See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/334862011

Leveraging Blockchain Technology in a BIM Workflow: A Literature Review

Conference Paper · January 2019

DOI: 10.1680/icsic.64669.371

CITATIONS READS

3 179

3 authors:

Abhinaw Sai Erri Pradeep Kenneth Tak Wing Yiu

University of Auckland Massey University
1 PUBLICATION   3 CITATIONS    97 PUBLICATIONS   1,401 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Robert Amor
University of Auckland
211 PUBLICATIONS   1,420 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Agile Project Management View project

Rapid post-earthquake bridge inspection through 3D reconstruction View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Abhinaw Sai Erri Pradeep on 13 August 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 International Conference on Smart Infrastructure and Construction 2019 (ICSIC):
Driving data-informed decision-making

DeJong, Schooling and Viggiani

ISBN 978-0-7277-6466-9
https://doi.org/10.1680/icsic.64669.371
Published with permission by the ICE under the CC-BY license. (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

LEVERAGING BLOCKCHAIN TECHNOLOGY IN A BIM

WORKFLOW: A LITERATURE REVIEW
A.S. Erri Pradeep1*, T.W. Yiu1 and R. Amor2
1
Civil and Environmental Engineering Department, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
2
School of Computer Science, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
* Corresponding author

ABSTRACT Building Information Modelling (BIM) involves the exchange of models and information between stakeholders and within
collaborating teams. This information is prone to contractual, legal, security and system issues amongst others. The existing practices aim to
address a digital concept such as BIM with solutions from the paper world – contracts and other documents, which do not solve the problem
completely. A recent advancement in database management – Blockchain Technology (BCT) aims to provide a new stream of solutions to
industries across various sectors. BCT is a system of recording a database that stores information chronologically and distributes a copy of it
over a network of computers that maintain its authenticity and security collectively. This paper first reviews the literature on the issues of
information exchange in a BIM workflow and next explores the concept of BCT and its connection with BIM. The literature indicates that
BCT shows high potential for solving challenges during the design phase of the project by clarifying liabilities, increasing the reliability of
information and enhancing the security of information flow. Its ability to incorporate self-executing contracts enable many more applications
around ownership and payments. Finally, the paper discusses a few of its challenges with scalability, user acceptance amongst others.

1. Introduction incremental, and instead of storing the ledger on one single

system, this technique requires it to be shared across several
Building Information Modelling (BIM) is regarded as the step- devices using a predefined set of rules to update it, called a
change the Architecture, Engineering, Construction, Owner protocol. Therefore, BCT is essentially a form of Distributed
and Operator (AECOO) industry needed (Industry Training Ledger Technology (DLT) (Giancaspro, 2017). A distributed
Group, 2016). The use of BIM has increased from 3D ledger system (based on DLT), Conte de Leon et al. (2017)
visualisation to better information modelling and work process explain is a computer-based system in which a set of computer
comprehension (Likhitruangsilp et al., 2014). The PAS 1192- processes representing agents or users connected to a digital
2: 2013 by British Standards Institution (2013) has proposed network operate collaboratively on a set of distributed ledger
three levels of BIM maturity where an increase of level indicate data structures. Swan (2015) places the analogy of a giant
a better technology integration and an increase in collaborative interactive spreadsheet, which everyone has access to, updates,
work culture. Majorly, the segment of the industry that is and confirms that the digital records are unique. What has
currently hoping to reap the benefits of BIM is working at level brought this technology to light is the clever combination of
two. At this level, the stakeholders are required to build BIM existing techniques used in database and network sciences.
models in silos and exchange their models at various stages to
finally create a non-clashing federated model. Depending on BCT finds its origins in the 2008 whitepaper by a pseudo-
the type of procurement model, the chronology and frequency author(s) named Satoshi Nakamoto titled ‘Bitcoin: a peer-to-
of BIM information exchange vary, and risks creeps in for the peer electronic cash system’ (Nakamoto, 2008). Although the
participating stakeholders, such as issuer liability, the terms block and chain were not used together in the paper, the
vulnerability of information to unethical modification, misuse concept and functionality of the cryptocurrency, bitcoins, is
of information amongst others (Hudson, 2016; Wong and Lam, derived from a protocol Bitcoin (‘B’ in capital) which uses the
2010). Hence, these risks account for a range of contractual, concept of what today is referred to as Blockchain Technology.
legal, security and system challenges that hinder the growth It is worth noting that the system of Bitcoin is only an
and ease of adoption of BIM at the industry level. application of BCT and this study will discuss BCT devoid of
Bitcoin.
This paper reviews a recent advancement called Blockchain
Technology (BCT), which displays potential for a new strategy BCT primarily sets out to solve the problem of trust between
for addressing some of these challenges. BCT at its core is a interacting parties. Mathews et al. (2017) assert that with the
digital information recording method (Conte de Leon et al., advent of working systems based on network structures rather
2017). It uses an approach, which is similar to what the than hierarchy, BCT enables participants to read and write data
construction industry is quite familiar with – the logbook. The to its ledger without a trusted intermediary. Security of such a
information recorded on this database or ledger is ordered and ledger is managed by cryptography protocols rather than
human administrators. BCT solves the trust aspect of an

371

Downloaded by [] on [12/08/19]. Published with permission by the ICE under the CC-BY license
 International Conference on Smart Infrastructure and Construction 2019 (ICSIC)

ancient human ritual “the handshake”, an agreement for a value the project participants (Al Hattab and Hamzeh, 2016).
transaction (Robles and Bowers, 2017). The industry report Designers use information as raw material, and information
from Arup by Kinnaird and Geipel (2017) concurs that BCT is flow is an enabler for them to perform effectively and
a revolutionary technology that disrupts trust so much that it is efficiently (Tribelsky and Sacks, 2011). They also directly link
not needed anymore. Tapscott and Tapscott (2016) raise a bold with the amount of rework that happens in construction
comparison between the advent of the internet as the first set projects. Khan et al. (2016) extend the discussion that timely
of digital revolution and blockchain as the second generation and accurate information during the production phase reduces
of revolution and call it the internet of value. In line with this delays, the likelihood of contractual claims, disputes and the
are authors Ibáñez et al. (2017) who agree that BCT has the requirement of change orders and RFIs. Rao (2006) calls for a
potential to re-decentralise the internet. complete and adequate electronic project information system
and concurs that Information is regarded as ‘probably the most
This paper reviews literature to explore how a BIM workflow important construction material’. ‘Information systems’
can leverage the advantages of BCT. First, it reviews the recognise the criticality of the flow among the project
challenges of an ineffective BIM-based workflow. Next, the participants, and improving the flow of information across
properties of BCT are discussed with a review of the potential different stakeholders leads to better performance (Khan et al.,
advantages of integrating BCT with BIM. Finally, it discusses 2016). They form a significant contributor to the success of the
the current limitations of BCT before concluding the project (Lam and Wong, 2011). The Network for Construction
discussion. Collaboration Technology Providers regarded construction
industry as ‘highly dependent on information’ and asserted that
2. BIM workflow and its challenges team members in a project require timely, most accurate and
latest information exchanged between them to ensure success
Manley (2001) and Winch (1998) identify the construction of projects – ‘the right information needs to go in the right form
industry as a ‘complex product systems industry’. Hobday to the right person at the right time’ (Shelbourn et al., 2007).
(1998) defines this as ‘any high cost, engineering-intensive In 1995, the National Science and Technology Council
product, sub-system, system or construct supplied by a unit of (NSTC) identified information and decision technology, which
production – be it a single firm, production unit, a group of includes integrated databases and information systems, as one
firms or a temporary project-based organisation.’ This fits well of the most critical drivers of a competitive construction
as construction projects require individuals or entities industry (Wong and Lam, 2010).
(stakeholders) of different skillsets from multiple industries to
work with each other for the duration of their association with Adoption of IT in construction to improve information
the project and discontinue on completion (Zhu and exchange is confirmed and reported across the literature
Augenbroe, 2006). A report by Tribelsky and Sacks (2011) on (Behzadan et al., 2008; Fukai, 1997; Nitithamyong and
journal logs used for 14 projects, found a total of 70,048 Skibniewski, 2004; Zhu and Issa, 2003). A study by Wong and
transactions, of which 90% were exchange of drawings and Lam (2010) has indicated that the industry users welcomed
schedules – mostly in DWG and PDF formats, 8% were novel technology for information exchange. With the advent of
technical specification documents and the remaining 2% Building Information Modelling (BIM), information has taken
included meeting summaries, requests for information (RFI), the shape of parametric 3D models and other digital forms.
client’s memo and budget directives. This exemplifies the Typically, the architect creates an architectural model first, and
sheer volume of technical information that is exchanged on then other participants use this model as the basis for creating
average in construction projects. Hence, there is a constant their domain-specific models. Subsequently, meetings among
exchange of dialogue, information and deliverables between the parties are conducted to coordinate the models and evaluate
the stakeholders. For example, the design teams are composed the constructability perspective (Staub-French and Khanzode,
ad-hoc for construction projects, and they belong to multiple 2007). Traditionally, this process is sequential and is time-
firms trying to work towards producing a coherent design consuming. With demand for faster delivery of projects, there
through collaborative work. The fact that the design teams do is a trend for these processes to be carried out concurrently.
not co-locate for the project and they are contracted only with This means that with such complication of information moving
the client and not among themselves leaves collaboration and between multiple parties and without a sequence of approvals,
coordination to informal relationships and tacit understandings the process of information exchange needs to be more efficient
between the team members (Ford and Sterman, 2003; Love et than ever before (Rao, 2006).
al., 2002). Information produced in the design phase influences
the construction of the project and information produced in the 2.1 Challenges of a BIM workflow
construction phase may influence future design, client The standard forms of contracts have always been tested with
requirements or may require the construction process to be the development and integration of technology into projects,
amended (Yang and Baldwin, 2013). Hence, this process is not and adoption of BIM is no exception. Unlike CAD, which is
linear. Ballard and Koskela (1998) assert that perceiving the considered as a tool, BIM is a new process that has not been
design process as a flow of information rather than a rigid tested enough in courtrooms to establish legal history
segmentation and sequencing of design tasks can lead to a (Arensman and Ozbek, 2012). For example, in the traditional
better design management approach. Hence, it is better suited procurement method, the architect retains the copyright over
to use the term workflow, which is defined as the flow of the design and the drawings, expressing that the designs are
information, specifications and other design resources between licensed to other design stakeholders to do their work. This

372

Downloaded by [] on [12/08/19]. Published with permission by the ICE under the CC-BY license
 Erri Pradeep, Yiu and Amor

means there is a clear identification possible of who did what. (Arensman and Ozbek,
With the introduction of BIM and collaborative work, this 2012; Ashcraft, 2008;
process is disrupted. This scenario is especially visible in Azhar, 2011; Beth and
procurement techniques such as Integrated Project Delivery Difficulty with establishing Chatswood, 2014;
(IPD) method where collaboration and contribution of the - Intellectual Property (IP) Collaborate, 2016; Group,
project participants during design development are vital to the rights 2011; Hudson, 2016;
delivery method itself (Mathews et al., 2017). Hence, - Causation, Liability, Hurtado and O Connor,
increasing the complexity to establish liability and causations. Indemnity 2008; King’s College,
- Model ownership 2016; Mathews et al.,
Moses et al. (2008) state how a balance needs to be struck - Insurance claims 2017; McAdam, 2010;
between the data verification and time required for it. The - Traceability Olatunji, 2011; Parrott and
authors discuss how once the data leaves the collaboration - Reliance Bomba, 2010; Savage,
system, the security applicable to the objects and documents is 2014; Simonian and
lost, which allows anybody who gains access to the Korman, 2010; Winfield,
information to view or amend it. Wong and Lam (2010) discuss 2015)
that the construction professionals shared worries of Security implications
employees sharing confidential or sensitive information to - Unauthorised viewing or
competitors and an unreliable user authentication mechanism. (Hudson, 2016; Moses et
amending data
Likewise, Alshawi and Ingirige (2003) also shared that a al., 2008; Wong and Lam,
- Data leakage
central database of project information where IP was kept for 2010)
- Unreliable user
downloading freely could result in copyright infringement and authentication mechanism
this made the designers very anxious. (Alshawi and Ingirige,
Copyright infringement
2003)
Below tabulated (in no particular order) are a few of the Solving these issues is a necessity for true collaboration to exist
challenges of an ineffective information system in a BIM in the industry. Demian and Walters (2014) add that
process. cumulative coordination of information exchange is a critical
requirement in the overall improvement of the information
Challenges Reference management system in a project or an organisation. Despite the
technology offering solutions at a brisk pace, the legality of this
Waste of time innovative methodology and tools are far from being risk-free.
(Anumba et al., 2008;
- Spent on coordinating the
Khan et al., 2016; Tang et
exchange of information 3. Potential of Blockchain Technology
al., 2008; Tribelsky and
- Designers wait for
Sacks, 2011)
information Since Blockchain Technology (BCT) is a recently introduced
Waste of cost through data technology, there is limited academic literature surrounding
(Anumba et al., 2008)
loss this concept, and the volume drastically drops further when we
(Abukhder and Munns, look at its application in the construction industry. A study by
Incompatibilities in semantics, 2003; Ashcraft, 2008) (Yli-Huumo et al., 2016) that reviewed 41 papers related to
process and software used for (Hurtado and O Connor, BCT reflected no research on the use of BCT in the building
collaboration or 2008; McAdam, 2010; design or construction. Hence, there is very little academic
interoperability Simonian and Korman, work published on BCT in the AECOO industry.
2010; Winfield, 2015)
Traditional project There are two kind of properties a complex system with many
(Mathews et al., 2017) users or agents may have – intrinsic and, emergent and desired
management tools fail
Contractors (small to medium) properties. The characteristics such as immutability, the exact
(Kangari, 1995) copy of ledger with all users, among others are not intrinsic but
suffer
Rework (Moses et al., 2008; desired and emergent properties. Conte de Leon et al. (2017)
Over design Tribelsky and Sacks, 2011) emphasise the difference between these two kinds of properties
(Abukhder and Munns, and adds that proving the emergent properties of a complex
Design information is still system with multiple users, some of which cannot be trusted,
2003; Anumba et al.,
commonly communicated or is a difficult task to achieve. This paper will first look at a few
2008; Dawood et al., 2002;
submitted in documents (2D), of the intrinsic and emergent properties.
Park and Lee, 2017;
whether electronic or paper
Tribelsky and Sacks, 2011)
Cryptographic security: Information recorded on the
Unused information
blockchain is considered authentic where it does not lose its
Inability to evaluate the value (Tang et al., 2008)
integrity. All the data added or modified to this ledger is crowd
of stored information
consented. The verification of transactions is validated by a
Paucity of information (Chen and Kamara, 2008)
series of cryptographic screening procedures, for example,
Frequent variability of
‘proof-of-work’ (Giancaspro, 2017). The quality, accuracy and
accuracy and reliability of (Khan et al., 2016)
the integrity of the data are not dependent on trusting a single
information

373

Downloaded by [] on [12/08/19]. Published with permission by the ICE under the CC-BY license
 International Conference on Smart Infrastructure and Construction 2019 (ICSIC)

authority but based on a mechanism which acquires consensus data to be managed. Bitcoin transaction data are tiny in size but
from all bookkeepers using that blockchain. huge in volume, on the contrary, BIM has a much lesser
volume of transactions which include files of enormous sizes.
Distributed database: BCT is designed as a peer-to-peer, non- The author discusses four scenarios of integrating BCT within
intermediated architecture. It mitigates the risks of a a BIM setup.
centralised system such as: there is no risk of single-point-of-
failure, unnecessary control over data by an untrusted authority  In the first scenario, the blockchain records BIM
and breach in security of this centralised system, among others. model data that is then distributed with other
stakeholders. The problem with that would be storing
Data provenance: BCT’s logbook based data recording such large BIM models along with their parametric
method enables assured data provenance. The transactions data on the blockchain is currently not feasible with
once recorded on to the ledger are cryptographically linked the existing infrastructure. This will make
with other entries, and this enables a highly secure record of management of the blockchain database highly
the origins of any piece of information. Compared to other challenging to manage.
systems of information recording, such as cloud databases,  In the second scenario, not all the stakeholders keep a
blockchain address the issues of security concerns much more copy of the database, instead only the essential
effectively (Liang et al., 2017). members do. For all the other participants they use a
“wallet software” which will enable them to cache the
Immutable database: BCT adopts the advantage of a physical files locally when opened from the blockchain.
ledger that data can only be added and can never be changed or
 Explaining a more practical approach for the third
removed. Any attempt at changing or removing a single entry
scenario, the author explains that instead of the
in an older block would mean rewriting the entire history of
complete information being recorded on the
transactions after that block (Kinnaird and Geipel, 2017). The
blockchain, the project can choose to only record a
only way to manipulate existing data is to manipulate the
fingerprint of the file on the blockchain along with all
ledger across the entire network, almost simultaneously. The
the metadata of transactions happening on it. The
probability the attacker will ever catch up drops exponentially
actual complete BIM files would instead be stored in
as the number of the blocks by which the attacker lags behind
a centralised cloud or a file management server. This
increases. This way the blockchain mechanism solves the
would enable the participants to verify the file version
relaxed version of Byzantine Generals Problem and the Sybil
and its modification details. However, the author
Attack Problem as proved by Miller and LaViola Jr (2014), and
rightly points out, in this case, the overall security of
Man-in-the-middle attack (MitMA) (Lemieux, 2016).
the file content will be dependent on the file
management server or the cloud storage facility used.
3.1 Blockchain technology and BIM
 Finally, the author introduces the fourth scenario and
An integration of technologies is not a new phenomenon and believes that the right way to integrate BCT in a BIM
has been the basis of many recent developments not only in the workflow is an alliance between a BIM server and the
construction industry but also many other fields. Mathews et blockchain database. This is not discussed further and
al. (2017) believe that BIM, when powered by other emergent hence how this would affect the overall performance
technologies such as BCT, Artificial Intelligence, Internet of and security of the system is still to be determined.
Things, Machine Learning (and Big Data), might provide the
opportunity the AECOO industry needs for a systematic This paper will review the use of BCT in BIM in three phases
change. BCT provides a tamper-proof exchange of value and of the project - pre-construction, construction and post-
information layer on top of the existing internet infrastructure, construction.
and this is why Kinnaird and Geipel (2017) believe its impact
will be as vast as the impact the World Wide Web had a few Pre-construction phase: BCT enables the ability to store an
years ago. Mathews et al. (2017) assert that information stored immutable record of changes that a stakeholder makes to a
in a BIM model at the end of the day is data which can be open BIM model. These records can be stored permanently with a
to the same level of manipulation as any other form of data. time-stamp and tamper-proof guarantee. The history of
They further add that a construction project could probably modification as well as the metadata (timestamps, author
provide for a best-case scenario for BCT implementation with information) is protected with the equivalent of a
multiple untrusting parties looking for a means to form a cryptographically secure digital signature (Turk and Klinc,
trusted secure record of information that is independent of a 2017). As of now, different software packages handing BIM
third party and open for verification by the participants. It offer the option of saving these changes internally or on a
provides the users with visual evidence of ‘value transactions’ centralised storage platform, but with BCT, stakeholders
that occur between untrusting stakeholders through its system working on projects can share these records with external
of a trusted database. stakeholders (Kinnaird and Geipel, 2017). Therefore, the
records of who did what and when are more authentic as they
Turk and Klinc (2017) assert that the major difference between are on a blockchain database that operates on public consensus,
using BCT for a cryptocurrency platform (like Bitcoin) and unlike the current BIM’s centralised storage, promoting
using it for BIM is the difference in ratio between the number disintermediation. This can be used as a basis for any legal
of transactions, the number of participants and the size of the arguments that might occur over information exchange and
manipulation as it enables traceability of errors, minimises

374

Downloaded by [] on [12/08/19]. Published with permission by the ICE under the CC-BY license
 Erri Pradeep, Yiu and Amor

non-repudiation and increases liability control. Through clever A project working towards integrating the BCT capability in a
coding, one can also build a platform which enables control BIM workflow is BIMCHAIN. The solutions offered by this
over modification rights on the BIM model and hence restrict French firm is still in its prototype stages and are built on
unauthorised changes from happening in the first place. infrastructure that is in line with the third scenario from the
previous discussion (Turk and Klinc, 2017). BIMchain works
Considering the current path of progress of BIM towards level on creating digital proofs of various transaction scenarios in a
three maturity, stakeholders will be expected to work on a BIM workflow and append these proofs on a public blockchain
single shared model with contributions related to their domain such as Ethereum. Owing to the nature of a public blockchain,
of work. At this stage, BCT can help with stakeholder these digital proofs are undeniable, inalterable, inviolable,
integration through multi-signature transactions and inter- public, perennial and not controlled by a third party (Gueguen
organisational record keeping (Barnett, 2016; Turk and Klinc, and Haloche, 2018). At this moment, BIMchain offers five
2017). Stakeholders can take advantage of the provenance different proofs –
tracking ability of BCT to publicly prove the ownership of
Intellectual Property of components within the shared model  Proof of ownership: Stakeholders digitally sign-off
such as Revit families and other components (Kinnaird and their creations to maintain authenticity and anteriority
Geipel, 2017). In her book, Swan (2015) discusses a project of publication (precedence) to prevent disputes
called Ascribe (no longer active) which built an infrastructure around copyright and ownership.
for IP registration in the digital art and copyright protection  Proof of context: Establishes proof that the work
sector. This service set out to address the issues of digital work performed by stakeholders is built on verifiable inputs
piracy on the internet. Hence, a potential system using such a and enables better control over liability.
service could enable BIM files to use a service such as Ascribe  Proof of handshake: This creates an electronic
in the background which would help to prove the rights of agreement where stakeholders can commit to working
Revit families. Copying and unauthorised use of BIM files on synchronised versions of the file through digital
have so far been a problem which now could be addressed signatures.
through smart contracts and digital currencies to securely and  Proof of consistency: Exchange of digital outputs
publicly record the ownership, and also transfer ownership in from a BIM model as deliverables between
exchange for payment. Kinnaird and Geipel (2017) explain this stakeholders is common in projects, and this proof
through an example: An AHU designed by an MEP engineer enables the outputs to be tracked back to the source
associates this component to an address on a blockchain and model which makes the model a ‘single source of
includes it in the shared model. At this point, no other truth.’
stakeholder can edit or claim ownership of this component and  Proof of certifications – Objects and families used in
the rights remain with the MEP engineer. When this ownership a BIM model can be digitally certified by the issuing
needs to be transferred, say to the contractor, the MEP engineer stakeholder and passed on to the recipient as proof of
does this by sending a tiny amount of bitcoin on the blockchain compliance.
to the contractor’s address, thereby transferring the ownership
of the family. Hence, transfer or licencing of ownership In addition to this, BIMchain is working on improving
between the stakeholders can happen securely without an workflows in BIM by creating a Deliverables Management
intermediator and at a negligible cost. Therefore, Swan (2015) System that integrates BCT into the regular flow of
explains that blockchain is like a giant spreadsheet which information exchange between stakeholders on the existing
maintains a register of all assets and an accounting system for BIM platforms. It also visions use of smart contracts for
transacting them on a global scale. Satoshi Nakamoto had enabling payments in the future, and use of a decentralised
initially indicated this use through the examples of escrow project cloud for sharing information through a blockchain
transactions, bonded contracts, third-party arbitration and secured peer-to-peer protocol. Its vision is to enable
multiparty signature transactions (Nakamoto, 2008). stakeholder collaboration through a single BIM model that can
itself act as the contract for the project (Gueguen and Haloche,
Further, BCT can also be used as an alternative to a central 2018).
cloud-based data repository, sometimes referred to as the
Common Data Environment (CDE). The problem with a Construction phase: In the construction phase of a project,
centralised cloud service is it is vulnerable to hacking and data BCT can be used to improve the reliability and authenticity of
leakage. Generally, in projects that are related to national records such as works performed, materials used and other
security or which include sensitive information such as banks, such information that can be integrated to the BIM model. The
prisons and so forth centralised CDEs are not the ideal option. current system using BIM is unable to reliably verify if specific
One company that aims to provide a distributed or information has been authorised by the issuing party and
decentralised cloud storage facility is Storj (Storj Labs, 2018). creates a lag between the event occurrence and its reporting.
It provides end-to-end encryption where the data is shredded to Kinnaird and Geipel (2017) explain through an example where
small pieces called shards and stored in a global network of the foreman could digitally sign off each dataset in near real
computers. This enables faster, cheaper, secure storage than time, and a hash of this could be added to the blockchain with
centralised cloud services. Since this is the beginning of such a timestamp and this can be further counter-signed by other
services user-friendliness is not the best and is expected to get team members to validate the information through the use of a
better with time. common data environment (CDE). This creates consistent
reporting for stakeholders such as the subcontractors,

375

Downloaded by [] on [12/08/19]. Published with permission by the ICE under the CC-BY license
 International Conference on Smart Infrastructure and Construction 2019 (ICSIC)

contractors and owners which is of prime importance. In cases 2018). For example, in a scenario where an HVAC fixture fails
where there is a need to modify sections of the design, or malfunctions, the device sends out distress signals to service
blockchain can help log not only these changes but also contractors within the vicinity. Based on the signals,
incorporate the physical implementation of these changes. contractors quote their repair or replacement price (maybe on
Such a system can be used for controlling disputes on whether a blockchain marketplace), thereby sending return information
the work was completed in time or not, which are usually tried to the fixture. The most suitable quote is accepted and called in
to fix with the use of incomplete paper records and based on for repair or replacement. Once the work finishes, the device
memories of the individuals. Authors also note that using a releases currency units for their service or replacement charges
suitable IT system, the identity of the digital signature can be almost instantaneously. Hence, this automates the actions
controlled concerning its visibility to the other project required to be carried by a building manager, and technician in
participants. Hence, BCT can be valuable to minimise the risk a more straightforward, faster, cheaper and trustworthy way.
of making mistakes and of overlooking information (Gordge,
2018). Turk and Klinc (2017) conclude that BCT does provide
solutions to many current problems in construction information
Mathews et al. (2017) point out the AECOO industry is management; however, it is most likely that the technology will
different from the financial and software industry in a way that be built into the generic IT infrastructure on top of which
at the end of a project the deliverable is a real-world physical construction applications are built. Design and construction
artefact. BCT can be used to link the physical components software solutions provider giant, Autodesk (Sheppard, 2018)
constructed to its digital counterpart on BIM. Kinnaird and has confirmed their investigations on BCT to enable
Geipel (2017) explain that when the technology is combined automation in the future, which indicates its potential
with Internet of Things (IoT) it enables microchips can be used application in BIM as well. Swan (2015) asserts that the
to track components from the manufacturer to the site. This technology is not just a better organisational model
will also help in reducing waste and carbon emissions that functionally, practically and quantitatively – by requiring
could be caused due to over-production. Another idea consensus to operate, but also promotes greater liberty, quality
presented is called the ‘product passport’ proposed by the and empowerment qualitatively.
Buildings As Material Banks Project (BAMB, 2018). The
product passports are to hold information about the materials 3.2 Limitations of blockchain technology
that building products contain, and define their characteristics. The fact that the technology is in its infancy and still in
This information can be stored on a readable label or a QR code development is an area of concern as this indicates that the
or something similar, which enables the reuse and recovery of technology is not at the maturity level as other well tried and
such products. In both these scenarios where blockchain comes tested technologies. Issues include:
into play is instead of storing the linked information onto a
central server where it could be prone to attack and other Accuracy of the information: One of the biggest concerns with
security issues, the information could be stored on a blockchain technology is that the participants can validate the
decentralised blockchain database. The authors believe a digital signature of the receiving party based on the public key
system that enables the linkage between the digital and or the ‘address’ assigned to that party but the correctness of the
physical counterparts has an immense potential to create a truly content cannot be verified (Kinnaird and Geipel, 2017).
live BIM model that can receive information from more than a Considering the third and fourth scenario stated by Turk and
single source or medium. This will open an entirely new Klinc (2017), the blockchain only stores the hash of the data
paradigm for BIM (Kinnaird and Geipel, 2017). The use of that is being digitally signed but the content of the data is not
such a model during and after construction is of great value. on the blockchain itself. This can be problematic if smart
contracts are triggered based on files with incorrect content.
Post-construction phase: On project completion, all the final Stakeholders will have to resort to conventional methods to
changes are recorded in the BIM model, and this becomes a sort out such issues.
highly valuable asset during the operation of the structure for
the facility manager. This will form the basis for any further Scalability: BCT’s consensus mechanism, although secure and
upgrades for the facility and a reliable source of information sound, comes with its limitations of difficulties to scale in the
and records for its maintenance. future. The effect of the ever-increasing size of the linear
blockchain means the size of the transactions ledger is growing
BCT can offer better security of sensitive information storage beyond what is acceptable as it is necessary for the protocol
collected during the operation phase that can include data that every node maintains a copy of the complete register to
received from sensors (Turk and Klinc, 2017). It also facilitates participate in the network. In terms of speed, the fastest
a maintenance log integrated on the facility’s BIM model growing bitcoin network transacts a single transaction per
which can be way more reliable thanks to the immutable nature second with a theoretical maximum of seven transactions per
of this log. Inspections and audits can happen seamlessly, and second (Luu et al., 2015). This can be compared with other
the records maintained by the facility manager are more financial transactions processed by leading vendors such as
trustworthy and secure. Visa which is designed to take 2000 transactions per second
with a maximum of 10,000 transactions per second at peak
In the future, it can also be predicted that facility managers can times such as holidays (McConaghy et al., 2016). Ideally, a
use IoT and smart contract enabled fixtures to self-maintain blockchain network will be required to support such massive
and regulate itself based on pre-defined parameters (Saleem,

376

Downloaded by [] on [12/08/19]. Published with permission by the ICE under the CC-BY license
 Erri Pradeep, Yiu and Amor

amounts of data generated each second without being we consider a private blockchain, which will enable the
concerned about the scalability of the networks. The blockchain to be fast with a different protocol to arrive at the
functioning of public blockchains such as Bitcoin or Ethereum leader election. However, since this is a closed or permissioned
requires an enormous amount of energy to run. This is blockchain, it will lack the ability to be open and can only
estimated at $15 million per day (Swan, 2015). Although the guarantee partial security as compared to the open blockchain.
use of computational power is what ensures the security and Taking this discussion forward with an IOTA network, which
trust behind the blockchain, there has to be a more efficient is based on directed acyclic graphs, it presents us with an
form of arriving at consensus than using such levels of energy. opportunity for a network to be fast, due to its tangle nature,
secure, as every attempt to spam it makes it even stronger and
To address these issues, there is a relatively new concept which also open as it is distributed as an open network, similar to
is still under tests is called the IOTA project. IOTA is built with blockchain (Popov, 2018).
the Internet of Things in mind, which will have billions of
devices running on the network. How this technology Industry users’ acceptance: One of the significant drawbacks
progresses and how adaptive it is to transactions that are of the system include the complexity of the security model and
possible in different industries is something to wait and watch an unclear regulatory environment. The end user experience
for (Popov, 2018). becomes very crucial when considering such a complex
system. Patel (2018) discusses how the framework requires the
Sensitive information: Data stored on a blockchain ledger are users to generate and manage key pairs, provide cryptographic
pseudonymous, that is, the data is accessible to all participants signatures and post transactions authorising access to the data.
but does not reveal the identities of the transacting parties. This The majority of the users are expected to be unfamiliar to
can be problematic for applications that require a higher level cryptographic concepts, hence the complexities of the system
of privacy than this. Another issue is that when undesirable or will need to be hidden under a user-friendly interface. While
error-prone transactions are embedded into a blockchain, this using smart contracts, it is a challenge to gain buy-in from the
cannot be removed due to the immutability of the blockchain. construction industry on decentralise applications or the
Although this is what powers the blockchain with its ability to Dapps. The current way of working with a period of payment
record unchangeable records, sometimes sensitives on completion enables a particular way of cash flow, which
information could be uploaded which becomes impossible to may no longer be accessible under the use of Dapps (Gordge,
retract. However, the downside is mitigated by the fact that the 2018).
sensitive data is buried amongst other information and would
need to be specifically searched for. Kinnaird and Geipel Security: The science behind cryptography is ever-changing,
(2017) argue that this is no different to what is present on the and the resilience of a good cryptographic function is not a
World Wide Web, where personal information can be uploaded static property. Hence, a function designed today to resist
to a website and can never be entirely removed unless certain computational power will not be of the same capability
intervened by the government. a few years from now. This is a challenge for software creators
to design systems that can adapt itself to the changes in
Consensus mechanism: The current leading blockchains of computing technology. The authors believe this can be possible
Ethereum and Bitcoin are based on a Proof-of-work (PoW) through a nested blockchain approach and it requires research
consensus scheme where the participants have to agree on a in this space (Conte de Leon et al., 2017). Next, the blockchain
common ledger and also have access to all the transactions ever database system designed is only as good as the code used to
recorded. However, this affects the overall performance of the design that protocol. Owing to the short coding history of BCT
system negatively (Patel, 2018). There have been cases where and Dapps a sound and secure design and implementation of
the authors have considered storing more than just the code is a challenge.
transaction hashes and have commented on how the size of a
blockchain is a limiting factor when just the transactional data The immutability of a blockchain is based on the logic that the
is recorded (Croman et al., 2016; Wilkinson et al., 2014). The distributed users who consent over a block of information are
research community is proposing new mechanisms for the always the majority. Nevertheless, it is theoretically possible
leader election for DLS (Conte de Leon et al., 2017). Other that an alliance of attackers who are users on the blockchain
reasons why it is important to find alternatives to PoW is can pool together their computational power to reach 51% of
because of the increasing use of energy for the computational the entire network (Tosh et al., 2017). This will compromise
power and the high monetary costs to maintain it. The author the authenticity of any value transactions on the database hence
emphasises that the distributed systems research community breaking its immutability. Hence, BCT should be better
need to consider these concerns as this could lead to an referred to as mutable-by-hashing-power (Conte de Leon et al.,
unsustainable and economically unviable system. 2017). In addition to this, reliance on asymmetric cryptography
does not allow for a recovery mechanism when the user loses
A trade-off between fast, open and secure: Most of the the private key for access to the information on the blockchain.
blockchains based on current technologies lack one of the This is sorted through off-the-chain solutions, which again
three: fast, open and secure (Kinnaird and Geipel, 2017). This compromises the security aspect (Patel, 2018).
is illustrated with an example of Bitcoin (or we can also
consider Ethereum) where the network is open and secure but
cannot be fast due to the various mechanism involved in its
protocol to make it secure and open. On the other hand, when

377

Downloaded by [] on [12/08/19]. Published with permission by the ICE under the CC-BY license
 International Conference on Smart Infrastructure and Construction 2019 (ICSIC)

4. Conclusions Anumba C et al. (2008) Collaborative project information

management in a semantic web environment. Engineering,
There is evidence that points to the growth of blockchain Construction and Architectural Management, 15(1), 78-94.
technology (BCT) as a solution to the problem of trust. Arensman DB and Ozbek ME (2012) Building information
Claiming this technology can revolutionise the use of internet modeling and potential legal issues. International Journal of
infrastructure is a long shot and cannot be accurately answered Construction Education and Research, 8(2), 146-156.
with the available evidence. Although industries such as the
Ashcraft HW (2008) Building information modeling: A
finance, banking and supply chain are benefitting from the
framework for collaboration. Constr.Law., 28, 5.
application of BCT, the construction industry is yet to find its
roots. This paper reviewed the challenges of a BIM workflow Azhar S (2011) Building information modeling (BIM): Trends,
and examined the limited literature available on the potential benefits, risks, and challenges for the AEC industry.
of BCT in BIM. Leadership and management in engineering, 11(3), 241-252.
Ballard G and Koskela L (1998) On the agenda of design
BCT has more potential of application in the pre-construction management research. Proceedings IGLC.
stage where the use of BIM is at its maximum. BCT seems to BAMB (2018) https://www.bamb2020.eu/ (accessed
enhance stakeholder confidence by enabling change tracking 24/01/2019).
and establishing clear liabilities. It facilitates true collaboration
through multi-signature transactions and inter-organisational Barnett J (2016) Blochain for BIM | Smart Contracts Lawyer.
record keeping. It provides visual evidence of information See http://www.jeremybarnett.co.uk/blochain-for-bim-smart-
ownership and reduces disputes over information authenticity. contracts-lawyer for further details (accessed 24/01/2019).
It enables a secure platform for exchanging sensitive Behzadan AH et al. (2008) Ubiquitous location tracking for
information and information subject to Intellectual Property context-specific information delivery on construction sites.
rights. A distributed database avoids concentration of Automation in Construction, 17(6), 737-748.
ownership and eliminates misuse and corruption of Beth C and Chatswood B (2014) Legal implications where
information making it suitable for legal proofs. The example BIM is implemented on a project. See
project of BIMchain and Autodesk’s announcements have http://search.proquest.com/docview/1641352083 for further
proved that the industry can soon expect some of the identified details (accessed 24/01/2018).
challenges in information workflow to be addressed using BSI P (2013) 1192-2: 2013. Specification for information
BCT. The literature suggests BCT is best implemented when management for the capital/delivery phase of construction
its integration is concealed within the BIM interface. projects using building information modelling
The idea of linking physical construction to its digital Chen Y and Kamara J (2008) The mechanisms of information
counterpart on this platform opens a new paradigm for BIM communication on construction sites. Forum Ejournal.
and is definitely worth researching. The use of smart or self- Collaborate ANZ (2016) CWG004 – BIM Legal and
executing contracts running on blockchain is a potential Procurement. See http://collaborate-
solution to saving enormous time and money in projects during anz.com/assets/cwg004_release_v1.0.pdf (accessed
and after construction. As the industry progress towards BIM 24/01/2019)
level 3, it increases the need for stakeholder integration and a Conte de Leon D et al. (2017) Blockchain: properties and
clear division of responsibilities. At this stage, BCT can help misconceptions. Asia Pacific Journal of Innovation and
keep liabilities clear and back them up with evidence without Entrepreneurship, 11(3), 286-300.
having to rely on the contracts as often. Further research on this
is needed as the industry needs to be well equipped to take on Croman K et al. (2016) On scaling decentralized blockchains.
the next digital revolution. Will BCT prove its mettle in the International Conference on Financial Cryptography and
days to come? Is BCT the right solution for the construction Data Security.
industry of the future? These questions are open to be Dawood N et al. (2002) Development of automated
addressed. communication of system for managing site information using
internet technology. Automation in Construction, 11(5), 557-
5. References 572.
Demian P and Walters D (2014) The advantages of information
Abukhder J and Munns A (2003) Attributing management management through building information modelling.
problems on construction projects to project information. Construction Management and Economics, 32(12), 1153-
Proceedings 19th Annual ARCOM Conference, Brighton. 1165.
Al Hattab M and Hamzeh F (2016) Analyzing Design Ford DN and Sterman JD (2003) The Liar's Club: concealing
Workflow: An Agent-based Modeling Approach. Procedia rework in concurrent development. Concurrent Engineering,
Engineering, 164, 510-517. 11(3), 211-219.
Alshawi M and Ingirige B (2003) Web-enabled project Fukai D (1997) PCIS: a piece-based construction information
management: an emerging paradigm in construction. system on the world wide web. Automation in Construction,
Automation in Construction, 12(4), 349-364. 6(4), 287-298.

378

Downloaded by [] on [12/08/19]. Published with permission by the ICE under the CC-BY license
 Erri Pradeep, Yiu and Amor

Giancaspro M (2017) Is a ‘smart contract’really a smart idea? Implementation: Case Study of an Academic Institute. In
Insights from a legal perspective. Computer law & security Computing in Civil and Building Engineering (2014) pp. 2224-
review, 33(6), 825-835. 2231.
Gordge J (2018) Programmable Construction: Disrupting the Love PE et al. (2002) Using systems dynamics to better
Construction Industry with Blockchain Technology. See understand change and rework in construction project
http://constructionlaw.org.nz/ for further details (accessed management systems. International journal of project
24/01/2019). management, 20(6), 425-436.
Group BIW (2011) A report for the Government Construction Luu L et al. (2015) SCP: A Computationally-Scalable
Client Group. See Byzantine Consensus Protocol For Blockchains. IACR
https://www.cdbb.cam.ac.uk/Resources/ResoucePublications/ Cryptology ePrint Archive, 2015, 1168.
BISBIMstrategyReport.pdf (accessed 24/01/2019) Manley K (2001) Innovation systems–developing an
Gueguen A and Haloche M (2018) https://bimchain.io/ integrated framework for investigating the Queensland road
(accessed 24/01/2019). sector. Queensland Department of Main Roads, Brisbane
Hobday M (1998) Product complexity, innovation and Mathews M et al. (2017) BIM+ Blockchain: A Solution to the
industrial organisation. Research policy, 26(6), 689-710. Trust Problem in Collaboration? , See
Hudson N (2016) Defining the Legal Landscape - part 2. See https://arrow.dit.ie/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1032&context
https://thebimhub.com/2016/06/20/bim-legal-forum-defining- =bescharcon for further details (accessed 24/01/2019).
legal-landscape-part-2/ for further details (accessed McAdam B (2010) Building information modelling: the UK
24/01/2019). legal context. International Journal of Law in the Built
Hurtado KA and O Connor PJ (2008) Contract issues in the use Environment, 2(3), 246-259.
of construction building information modelling. International McConaghy T et al. (2016) BigchainDB: a scalable blockchain
Construction Law Review, 25(3), 262. database. white paper, BigChainDB, See
Ibáñez L-D et al. (2017) Redecentralizing the web with https://mycourses.aalto.fi/pluginfile.php/378362/mod_resourc
distributed ledgers. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 32(1), 92-95. e/content/1/bigchaindb-whitepaper.pdf for further details
(accessed 24/01/2019).
Industry Training Group B (2016) bim101 - an insight. See
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/57390d2c8259b53089b Miller A and LaViola Jr JJ (2014) Anonymous byzantine
cf066/t/57ec74e4b3db2bc3c7a0d5da/1475114316630/bim101 consensus from moderately-hard puzzles: A model for bitcoin.
+-+an_insight.pdf (accessed 24/01/2019) See https://nakamotoinstitute.org/research/anonymous-
byzantine-consensus/ for further details (accessed
Kangari R (1995) Construction documentation in arbitration.
24/01/2019).
Journal of Construction Engineering and Management,
121(2), 201-208. Moses S et al. (2008) The practicalities of transferring data
between project collaboration systems used by the construction
Khan KIA et al. (2016) Managing information complexity
industry. Automation in Construction, 17(7), 824-830.
using system dynamics on construction projects. Construction
Management and Economics, 34(3), 192-204. Nakamoto S (2008) Bitcoin: A peer-to-peer electronic cash
system. See https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf for further details
King’s College L, BIM Research Group (2016) ENABLING
(accessed 24/01/2019).
BIM THROUGH PROCUREMENT AND CONTRACTS. See
http://www.kcl.ac.uk/law/research/centres/construction/assets Nitithamyong P and Skibniewski MJ (2004) Web-based
/bim-research-report-1-jul-2016.pdf (accessed 24/01/2019) construction project management systems: how to make them
successful? Automation in Construction, 13(4), 491-506.
Kinnaird C and Geipel M (2017) Blockchain Technology: How
the Inventions Behind Bitcoin are Enabling a Network of Trust Olatunji OA (2011) A preliminary review on the legal
for the Built Environment. Arup.See https://www.arup.com/- implications of BIM and model ownership. Journal of
/media/arup/files/publications/b/arup--blockchain-technology- Information Technology in Construction (ITcon), 16(40), 687-
report.pdf (accessed 24/01/2019) 696.
Lam PT and Wong FW (2011) A comparative study of Park JH and Lee G (2017) Design coordination strategies in a
buildability perspectives between clients, consultants and 2D and BIM mixed-project environment: social dynamics and
contractors. Construction innovation, 11(3), 305-320. productivity. Building Research & Information, 45(6), 631-
648.
Lemieux VL (2016) Trusting records: is Blockchain
technology the answer? Records Management Journal, 26(2), Parrott BC and Bomba MB (2010) Integrated project delivery
110-139. and building information modeling: A new breed of contract.
PCI Journal, 55(4), 147-153.
Liang X et al. (2017) Provchain: A blockchain-based data
provenance architecture in cloud environment with enhanced Patel V (2018) A framework for secure and decentralized
privacy and availability. Proceedings of the 17th IEEE/ACM sharing of medical imaging data via blockchain consensus.
International Symposium on Cluster, Cloud and Grid Health informatics journal, 1460458218769699.
Computing. Popov S (2018) The Tangle. See
Likhitruangsilp V et al. (2014). Mapping Work Process and https://assets.ctfassets.net/r1dr6vzfxhev/2t4uxvsIqk0EUau6g2
Information Exchange of Construction Entities for BIM

379

Downloaded by [] on [12/08/19]. Published with permission by the ICE under the CC-BY license
 International Conference on Smart Infrastructure and Construction 2019 (ICSIC)

sw0g/45eae33637ca92f85dd9f4a3a218e1ec/iota1_4_3.pdf for Turk Ž and Klinc R (2017) Potentials of Blockchain

further details (accessed 24/01/2019). Technology for Construction Management. Procedia
Rao TA (2006) Architecture, engineering, and construction Engineering, 196, 638-645. 10.1016/j.proeng.2017.08.052
informatics An overview of the developments and future. Wilkinson S et al. (2014) Metadisk a blockchain-based
Indian Concrete Journal, 46. decentralized file storage application. Technical Report.
Robles D and Bowers M (Producer) (2017). Blockchain For Technical Report
Engineering Professions - ASCE Grand Challenge Winch G (1998) Zephyrs of creative destruction:
Presentation. [Presentation] understanding the management of innovation in construction.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQzF6g3L6Oo (accessed Building Research & Information, 26(5), 268-279.
24/01/2019) Winfield M (2015) BUILDING INFORMATION
Saleem O (2018) Uses of Blockchain in Facility Management. MODELLING: THE LEGAL FRONTIER - OVERCOMING
See https://newdeal.blog/uses-of-blockchain-in-facility- LEGAL AND CONTRACTUAL OBSTACLES. See
management-53e3f76d62ca for further details (accessed http://www.ace-
24/01/2019). cae.eu/fileadmin/New_Upload/3._Area_2_Practice/BIM/Othe
Savage D (2014) Building Information Modelling: What Is It r_Docs/5_0_Legal_Frontier.pdf for further details (accessed
And What Are The Legal Issues Arising From Its Use? , See 24/01/2019).
http://www.mondaq.com/uk/x/336106/Building+Construction Wong FW and Lam PT (2010) Difficulties and hindrances
/Building+Information+Modelling+What+Is+It+And+What+ facing end users of electronic information exchange systems in
Are+The+Legal+Issues+Arising+From+Its+Use for further design and construction. Journal of Management in
details (accessed 24/01/2019). Engineering, 27(1), 28-39.
Shelbourn M et al. (2007) Framework for effective Yang M and Baldwin A (2013). Information Management for
collaborative working in construction. Management, Sustainable Building Projects. In Design and Management of
Procurement and Law: Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Sustainable Built Environments pp. 327-340: Springer.
Engineers, 160(4), 149-157. Yli-Huumo J et al. (2016) Where is current research on
Sheppard S (2018) Autodesk is Investigating Blockchain for blockchain technology?—a systematic review. PloS one,
AEC. See 11(10), e0163477.
https://labs.blogs.com/its_alive_in_the_lab/2018/05/autodesk- Zhu Y and Augenbroe G (2006) A conceptual model for
in-investigating-blockchain-for- supporting the integration of inter-organizational information
aec.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_ processes of AEC projects. Automation in Construction, 15(2),
campaign=Feed%3A+ItsAliveInTheLab+%28It%27s+Alive+ 200-211.
in+the+Lab%29 for further details (accessed 24/01/2019).
Zhu Y and Issa RR (2003) Viewer controllable visualization
Simonian L and Korman T (2010) Legal considerations in the for construction document processing. Automation in
United States associated with building information modeling. Construction, 12(3), 255-269.
COBRA 2010 CIB W113 Law & Dispute Resolution
Staub-French S and Khanzode A (2007) 3D and 4D modeling
for design and construction coordination: issues and lessons
learned. Journal of Information Technology in Construction
(ITcon), 12(26), 381-407.
Storj Labs (2018) Storj: A Decentralized Cloud Storage
Network Framework. (v3.0), See https://storj.io/storjv3.pdf
for further details (accessed 24/01/2019).
Swan M (2015) Blockchain: Blueprint for a new economy (T.
McGovern Ed.) O'Reilly Media, Inc.
Tang L et al. (2008) A characteristic based information
evaluation model. Proceedings of the 2nd ACM workshop on
Information credibility on the web.
Tapscott D and Tapscott A (2016) Blockchain revolution: how
the technology behind bitcoin is changing money, business,
and the world Penguin.
Tosh DK et al. (2017) Security implications of blockchain
cloud with analysis of block withholding attack. Proceedings
of the 17th IEEE/ACM International Symposium on Cluster,
Cloud and Grid Computing.
Tribelsky E and Sacks R (2011) An empirical study of
information flows in multidisciplinary civil engineering design
teams using lean measures. Architectural Engineering and
Design Management, 7(2), 85-101.

380

Downloaded by [] on [12/08/19]. Published with permission by the ICE under the CC-BY license

View publication stats