality, cost-effective solutions3. Data silos continue to hinder collaboration among general contractors, subcontractors, and suppliers, leading to fragmented workflows and inefficiencies across the entire industry chain. This fragmentation not only delays project timelines but also increases costs and diminishes the overall quality of construction outcomes4. In the domains of computer-aided design (CAD), computer-aided engineering (CAE), computer-aided manufacturing (CAM), and project management (PM), numerical simulation (CAE) and digital manufacturing (CAM) are often weak or absent, and the absence of robust project management (PM) systems affects the management functionality of 3D models. These challenges highlight the urgent need for more integrated and precise digital tools in construction.
Building information modeling (BIM), as a technological solution for the construction industry5, aims to propel integrated application throughout the entire lifecycle of buildings6 and has achieved significant progress since its inception in 19787,8. While BIM initially focused on the three-dimensional representation of building models9, it has evolved to include larger dimensionalities, such as 4D (time)10, 5D (cost)11, 6D (sustainability)12, and 7D (facility management)13.
Many researchers have turned to BIM to address fragmentation within the construction industry, working to overcome data silos across disciplines, enterprises, and regions. In a cross-disciplinary realm, Utkucu et al. improved the architectural design process by evaluating the energy performance and indoor comfort of buildings through a BIM platform, considering the multidisciplinary data storage behavior of building information models14. Chang et al. attempted to support complex decision-making requiring interdisciplinary information by representing and visualizing sensor data from various angles in BIM15. Nascimento et al. proposed a novel approach that integrates building information modeling (BIM) and lean thinking to enhance the production planning and control of pipe support modules in industrial facilities16. On the cross-enterprise front, Jiang et al. introduced blockchain to address information fragmentation and discontinuity in modular integrated construction (MiC) projects, facilitating cross-enterprise information sharing among stakeholders17. Concerning cross-regional collaboration, Khaled El Ammari et al. discussed the development of a BIM-based collaborative mixed reality (MR) approach that supports remote collaboration and visual communication between onsite workers and office managers18. Research shows that relying solely on BIM is insufficient for fully eliminating data silos, largely because of the widespread use of BIM Level 1 and Level 2 in the industry19. Therefore, researchers have adopted integrated approaches to bridge this gap.
The industrialization of the manufacturing sector surpasses that of the construction industry, and numerous studies have successfully introduced advanced design and manufacturing concepts from manufacturing into the realm of architecture20,21. Product life cycle management (PLM) stands out as a pivotal technology in the modern manufacturing domain, encompassing computer-aided design (CAD), computer-aided manufacturing (CAM), computer-aided engineering (CAE)22, and product data management (PDM)23. It emphasizes integrated management across the entire product lifecycle, spanning from design and manufacturing to maintenance and disposal24.
PLM excels in integrating product data, processes, resources, and functions into a unified platform, enabling efficient collaboration across departments and partners within an enterprise25, transcending geographical boundaries and integrating the upstream and downstream of the supply chain. Moreover, PLM can be customized from various perspectives, including enterprise planning, supply chain, and customer-centric approaches. It seamlessly integrates with enterprise resource planning (ERP)26, supply chain management (SCM)27, and customer relationship management (CRM)28, forming a comprehensive ecosystem. PLM has proven successful in industries such as aerospace29, automotive30, shipbuilding31, cosmetics32, textiles, and fashion33, providing valuable insights and inspiration for digital innovation in the construction industry34,35.
Despite having different product and project lifecycle models, the manufacturing and construction industries face similar challenges. While manufacturing involves standardized products, construction projects are unique and nonstandardized36. However, compared with traditional construction methods, building information modeling (BIM) is more standardized37. Several studies have explored project lifecycle management in the construction industry. Nguyen et al. leveraged BIM models and 3D laser scanning to increase the efficiency of quantity surveying38. Wang et al. proposed an integrated four-dimensional design change management model (DCMM) to enhance construction data asset management39. Le et al. established a BIM–life cycle cost (LCC) integration system to improve LCC calculations in building lifecycle management40. Kaewunruen et al. integrated BIM with a bridge risk inspection model, providing a more effective information platform to mitigate risks and uncertainties throughout the lifecycle41. Sresakoolchai et al. combined machine learning with BIM to enhance asset management and cost-effective maintenance42. Gao et al. developed a BIM-based simulation approach for addressing lifecycle quality control issues in postpandemic hospitals43. Sengsri et al. argued that the application of 6D-BIM contributes to reducing unexpected consumption and waste throughout the project lifecycle44. These successes lay a robust foundation for the integration of PLM from manufacturing with BIM in the construction sector.
Several studies have explored the potential and prospective benefits of integrating BIM and PLM concepts in the construction industry. Keskin et al. proposed a platform architecture based on building information modeling (BIM) and model-based systems engineering for optimizing airport asset data management, with the systems engineering approach primarily addressing product lifecycle management (PLM)45. Vestin et al. developed a pilot PLM system that facilitated integration among pilot PLM systems, building information modeling tools, and a company’s enterprise resource planning system, effectively managing product data in the wooden single-family housing industry46. Meschini et al. adopted a PLM perspective to define a method for developing DTPs (digital twins as virtual prototypes) starting from bidding BIM models47. Lennartsson et al. developed a product lifecycle management system for industrialized residential construction, significantly enhancing the competitiveness and efficiency of industrialized residential construction48. Tchana et al. suggested that by integrating product lifecycle management (PLM) and BIM, linear infrastructure construction projects could be effectively managed49. Correa viewed BIM as an implementation approach for product lifecycle management (PLM) that uses Petri nets and RFID data to simulate the building production process50. Di Biccari et al. proposed a personalized configuration view method for building life cycle management (BLM) based on building information modeling (BIM) methods and technologies, drawing lessons from experiences with product life cycle management (PLM) applications in the aerospace and automotive industries51. Aram proposed a conceptual model for information flow and integration between BIM and PLM systems52. Elodie Hochscheid, through case studies, demonstrated a nonexclusive integration pattern where Catia software acts as a driver for PLM in conjunction with BIM tools such as Revit34. Li et al. precisely defined the functionalities of building life cycle management (BLM) and conducted a study on a BLM system, demonstrating the powerful integration of PLM functionalities with BIM technology35. While various studies have explored the integration of BIM and PLM concepts, few have fully realized their combined potential in managing the entire lifecycle of construction projects. Our research goes a step further by not only proposing this integration but also demonstrating its practical application in large-scale projects, where traditional methods have consistently fallen short. By leveraging the strengths of both BIM and PLM, we offer an innovative solution that enhances collaboration, optimizes resource management, and delivers superior project outcomes.
In the current architecture, engineering, construction, and operations (AECO) industry, building information modeling (BIM) has been widely applied, particularly in the design and construction phases53. Therefore, integrating product lifecycle management (PLM) with BIM during these phases represents an initial attempt to address the data silo issue in the construction industry, marking the first step toward the transformation and upgrade of the sector. However, the literature still presents a noticeable gap in solutions detailing how the integration of BIM and PLM can be effectively employed to optimize the architectural design and construction phases in the construction industry. This paper aims to bridge this gap by proposing a seamless integration method for BIM and PLM, addressing the pain points associated with data silos in the construction industry. Through an in-depth exploration of the proposed integrated BIM–PLM management and business framework, coupled with collaborative workflows in architectural design and construction, we studied two integrated BIM–PLM digital construction projects in China. This innovative approach enables comprehensive oversight and optimization of construction processes from design to completion, which is unprecedented in the industry. Our objective is to showcase the practical impacts, benefits, and challenges associated with this integrated approach, contributing to the ongoing discourse on the digital transformation of the construction sector. It is important to acknowledge, however, that while this study demonstrates the potential of BIM–PLM integration, certain limitations persist. These include the focus on large-scale projects, which may not be fully generalizable to smaller, more resource-constrained projects, and the relatively limited emphasis on the operational phase. Additionally, the integration of life cycle assessment (LCA) standards and real-time data sharing across teams remains an area for further exploration. These limitations, along with potential future research directions, will be further discussed in the subsequent sections.
In the subsequent sections, we delve into the methods adopted for BIM–PLM integration during the architectural design and construction phases, present tangible outcomes of the integrated approach and discuss potential challenges and future research directions.
Results
Optimizing the building lifecycle management process
The seamless integration of BIM and PLM has propelled significant advancements in building lifecycle management, achieving comprehensive optimization across critical stages of a construction project, including design and construction. This integrated management approach substantially reduces information silos and data gaps, laying a solid foundation for collaborative cooperation throughout the lifecycle.
In the design phase, BIM technology empowers designers with robust tools for creating highly visual architectural models. This not only aids designers in better expressing design intent but also provides high-quality input data for subsequent lifecycle activities. The PLM system offers comprehensive data management for the design team, ensuring the accuracy and completeness of design information. Version control features effectively prevent confusion in design changes, providing robust support for design consistency and traceability. Such integrated management mechanisms contribute to improved design quality, reducing additional work and costs associated with design changes.
During the construction phase, the PLM system provides a comprehensive project collaboration platform for the project team. Virtual design and construction functionalities enable the construction team to conduct virtual verification before actual construction, reducing risks and changes during the construction process. Reliable analysis and validation of aspects such as structure, materials, and fluid dynamics ensure the stability and safety of the building in actual use. Team members can share data within the same system, ensuring efficient collaboration and information synchronization during the construction process. By integrating BIM models, the construction site can directly utilize virtual models for visual navigation and project coordination, reducing the time and cost required to address issues onsite.
Enhancing cross-disciplinary, cross-enterprise, and cross-regional collaboration
This study aims to enhance cross-disciplinary, cross-enterprise, and cross-regional collaboration in architectural design and construction by integrating building information modeling (BIM) and product lifecycle management (PLM) systems. The PLM system serves as a comprehensive information management and sharing platform throughout the entire building lifecycle, enabling teams from various disciplines, companies, and regions to easily access design documents, construction plans, quality control files, and other project-related information.
In the design phase, the introduction of BIM provides experts from different disciplines with a shared digital platform. Traditionally, architects, structural engineers, MEP engineers, and other professionals have relied on manual processes and paper documents for information transfer, resulting in slow transmission speeds and high error rates. With the integrated BIM and PLM system, they can collaborate in virtual design and validation processes, view and edit BIM models in real time, and share information across departments without delays or errors. This real-time information sharing significantly reduces delays and errors, thereby improving the rate of information sharing. This integrated design environment helps break down traditional information silos, promoting closer collaboration within the design team and enhancing the comprehensiveness and synergy of design solutions.
During the construction phase, the combined use of BIM and PLM systems provides a more intuitive working environment for construction personnel from different enterprises and regions. Traditional projects often suffer from lower on-time completion rates for cross-department tasks because of a lack of real-time task coordination and progress-tracking tools. However, the integrated BIM and PLM system offers real-time task coordination and progress tracking features, ensuring that cross-department tasks are completed on time. This fosters better collaboration among construction personnel from different fields, thereby improving construction efficiency.
In terms of training and knowledge sharing, the integration of BIM and PLM systems offers a unified training and learning platform for team members from different professional domains. This helps shorten the learning curve among experts from different fields, enhancing the team’s overall efficiency. Through digital training resources and online knowledge repositories, team members can access necessary information anytime and anywhere, facilitating the rapid transfer and sharing of knowledge. This comprehensive collaborative effort not only promotes internal teamwork but also provides a solid foundation for the successful implementation of the project.
Project Team Member: Monthly project technical exchange meetings facilitate team members’ discussions and learning to enhance management or design capabilities. Learning can also be conducted anytime and anywhere through mobile devices or tablets, and the learned information can be directly applied to various construction processes and stages onsite.
In terms of collaboration, BIM–PLM projects demonstrated superior performance compared with traditional projects in several key areas, including the information sharing rate, problem-solving time, and cross-department task completion rate, as shown in Fig. 1a. The overall cross-department collaboration scores for Case 1 and Case 2 were 0.98 and 1.00, respectively, whereas the scores for Traditional Projects 1 and 2 were 0.92 each. This finding indicates that BIM–PLM projects are more effective in promoting team collaboration and communication, with improvements of 5.97% and 8.30%, respectively, as illustrated in Fig. 2. These enhancements contribute to the smooth progress of projects, reducing delays and errors caused by poor communication.
Fig. 1.
Comparison of assessment criterion indicators between traditional projects and integrated BIM–PLM projects. a Cross collaboration. b Quality. c Duration. d Cost. e Waste.
Fig. 2.
Comparison of objective function values between traditional projects and integrated BIM–PLM projects.
Enhancing project design efficiency and quality
The organic integration of BIM and PLM has fundamentally transformed the design process, creating a more efficient and collaborative workflow environment for design teams, thereby increasing the efficiency and quality of project design.
The introduction of BIM technology provides designers with powerful 3D modeling capabilities, making designs more intuitive and accurate. Designers can create, modify, and optimize architectural models visually on a unified platform, enhancing the visibility of design solutions and aiding in the early detection and resolution of potential issues. Unlike traditional projects, which often rely on limited model data and 2D drawings to convey design outcomes, the BIM and PLM integrated system enables detailed modeling. Model-based definition (MBD) 3D annotations save 30% of the design time by automatically updating information. This integrated digital platform further promotes closer collaboration among design teams, providing strong support for project success.
Additionally, the PLM system offers robust support for managing the design lifecycle. In traditional projects, structural analysis involves modeling and calculations via specialized software such as SAP2000, YJK, PKPM, and TEKLA, which hinders multischeme comparisons. The BIM and PLM integrated system connects with structural analysis software to perform calculations and compare schemes, reducing the workload of structural designers, expanding the range of design options, and enhancing structural design efficiency.
Owner: Quality is our priority for this project because of past experiences of subpar quality in other projects. Through the BIM–PLM integrated system, we can monitor project construction progress and quality in real time. For example, in a previous project, discrepancies between design and actual conditions led to minor quality issues. However, we can now identify and resolve model issues in a timely manner during construction, ensuring project quality standards.
Moreover, the integrated information discovery and the search engine within the platform enable design teams to quickly retrieve the required design data and documents, improving the overall efficiency of design data management. This not only accelerates the decision-making process, ensuring that the design team can access necessary information in the shortest amount of time possible, but also lays a solid foundation for comprehensively improving overall work efficiency and design quality. Through this integration, significant progress has been made in design innovation and project management, achieving the dual goals of enhancing project design efficiency and quality.
Compared with the traditional projects (Traditional 1 and 2), the BIM–PLM projects (Cases 1 and 2) presented significantly higher scores for deepening concrete structures, deepening steel structures, 3D proofreading, steel structure installation, and total level program quality, as shown in Fig. 1b. The total quality scores for Case 1 and Case 2 were 0.84 and 0.85, respectively, representing improvements of 15.49% and 18.56% over those of Traditional 1 (0.72) and Traditional 2 (0.71), as illustrated in Fig. 2. This indicates that the BIM–PLM projects implemented more effective quality management measures and utilized more advanced technologies and methods, thereby enhancing the overall quality of the projects.
With respect to project duration, the BIM–PLM projects had significantly reduced construction times for concrete structure deepening construction, steel structure deepening construction, pipe optimization and comprehensive arrangement, component processing, general flat plan construction, 3D delivery, and project construction management. Only the curtain wall optimization and design phase had a longer duration in the BIM–PLM projects than in the traditional projects. This is because the traditional projects did not include this optimization phase, but adding it to the BIM–PLM projects reduced the initial cost from 24 million to 20 million, as shown in Fig. 1c and d. The total duration scores for Case 1 and Case 2 were 1.41 and 2.06, respectively, reflecting reductions of 28.86% and 23.49% compared to those of Traditional 1 (1.98) and Traditional 2 (2.69), as shown in Fig. 2. These results demonstrate that BIM–PLM projects are more efficient in both the design and construction phases, significantly reducing waste and delays throughout the project lifecycle.
Reducing costs and minimizing waste
By breaking down the detailed costs at both the design and construction stages, we can more accurately control and manage the overall project expenses. This cost breakdown not only helps identify the distribution of costs across different stages but also provides crucial insights for cost optimization. On the basis of our analysis of BIM–PLM projects, the detailed costs are as follows:
The cost analysis for the design phase can be divided into three main categories: design costs, which include salaries for designers such as architects, structural engineers, and electrical engineers, as well as costs for design materials used during the process, such as model-making supplies; design consulting fees, which cover external design consultancy services and the costs associated with the purchase and maintenance of BIM software; and government approval fees, which include the expenses required for the approval of design plans by relevant government authorities.
For the construction phase, the cost analysis is categorized into direct and indirect costs. Direct costs encompass material costs such as expenses for GRC curtain walls, autoclaved lightweight concrete (ALC) panels, and steel structure materials, as well as labor costs, including wages for various construction and technical workers. Additionally, they include site usage costs, which are the costs associated with the use and rental of the site during construction. Indirect costs include equipment costs, which cover the rental and maintenance of construction equipment; subcontractor costs, which are payments made to subcontractors for their services; and transportation costs, which include the expense of transporting construction materials from suppliers to the site. Other indirect costs include safety costs, which cover safety equipment and management; environmental protection costs, which are investments made to minimize environmental impact during the project; temporary facility costs, which include expenses for temporary office spaces and sanitation facilities used during construction; and supervision costs, which are incurred for the oversight of the construction process.
The integration of BIM and PLM has successfully reduced costs in architectural design and construction projects. The application of the BIM–PLM integrated system throughout the project lifecycle provides precise tools for cost management. During the design and construction phases, the PLM system can track and record project budgets, costs, and expenditures, providing project managers with comprehensive financial data to make timely decisions and ensure that the project stays within budget constraints. In traditional projects, material ordering and usage plans are often based on experience and lack precise data support, leading to overordering and waste. The BIM–PLM system optimizes material ordering and usage plans through precise modeling and refined material management, reducing material redundancy and saving costs.
Material Supplier: Real-time access to project progress and requirements allows for advanced preparation of necessary materials, ensuring timely supply and reducing project waiting times and waste. Material delivery delays due to communication issues no longer occur with the integrated system.
BIM–PLM integration also minimizes waste. Traditional projects often suffer from inconsistencies and poor communication between the design and construction phases, leading to errors and rework. The BIM–PLM system provides comprehensive coordination and information sharing throughout the design and construction stages, helping reduce errors and rework at the design stage and thus lowering waste rates. During the construction phase, traditional projects often experience significant nonproductive time as workers wait for materials, equipment, or instructions. The BIM–PLM system optimizes construction workflows and resource scheduling, reducing nonproductive time and labor resource waste. Similarly, energy usage plans during traditional project construction are often not precise, leading to high energy consumption. The BIM–PLM system optimizes energy usage through detailed construction planning and management, reducing energy consumption.
In terms of cost, the BIM–PLM projects presented lower costs for curtain walls, site use, labor, construction machinery and tools, steel structures, other direct costs, and other indirect costs. However, costs increased in the autoclaved lightweight concrete (ALC) panel category. This is because traditional projects typically use ordinary concrete panels or bricks, whereas ALC panels, although slightly more expensive, contribute to the quality and energy efficiency of projects because of their light weight, high strength, and insulation properties, as shown in Fig. 1d. The total cost scores for Case 1 and Case 2 were 2.13 and 2.36, respectively, reflecting reductions of 8.85% and 10.53% compared with those of Traditional 1 (2.34) and Traditional 2 (2.63), respectively, as shown in Fig. 2. While the reduction are relatively small, they still indicate a significant advantage in cost management for the BIM–PLM projects.
The BIM–PLM projects performed well in terms of material waste, rework, nonproductive time, and energy consumption, as shown in Fig. 1e. The waste scores for Case 1 and Case 2 were 0.28 and 0.21, respectively, whereas those for Traditional 1 and Traditional 2 were 0.32 and 0.26, respectively. This finding indicates that the BIM–PLM system’s optimization reduced material waste rates by 10.97% and 16.80%, respectively, helping lower resource waste and environmental impact, as shown in Fig. 2.
Under the comprehensive objective function evaluation, the BIM–PLM projects demonstrated significant improvements. The objective function value of Case 1 was 4.50, an improvement of 24.39% over that of Traditional 1 (4.02), and the objective function value of Case 2 was 4.22, an improvement of 38.04% over that of Traditional 2 (3.06), as shown in Fig. 2. These results indicate that the BIM–PLM system achieves overall benefits when considering cross-collaboration, quality, duration, cost, and waste, resulting in higher project efficiency.
Discussion
Challenges and resolutions
This study proposes an integrated PLM and BIM management and collaborative workflow. Through collaborative design involving multiple disciplines, such as architecture, structure, mechanical and electrical engineering, and construction, a detailed 3D modeling approach from conceptualization to detailed design phases is achieved. This comprehensive approach successfully manages project progress, personnel, data, and external collaboration units. The integrated method has demonstrated unique advantages in optimizing lifecycle management, enhancing interdisciplinary, interenterprise, and interregional collaboration, improving project design efficiency and quality, and reducing costs and resource waste. However, in the integration of BIM and PLM in the two considered projects, as many as 122 challenges were encountered across the technical, cultural, and managerial dimensions. Recognizing and addressing these challenges is crucial for ensuring successful integration52.
Considering the significant differences between the AEC industry and the primary industry markets of PLM, certain aspects of current PLM technology require modification and customization for successful adoption in the AEC industry35. The 3DEXPERIENCE platform does not align fully with the practical work requirements of the domestic construction industry. To enhance flexibility and applicability, we conducted secondary development on the Dassault 3DEXPERIENCE platform. Development tools that were provided by Dassault, including macros, Automation API, and CAA54, were leveraged to develop 3D modeling programs for the site and supporting structures. The secondary development functionality encompassed 6% of the design content in this project.
Existing methods for site modeling rely heavily on manually creating 3D models based on DWG drawings, which is not only labor intensive but also prone to errors. In contrast, the developed 3D site modeling program efficiently generates point clouds, building structures, roads, terrain surfaces, landscape elements, and foundation excavations through simple human‒computer interactions. This program aligns with the modeling habits of engineers in China and significantly reduces the manual modeling effort from 15 person-days to just 2 person-days.
For the stage of constructing the support and hanger template library, challenges such as low template flexibility, inefficiency in creating and instantiating templates for different profile variations, and overall low creation and instantiation efficiency were addressed. A method based on custom features for pipeline support and hanger model construction was proposed. By defining different profile types and cross-sectional parameters within the feature template (StartUp), free switching of support and hanger member profile types and specifications can be achieved. Additionally, rapid batch creation of supports and hangers can be realized through product encapsulation. This approach enhances the flexibility and applicability of the workflow.
To address the absence of relevant model libraries from the native platform, our project introduced additional templates via the “skeleton + template” approach. We organized and categorized models on the basis of component characteristics, clarifying the template creation logic. This resulted in the establishment of 46,241 distinct templates, covering walls, doors and windows, stairs and handrails, beams, columns, slabs, and reinforcements. This addition of template library data, amounting to 1.5 GB, significantly reduced the number of redundant modeling steps, facilitating easier sharing and reuse of design elements, models, and resources, thereby strengthening collaborative design and project efficiency. Automation scripts written in the EKL language facilitated the automatic generation of numerous templates. This modeling approach can be applied to similar engineering projects, optimizing the modeling process and improving efficiency. Furthermore, the establishment of a template library file effectively prevents the time-consuming search for templates in the database. The template library can be customized on the basis of specific project requirements, enabling the team to flexibly address various types of construction projects while maintaining a certain level of standardization and efficiency.
The implementation of BIM–PLM integration presents multiple challenges in personnel training. First, cultural adjustment and acceptance are critical when new technology is introduced, necessitating internal cultural adjustments to accommodate change. Second, skill transformation and training requirements are significant, as professionals need to adapt to new management and business frameworks, collaborative workflows, and tools. Moreover, the importance of training in data management and security cannot be understated. Employees must understand proper data handling practices and how to safeguard sensitive information. Training costs and time are also considerations, requiring a balance between resource investment and anticipated returns.
Considering these factors, we initiated a comprehensive training program using a combination of online and offline methods. The training covered platform basics, project implementation fundamentals, basic modeling (sketch design, surface design, solid design, and basic structural modeling), advanced modeling (3D reinforcement and steel structure detailing), 3D annotation, and model review. The training duration was just one week. Future projects will adapt to the continuous development of BIM and PLM technologies, periodically updating training content to reflect changes in new technologies and maintain awareness of the latest trends in the field.
Limitations and prospects
This study underscores the integration of BIM and PLM in the design and construction phases, with relatively less emphasis on the operational aspect. Despite efforts made during the operational phase of this project, including the commissioning of MEP equipment, system debugging, and landscaping activities, the outcomes in the operational stage may take longer to manifest than those in the design and construction phases. The implementation and validation of technological and process optimizations require an extended period.
In future research, a more comprehensive consideration of the project’s entire lifecycle55, encompassing the design, construction, operation, and maintenance phases, should be pursued. To ensure the sustained effectiveness of BIM–PLM integration throughout the project, future research directions may include the following:
Data Delivery and Information Transmission: After design and construction, efficient transmission of accumulated data and information to the operational team is critical to better support the operation and maintenance phases56. This involves establishing effective data delivery standards and transmission processes.
Smart and Sustainable Solutions: The future of architecture demands a greater focus on intelligence and sustainability57. Extensions of BIM and PLM systems should explore how to facilitate intelligent operations and maintenance. Leveraging sensors and data analytics can lead to more efficient energy management and equipment maintenance.
Integration of Maintenance Management: Combining design and construction phase information with the practical needs of the operational stage is crucial for establishing an integrated platform for maintenance management. This integration aids in the early identification and resolution of maintenance issues, thereby reducing operational costs.
A limitation of our study is the absence of life cycle assessment (LCA) standards, which are increasingly critical in evaluating the sustainability and environmental impacts of architectural design and construction projects58,59. While our research demonstrates significant advancements in enhancing cross-disciplinary collaboration, improving project design efficiency, and reducing costs and waste, it does not assess the environmental footprint throughout the project’s lifecycle. LCA standards offer a comprehensive framework for assessing environmental performance across all stages, from material extraction to disposal.
Addressing this gap in future research could significantly improve the sustainability of BIM–PLM applications. Key prospects include the following:
Incorporating LCA Standards into BIM–PLM Models: Developing methods for integrating LCA metrics directly into BIM–PLM frameworks will provide a holistic view of environmental impacts, supporting more sustainable decision-making.
Automating LCA Processes: Creating automated tools within BIM–PLM platforms for performing life cycle assessments will streamline the evaluation of environmental impacts and facilitate the comparison of different design options.
LCA-Based Design Optimization: Combining LCA with parametric design and optimization techniques can drive the development of design solutions that not only meet project requirements but also minimize environmental impacts, leading to more sustainable architectural practices.
The integrated BIM and PLM framework, as detailed in the Methods section, was successfully applied to several projects within Central South Architectural Design Institute Co., Ltd. However, it is important to acknowledge the limitations of the sample size and the generalizability of these findings. A limitation of our study is the relatively small sample size, which consisted of a limited number of large-scale projects from a single company. This sample may not adequately represent the full spectrum of construction projects, including smaller, more resource-constrained projects or projects conducted by companies with less advanced digital infrastructures. As such, the generalizability of our findings to a broader range of construction environments, particularly those outside large-scale infrastructure projects, is limited. Moreover, different project types, such as renovations, expansions, or specialized buildings, are often subject to distinct industry standards, design specifications, and unique requirements. These variations necessitate further customization and augmentation of the BIM–PLM framework on the basis of the specific characteristics of each project type. These projects frequently involve the integration and optimization of existing structures, prompting deeper exploration in the following areas:
Challenges in Integrating Existing Structures: Tailing the integration approach for renovation and expansion projects requires meticulous consideration of how to enhance the integration of data and information from existing structures60,61. The extension of BIM and PLM systems should demonstrate adaptability across diverse project types, including renovation and expansion projects, effectively addressing collaborative challenges between existing structures and new designs.
Data Migration and Compatibility: Confronting the unique complexities of renovation and expansion projects, the smooth migration of data and compatibility between different systems emerge as critical concerns62. Delving into strategies for achieving seamless data migration is essential for ensuring the fluent exchange of data between existing structures and new designs.
Adaptability in Project Management: Renovation and expansion projects introduce a layer of complexity into project management requirements, including adjustments to schedules and reallocation of resources63. To align with these dynamics, our future work should focus on enhancing the adaptability of our research outcomes to cater to the evolving needs of various project types.
Methods
Selection of the software platform
BIM and PLM systems typically employ different data formats and structures. Achieving seamless integration requires ensuring data interoperability between the two. This commonly involves developing data conversion tools or adopting widely accepted data exchange standards64. In the current international market, leading software vendors such as Autodesk, Bentley, Dassault Systèmes, Siemens, and Trimble, among others, have provided advanced solutions that support the integration of PLM and BIM. This directly mitigates the issue of data loss caused by transferring data through intermediate formats. Considering the diverse needs of digital projects in architectural design and construction, driven by the ongoing digital transformation in the construction industry, it is essential to prioritize aspects such as project management, design patterns, enterprise collaboration, digital delivery, and ecosystem development. The specific requirements are outlined in Tables 1 and 2, and 3.
Table 1.
Factors considered in platform selection: design pattern requirements.
Requirement | Requirement subitem | Description of requirement |
---|---|---|
Design planning | Structural trees and coding systems | Specification of structural trees and coding system application development |
Resource template library improvement | Building, structural, interior, electrical, plumbing, landscaping and other standard library construction | |
BIM attribute extension | Attribute refinement of BIM components | |
Schematic design | Creative shape design | Creative shape design and implementation of architectural projects |
Environmental data entry | Tilt photography and aerial photography model import | |
Rendering (computing) | Renderer design based on 3DEXCITE | |
Preliminary design | Visual design localization | Dassault XGD from cloud to local |
Development of topographic and geologic import tools | Rapid production of topographic surfaces based on CAD drawings and development of geologic layering tools | |
Detailed design | Steel node design development | Based on the construction industry specifications, layout optimization and reinforcement function changes through development |
Reinforcing steel arrangement development | Development of automatic shear tools for building beams, columns and walls | |
Automatic shear for building beams, columns and walls | Mechanical, electrical and wall automatic opening function development | |
Automatic electromechanical opening | Rapid extraction of material reports based on the 3d model | |
Information application | Quick report extraction | Construction guidance, maintenance and repair |
3D atlas | Customization of localization roles and data permissions based on the design institute business |
Table 2.
Factors considered in platform selection: enterprise collaboration needs.
Requirement | Requirement subitem | Description of requirement |
---|---|---|
Design collaboration | Platform role and permission customization | Based on the lightweight model of the web page, the review circle, message push and problem management |
3D model proofreading | Design of the change process, data management, etc. | |
Data management and change | Revit, Catia component library warehousing, call, and information statistics management system | |
Component library management system | Management of personnel and data access rights of outsourcing units | |
Collaborative management of outsourcing companies | Knowledge base, knowledge retrieval and forum functions based on 3DE | |
Internal coordination | Knowledge management system | The 3DE platform is integrated with enterprise WeChat, instant messaging and message reminders. |
Communication software integration | The material management platform is built based on three-dimensional digital-modulus correlation data. | |
Material management platform | Based on MBD data, cooperation with the processing plant data and implementation of the procurement, materials, and CNC processing process | |
External synergies | Design-processing collaboration | Based on virtual construction simulation, guidance of site construction and installation and management of the construction equipment, materials and personnel |
Design-construction collaboration | Based on the 3D model, the GIS platform is imported to realize the operation and maintenance management. | |
Design operation and maintenance collaboration | 3dEXCITE high-quality rendering application |
Table 3.
Factors considered in platform selection: project management, digital delivery, and ecosystem development requirements.
Requirement | Requirement Subitem | Description of Requirement |
---|---|---|
Project management | Design project management | Localization of design project task progress, work hours, task review, documentation, weekly report management, etc. |
Construction progress management | Localization of construction project task progress, site monitoring, construction cost management, etc. | |
3d rendering | High-quality rendering | 3DEXICTE high-quality rendering applications |
VR virtual construction | MBD 3D annotation was achieved through the development. | |
MBD development | MBD 3D labeling | Two-dimensional digital analog standard construction and establishment of a fine model throughout the whole life cycle |
Standard construction | BIM model design standards | The 3D digital model definition is directly transmitted to the downstream system to realize paperless production. |
Model delivery criteria | Through training, project navigation, and development iteration, digital operations are implemented within the enterprise. | |
Popularize | In-house promotion | Creative shape design and implementation of architectural projects |
Following a comprehensive comparison and evaluation of various software solutions on the basis of various requirements, this study ultimately selected the 3DEXPERIENCE foundational service platform by Dassault Systèmes. This choice not only addresses the comprehensive demands of the architectural industry’s digital transformation but also acknowledges the potential for secondary development on the 3DEXPERIENCE platform. This decision stems from a deep understanding of diverse requirements, aiming to deliver a more efficient, consistent, and innovative solution for digital architectural design and construction.
Platform configuration
In the process of integrating building information modeling (BIM) and product lifecycle management (PLM), meticulous consideration of platform configuration is crucial for ensuring system stability, efficient operation, and data security. The selection of software and hardware stands out as a key determinant for the successful implementation of seamless BIM–PLM integration.
Software configuration
The selection of software tailored to the specific requirements of architectural design and construction processes is crucial for successful integration. The chosen software should demonstrate compatibility, robust functionality, and the ability to support collaborative workflows across various stages of the project lifecycle. Therefore, we employed six key modules on the selected Dassault Systèmes 3DEXPERIENCE collaborative project work platform to meet these criteria.
ENOVIA: This module serves as a comprehensive project lifecycle management tool, facilitating efficient management of project data and processes from inception to completion. It enables collaborative planning, tracking, and execution of project tasks, ensuring seamless coordination among team members.
CATIA: CATIA is employed for professional modeling in various domains, including architecture, structure, HVAC, piping, electrical, and construction. Its robust 3D modeling capabilities allow for precise modeling, annotation, and delivery of design elements essential for architectural design and construction.
EXALEAD: EXALEAD is utilized for project data processing, enabling efficient organization, indexing, and retrieval of project-related information. It enhances data management and accessibility, facilitating informed decision-making throughout the project lifecycle.
3DEXCITE: This module is utilized for model rendering and visual representation, enhancing the visualization of design concepts and project outcomes. It enables stakeholders to gain insights into project designs and communicate ideas effectively.
DELMIA: DELMIA is employed for process and construction simulation, covering a wide range of activities from facade installation to final assembly. It enables simulation-based planning and optimization of construction processes, ensuring safety, efficiency, and quality in project execution.
SIMULIA: SIMULIA is utilized for numerical simulation, allowing for preconstruction experimentation and validation via digital twin models. It enables the consideration of factors such as the wind load in joint simulations, ensuring the accuracy and reliability of construction simulations.
The methodology employed in this study revolves around the utilization of a unified foundational collaboration platform, ensuring coherence among the major modules within the platform. This uniformity at the core data level facilitates seamless data exchange among the six modules, eliminating the need for manual data import and export processes. Consequently, this integrated approach significantly reduces the transfer of project data. The integration simplifies both the design and construction workflows, mitigates data silos, enhances interdisciplinary collaboration, and ultimately improves the overall efficiency and accuracy of the project. Furthermore, it ensures a cohesive digital environment, fostering effective project management.
Hardware configuration
The seamless integration of building information modeling (BIM) and product life cycle management (PLM) to support the digital transformation of the construction industry necessitates the careful selection of appropriate hardware configurations.
The wide adoption of cloud computing by enterprises for its myriad advantages is a necessary trend in the architectural industry65,66. By analyzing the characteristics of public, private, and hybrid cloud deployment models and considering the specific requirements of Central South Architectural Design Institute Co., Ltd., a decision was made to adopt a private cloud infrastructure. This choice was driven by considerations of security, compliance, customization needs, and greater control over data and performance.
To ensure seamless collaboration among design teams, multiple technologies were employed for high-speed data transfer and security. First, a dedicated network line was utilized, ensuring rapid transmission of design data between stakeholders and enhancing collaboration efficiency. Additionally, VPN technology provided a secure connection for remote users, allowing them secure remote access to the company’s design system from any location. The local area network within the company ensured reliable local connectivity, enabling internal staff to access the required resources swiftly and stably.
The design system, configured on this platform, diverges significantly from traditional design workflows by discarding the conventional file-based approach in favor of a database-driven cloud-based collaborative design methodology. In this system, design data are no longer stored in traditional folders and files but are unified in a robust database. An essential advantage of this method is the exceptionally high level of data correlation, allowing for more precise management of interdependencies among different design elements—a critical aspect for collaborative work on complex projects.
The storage of data in a database streamlines data management. Tasks such as backup, recovery, and maintenance become more straightforward, providing the company with enhanced data reliability and security. Furthermore, the real-time online collaborative features of this system offer significant convenience to the design team. Multiple stakeholders can simultaneously collaborate online, viewing and editing data in the database in real time, fostering high levels of teamwork and instant communication. This innovative approach not only enhances efficiency but also transforms the dynamics of collaborative work within the architectural design and construction domain.
Proposed integrated BIM and PLM management and business framework
To establish a robust foundation for integration, a platform-centric approach was adopted to delineate clear management and business processes, optimizing the organization and implementation of the project. The comprehensive project collaborative management workflow comprises the project planning process, platform data management process, project data management process, template validation process, dual-track design review process, and construction scheme design and review process. The personnel involved in the workflow span disciplines, companies, and regions and include project managers, PLM directors, discipline leaders, discipline chief designers, construction leaders, and platform administrators, among others. The project collaborative management and business framework is illustrated in Fig. 3a.
Fig. 3.
Proposed integrated BIM and PLM management and business framework. a Project management and overall business framework. b Template repository validation process. c Design model validation process. d Construction model validation process.
Project management personnel, guided by the outlined design and construction processes, formulated specific workflows:
Template Repository Validation Process: Managing template creation and repository entry involves discipline chief designers in template creation and validation by discipline leaders until approval, followed by repository entry and maintenance by the PLM director and platform administrator. Once approved, templates are accessible for further use by discipline leads. The processes are depicted in Fig. 3b.
Design Model Validation Process: Mandating reviews by discipline chief designers, discipline leads, and construction leads ensures that project design models transition downstream only after comprehensive validation. Joint approval by the PLM director and platform administrator precedes the final three-dimensional delivery. The processes are depicted in Fig. 3c.
Construction Model Validation Process: Initiated by construction leads, this process involves creating construction models on the basis of the design model. A review of the scheme by the PLM director, database maintenance by the platform administrator, and final organization of construction by the construction lead conclude the workflow. The processes are depicted in Fig. 3d.
At the initiation of the project, collaborative platform administrators create collaboration zones on the project collaborative management platform. Defining roles on the basis of the project members’ permissions, the team establishes project design and construction unit accounts and assigns licenses. Different accounts possess varying permissions on the basis of roles and job responsibilities.
During the planning phase, project managers, supported by collaborative platform administrators, create a project structure tree outlining the project’s logical progression from the conceptual design phase to the construction and maintenance phases. By utilizing the functionalities of the 3DEXPERIENCE platform, the team decomposes design and modeling tasks by functionality, clarifies input conditions, and defines the output. This process aids in task assignment, collaborative work, and project management. Each node in the project structure tree represents a work package, facilitating task breakdown, collaboration, and project management.
Throughout the project implementation, roles are assigned and managed according to workflows and designated work packages. This encompasses template library management, document management, and design tasks such as 3D model creation, 3D review, and 3D annotation. All the units and participants in the design and construction processes collaborate on the platform following the established collaborative workflows. This ensures streamlined communication, efficient collaboration, and adherence to the integrated project management and business framework.
Proposed integrated BIM and PLM workflow for architectural design and construction
Application of the integrated BIM and PLM collaborative platform
This project establishes a unified management and collaborative platform across disciplines, enterprises, and the entire workflow, leveraging a centralized data source. The platform supports seamless three-dimensional collaboration among professionals in architecture, structure, electromechanical systems, steel structures, geotechnics, curtain wall design, and construction. It facilitates real-time communication and collaboration between upstream and downstream enterprises via a shared model. The project’s implementation spans from the conceptual design phase to the construction phase, encompassing all aspects of site design, architectural design, structural design, electromechanical design, and construction. During the design phase, an evolutionary design approach based on components is employed. Specifically, the design progresses from LOD100 skeletal design to LOD200 component design, then to LOD300 product detailing, and finally to LOD400 fabrication model creation, where components refer to individual elements or parts of the building, such as walls, doors, windows, beams, columns, slabs, and reinforcements. As the levels advance, the model details become richer, the accuracy gradually improves, and the transmission of design parameters and information increases continuously. In the evolution from conceptual skeletal design to detailed design processes, details and accuracy are enhanced on the basis of the same model without the need for redundant modeling. This achieves cross-stage delivery on the basis of a single data source for the preliminary design, detailing, fabrication, construction, and operation phases, all of which are facilitated through cloud-based platforms. Both case study projects in this research achieve LOD400 models. The proposed integrated workflow is illustrated in Fig. 4.
Fig. 4.
Proposed Integrated BIM and PLM Workflow for Architectural Design and Construction.
Case overview
Case one
The Wuhan Next-Generation Weather Radar Construction Project represents a pivotal collaboration between the China Meteorological Administration and the provincial government. It holds significance in Wuhan’s meteorological development, as outlined in the “13th Five-Year Plan for Wuhan Meteorological Development”, and is a pioneering project in the construction industry, spearheading digitized construction. Positioned atop Bafen Mountain in Jiangxia District, Wuhan, the project spans approximately 8672.01 m² of planned land, with a total construction area of 4230 m², comprising approximately 2693 m² above ground and 1537 m² below ground. With ground elevations ranging between 265.6 and 251.8, the structure comprises 26 above-ground floors and 1 basement level, standing at a height of 92.15 m. The project’s total investment is estimated at approximately 148 million RMB.
This endeavor faces multifaceted challenges, including complex structural design, intricate infrastructure layout, intricate construction arrangements, and exceedingly high construction difficulty.
Complex Structural Design: Adopting a reinforced concrete structure, the project features vertically inclined torsional components in twin towers, rendering the structure intricate. To meet operational requirements, the towers require a vibration period of less than 1 m. Additionally, the massive integrated radar room atop further complicates structural design and analysis, increasing the complexity.
Intricate Infrastructure Layout: Constrained indoor space results in significant clashes between disciplines, especially in the intricate layout of infrastructure.
Challenges in Construction Arrangement: Located at the summit of Bafen Mountain in Jiangxia District, Wuhan, site constraints pose challenges in arranging tower cranes, external scaffolding, internal formwork, and construction platforms.
Exceedingly High Construction Difficulty: The irregular concrete structure presents numerous difficulties in positioning, processing structural templates, and installing curtain wall panels, contributing to exceptionally high construction complexity.
Despite these daunting challenges, this project notably achieved China’s first-ever PLM–BIM integration in architectural engineering, setting a precedent as the country’s pioneer seamless digital construction project. It stands as a benchmark in the industry, marking a milestone in low-carbon, environmentally friendly digital construction.
Collaborative design
The typical applications and achievements of BIM–PLM integration in the design phase include the following aspects:
Site Design: Project terrain, road, and landscape models are created on the collaborative platform. The site layout is optimized on the basis of detailed terrain models, which included foundation designs for the main piles and retaining walls. The platform facilitates excavation, backfilling on the basis of the geological layer distribution, and design of the pile foundation lengths.
Design: CATIA’s parametric design capabilities are utilized within the platform to adjust architectural surface rotation angles continuously, optimizing building forms. The optimal rotation angle was determined to be 18° through iterative adjustments. Refer to Fig. 5a.
Curtain Wall Reconstruction and Optimization: Reconstruction of freeform surfaces via regularized generation logic employs intelligent optimization algorithms to iteratively compute the surfaces closest to the original surfaces. This process ensured more uniform and standardized panel specifications after division.
Structural Selection: Parametric design tools are utilized on the platform to swiftly create structural skeleton lines on the basis of architectural outlines. Multiple generation logics are developed according to various system characteristics, enabling the creation of structural calculation models. These models are interactively linked with structural analysis software for comparative assessments, addressing complexities in modeling complex structures; refer to Fig. 5b.
Structural Design: Based on the comparative results, structural design of components, including beams, columns, slabs, and foundations, as well as detailed concrete and steel structure designs, is carried out on the collaborative platform. The concrete structure details include the reinforcement layout, the bending and anchoring of the steel bars, and the node reinforcement design. The detailing of the steel structure includes component selection, node design, and finite element simulations; refer to Fig. 5c.
Electromechanical design: This includes schematic design, pipeline layout, comprehensive pipeline integration, and system simulations. The electromechanical schematic design is developed on the basis of architectural and functional requirements. The platform facilitates comprehensive design for plumbing, HVAC, and electrical systems, identifying and resolving clashes with other disciplines; refer to Fig. 5d.
Numerical Simulation: An integrated numerical simulation system is used to analyze and evaluate a building’s response under various physical conditions. This includes the design and validation of HVAC, fire safety, and electrical systems, contributing to the technical support for the entire lifecycle management of the building; refer to Fig. 5e.
Large-Scale Precise Modeling: Large-scale, precise models encompassing both architectural and construction process models are established.
Engineering calculation: Detailed models are utilized to accurately estimate the material requirements for concrete, steel, and construction measures such as scaffolding and formwork on the basis of the project’s construction process. The 3D models facilitate precise cost control. Refer to Fig. 5f.
Fig. 5.
Typical applications and achievements of BIM–PLM integration in the case one design phase. a Form design. b Structural selection. c Structural design. d Electromechanical design. e Numerical simulation. f Engineering calculation. This figure was drawn and edited by the authors of this paper, Shen Zhang, Yuchen Tang, and Hao Yang, via 3DEXPERIENCE, version 2022X (https://www.3ds.com/3dexperience).
Collaborative construction
On the basis of a unified platform, construction design personnel integrated BIM–PLM applications into the construction phase, encompassing construction scheme development, construction disclosures, virtual design, and construction. Typical applications in this study included the following:
On-Site Tower Crane Positioning: The double-curved surface design made it difficult to determine the optimal position of the tower crane via traditional 2D drawings. By collaborating with the construction project manager, the tower crane and adjacent wall positions were accurately designed on the basis of the 3D model. The figure shows the exact parameters used to define wall lengths and angles, which were derived from the model. Refer to Fig. 6a.
Scaffolding Design: Determining scaffolding schemes for complex curved surfaces was equally challenging when 2D plans were used. The scaffolding plan was established through a precise 3D layout with the scaffolding structures highlighted to indicate their placement in relation to the main structure and tower crane. Refer to Fig. 6b.
Formwork Design and Validation: The formwork scheme was developed through collaboration and verified through simulation analysis. Figure 6c illustrates both the model-based formwork layout and the corresponding simulation results, which validated the material selection and structural stability. Refer to Fig. 6c.
Construction Unloading Platform Design: Fig. 6d displays the 3D layout and final construction plan for the unloading platform. The design process, which is complicated by the building’s shape, required coordination between 3D modeling and site communication to resolve form and installation issues. Refer to Fig. 6d.
Complex Reinforcement Detailing: Due to the intricate arrangement of steel bars at various nodes, Fig. 6e focuses on enlarged views of critical connection nodes. These visualizations provide construction workers with a comprehensive understanding of how to implement precise steel bar layouts at key intersections. Refer to Fig. 6e.
Concrete Pouring Formwork Scheme: Collaborative efforts were made with the construction unit to combine the model to finalize the tower structure construction plan. The curved surfaces from the design model were unfolded to obtain intersection lines. These lines were then printed on paper by 3D printing, cut, pasted onto template materials, cut again, and finally installed as formwork.
Lifting Simulation: Following the establishment of tower crane positioning, scaffolding, and formwork schemes, lifting simulations were conducted.
Construction Simulation: Fig. 6f illustrates how 3D model-based simulations were used to develop construction operation manuals and training videos for onsite workers. The simulation ensured construction precision and enhanced workflow efficiency. Comparison between 3D simulations and real-life site photography provides a clear indication of the alignment between planned and actual construction. Refer to Fig. 6f.
Fig. 6.
Typical applications and achievements of BIM–PLM integration in the case one construction phase. a On-site tower crane positioning. b Scaffolding design. c Formwork design and validation. d Construction unloading platform design. e Complex reinforcement detailing. f Construction simulation. This figure was drawn and edited by the authors of this paper, Shen Zhang, Yuchen Tang, and Hao Yang, via 3DEXPERIENCE, version 2022X (https://www.3ds.com/3dexperience).
Case two
The Hubei Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Comprehensive Capacity Enhancement Project (Phase I) is a key initiative within the public health system of Hubei Province. To address the specific needs of Hubei Province, this project sought to establish a model for the province, fundamentally improving the existing framework for responding to infectious diseases and other public health emergencies. Located on Zhuodaoquan North Road in the Hongshan District of Wuhan, the project encompasses a total floor area of 79,666.7 square meters, including nine above-ground floors and two underground levels. The project faced several challenges, including the construction of large-span steel structures, a tight schedule, and limited site space. The integration of BIM and PLM methodologies effectively addressed these challenges.
Collaborative design
Three-Dimensional Geological Modeling: This allowed for a more objective and vivid description of geological features, overcoming the limitations of using 2D drawings to describe 3D geological features. It enabled excavation, backfilling, and pile foundation length design on the basis of the distribution of geological layers. Refer to Fig. 7a.
Curtain Wall Optimization and Design: By optimizing and segmenting the facade, freeform surfaces were reconstructed to make the divided panel specifications more uniform and consistent. The curtain wall unit design was based on segmented surfaces and considered embedded positioning during the design phase to guide onsite construction. Refer to Fig. 7b.
Structural Design: A proprietary interface program was developed between 3DE and SAP2000 software, which converts 3DE building skeleton lines into beam, column, and wall units. It then invokes SAP2000 to generate analytical models for structural analysis. Refer to Fig. 7c.
Structural Deepening: Combining structural analysis results, concrete and steel structure node finite element simulations were conducted via CATIA’s basic design and SIMULIA numerical simulation functions. Refer to Fig. 7d.
Mechanical and Electrical Design: Integrated architectural and structural design schemes, including equipment selection schematic design, pipeline layout, comprehensive pipeline integration, and system simulation, were used to carry out mechanical and electrical professional design. Refer to Fig. 7e.
3D Review: In a three-dimensional digital environment for review, modification, feedback, and confirmation of designs, deepening models, construction measures, and construction plans were utilized to achieve refined management of the design process, effectively controlling design quality and ensuring traceability of the design results. Refer to Fig. 7f.
Fig. 7.
Typical applications and achievements of BIM–PLM integration in the case two design phase. a Three-dimensional geological modeling. b Optimization of curtain wall separation for the whole project. c 3DE and SAP2000 interface programs. d Typical type of reinforced concrete joint. e Electromechanical three-dimensional full model. f Three-dimensional proofreading. This figure was drawn and edited by the authors of this paper, Shen Zhang, Yuchen Tang, and Hao Yang, via 3DEXPERIENCE, version 2022X (https://www.3ds.com/3dexperience).
Collaborative construction
Overall Scheme Formulation and Verification: Through preliminary simulation planning of project office areas, living areas, and construction sites, the application of 3D scene layouts at construction sites were simulated to comprehensively and accurately grasp the layout of construction site plans, improve the utilization rate of construction site space, and avoid secondary handling.
Excavation Support Removal Simulation: The actual situation onsite was restored via a model combined with numerical simulation analysis technology to determine the arrangement of excavation support removal schemes, ensuring the feasibility of construction measures. Refer to Fig. 8a.
High- and Large-Template Support System Design: On the basis of the design model, the construction unit created a high- and large-template support frame model on the same platform to determine whether the construction support frame scheme was reasonable, providing a theoretical basis for onsite material selection. Refer to Fig. 8b.
Steel Structure Installation Simulation: The entire process of steel structure installation in virtual space was simulated to discover difficulties in the construction process in advance, rehearse schemes, and improve construction safety and efficiency. A real-time comparison between the construction status and the model was conducted to promptly correct deviations and ensure construction accuracy. Refer to Fig. 8c.
Curtain Wall Installation Simulation: Based on the curtain wall construction scheme, typical floor curtain wall installation construction simulation videos were produced through the platform’s construction simulation module, facilitating onsite explanations of construction schemes to construction personnel.
Mechanical and Electrical Installation Simulation: On the basis of the overall linkage lifting installation scheme of mechanical and electrical pipelines, typical mechanical and electrical installation area construction simulation videos were produced through the platform’s construction simulation module, facilitating onsite explanations of construction schemes to construction personnel. Refer to Fig. 8d.
Three-Dimensional Annotation: The intuitive, visual, and accurate expression features of the three-dimensional model were fully utilized to eliminate potential risks of inconsistency between 3D and 2D drawings through 3D annotations, reducing downstream personnel’s (processing, manufacturing, construction, operation and maintenance, etc.) understanding time and errors in the model. Refer to Fig. 8e.
Three-Dimensional Delivery: On the basis of 3D annotations, a steel structure installation guide manual was prepared. The manual details the component partitioning, component positioning, component coding, construction sequence, precautions, and personnel, material, machinery, and material information for steel structure installation, making construction tasks clearer. The components here refer to the various parts and elements of the steel structure, such as beams, columns, connections, braces, and other structural elements. Refer to Fig. 8f.
Three-Dimensional Disclosures: Completed technical disclosures were expressed using a three-dimensional digital model instead of drawings, presenting detailed structures in a more intuitive manner.
Fig. 8.
Typical applications and achievements of BIM–PLM integration in the case two construction phase. a Interior support construction. b Independent research and development of scaffolding and formwork design tools. c Simulation of the installation of steel structures on typical floors. d Electromechanical installation simulation. e Floor steel column specifications and positioning marking. f, Three-dimensional disclosure. This figure was drawn and edited by the authors of this paper, Shen Zhang, Yuchen Tang, and Hao Yang, via 3DEXPERIENCE, version 2022X (https://www.3ds.com/3dexperience).
Comprehensive assessment of the integrated BIM and PLM approach
Establishment of assessment criteria and indicators
In this study, focus group discussions and semistructured interviews were employed to identify current issues in the traditional project design and construction phases, as well as stakeholders’ concerns. These insights were used to establish assessment criteria and their respective indicators, which were then applied to projects integrating BIM and PLM to comprehensively evaluate their effectiveness.
Sample Selection: Key stakeholders closely associated with both traditional projects and those using the integrated BIM–PLM approach were selected as the study sample. These stakeholders included owners, investors, design firms, project team members, and government authorities for the design phase, as well as construction firms, project team members, material suppliers, supervisory units, researchers, and subcontractors for the construction phase (as shown in Fig. 9). The total sample size was 45 participants, covering various disciplines, enterprises, and regions to ensure comprehensiveness and representativeness.
Fig. 9.
Stakeholders of the BIM–PLM integration project.
-
(2)
Focus Group Discussions: Five focus group discussions were organized, each comprising 8–10 participants. Guided by the researchers, these discussions utilized open-ended questions to delve into the current issues and concerns in traditional projects. Each session lasted approximately 1.5 h and was recorded for analysis. Five key assessment criteria were established from these discussions, as detailed in Table 4.
-
(3)Semistructured Interviews: Following the focus group discussions, the researchers conducted semistructured interviews with each participant. The interview questions were based on the five assessment criteria identified in the focus groups and covered the establishment of indicators, overall project effectiveness evaluation, and recommendations for future project implementations. The questions were tailored according to each interviewee’s role and background. Each interview lasted 30–45 min and was recorded for analysis. The evaluation of project effectiveness and recommendations for future implementations are discussed in the Results and Discussion sections and will not be reiterated here. The specific indicators established for the assessment criteria are as follows:
- Cross Collaboration (fraction/days): information sharing rate, problem-solving time, and cross-department task completion rate.
- Quality (points): deepening concrete structures, deepening steel structures, 3D proofreading; steel structure installation, and total level program.
- Duration (weeks): curtain wall optimization and design, concrete structure deepening construction, steel structure deepening construction, pipe optimization and comprehensive arrangement, component processing, general flat plan construction, 3D delivery, and project construction management.
- Cost (million RMB): curtain wall, site use, labor, construction machinery and tools, steel structure, autoclaved lightweight concrete panel, other direct costs, and other indirect costs.
- Waste (fraction): material waste, rework, nonproductive time, and energy consumption.
Table 4.
Stakeholder perspectives and Assessment Criteria across Design and Construction Phases.
Lifecycle Stage | Stakeholders | Current Issues | Concerns | Assessment Criteria |
---|---|---|---|---|
Design | Owner | Inaccurate budgeting, unclear classification, design flaws, and approval delays | Overall project budget and design quality |
Quality Cost Duration |
Investors | Budget overruns | Financial monitoring | Cost | |
Design Firms | Single-discipline design, low productivity, significant rework, and material waste | Design quality, efficiency, rework instances, and material waste rate |
Quality Waste Duration Cross-collaboration |
|
Project Team Members | Poor communication and coordination difficulties | Organizational structure management | Cross-collaboration | |
Government Authorities | Complex approval processes, policy changes, and failure to meet energy use and environmental protection standards | Public management quality, social impact, and energy consumption |
Quality Waste Cross-collaboration |
|
Construction | Construction Firms | Complex safety management with diverse personnel and machinery, quality control issues, project delays, significant rework, excessive nonproductive time, and material waste | Safety, quality, duration, rework instances, and nonproductive time |
Quality Duration Cost Waste |
Project Team Members | Team collaboration issues, unclear task allocation, complex task overlaps, and varying professional skills | Collaboration quality and task guidance |
Quality Cross-collaboration |
|
Material Suppliers | Inaccurate project quantities or omissions, leading to untimely restocking, and impact of market price fluctuations | Construction material costs, demand, and market price fluctuations | Cost | |
Supervisory Units | Inconsistent construction standards, inadequate on-site management, and insufficient resources on-site affecting project progress | Construction quality and resource supervision |
Quality Cross-collaboration |
|
Researchers | Disconnection between practice and research and sustainability issues disconnected from theoretical research | Application of theory, material waste rate, and energy consumption |
Quality Cross-collaboration Waste |
|
Subcontractors | Construction interface disputes, contract disputes, and delays | Contract fulfillment and unclear professional interfaces |
Quality Cross-collaboration |
All methods were carried out in accordance with relevant guidelines and regulations. All experimental protocols were approved by the Academic Committee of Hubei University of Technology. Informed consent was obtained from all the subjects and/or their legal guardian(s) prior to their participation in the study.
Establishment of objective functions and constraints
In this subsection, the optimization results of the BIM–PLM project are evaluated on the basis of the objective function67. The project’s degree of collaboration, quality score, total duration, cost, and waste are considered in the objective function, with the optimal solutions for the objective function variables corresponding to the optimal values of the variables: highest collaboration, highest quality score, shortest total duration, lowest cost, and minimal waste. A mathematical model for the objective function was established:
![]() |
1 |
In the formula, S is the cross-collaboration, Q is the quality score, C is the cost quantity, T is the total duration of the project, and W is the waste. The values of the subindicators of their respective variables are analyzed and normalized, and their values are restricted to between 0 and 1 to equalize the degree of influence of each indicator on the total indicator. The constant 7 serves as a baseline adjustment value to adjust the range of the final result to ensure that the value of F is not too low or negative because of the negative effects of other variables.
(1) Cross-collaboration
![]() |
2 |
where is the collaboration indicator for the i-th item,
is the minimum value of the collaboration indicators for each subitem, and
is the maximum value of the collaboration indicators for each subitem. In the context of specific projects, n is assigned a value of 2 (set to positive correlation), and m is assigned a value of 1 (set to negative correlation). The subprojects are the information sharing rate, problem-solving time (negative correlation), and cross-department task completion rate.
(2) Quality
![]() |
3 |
In the formula, is the quality indicator value for the i-th item,
is the minimum value of the quality indicators for each subitem, and
is the maximum value of the quality indicators for each subitem. Based on the specific project situation, n is assigned a value of 5. The subprojects are deepening concrete structures, deepening steel structures, 3D proofreading, steel structure installation, and the total level program.
(3) Duration
![]() |
4 |
where is the duration indicator value of the i-th item,
is the minimum value of the duration indicators for each subitem,
is the maximum value of the duration indicators for each subitem, and
is the total duration limit, which represents the maximum value of the total duration of the project. On the basis of the specific project situation, n is assigned a value of 8. The subprojects include curtain wall optimization and design, concrete structure deepening construction, steel structure deepening construction, pipe optimization and comprehensive arrangement, component processing, general flat plan construction, 3D delivery, and project construction management.
(4) Cost
![]() |
5 |
Similarly, in the formula, is the cost indicator for the i-th item,
is the minimum value of the cost indicators for each subitem, and
is the maximum value of the cost indicators for each subitem. On the basis of the specific project situation, an n value of 8 is assigned. The subprojects include curtain walls, site use, labor, construction machinery and tools, steel structures, autoclaved lightweight concrete panels, other direct costs, and other indirect costs.
(5) Waste
![]() |
6 |
In the formula, is the index value of the level of waste for the ith subitem,
is the minimum value of the waste index for each subitem, and
is the maximum value of the waste index for each subitem. According to the specific project, n is assigned a value of 4. The subitems are material waste, rework, nonproductive time, and energy consumption.
Furthermore, in terms of design variable constraints and design standard constraints, the relevant indicators of BIM–PLM projects should also meet the requirements of the owner, actual project conditions, quality and safety standards, and environmental regulations, which will not be repeated here. Next, the final quality score, duration, and cost are calculated based on the specific workload of each subproject and the quality, duration, and cost indicators for each sub project. Finally, based on Formulas 1–4, Q, T, and C of the project are calculated and substituted into the objective function formula, and finally, the comparison results of the objective function between the traditional project and the BIM–PLM project are obtained.
Electronic supplementary material
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Acknowledgements
This study is supported by the Major Program (JD) of Hubei Province (2023BAA007).
Author contributions
Y.Z.: conceptualization and supervision; S.Z.: methodology; Y.T.: writing—original draft preparation, writing review and editing; H.Y.: investigation; Y.C.: investigation; and J.L.: investigation. All the authors have read and agreed to the publication of the submitted version of the manuscript.
Data availability
Some or all of the data, models, or codes that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
Declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Footnotes
Publisher’s note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Contributor Information
Yuchen Tang, Email: 102200786@hbut.edu.cn.
Yiquan Zou, Email: zouyq@mail.hbut.edu.cn.
References
- 1.Abioye, S. O. et al. Artificial intelligence in the construction industry: A review of present status, opportunities and future challenges. J. Build. Eng.44, 103299 (2021). [Google Scholar]
- 2.Gomes, A. M., Azevedo, G., Sampaio, A. Z. & Lite, A. S. BIM in structural project: Interoperability analyses and data management. Appl. Sci.12, 8814 (2022). [Google Scholar]
- 3.Yilmaz, G., Akcamete, A. & Demirors, O. BIM-CAREM: Assessing the BIM capabilities of design, construction and facilities management processes in the construction industry. Comput. Ind.147, 103861 (2023). [Google Scholar]
- 4.Jang, S., Jeong, Y., Lee, G. & Kang, Y. Enhancing subcontractors’ participation in BIM-based design coordination under a DBB contract. J. Manag. Eng.35, 04019022 (2019). [Google Scholar]
- 5.Volk, R., Stengel, J. & Schultmann, F. Building Information Modeling (BIM) for existing buildings—Literature review and future needs. Autom. Constr.38, 109–127 (2014). [Google Scholar]
- 6.Shim, C.-S. & Roh, G.-T. Data-driven modeling algorithms for cable-stayed bridges considering mechanical behavior. Appl. Sci.11, 2266 (2021). [Google Scholar]
- 7.Azhar, S. Building Information Modeling (BIM): Trends, benefits, risks, and challenges for the AEC industry. Leadersh. Manag. Eng.11, 241–252 (2011). [Google Scholar]
- 8.Eastman, C. M. BIM Handbook: A Guide to Building Information Modeling for Owners, Managers, Designers, Engineers and Contractors (Wiley, 2011).
- 9.Li, J. et al. Benefits of Building Information Modelling in the project lifecycle: Construction projects in Asia. Int. J. Adv. Rob. Syst.11, 124 (2014). [Google Scholar]
- 10.Martins, S. S., Evangelista, A. C. J., Hammad, A. W. A., Tam, V. W. Y. & Haddad, A. Evaluation of 4D BIM tools applicability in construction planning efficiency. Int. J. Constr. Manag.22, 2987–3000 (2022). [Google Scholar]
- 11.D’Amico, F. et al. BIM for infrastructure: An efficient process to achieve 4D and 5D digital dimensions. Eur. Transp./Trasp. Eur.77 (2020).
- 12.Kaewunruen, S., Sresakoolchai, J. & Zhou, Z. Sustainability-based lifecycle management for bridge infrastructure using 6D BIM. Sustainability12, 2436 (2020). [Google Scholar]
- 13.Mehedi, M. T. & Shochchho, A. H. Exploring facility management (7D) with BIM considering quality and performance assessment models. in E3S Web of Conferences vol. 304 02007 (EDP Sciences, 2021).
- 14.Utkucu, D. & Sözer, H. Interoperability and data exchange within BIM platform to evaluate building energy performance and indoor comfort. Autom. Constr.116, 103225 (2020). [Google Scholar]
- 15.Chang, K.-M., Dzeng, R.-J. & Wu, Y.-J. An automated IoT visualization BIM platform for decision support in facilities management. Appl. Sci.8, 1086 (2018). [Google Scholar]
- 16.Nascimento, D. L. de M., Sotelino, E. D., Lara, T. P. S., Caiado, R. G. G. & Ivson, P. Constructability in industrial plants construction: a BIM-lean approach using the Digital Obeya Room framework. J. Civ. Eng. Manag.23, 1100–1108 (2017).
- 17.Jiang, Y. et al. Blockchain-enabled cyber-physical smart modular integrated construction. Comput. Ind.133, 103553 (2021). [Google Scholar]
- 18.El Ammari, K. & Hammad, A. Remote interactive collaboration in facilities management using BIM-based mixed reality. Autom. Constr.107, 102940 (2019). [Google Scholar]
- 19.Hall, A. T., Durdyev, S., Koc, K., Ekmekcioglu, O. & Tupenaite, L. Multi-criteria analysis of barriers to building information modeling (BIM) adoption for SMEs in New Zealand construction industry. Eng. Constr. Archit. Manag.30, 3798–3816 (2023). [Google Scholar]
- 20.Dong, D. et al. DFMA-oriented modular and parametric design and secondary splitting of vertical PC components. Sci. Rep.13, 3457 (2023). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Innella, F., Arashpour, M. & Bai, Y. Lean methodologies and techniques for modular construction: Chronological and critical review. J. Constr. Eng. Manag.145, 04019076 (2019). [Google Scholar]
- 22.Nosenzo, V., Tornincasa, S., Bonisoli, E. & Brino, M. Open questions on Product Lifecycle Management (PLM) with CAD/CAE integration. Int. J. Interact. Des. Manuf8, 91–107 (2014). [Google Scholar]
- 23.Weber, C. & Deubel, T. New theory-based concepts for PDM and PLM. in DS 31: Proceedings of ICED 03, the 14th International Conference on Engineering Design, Stockholm (2003).
- 24.Ming, X. G. et al. Collaborative process planning and manufacturing in product lifecycle management. Comput. Ind.59, 154–166 (2008). [Google Scholar]
- 25.Corallo, A. et al. Defining product lifecycle management: A journey across features, definitions, and concepts. Int. Sch. Res. Not.2013 (2013).
- 26.Loison, F. & Eynard, B. PLM data transformation: A mesoscopic scale perspective and an industrial case study. Comput. Ind.155, 104053 (2024). [Google Scholar]
- 27.Matenga, A. E. & Mpofu, K. Blockchain-based product lifecycle management using supply chain management for railcar remanufacturing. Procedia CIRP116, 486–491 (2023). [Google Scholar]
- 28.Min, K. yuk, Ham, N., Kim, J. H., Lee, Y.-S. & Kim, J. An application strategy for PLM in construction industry. JDCTA2, 4–10 (2008).
- 29.Pop, G. I., Titu, A. M. & Pop, A. B. Enhancing aerospace industry efficiency and sustainability: Process integration and quality management in the context of Industry 4.0. Sustainability15, 16206 (2023).
- 30.Tanpure, G., Yadav, V., Jain, R. & Soni, G. Framework for cloud product lifecycle management system: A case study of an automotive industry. Bus. Process Manag. J.29, 1920–1937 (2023). [Google Scholar]
- 31.Park, S. & Huh, J.-H. Study on PLM and big data collection for the digital transformation of the shipbuilding industry. J. Mar. Sci. Eng.10, 1488 (2022). [Google Scholar]
- 32.Bandinelli, R. PLM needs for cosmetic and fragrance industries: A preliminary assessment. in Product Lifecycle Management. PLM in Transition Times: The Place of Humans and Transformative Technologies: 19th IFIP WG 5.1 International Conference, PLM 2022, Grenoble, France, July 10–13, 2022, Revised Selected Papers vol. 667 126 (Springer, 2023).
- 33.Conlon, J. From PLM 1.0 to PLM 2.0: The evolving role of product lifecycle management (PLM) in the textile and apparel industries. J. Fash. Mark. Manag.: Int. J.24, 533–553 (2020).
- 34.Hochscheid, E., Falardeau, M., Lapalme, J., Boton, C. & Rivest, L. Practitioners’ concerns about their liability toward BIM collaborative digital mockups: Case study in civil engineering. J. Constr. Eng. Manag.149, 05023010 (2023). [Google Scholar]
- 35.Li, L. et al. Developing a BIM-enabled building lifecycle management system for owners: Architecture and case scenario. Autom. Constr.129, 103814 (2021). [Google Scholar]
- 36.Abanda, F. H., Jian, N., Adukpo, S., Tuhaise, V. V. & Manjia, M. B. Digital twin for product versus project lifecycles’ development in manufacturing and construction industries. J. Intell. Manuf.10.1007/s10845-023-02301-2 (2024). [Google Scholar]
- 37.Abanda, F. H., Tah, J. H. M. & Cheung, F. K. T. BIM in off-site manufacturing for buildings. J. Build. Eng.14, 89–102 (2017). [Google Scholar]
- 38.Nguyen, T. A., Do, S. T., Pham, T.-A. & Nguyen, M. C. Application of BIM and 3D Laser Scanning for Quantity Surveying and Quality Management in Construction Projects vol. 2428 (2021).
- 39.Wang, L., Lee, J., Nimawat, J., Han, K. & Gupta, A. Integrated 4D design change management model for construction projects. J. Constr. Eng. Manag.150 (2024).
- 40.Le, H. T. T. & Nguyen, P. T. BIM-LCC Integrated for Selecting the Sustainable Building Envelope Design vol. 2560 (2023).
- 41.Kaewunruen, S., Sresakoolchai, J., Ma, W. & Phil-Ebosie, O. Digital twin aided vulnerability assessment and risk-based maintenance planning of bridge infrastructures exposed to extreme conditions. Sustain13, 1–19 (2021). [Google Scholar]
- 42.Sresakoolchai, J. & Kaewunruen, S. Track geometry prediction using three-dimensional recurrent neural network-based models cross-functionally Co-simulated with BIM. Sensors-basel.23, 391 (2023). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 43.Gao, S. et al. A BIM-based simulation approach for life-cycle quality control in post-pandemic hospitals. Buildings13 (2023).
- 44.Kaewunruen, S. et al. 6D-BIM applications to enrich circular value chains and stakeholder engagement within built environments. in 4th International Conference ‘Coordinating Engineering for Sustainability and Resilience’ & Midterm Conference of CircularB “Implementation of Circular Economy in the Built Environment” (eds. Ungureanu, V., Bragança, L., Baniotopoulos, C. & Abdalla, K. M.) 346–356 (Springer, 2024). 10.1007/978-3-031-57800-7_32.
- 45.Keskin, B., Salman, B. & Koseoglu, O. Architecting a BIM-based digital twin platform for Airport Asset Management: A model-based system engineering with SysML approach. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management148, 04022020 (2022). [Google Scholar]
- 46.Vestin, A., Säfsten, K. & Popovic, D. Mitigating product data management challenges in the wooden single-family house industry. Journal of Information Technology in Construction28, 757–773 (2023). [Google Scholar]
- 47.Meschini, S., Tagliabue, L. C. & Di Giuda, G. M. Leveraging Digital Twins to Enhance Green Public Procurement in AECO Industry. vol. 3285 26–38 (2022).
- 48.Lennartsson, M., Yitmen, I., Movaffaghi, H. & Linderoth, H. Framework for Digital Development in Industrialized Housebuilding vol. 13 335–345 (2020).
- 49.Tchana, Y., Ducellier, G. & Remy, S. Designing a unique digital twin for linear infrastructures lifecycle management. Procedia CIRP84, 545–549 (2019). [Google Scholar]
- 50.Correa, F. Simulating Wood-Framing Wall Panel’s Production with Timed Coloured Petri Nets 1026–1033 (2019). 10.22260/isarc2019/0137.
- 51.Di Biccari, C., Mangialardi, G., Lazoi, M. & Corallo, A. Configuration Views from PLM to Building Lifecycle Management vol. 540 69–79 (2018).
- 52.Aram, S. & Eastman, C. Integration of PLM Solutions and BIM Systems for the AEC Industry. in (Montreal, Canada, 2013). 10.22260/ISARC2013/0115.
- 53.Rafsanjani, H. N. & Nabizadeh, A. H. Towards digital architecture, engineering, and construction (AEC) industry through virtual design and construction (VDC) and digital twin. Energy Built Environ.4, 169–178 (2023). [Google Scholar]
- 54.Tzivelekis, C. A., Yiotis, L. S., Fountas, N. A. & Krimpenis, A. A. Parametrically automated 3D design and manufacturing for spiral-type free-form models in an interactive CAD/CAM environment. Int. J. Interact. Des. Manuf.11, 223–232 (2017). [Google Scholar]
- 55.Waqar, A., Qureshi, A. H. & Alaloul, W. S. Barriers to Building Information Modeling (BIM) deployment in small construction projects: Malaysian Construction Industry. Sustainability15, 2477 (2023). [Google Scholar]
- 56.Gao, X. & Pishdad-Bozorgi, P. BIM-enabled facilities operation and maintenance: A review. Adv. Eng. Inf.39, 227–247 (2019). [Google Scholar]
- 57.Fadeyi, M. O. The role of building information modeling (BIM) in delivering the sustainable building value. Int. J. Sustain. Built Environ.6, 711–722 (2017). [Google Scholar]
- 58.Karolyfi, K. & Szep, J. A parametric BIM framework to conceptual structural design for assessing the embodied environmental impact. Sustainability15 (2023).
- 59.Lima, M. S. S., Duarte, S., Exenberger, H., Fröch, G. & Flora, M. Integrating BIM-LCA to enhance sustainability assessments of constructions. Sustainability16 (2024).
- 60.Chi, H.-L., Wang, X. & Jiao, Y. BIM-enabled structural design: Impacts and future developments in structural modelling, analysis and optimisation processes. Arch. Comput. Methods Eng.22, 135–151 (2015). [Google Scholar]
- 61.Koo, H. J. & O’Connor, J. T. A strategy for building design quality improvement through BIM capability analysis. J. Constr. Eng. Manag.148, 04022066 (2022). [Google Scholar]
- 62.Chen, S.-Y. et al. Data-driven platform framework for digital whole-process expressway construction management. Front. Neurosci.16, 891772 (2022). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 63.Lin, Y. C., Hsu, Y. T. & Hu, H. T. BIM model management for BIM-based facility management in buildings. Adv. Civ. Eng.2022 (2022).
- 64.Lee, Y.-C., Solihin, W. & Eastman, C. M. The mechanism and challenges of validating a building information model regarding data exchange standards. Autom. Constr.100, 118–128 (2019). [Google Scholar]
- 65.Beach, T., Rana, O., Rezgui, Y. & Parashar, M. Governance model for cloud computing in building information management. IEEE Trans. Serv. Comput.8, 314–327 (2015). [Google Scholar]
- 66.Zhang, T., Doan, D. T. & Kang, J. Application of building information modeling-blockchain integration in the Architecture, Engineering, and Construction/Facilities Management industry: A review. J. Build. Eng. 107551 (2023).
- 67.Freeman, R. E. Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach (Cambridge University Press, 2010).
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Supplementary Materials
Data Availability Statement
Some or all of the data, models, or codes that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.