Investigating the Synergy of Integrated Project Delivery and Building Information Modeling

What is it about?

A B S T R A C T Architectural heritage conservation projects are one of the most risky and complex projects in the construction industry. Many studies have reported frequent performance failures in terms of time, cost and quality. To implement a quality management in the conservation projects and enhance their performance; we propose the adoption of two emerging and innovative approaches: Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) and Building Information Modeling (BIM). Through an analysis of literature review (journals, white papers, norms and standards) on the subject, a comprehensive qualitative study in theoretical term has been carried out to define the potential advantages of the synergy between the BIM and IPD to face conservation issues and constraints through project lifecycle. Finally, we draw some general conclusions, summarize the implications for practice and set out recommendations for further research.

Featured Image

Why is it important?

Investigating the Synergy of Integrated Project Delivery and Building Information Modeling in the Conservation of the Architectural Heritage *Dr. BRAHMI BANI FERIEL1, Dr. KITOUNI ILHAM2 and Dr. SASSI BOUDEMAGH SOUAD3 1, 3AVMF laboratory, Faculty of Architecture and Urban Planning, Salah Boubnider-Constantine03 University, Constantine, Algeria 2 MISC laboratory, Faculty of New Information and Communication Technologies, Abdelhamid Mehri-Constantine02 University, Constantine, Algeria E mail: brahm.matchi@gmail.com E mail: ilham.kitouni@univ-constantine2.dz E mail: souad.sassi@univ-constantine3.dz A B S T R A C T Architectural heritage conservation projects are one of the most risky and complex projects in the construction industry. Many studies have reported frequent performance failures in terms of time, cost and quality. To implement a quality management in the conservation projects and enhance their performance; we propose the adoption of two emerging and innovative approaches: Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) and Building Information Modeling (BIM). Through an analysis of literature review (journals, white papers, norms and standards) on the subject, a comprehensive qualitative study in theoretical term has been carried out to define the potential advantages of the synergy between the BIM and IPD to face conservation issues and constraints through project lifecycle. Finally, we draw some general conclusions, summarize the implications for practice and set out recommendations for further research. CONTEMPORARY URBAN AFFAIRS (2018), 2(3), 67-77. https://doi.org/10.25034/ijcua.2018.4720 www.ijcua.com Copyright © 2018 Contemporary Urban Affairs. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction Architectural heritage building is a complex system that embraces interlinked tangible and intangible values (Attenni et al., 2017). A worldwide awareness calls for the conservation of cultural heritage to preserve, enhance and integrate it harmoniously into the contemporary living environment; and ensure the development of cultural tourism (ICOMOS, 1999). Conservation project is a complex and sensitive approach required various skills and knowledge; In addition to the risky and uncertain nature of these projects, their fragmented and hierarchical delivering has affected project effectiveness; notably cost overruns and delays which are significantly higher in heritage conservation projects than in overall public works contracts (Guccio & Rizzo, 2010). In this context; complex conservation projects require the adoption of emerging and innovative approaches, it needs more sophisticated project management models with flexible contracts to take care of the contingencies (Debopam & Satyanarayana, 2017); to enhance communication, collaboration and remove obstacles during project lifecycle. Recently, emerging digital technologies are dealing with digital document and interconnected Cultural Heritage information on a variety of delivery platforms, devices and environments; they are changing architectural heritage conservation in increasingly profound ways: functionalities, relationship and roles, to implement a quality approach and eliminate weaknesses in current project delivery systems. In latest years, the BIM field has become a topic of great interest within the developed technology and methods notably 3D laser scanning and photogrammetry which generating 3D cultural heritage models (Logothetis et al., 2015; Dore & Murphy, 2012; Cheng et al., 2015). The power of BIM is their ability to integrate different skills, information throughout the entire project lifecycle (conceptualization and programming, survey, conservation, exploitation, maintenance). The BIM has a limited use by heritage professionals around the world (Historic England, 2017; Arayici et al., 2017); moreover a few academic researches explore the BIM added value in the management of heritage conservation project considering its whole aspects and process. To turn into BIM in the construction industry is obviously a process of change not only in execution processes but also in functional capabilities and contractual agreements, it aims to provide better project delivery solutions (Migilinskasa et al., 2013; Hamdi & Leite 2014); nevertheless the fragment of traditional approaches and the fights for individual benefits goes against the collaborative atmosphere for BIM implementation. Thus, integrated project delivery emerged as an innovative approach and relational alternative delivery methods based on collaborative decision making, shared values and common goals. It can effectively reduce inefficiencies and wastes that are embedded in the current design and practices of the construction industry (AIA, 2007; Kent & Becerik-Gerber, 2010; Azhara et al., 2014). AIA (2007) indicates that the full potential benefits of both IPD and BIM are emphasized when they are used together; although it is possible to achieve IPD without BIM (Kent & Becerik-Gerber, 2010), many studies stated that BIM is essential to efficiently achieve the collaboration required for IPD. Despite the complexity of architectural heritage conservation projects and the frequent failures of its management within traditional delivery methods, there is a total lack of research concerning the adoption of IPD in the conservation sector. In this research we intend to highlight theoretically the potential benefits of the synergy between the BIM and IPD to face conservation issues and constraints. The rest of paper is structured as follows: Section 2 introduces some necessary concepts and definitions related to the architectural heritage conservation projects and highlights related works. Section 3 presents and reviews related works to Building Information Modeling. Section 4 presents the relationship between Building Information Modeling and heritage conservation project. Section 5 presents integrated project delivery and reviews some related works. Section 6 presents the link between IPD and BIM and depicts the benefits of the synergy between them. Section 7 is the core of the paper, it discusses and analyses the benefits of an integrated approach for managing heritage conservation projects based on the junction of IPD and BIM processes. Section 8 concludes the paper and gives prospects to be continued in the future. Architectural heritage conservation is a dynamic intervention aims to bring out the hidden architectural qualities of heritage; to restore its state of conservation and ensure its sustainability; it takes place in complex contexts involving intricate interactions of multi-disciplinary fields; including architects, engineers, historians, archeologists, chemists, environmentalists, geologist, surveyors, craftsmen, building economist , structural, mechanical and electrical engineers , town planner and other specialists , the involving of the building owner or his representative with all this expertise which demands a high degree of experience, communication and knowledge of building materials and construction improve decision making (Harun, 2011). Unfortunately, literature showed that heritage conservation is fragmented (Azizi et al., 2015 ; Avrami et al., 2000; Smith, 2005; Ismail & Azlan, 2010; Perovic et al., 2016); and a different organizational cultures and philosophies ranging from archaeologists/ architect (Kamal, 2008); the developer/ the preserver (Azizi et al., 2015).

Perspectives