跳到主要內容

簡易檢索 / 詳目顯示

回結果列表
研究生： 蕃英宝
Phan Anh Bao
論文名稱： 應用BIM技術時RFI價值之調查研究
A Survey on Request For Information Values in Building Information Modeling Implementation
指導教授： 楊智斌
Jyh-Bin Yang
口試委員:
學位類別： 碩士
Master
系所名稱： 工學院 - 土木系營建管理碩士班
Master's Program in Construction Management, Department of Civil Engineering
論文出版年： 2018
畢業學年度： 106
語文別： 英文
論文頁數： 65
中文關鍵詞： 建築資訊模型 、釋疑單 、成本節省 、時間節省 、系統架構
外文關鍵詞： BIM, RFI, Cost Saving, Time Saving, Systematical Framework
相關次數： 點閱：13  下載：0 
分享至:
查詢本校圖書館目錄 查詢臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統 勘誤回報

    • 應用建築資訊建模(Building Information Modeling, BIM)技術是近年來營建產業非常重要的一項發展。過去的研究顯示，為了評估、量測與強化BIM應用的商業價值，產業參與者與研究人員有高度的興趣進行BIM應用的不同面向評估，且過往多數研究會經由分析釋疑單(Request For Information, RFI)的數量來掌握應用BIM的金錢與管理上的價值，然而對於RFI的深入研究與分析卻相對有限。本研究提出一個以投資報酬率(ROI)為主軸且包含三個不同面向的BIM應用價值評估架構，進而討論RFI在成本節省與時間節省的價值。此外，本研究並以問卷調查取得BIM應用參與者的回饋資訊後，探索應用BIM的參與者在RFI五個元素的BIM預期價值。經由分析後，本研究認為RFI的價值可以經由ROI的三個面向獲得解釋：(1)在專案面向，規模較大與契約金額較高且較為複雜的專案RFI的價值較高；(2)在利害關係人面向，業主與顧問較其他專案參與者能夠認同RFI帶來的價值；(3)在BIM成熟度面向，較高的BIM成熟度能夠獲得較高的RFI價值。期望本研究之成果能夠提供組織，尤其是在近期想要了解BIM是否值得投資的業主，做為掌握BIM價值的重要參考資料。

    Implementing Building Information Modeling (BIM) technology is one of the most significant developments in the architecture, engineering and construction (AEC) industry recently. The previous research showed that there is an intense interest among the industry practitioners and academic researchers to assess different aspects of BIM implementation in order to evaluate, measure and enhance the business value of BIM. Although previous researches have mentioned the monetary and managerial values in dealing with the number of Request For Information (RFI), the reality of the situation is that a limited research has discussed broadly and methodically the RFI metric with BIM implementation assessment. The objectives of this study are to discuss primarily the RFI values in terms of cost-saving and time-saving by developing a systematical framework in three different dimensions of Return On Investment (ROI) in implementing BIM, and to explore the potential RFI’s elements under BIM players’ perceptions by conducting a questionnaire survey. By determining the cost and time values associated with five RFI elements (RFI response, RFI reduction, RFI process, RFI reissue, and pending RFI), this study concludes that the RFI metric is a potential measure in perceiving the BIM benefits. Furthermore, the values of RFI fully explored in three distinct dimensions of ROI are interpreted that: (1) In project dimension, the larger project scale and contract value, with more complexity there are, the higher RFI value can be achieved; (2) In stakeholder dimension, owners and consultants perceived the highest RFI value comparing to other BIM players; (3) In BIM maturity level dimension, a higher RFI value would have been reported in the higher BIM maturity levels. Hopefully, the research findings can provide essential information for organizations, particularly to owners who want to know whether BIM is valuable to invest in the near future.

    ABSTRACT i 摘要 ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iii TABLE OF CONTENTS iv LIST OF TABLES vi LIST OF FIGURES vii CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 Research Background 1 1.2 Statement of Problem 2 1.3 Research Objectives 3 1.4 The Scope of Research and Limitation 3 1.5 Thesis Structure 4 CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW 5 2.1 Building Information Modeling (BIM) 5 2.2 Request For Information (RFI) Definition 6 2.3 Request For Information (RFI) in BIM Implementation 8 2.4 Impact of Request For Information (RFI) – Cost and Time 9 2.4.1 RFI Process 10 2.4.2 RFI Reduction 10 2.4.3 RFI Response 11 2.4.4 Pending RFI 12 2.4.5 RFI Reissue 12 2.5 Request For Information (RFI) Impacts to BIM Players 13 2.5.1 Impact of RFI aspects on Owners 13 2.5.2 Impact of RFI aspects on Designers 13 2.5.3 Impact of RFI aspects on Contractors 14 2.5.4 Impact of RFI aspects on Consultants 14 2.6 Request For Information (RFI) Value under ROI Discussions 15 2.6.1 RFI Value from the Viewpoint of the Project Dimension 15 2.6.2 RFI Value from the Viewpoint of the Stakeholder Dimension 17 2.6.3 RFI Value from the Viewpoint of the BIM Maturity Dimension 18 CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY 20 3.1 Planned Research Procedure 20 3.2 Planned Research Methodology 22 3.2.1 Affinity Diagram 22 3.2.2 Relationship Diagram 22 3.3 Questionnaire Survey 23 3.4 Data Analysis 26 CHAPTER 4: RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS 28 4.1 Request For Information (RFI) Aspects in BIM 28 4.1.1 Coordination Issue 28 4.1.2 Design Outcome Issue 28 4.1.3 Returns of Benefit Issue 30 4.1.4 Cost Saving Issue 30 4.2 Request For Information (RFI) Impacts to BIM Players 31 4.3 Request For Information (RFI) Elements - Cost and Time 33 4.4 Request For Information (RFI) Value in ROI Discussions 34 4.4.1 RFI Value in Project Dimension 35 4.4.2 RFI Value in Stakeholder Dimension 38 4.4.3 RFI Value in BIM Maturity Dimension 42 CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS 46 5.1 Conclusions 46 5.2 Suggestions 47 REFERENCE 49 APPENDIX A - QUESTIONNAIRE INFORMATION SHEET 53 (English Version) 53 (Chinese Version) 60

    1. McGraw Hill Construction, Measuring the Impact of BIM on Complex Buildings. 2015.
    2. Succar, B. The five components of BIM performance measurement. in CIB World Congress. 2010.
    3. BuildingSMART UK and British Standards Institution, Constructing the business case - Building Information Modelling. 2010, British Standards Institution: London.
    4. Eadie, R., et al., An analysis of the drivers for adopting building information modelling. Journal of Information Technology in Construction, 2013. 18: p. 338-352.
    5. Khanzode, A., An integrated, virtual design and construction and lean (IVL) method for coordination of MEP. Unpublished Technical Report, 2010. 187.
    6. Li, J., et al., A project-based quantification of BIM benefits. International Journal of Advanced Robotic Systems, 2014. 11(8): p. 123.
    7. BIMForum Portugal Building Information Modelling: Challenges to Overcome. Proceedings of The 2nd BIM International Conference (BIC), 2015.
    8. Talebi, S. Exploring advantages and challenges of adaptation and implementation of BIM in project life cycle. in 2nd BIM International Conference on Challenges to Overcome. 2014. BIMForum Portugal.
    9. Hannon, J.J., Emerging technologies for construction delivery. Vol. 372. 2007: Transportation Research Board.
    10. Becerik-Gerber, B. and S. Rice, The perceived value of building information modeling in the US building industry. Journal of Information Technology in Construction (ITcon), 2010. 15(15): p. 185-201.
    11. Chelson, D.E., The effects of building information modeling on construction site productivity. 2010.
    12. Fan, S.-L., M.J. Skibniewski, and T.W. Hung, Effects of building information modeling during construction. 淡江理工學刊, 2014. 17(2): p. 157-166.
    13. Giel, B.K. and R.R. Issa, Return on investment analysis of using building information modeling in construction. Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering, 2011. 27(5): p. 511-521.
    14. Barlish, K. and K. Sullivan, How to measure the benefits of BIM—A case study approach. Automation in construction, 2012. 24: p. 149-159.
    15. Mandhar, M. and M. Mandhar, BIMing the architectural curricula: integrating Building Information Modelling (BIM) in architectural education. International Journal of Architecture, 2013. 1(1): p. 1-20.
    16. McGraw-Hill Construction, The Business Value of BIM: Getting Building Information Modeling to The Bottom Line, in SmartMarket Report. 2009: New York.
    17. Ningappa, G.N., Use of lean and building information modeling (bim) in the construction process; does bim make it leaner? 2011, Georgia Institute of Technology.
    18. Sai Evuri, G. and N. Amiri-Arshad, A Study on Risks and Benefits of Building information Modeling (BIM) in a Contruction Organization. 2015.
    19. Brookhaven National Lab and REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION (RFI) (Revised AD-6). 2010, Interdisciplinary Science Building.
    20. Torrance Government, Torrance Transit Park And Ride Regional Terminal - Phase 1 in RFI LOG - FEAP764. C2015-21 Rough Grading. 2015.
    21. American Council of Engineering Companies of Kansas (ACECK). Contractor's Request For Information Definition. 28th April, 2017]; Available from: http://www.acecks.org/Portals/0/Content/Partnering/KCA/ContractorsRequest.pdf.
    22. Hanna, A.S., E.J. Tadt, and G.C. Whited, Request for information: benchmarks and metrics for major highway projects. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 2012. 138(12): p. 1347-1352.
    23. New Central Kitchen Building - Rebid, in Ken Tanase. 2016, Berryessa Union School District.
    24. Architects, T.A.I.o. Request for Information (RFI) - GENERAL INFORMATION. Document G716™ – 2004 Instructions 2004; Available from: http://contractdocs.aia.org:800/!SSL!/Multiscreen_HTML5/desktop/Get_Document_Answers/Document_Instruction_Sheets/By_Series/G-Series/G716-2004.htm.
    25. Hergunsel, M.F., Benefits of building information modeling for construction managers and BIM based scheduling. 2011, Worcester Polytechnic Institute.
    26. Qian, A.Y., Benefits and ROI of BIM for Multi-disciplinary Project Management. National University of Singapore, Mar, 2012.
    27. Suermann, P.C., Evaluating the impact of building information modeling (BIM) on construction. 2009, University of Florida.
    28. Khanzode, A., M. Fischer, and D. Reed, Benefits and lessons learned of implementing building virtual design and construction (VDC) technologies for coordination of mechanical, electrical, and plumbing (MEP) systems on a large healthcare project. Journal of Information Technology in Construction (ITcon), 2008. 13(22): p. 324-342.
    29. Stowe, K., et al., Capturing the return on investment of all-in building information modeling: Structured approach. Practice Periodical on Structural Design and Construction, 2014. 20(1): p. 04014027.
    30. Abdirad, H., Metric-based BIM implementation assessment: a review of research and practice. Architectural Engineering and Design Management, 2016: p. 1-27.
    31. Kuehmeier, J.C., Building information modeling and its impact on design and construction firms. 2008, University of Florida.
    32. Fanning, B., Impacts and benefits of implementing BIM on bridge and infrastructure projects. 2007, Colorado State University. Libraries.
    33. Filho, J.B.P.D., et al., CONSTRUCTABILITY ANALYSIS OF ARCHITECTURE–STRUCTURE INTERFACE BASED ON BIM.
    34. Clevenger, C.M., et al., Impacts and Benefits of Implementing Building Information Modeling on Bridge Infrastructure Projects. 2014.
    35. Kelly, D. and B. Ilozor, A Quantitative Study of the Relationship between Project Performance and BIM Use on Commercial Construction Projects in the USA. International Journal of Construction Education and Research, 2016: p. 1-16.
    36. Dickinson, J., BIM: What, Why and How. 2010: National Research Council Canada, Ontario, Canada.
    37. Dinsmore, R.C., Investigating the impact of the Request For Information process in construction. 2013.
    38. Shim, E., B. Carter, and S. Kim, Request for Information (RFI) Management: A Case Study, in 52nd ASC Annual International Conference Proceedings. 2016, The Associated Schools of Construction.
    39. Tilley, P.A., A. Wyatt, and S. Mohamed. Indicators of design and documentation deficiency. in Proceedings of the Fifth Annual Conference of the International Group for Lean Construction. 1997.
    40. Hughes, N., et al., Impact & Control of RFIs on Construction Projects 2013, Navigant Construction
    41. Love, P.E. and J. Zhou, Documentation Errors in Instrumentation and Electrical Systems, in SoBE 100/2012. 2012, Curtin University.
    42. Salunke, R., An Exploratory Case Study Of Offshore outsourcing Within Downstream Structural Steel Engineering Services, in Department of Civil, Construction & Environmental Engineering. 2011, The University of Alabama.
    43. Latiffi, A.A., J. Brahim, and M.S. Fathi. Roles and Responsibilities of Construction Players in Projects Using Building Information Modeling (BIM). in IFIP International Conference on Product Lifecycle Management. 2015. Springer.
    44. Gould, F.E. and N.E. Joyce, Construction project management. 2009: Prentice Hall.
    45. Eastman, C.M., et al., BIM handbook: A guide to building information modeling for owners, managers, designers, engineers and contractors. 2011: John Wiley & Sons.
    46. FMI Management Consulting and the Construction Management Association of America (CMAA), The perfect storm - construction style. Eighth annual survey of owners. 2007.
    47. Rodriguez, J. Building Information Modeling (BIM) Benefits. 2016; Available from: https://www.thebalance.com/building-information-modeling-bim-benefits-845045.
    48. Procurement law for different sizes of project. Government Procurement Information [cited 2017 23rd May]; Available from: https://www.pcc.gov.tw/pccap2/FAQmain/FaqContent.do?site=002&fid=3122.
    49. Lee, H.-S., et al., RFID-based real-time locating system for construction safety management. Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering, 2011. 26(3): p. 366-377.
    50. Autodesk. Measuring the value of BIM: Achieving Strategic ROI. 2015 28th April, 2017]; Available from: https://synergiscadblog.com/2015/08/14/measuring-the-value-of-bim-achieving-strategic-roi/.
    51. McGraw Hill Construction, The Business Value of BIM for Infrastructure in SmartMarket Report, H. M.Bernstein, Editor. 2012.
    52. McGraw Hill Construction, Building Information Modeling (BIM): Transforming Design and Construction to Achieve Greater Industry Productivity, in Building Information Modeling Trends SmartMarket Report. 2008.
    53. 28th April, 2017]; Available from: http://www.statpac.com/surveys/advantages.htm.
    54. Kawakita, J., The KJ Method: Seeking Order Out Of Chaos. Tokyo: Chuokoronsha, 1986. ISBN: 4-12-001517-3.
    55. Burge, D.S. The Systems Thinking Tool Box. 2011.
    56. Chen, P.P.-S., The entity-relationship model—toward a unified view of data. ACM Transactions on Database Systems (TODS), 1976. 1(1): p. 9-36.
    57. Ticehurst, G. and A. Veal, „Questionnaire surveys‟. Business Research Methods: A Managerial Approach, 2000: p. 135-158.
    58. Fellows, R. and A. Liu. Impact of participants’ values on construction sustainability. in Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers–Engineering Sustainability. 2008. Citeseer.
    59. Kvale, S. and S. Brinkmann, Interview. 2009: Hans Reitzel.
    60. Central Limit Theorem. 2016 [cited 2017 23rd May]; Available from: http://sphweb.bumc.bu.edu/otlt/mph-modules/bs/bs704_probability/BS704_Probability12.html.
    61. Whittemore, R. and G.D.E. Melkus, Designing a research study. The Diabetes Educator, 2008. 34(2): p. 201-216.
    62. Naoum, S.G., Dissertation research and writing for construction students. 2012: Routledge.
    63. Badu, E., et al., Rural infrastructure development in the Volta region of Ghana: barriers and interventions. Journal of Financial Management of Property and Construction, 2013. 18(2): p. 142-159.
    64. The Weighted Average Method, Weighted Average Costing. [cited 2017 28th April]; Available from: http://www.accountingtools.com/weighted-average-method.
    65. Khanzode A, F.M., Reed D, Benefits and lessons learned of implementing building virtual design and construction (VDC) technologies for coordination of mechanical, electrical, and plumbing (MEP) systems on a large healthcare project. ITcon 2008. Vol. 13(Special Issue Case studies of BIM use): p. pg. 324-342.
    66. El Asmar, M., A.S. Hanna, and W.-Y. Loh, Quantifying performance for the integrated project delivery system as compared to established delivery systems. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 2013. 139(11): p. 04013012.
    67. buildingSMART, B.a., Constructing the business case - Building Information Modelling. 2010, London: British Standards Institution.
    68. El Asmar, M., Modeling and Benchmarking Performance for the Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) System, in Civil and Environmental Engineering. 2012, University of Wisconsin – Madison: US.
    69. Dickinson, J.K., BIM: What, Why and How. 2010, Ontario, Canada: National Research Council Canada.
    70. Marrone, M. and M. Kolbe, Impact of IT Service Management Frameworks on the IT Organization: An Empirical Study on Benefits. Challenges, and Processes, 2011.

    QR CODE
    :::