sustainability

Article
BIM and Mechanical Engineering—A Cross-Disciplinary Analysis
Luka Adanič *, Sara Guerra de Oliveira and Andrej Tibaut

Construction and Transportation Informatics, University of Maribor Faculty of Civil Engineering Transportation
Engineering and Architecture, 2000 Maribor, Slovenia; [email protected] (S.G.d.O.);
[email protected] (A.T.)
* Correspondence: [email protected]

Abstract: Mechanical Engineering (ME) includes the design, manufacturing, assembly, and mainte-
nance of mechanical subsystems for Architecture, Engineering, Construction, and Owner-Operator
(AECO) projects. The intense adoption of information and communication technology in the AECO
started with building product modelling, which was originally pioneered in the ME domain (i.e.,
automotive industry). The complexity and limited openness of product models paved the way for
Building Information Modelling (BIM). Today, BIM workflows require an exchange of interoperable
architecture, structure, and MEP/HVAC models and their seamless integration into a shared BIM
model. Many specialized ME systems exist (i.e., medical gases and vacuum) for which BIM is not
mature enough and where the role of BIM has not yet been studied. Therefore, a comprehensive cross-
disciplinary analysis on the mutual influence of the BIM and the ME domain is needed for researchers
and professionals. It identifies research fields and trends at the intersection of BIM and ME and
analyzes their scope, limitations, and requirements for future extensions of BIM for better integration
with ME. The analysis is based on an extensive literature search considering the interdisciplinary
nature of ME. The initial collection of papers has undergone a rigorous bibliometric analysis that used





 a text mining approach for validation. Results show the field “Industry 4.0” as the most prosperous
BIM influencing research field, followed by “Energy optimisation” and “Environmental Product
Citation: Adanič, L.; de Oliveira,
Declaration”, while identifying “Geometric optimisation” and “Reinforced material” as the trendiest.
S.G.; Tibaut, A. BIM and Mechanical
Engineering—A Cross-Disciplinary Finally, conclusions on the impact of BIM on ME were drawn and 11 research opportunities were
Analysis. Sustainability 2021, 13, 4108. identified. This paper provides directions for studies where research is focused on the integration of
https://doi.org/10.3390/su13084108 ME systems in BIM workflows and on the extension of BIM capability to model future ME systems.

Academic Editors: Changbum R. Ahn Keywords: BIM; mechanical engineering; cross-disciplinary analysis; AECO
and Chansik Park

Received: 23 February 2021

Accepted: 5 April 2021 1. Introduction
Published: 7 April 2021
Spanning from the production of a blank sheet of paper, to the construction process
of the Burj Khalifa or the latest aircraft: Mechanical Engineering (ME) has an impact on
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral
every man-made engineering achievement. There are products where ME is indispensable
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
throughout the majority of its lifecycle activities—such as design, manufacturing and
published maps and institutional affil-
product maintenance (e.g., car industry, tool manufacturing)—while with other products
iations.
ME is involved only partially in a specific engineering process (e.g., built environment
industry). Built environment (BE), represented by the joint domains of Architecture,
Engineering, Construction and Owner-Operator (AECO), is a domain where ME provides
an utterly important consultancy responsible for the design and installation of typical
Copyright: © 2021 by the authors.
mechanical subsystems like heating, ventilation, air conditioning, and plumbing. The
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
mechanical subsystems planned for BE projects can be designed using Building Information
This article is an open access article
Modelling (BIM) [1].
distributed under the terms and
For the BE, BIM can be viewed as a model-centric, collaboration-rewarding, and prod-
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
uct lifecycle-oriented methodology that is more holistic than the other existing computer-
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
aided methods used by the AECO, namely:
4.0/). • Drafting-centric or CAD-centric (e.g., CAD drawings),

Sustainability 2021, 13, 4108. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13084108 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

Sustainability 2021, 13, 4108 2 of 17

• Product-centric (e.g., LCCA—LifeCycle Cost Analysis),

• Model-centric (e.g., product modelling using STEP—Standard for the Exchange of
Product model data), or
• Process-centric (e.g., project scheduling, workflow management using BPMN—Business
Process Modelling Notation).
BIM is a methodology that transitions BE to the digital era [2] and, therefore, the
industry is catching up on the automotive, petrochemical, shipbuilding, and aerospace
industries. The maturity of the BIM implementation can be described through the Levels
of Maturity (Level 0—paper-based drawings employing CAD and low coordination, Level
1—partial 3D modelling with proprietary formats exchange, Level 2—federated BIM
with a higher level of coordination using Common Data Environment, and Level 3—
fully integrated and interoperable cloud-based BIM) which distinguishes the degrees of
coordination and collaboration between the stakeholders, use of exchange formats, and
depth of the exchanged information [3].
The industries, mostly ME dominated fields, have built on the product models [4]
utilized with Computer Aided Design (CAD), Computer Aided Engineering (CAE), and
Computer Aided Manufacturing (CAM) [5]. Despite the advanced use of product models,
attention is mostly paid to the single field models used to automate the generation and
coordination of 2D documentation and less to the lifecycle product data management.
The approach is mainly proprietary and is different from the BE domain where BIM
enables open standardized and interoperable solutions throughout the building lifecycle
with global influence [6]. BIM also encourages discussions beyond the technical systems,
such as socio-technical systems [7]. It can be concluded that there are differences in the
notion of digitalization between the BE and ME: the ME is still deeply rooted in CAD
2D/3D approaches, while the BE domain is already moving from the CAD-based to the
open BIM-standardized digitalization. Pioneering steps towards BIM in ME include early
observations that BIM is making design and construction easier by creating ways to design,
lay out, and allow for multidiscipline coordination in 3D [8]; automating the extraction of
information from textual descriptions and schematic diagrams in construction documents
for HVAC systems [9]; providing favorable analysis of practicing BIM in the mechanical
industry sector [10], and automating the reconstruction of mechanical systems in BIM
from legacy 2D drawings [11]. Recent research has led to the formulation of the IDM
(Integrated Delivery Manual) standard from the perspective of the actual designs that are
integrating process maps covering architecture, structure, plumbing, ME, and electrical
engineering, and are thus showing how to realize BIM-based collaborative work [12].
Therefore, mechanical engineers working in the BE domain are switching from CAD
models to the more open and information model-centric BIM models where exchange
formats are often connected to the Industry Foundation Classes (IFC) standardized data
model, developed by BuildingSMART. IFC can define, for example, the components of
buildings, manufactured products, mechanical and electrical systems and logically codify
identities, semantics, attributes, objects, relationships, concepts, and processes. IFC files are
neutral, open, and standardized: created to promote full interoperability within BIM [13].
This will influence the ME itself, which is likely to shift from an isolated workflow to a
more open and lifecycle-based modelling workflow.

1.1. Mechanical Subsystems in AECO Projects

There are fields that require active collaboration between ME and the AECO, such as
energy efficiency [14], HVAC [15], design coordination [16], cost estimation [17], mechanical
equipment [18], structural simulation with a finite element model [19], the design of
residential containers, etc. For example: to ensure the structural integrity of a residential
container, the mechanical design considers the steel profiles and sheets as well as the
methods of joining (screwing and welding). Complementary to this, the AECO takes over
with the architectural design—the arrangement of containers and the interior design of
the furniture.
Sustainability 2021, 13, 4108 3 of 17

It can be assumed that BIM might create benefits for other subfields of ME. To prove
that, research was carried out to identify all fields in the intersection between ME and
BIM. The research also explores future research directions for the specialization of a BIM
approach inside ME.
To get acquainted with different approaches to literature analysis we carried out an
initial reading of publications from the field of systematic literature research [20–23] which
served us as a base for the development of a research methodology.

1.2. Research Contributions

The two scientific fields, ME and AECO, are individually thoroughly researched. In
our research, however, we focused on the intersection between the ME fields and BIM as a
subfield of the AECO.
Therefore, the paper aims to comprehensively analyze literature published after the
emergence of BIM to find potential research and applications of BIM within ME subfields.
The methodology implements a search strategy, a rigorous bibliometric analysis, a text
mining approach, and a detailed assessment of the narrowed set of selected papers. With
this in mind, the following research questions were defined:
1. What research fields exist at the intersection of BIM and ME?
2. What are the trends in the research fields from the intersection of BIM and ME?
3. What are the knowledge gaps and open research topics and what is the future research
agenda for BIM in ME?

2. Methodology
To ensure a systematic, robust, and repeatable literature analysis process, the Kitchen-
ham guidelines [24] were adopted. A methodology that involved a literature search,
Sustainability 2021, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW  4  of  20 
analysis, and evaluation of search results has been defined according to the guidelines,
 
encompassing three steps (Figure 1).

 
Figure 1. Methodology for the literature search, analysis, and an evaluation of search results. 
Figure 1. Methodology for the literature search, analysis, and an evaluation of search results.

2.1. Step 1: Design of the Search Strategy 
The design of the search strategy and the definition of inclusion and exclusion criteria 
for the first and the second research questions that were related to the research fields at 
the intersection of BIM and ME and the main trends, included the following steps: 
Sustainability 2021, 13, 4108 4 of 17

2.1. Step 1: Design of the Search Strategy

The design of the search strategy and the definition of inclusion and exclusion criteria
for the first and the second research questions that were related to the research fields at the
intersection of BIM and ME and the main trends, included the following steps:
a. Identification of the science domain-split related to the AECO and ME science fields,
b. Selection of repositories for publication retrieval,
c. Definition of inclusion and exclusion criteria,
d. Definition of specific keywords related to ME.
ME is a broad engineering field; therefore, in the first step, an initial search was per-
formed within five science fields (Engineering, Computer Science, Energy, Environmental
Science, and Material Science) which are significant for both ME and AECO. The initial
set of keywords were selected from recent scientific literature related to the trends and
applications of mechanical engineering [25], as indicated in Table 1.

Table 1. Science fields influencing Architecture, Engineering, Construction, and Owner-Operator

(AECO) and Mechanical Engineering (ME) and the corresponding 52 specific keywords as defined in
the first phase of the search strategy.

Science Field Related to

Specific Keywords (Subfields)
ME and AECO
Construction material; Material supply; Mechanical property;
Material Science Reinforced material; Carbon steel; Composite; Fatigue load;
Nanomaterial; Polymer; Microstructure.
Mechanical Design; Process Automation; Industry 4.0;
Engineering Sustainable Design; Product Modelling; Mechanical, Electrical
and Plumbing; Manufacturing, Production; 3D printing; Robotics.
Thermodynamic; Energy system; Green energy; Energy efficiency;
Heating, ventilating and air conditioning; Energy optimisation;
Energy
Energy conservation; CO2 emission; Heat transfer;
Thermal energy.
Environmental protection; Environmental impact; Greenhouse
gas emissions; Climate change; Renewable resources; Air
Environmental Science
pollution; Water supply; Environmental Design; Lifecycle cost
analysis; Environmental Product Declaration.
Computer aided engineering; Computer Aided Design;
Computer integrated manufacturing; Computational fluid
Computer Science dynamics; Parametric modelling; Meta modelling; Geometric
optimisation; Numerical optimisation; Model based technique;
Finite element method.

2.2. Step 2: Detailed Literature Search

In the second step, a detailed literature search was performed (Figure 2). The step was
subdivided into two phases. The first phase (a, b, c) involved a specific keyword search
across the ME related fields. In the second phase (d, e, f), results from the first phase were
combined with the keyword “BIM” for a new search:
a. Search and retrieval of publications related to ME,
b. Normalization and regression of search results,
c. Application of first inclusion criteria,
d. Cross-reference search for publications with keywords from ME and BIM,
e. Application of second inclusion criteria,
f. Elimination of duplicates.
Sustainability 2021, 13, 4108
Sustainability 2021, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW  6 5 of 
of 17
20 
 

 
Figure 2. Two phases of the literature search. 
Figure 2. Two phases of the literature search.

The
The literature
literature search inclusion criteria
search inclusion  were defined
criteria were  to reduce
defined  the the 
to  reduce  result-set in the
result‐set  in first
the 
phase. The first inclusion criteria were:
first phase. The first inclusion criteria were: 
• The
The number of publications
number of  publications  has
has positive
positive  trend
trend over
over the
the years (regression curve
years (regression  curve of
of 
normalized results is ascending),
normalized results is ascending), 
• The five steepest graphs from each field are selected for the next phase.
The five steepest graphs from each field are selected for the next phase. 
In the second phase, further inclusion criteria narrowed the set of keywords and
In the second phase, further inclusion criteria narrowed the set of keywords and pub‐
publications into the most prosperous areas at the intersection of BIM and ME.
lications into the most prosperous areas at the intersection of BIM and ME. 
The second inclusion criteria applied were:
The second inclusion criteria applied were: 
• The connected graph of normalized results is ascending,
The connected graph of normalized results is ascending, 
• From the single field the most upward trend is selected and duplicated publications
From the single field the most upward trend is selected and duplicated publications 
are removed if they exist.
are removed if they exist. 
The remaining publications were then used as the input corpus for text mining with
The remaining publications were then used as the input corpus for text mining with 
term frequency analysis. The purpose of the analysis was to validate the appropriateness
term frequency analysis. The purpose of the analysis was to validate the appropriateness 
of the resulting set of publications. Results not satisfying all the inclusion criteria of a
of the resulting set of publications. Results not satisfying all the inclusion criteria of a par‐
particular phase were excluded from further research.
ticular phase were excluded from further research. 
In both searching phases, the Scopus search engine was used. Based on the European
In both searching phases, the Scopus search engine was used. Based on the European 
Classification of Research Activities (CERIF—CERCS) [26], it was found that ME does
Classification of Research Activities (CERIF—CERCS) [26], it was found that ME does not 
not have an explicitly named
have  an  explicitly  named  scientific
scientific  field,
field,  but
but  is isincluded 
includedin 
inother 
otherfields 
fields which 
which are 
are also
also 
related to AECO. The science fields included in the search (in the fields: Abstract, Title,
related to AECO. The science fields included in the search (in the fields: Abstract, Title, 
and Keywords) were: Engineering, Computer Science, Energy, Environmental Science
and  Keywords)  were:  Engineering,  Computer  Science,  Energy,  Environmental  Science 
Sustainability 2021, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW  7  of  20 
 
Sustainability 2021, 13, 4108 6 of 17

and  Material  Science.  The  logical  operator  in  the  cases  of  combined  multiple‐searched 
and Material
keywords  Science. The logical
was always AND.  operator in Type 
The  Publication  the cases
field ofof combined multiple-searched
the  search  was restricted  to 
keywords was always AND. The Publication Type field of the search
Journals  and  Books  published  in  the  time  period  of  2007–2020.  The  time  wasperiod 
restricted to
corre‐
Journals and Books published in the time period of 2007–2020. The time period corresponds
sponds  to  the  beginnings  of  BIM  research.  Additionally,  other  known  academic  data‐
to the beginnings of BIM research. Additionally, other known academic databases—namely
bases—namely WoS, Google Scholar, ASCE Library, Wiley, and IEEE—were used. 
WoS, Google Scholar, ASCE Library, Wiley, and IEEE—were used.
2.3. Step 3: Analysis and Evaluation of Search Results 
2.3. Step 3: Analysis and Evaluation of Search Results
In the third step, the literature search results were validated (a), statistically evalu‐
In the third step, the literature search results were validated (a), statistically evaluated,
ated, (b) and presented (c): 
(b) and presented (c):
a.
a. Content analysis of given publications using text mining to determine the frequency 
Content analysis of given publications using text mining to determine the frequency
of keywords, 
of keywords,
b.
b. Statistical trend function was used to compute linear trend line based on the given 
Statistical trend function was used to compute linear trend line based on the given
publication corpus, 
publication corpus,
c.
c. Graphical presentation of search results. 
Graphical presentation of search results.

3. Analysis of Recent Research on BIM and ME 
3. Analysis of Recent Research on BIM and ME
Implementation of the first phase of the analysis methodology resulted in more than 
Implementation of the first phase of the analysis methodology resulted in more than
six million publications collected for the 50 keywords in the period 2007–2020. Relative 
six million publications collected for the 50 keywords in the period 2007–2020. Relative
shares of the publications per science field are presented in Figure 3. 
shares of the publications per science field are presented in Figure 3.

Figure 3. Share of ME publications within the science fields comprising AECO.  

Figure 3. Share of ME publications within the science fields comprising AECO. 
The absolute number of publications in the search period was normalized and trend-
lines were calculated separately for the five individual science fields. Figure 4 shows the
The absolute number of publications in the search period was normalized and trend‐
trendlines for the Engineering field. For each field, the top five trendlines were identified
lines were calculated separately for the five individual science fields. Figure 4 shows the 
and the corresponding 25 keywords were included in the second phase.
trendlines for the Engineering field. For each field, the top five trendlines were identified 
The remaining 25 keywords were all combined with “BIM” (Table 2) in the second
and the corresponding 25 keywords were included in the second phase. 
analysis phase where 1883 publications were found.
Sustainability 2021, 13, 4108 7 of 17
Sustainability 2021, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW  8  of  20 
 

 
Figure 4. Publication trends for the period 2007–2020 for the field of Engineering. 
Figure 4. Publication trends for the period 2007–2020 for the field of Engineering.

Table The remaining 25 keywords were all combined with “BIM” (Table 2) in the second 
2. Keywords for the second phase of review.
analysis phase where 1883 publications were found. 
Field Keywords
Table 2. Keywords for the second phase of review. 
Reinforced material & BIM, Fatigue load & BIM, Construction
Material Science
material & BIM, Nanomaterial & BIM, Mechanical property & BIM.
Field  Keywords 
Industry 4.0 & BIM, 3D printing & BIM, Mechanical, Electrical and
Material Sci‐
Engineering Reinforced material & BIM, Fatigue load & BIM, Construction material & 
Plumbing & BIM, Manufacturing & BIM, Robotics & BIM.
ence  BIM, Nanomaterial & BIM, Mechanical property & BIM. 
Green energy & BIM, Energy system & BIM, Thermal energy & BIM,
Energy Industry 4.0 & BIM, 3D printing & BIM, Mechanical, Electrical and 
Engineering  Energy efficiency & BIM, Energy optimisation & BIM.
Plumbing & BIM, Manufacturing & BIM, Robotics & BIM. 
Environmental Product Declaration & BIM, Lifecycle cost analysis &
Environmental Green energy & BIM, Energy system & BIM, Thermal energy & BIM, En‐
Science BIM, Climate change & BIM, Greenhouse gas emissions & BIM,
Energy 
ergy efficiency & BIM, Energy optimisation & BIM. 
Environmental Design & BIM.
Environmental Product Declaration & BIM, Lifecycle cost analysis & 
Parametric modelling & BIM, Computational fluid dynamics & BIM,
Environmental 
BIM, Climate change & BIM, Greenhouse gas emissions & BIM, Environ‐
Computer Science Numerical optimisation & BIM, Geometric optimisation & BIM,
Science  Finite element method & BIM.
mental Design & BIM. 
Parametric modelling & BIM, Computational fluid dynamics & BIM, Nu‐
Computer Sci‐
merical optimisation & BIM, Geometric optimisation & BIM, Finite ele‐
After the application of the inclusion criteria in the second phase, 91 publications
ence 
remained. After the elimination of duplicates, 83 publications were selected for the next
ment method & BIM. 
step. The temporal distribution of the final set of publications is presented in the Figure 5.
After  the  application  of  the  inclusion  criteria  in  the  second  phase,  91  publications 
remained. After the elimination of duplicates, 83 publications were selected for the next 
step. The temporal distribution of the final set of publications is presented in the Figure 5. 
Sustainability 2021, 13, 4108 8 of 17
Sustainability 2021, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW  9  of  20 
 

 
Figure 5. Temporal distribution of the final set of publications. 
Figure 5. Temporal distribution of the final set of publications.

The temporal distribution shows a steep rise in the number of publications per year
The temporal distribution shows a steep rise in the number of publications per year 
for the final corpus of keywords (Table 2). This supports the state-of-the-art research fields
for the final corpus of keywords (Table 2). This supports the state‐of‐the‐art research fields 
on the intersection of BIM and ME.
on the intersection of BIM and ME. 
The distribution of the 83 papers across the science fields shows the most prosperous
The distribution of the 83 papers across the science fields shows the most prosperous 
research fields and subfields at the intersection of BIM and ME (Table 3). The field of
research fields and subfields at the intersection of BIM and ME (Table 3). The field of En‐
Engineering was identified as the most prosperous one, followed by the fields of Energy,
gineering was identified as the most prosperous one, followed by the fields of Energy, 
Environmental Science, Material Science, and Computer Science.
Environmental Science, Material Science, and Computer Science. 

Table 3. Distribution of the final set of publications for ME and BIM.

Table 3. Distribution of the final set of publications for ME and BIM. 

Field 
Field Keywords (Subfield) 
Keywords (Subfield) Number of Publications 
Number of Publications
Engineering 
Engineering Industry 4.0 & BIM 
Industry 4.0 & BIM 51 
51
Energy 
Energy Energy optimisation & BIM 
Energy optimisation & BIM 17 
17
Environmental 
Environmental Environmental Product Declaration & BIM 
Environmental Product Declaration & BIM 10 
10
Science 
Science
Material Science 
Material Science Reinforced material & BIM 
Reinforced material & BIM 33 
Computer Science  Geometric optimisation & BIM  2 
Computer Science Geometric optimisation & BIM 2

However, as shown in Figure 6, the biggest trend is demonstrated by the keyword 
However, as shown in Figure 6, the biggest trend is demonstrated by the keyword
“Geometric optimisation & BIM”, followed by “Industry 4.0 & BIM”, and “Environmental 
“Geometric optimisation & BIM”, followed by “Industry 4.0 & BIM”, and “Environmental
Product Declaration & BIM”. The year of publication and the number of publications per 
Product Declaration & BIM”. The year of publication and the number of publications per
year has a major impact on the rise of trends. 
year has a major impact on the rise of trends.
The structured and mechanistic research method developed for the analysis resulted
in a final corpus of 83 scientific publications. In the research step, the full texts of the
83 publications were analyzed with the term frequency analysis tool to determine fre-
quency counts of terms. For text-mining, an algorithm was developed in the R program-
ming language environment [27] to scan the publications in .pdf format. The algorithm
disregarded conjunctions and prepositions as these are common words.
By counting the frequency of terms in publications, the stability of the results in terms
of the usage of the term “BIM” was validated. Table 4 ranks the top 20 frequencies of terms
in all the final publications together.
Sustainability 2021, 13, 4108 9 of 17
Sustainability 2021, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW  10  of  20 
 

 
Figure 6. Trends for the final 83 publications. 
Figure 6. Trends for the final 83 publications.

Table 4.The structured and mechanistic research method developed for the analysis resulted 
Top 20 frequencies of terms for the final corpus of publications.
in a final corpus of 83 scientific publications. In the research step, the full texts of the 83 
publications were analyzed with the term frequency analysis tool to determine frequency 
Term, Frequency
counts of terms. For text‐mining, an algorithm was developed in the R programming lan‐
1. BIM, 1903
guage environment [27] to scan the publications in .pdf format. The algorithm disregarded 
2.
conjunctions and prepositions as these are common words.  Energy, 1616
By counting the frequency of terms in publications, the stability of the results in terms 
3. Building, 1579
of the usage of the term “BIM” was validated. Table 4 ranks the top 20 frequencies of terms 
4. Construction, 1420
in all the final publications together. 
5. Design, 1101
Table 4. Top 20 frequencies of terms for the final corpus of publications. 
6. Information, 1051
  7. Term, Frequency  Model, 1030
1.  8. BIM, 1903  Process, 607
2.  9. Energy, 1616  Analysis, 490
3.  Building, 1579 
10. System, 484
4.  Construction, 1420 
5.  11. Design, 1101  Research, 447
6.  12. Information, 1051  Industry, 427
7.  13. Model, 1030  Optimisation, 427
8.  Process, 607 
14. IFC, 386
9.  Analysis, 490 
15. Modeling, 382
10.  System, 484 
11.  16. Research, 447  Environmental, 376
12.  17. Industry, 427  Management, 364
13.  18. Optimisation, 427 Performance, 345
14.  IFC, 386 
19. Project, 345
20. Consumption, 309
Sustainability 2021, 13, 4108 10 of 17

The terms “BIM”, “Energy”, “Building” and “Construction” are the most frequently
repeated terms in the final set of papers, followed by the terms “Design”, “Information”
and “Models”. The ranking of the term “BIM” as the most frequent confirms its relevance
to and its representativeness of the final corpus of publications.

4. Discussion
In this section, a synthesis of research results is analyzed and discussed. The purpose
of the synthesis is to assess the stability of results based on the final set of 83 publications
(Table 5). During this step, each publication was read (by a researcher) to verify that it
considers a BIM approach and also influences ME. Such a contextual approach was crucial
in the decision to exclude research with a weak reference to BIM (i.e., pretentious use of
“BIM” in the keyword list, presenting BIM as 3D modelling only, etc.), thus contributing
to the reliability and relevance of the research publications. Publications with accepted
content (title, abstract, keywords, text) were grouped to form 14 subfields of ME that
aggregate current research related to both BIM and ME. Based on the synthesis step, the
findings are discussed in the next section.

Table 5. Most relevant findings with an impact on BIM and ME.

Field ME Subfield Application of BIM Impact on ME

Improved
Solid volume interchangeability of
optimisation and detailed MEP
Optimisation and
Computer optimisation of model models—maintaining a
simplification
Science storage, geometry high density of irregularly
of models
transfer and shaped mechanical
visualization [28,29]. components and reduced
storage volume.
Improved rebar steel
Optimisation of rebar
utilization, a transition of
quantity [30] and
Improved material knowledge from glass fiber
determination of
use reinforced material to BIM
Material junction points in free
with the purpose of
Science form buildings [31].
supporting the production.
Implementation of BIM The transition of 3D
Repairing and
as a data-centric model printing technologies to the
retrofitting of
for current and new field of bridge repairing
products
assets information [32]. and retrofitting.
BIM as a tool for
integration of
Encouraging the
sustainability
sustainable development of
indicators,
mechanical components
digitalization of Life
Environmental Sustainable design and integrated subsystems
Cycle Analysis (LCA)
Science and development into BE with the LCA
and decision making in
approach and
early design phases
minimization of
with respect to
environmental impacts.
environmental impacts
[33–40].
Sustainability 2021, 13, 4108 11 of 17

Table 5. Cont.

Field ME Subfield Application of BIM Impact on ME

New methods for
improvement of energy
BIM as an emerging
Optimisation of consumption in the
technology that
energy utilization in production and transport
supports the energy
the production processes of mechanical
associated processes
process. components and
[41,42].
subsystems, intended to be
installed in BE.
BIM as an emerging
technology that
Improved data transfer
supports the
(BIM to BEM) in
integration of processes
Interoperability optimisation processes,
during the product
challenges reducing software
lifecycle, developed as
interoperability problems,
a tool for data transfer
common also in ME.
between stages in
design [43–46].
Adoption and
integration of BIM for
Energy the optimisation of
energy efficiency in the Increased need for
Optimisation of BE, in the design and energy-efficient mechanical
energy efficiency construction phases, components and
considering the size of subsystems.
the projects and
traditional methods
[47–55].
Automatization of BIM
design for
mass-customized Minimization of the
Automated design houses and modelling effort for MEP
reconstruction systems.
processes of indoor
environments [56,57].
Investigations of the
impact of BIM-based The necessity for
Multidisciplinary
functions on the integration of ME in BIM
connectivity
construction industry functions.
and society [58,59].
Digitalization of BE
based on metamodels,
augmented reality,
Engineering Digitalization digital twins, Internet Digitalization of BE in
of Things and general means also
Computer Vision digitalization of ME
[60–76] subsystems, consequently
Analysis, reviews and all ME components must
case studies of the BIM be available in an
Construction impact on the interoperable digital form
Equipment development and with integrated
Industry automatization of the information.
construction industry
and its parties [77–93]
Implementation of CAD modelling with
Product modelling information modelling respect to requirements of
technologies [94–101]. BIM technologies.
Sustainability 2021, 13, 4108 12 of 17

Table 5. Cont.

Field ME Subfield Application of BIM Impact on ME

Application of additive
manufacturing Transfer of knowledge and
Additive technologies in best practice cases from the
manufacturing Industry 4.0 and field of additive
improved material manufacturing to a BE.
utilization [102–106].
Combining Industry 4.0 Chance for the
and BIM technologies implementation of
Improved workflow with the purpose of standardized production
construction logistics layouts from ME
optimisation [107,108]. industries.

5. Conclusions
This paper presented a cross-disciplinary analysis on the influence of BIM on the broad
ME domain. Mechanical engineering has long been a major driver of research, applications in
product modelling, and data management that improves interoperability between software
involved in the product lifecycle. After some time, the construction industry started to
adopt and adapt product modelling standards, used during the entire lifecycle of buildings
and infrastructures, that evolved into BIM. BIM now has an established influence on the
mechanical engineering domain. In this paper, a bibliometric analysis that encompasses
the five domains of Environmental Science, Engineering, Material Science, Energy, and
Computer Science was performed. For each domain, 10 specific ME related keywords (i.e.,
“mechanical design”) were defined. Using the keywords, the domains that had gone through
a survey method aimed to find relevant evidence for the use of BIM as methodology, methods,
and/or products (models). The survey method rigorously implemented a search of relevant
publications, a two-phase trend estimation, validation of results, and an assessment of the
stability of results. The process started with a set of more than 6 million scientific publications,
which at the end were filtered down to 83 publications and systematically analyzed. The
distribution of the final publications across the science fields ranked Engineering as the
best interwoven with BIM, followed by Energy, Environmental Science, Material Science
and Computer Science. The biggest trend was demonstrated by the keywords “Geometric
optimisation & BIM” and “Industry 4.0 & BIM”.
The validation of the results, primarily based on the counting of the frequency of the
term “BIM” in publications, confirmed that a final analyzed corpus of 83 publications was
relevant and representative. The averaged frequencies were ranked solely to prove the
occurrence of the term “BIM” in the selected papers, which was confirmed.
To further assess the stability of the results and to develop trust in the relevancy of
the research publications, all the 83 publications were also contextually analyzed through
reading (by a researcher). The reasoning process derived from the list of the final 11
research fields (Table 5) is the basis for the conclusions that highlight the most researched
bidirectional effects between BIM and ME domain, but also identify research opportunities
at the crossroads of BIM and ME, particularly:
1. Detailing, optimisation, simplification, and interchangeability of MEP models with
requirements for high density of irregularly shaped solid volumes can be better
achieved with BIM modelling and IFC-based model exchange.
2. Improved rebar steel utilization through the optimisation of rebar quantity, the de-
termination of junction points in free form buildings, and a transition of knowledge
from glass fiber reinforced material to BIM to support the manufacturing phase.
3. Implementation of BIM as a data-centric model for asset information to support the
transition of knowledge and best practice cases from 3D printing technologies to the
field of bridge repairing and retrofitting.
Sustainability 2021, 13, 4108 13 of 17

4. BIM as a tool for the integration of sustainability indicators, digitalization of LCA, and
decision making in early design phases with respect to the environmental impacts for
the sustainable development of mechanical components and integrated subsystems
into BE.
5. BIM is a technology that supports new methods for improvement of energy con-
sumption in the production and transport processes of mechanical components and
subsystems intended to be installed in BE.
6. Custom BIM-based tools improve data transfer (BIM to BEM) in the optimisation
processes, between design stages during the product lifecycle, and reducing software
interoperability problems that are also common in ME.
7. Adoption and integration of BIM improves the optimisation of energy efficiency in
the design and construction phases for energy-efficient mechanical components and
subsystems when compared to traditional methods.
8. BIM minimizes the modelling effort of MEP systems for mass-customized houses and
the reconstruction processes of indoor environments.
9. Digitalization of BE also means implementation of information modelling technolo-
gies for ME subsystems where CAD modelling is subordinated to the requirements of
BIM technologies.
10. Industry 4.0 can benefit from pairing BIM technologies and modularized production lay-
outs from ME industries in the domain of the construction site and in logistics optimisation.
11. Mechanical engineers need to analyze, review, and elaborate on case studies focused
on the impact of BIM on the development and automatization of the BE industry.
From the above conclusions, an important consideration for ME to adopt BIM is the
concept of design integration between the already “BIMified” disciplines and ME. As
conclusions 1, 2, 3, and 9 suggest, an obstacle to BIM is information loss which occurs
during the repetitive exchange of digital information taking place throughout the design
and analysis activities (e.g., BIM to energy analysis) until all design requirements are met.
That calls for improved algorithms that can integrate several mono-discipline models into
one, a concept known as an integrated model, and is also applicable to federated models.
Conclusions 3, 4, 8, and 10 also call for better-integrated design (requirements, models)
in automated manufacturing workflows, including digital fabrication. That all must be
underpinned by mechanical engineers with competencies for BIM projects as described in
conclusion 11.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, L.A. and A.T.; methodology, L.A., S.G.d.O. and A.T.;
software, L.A. and A.T.; validation, L.A., S.G.d.O. and A.T.; formal analysis, L.A.; investigation,
L.A., S.G.d.O. and A.T.; resources, A.T.; data curation, L.A.; writing—original draft preparation,
L.A. and A.T.; writing—review and editing, S.G.d.O.; visualization, L.A.; supervision, A.T.; project
administration, L.A.; funding acquisition, A.T. All authors have read and agreed to the published
version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: The data presented in this study are available on request from the
corresponding author.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Hu, Z.-Z.; Zhang, J.-P.; Yu, F.-Q.; Tian, P.-L.; Xiang, X.-S. Construction and facility management of large MEP projects using a
multi-Scale building information model. Adv. Eng. Softw. 2016, 100, 215–230. [CrossRef]
2. Abaglo, A.J.; Bonalda, C.; Pertusa, E. Environmental Digital Model: Integration of BIM into environmental building simulations.
Energy Procedia 2017, 122, 1063–1068. [CrossRef]
Sustainability 2021, 13, 4108 14 of 17

3. Borrmann, A.; König, M.; Koch, C.; Beetz, J. Building information modeling: Why? What? How? In Building Information Modeling;
Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; pp. 1–34.
4. Borrmann, A.; Rank, E. Specification and implementation of directional operators in a 3D spatial query language for building
information models. Adv. Eng. Inform. 2009, 23, 32–44. [CrossRef]
5. Lee, K. Principles of CAD/CAM/CAE Systems; Addison-Wesley: Boston, MA, USA, 1999; ISBN 0201380366.
6. Kassem, M.; Succar, B. Macro BIM adoption: Comparative market analysis. Autom. Constr. 2017, 81, 286–299. [CrossRef]
7. BIM Dictionary. Available online: https://bimdictionary.com/en/bim-stage-1/1/ (accessed on 17 March 2021).
8. Banse, J.P. Mechanical engineering: What are we in for? Consult. Specif. Eng. 2010, 47, 20–24.
9. Sunnam, R.; Ergan, S.; Akinci, B. Challenges in interpreting the design intent from HVAC sequence of operations to assess
the system behavior: A case study. In Proceedings of the 2014 International Conference on Computing in Civil and Building
Engineering, Orlando, FL, USA, 23–25 June 2014; pp. 1465–1472.
10. Boktor, J.; Hanna, A.; Menassa, C.C. State of practice of building information modeling in the mechanical construction industry. J.
Manag. Eng. 2014, 30, 78–85. [CrossRef]
11. Cho, C.Y.; Liu, X. An automated reconstruction approach of mechanical systems in building information modeling (BIM) using 2D
drawings. In Proceedings of the Congress on Computing in Civil Engineering, Seattle, WA, USA, 25–27 June 2017; pp. 236–244.
12. Xu, Z.; Abualdenien, J.; Liu, H.; Kang, R. An IDM-Based Approach for Information Requirement in Prefabricated Construction.
Adv. Civ. Eng. 2020, 2020. [CrossRef]
13. Industry Foundation Classes. Available online: https://www.buildingsmart.org/standards/bsi-standards/industry-foundation-
classes/ (accessed on 17 March 2021).
14. Gourlis, G.; Kovacic, I. Building Information Modelling for analysis of energy efficient industrial buildings—A case study. Renew.
Sustain. Energy Rev. 2017, 68, 953–963. [CrossRef]
15. Yang, Z.; Ghahramani, A.; Becerik-Gerber, B. Building occupancy diversity and HVAC (heating, ventilation, and air conditioning)
system energy efficiency. Energy 2016, 109, 641–649. [CrossRef]
16. Mujumdar, P.; Maheswari, J.U. Design iteration in construction projects—Review and directions. Alexandria Eng. J. 2015, 1–9.
[CrossRef]
17. Niknam, M.; Karshenas, S. Integrating distributed sources of information for construction cost estimating using Semantic Web
and Semantic Web Service technologies. Autom. Constr. 2015, 57, 222–238. [CrossRef]
18. Jeong, S.; Hou, R.; Lynch, J.P.; Sohn, H.; Law, K.H. An information modeling framework for bridge monitoring. Adv. Eng. Softw.
2017, 114, 11–31. [CrossRef]
19. Barazzetti, L.; Banfi, F.; Brumana, R.; Gusmeroli, G.; Previtali, M.; Schiantarelli, G. Cloud-to-BIM-to-FEM: Structural simulation
with accurate historic BIM from laser scans. Simul. Model. Pract. Theory 2015, 57, 71–87. [CrossRef]
20. Kitchenham, B.A.; Mendes, E.; Travassos, G.H. Cross- vs. Within-Company Cost Estimation Studies: A Systematic Review. IEEE
Trans. Softw. Eng. 2007, 33, 316–329. [CrossRef]
21. Mainela, T.; Puhakka, V.; Servais, P. The Concept of International Opportunity in International Entrepreneurship\rA Review
and a Research Agenda, International Journal of Management Reviews Volume 16, Issue 1. Int. J. Manag. Rev. 2014, 16, 105–129.
[CrossRef]
22. Bjørnson, F.O.; Dingsøyr, T. Knowledge management in software engineering: A systematic review of studied concepts, findings
and research methods used. Inf. Softw. Technol. 2008, 50, 1055–1068. [CrossRef]
23. Coutinho, E.F.; de Carvalho Sousa, F.R.; Rego, P.A.L.; Gomes, D.G.; de Souza, J.N. Elasticity in cloud computing: A survey. Ann.
Telecommun. Telecommun. 2014, 70, 289–309. [CrossRef]
24. Kitchenham, B. Procedures for performing systematic reviews. Keele UK Keele Univ. 2004, 33, 28.
25. Quadir, G.A. Trends and applications in mechanical engineering. In Applied Mechanics and Materials; Trans Tech Publications:
Baech, Switzerland, 2015; ISBN 9783038355496.
26. ARRS—Classifications—Common European Research Classification Scheme (CERIF). Available online: https://www.arrs.si/en/
gradivo/sifranti/sif-cerif-cercs.asp (accessed on 14 May 2019).
27. R: What is R? Available online: https://www.r-project.org/about.html (accessed on 14 May 2019).
28. Koźniewski, E.; Orłowski, M. Volume Optimization of Solid Waste Landfill Using Voronoi Diagram Geometry. Open Eng. 2019, 9,
307–311. [CrossRef]
29. Hu, Z.Z.; Yuan, S.; Benghi, C.; Zhang, J.P.; Zhang, X.Y.; Li, D.; Kassem, M. Geometric optimization of building information
models in MEP projects: Algorithms and techniques for improving storage, transmission and display. Autom. Constr. 2019, 107.
[CrossRef]
30. Chang, S.; Wu, I.C. Employing Multi-Objective Optimization to Rebar Quantity Takeoff Based on Building Information Model. J.
Chin. Inst. Civ. Hydraul. Eng. 2019, 31, 129–140. [CrossRef]
31. Lim, J.; Son, S.; Kim, D.Y.; Fitriani, H.; Kim, S. A solution of subordinate vertices for quality connections of external free-form
concrete panels. J. Civ. Eng. Manag. 2018, 24, 399–409. [CrossRef]
32. Singh, H. Repair and retrofitting of bridges—Cresent and future. In Proceedings of the Maintenance, Safety, Risk, Management
and Life-Cycle Performance of Bridges—Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Bridge Maintenance, Safety and
Management, IABMAS, Melbourne, Australia, 9–13 July 2018; CRC Press/Balkema: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2018; pp. 1209–1215.
Sustainability 2021, 13, 4108 15 of 17

33. Bruce-Hyrkäs, T.; Pasanen, P.; Castro, R. Overview of whole building life-cycle assessment for green building certification and
ecodesign through industry surveys and interviews. In Proceedings of the Procedia CIRP, Copenhagen, Denmark, 30 April–2
May 2018; Elsevier B.V.: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2018; Volume 69, pp. 178–183.
34. Passer, A.; Lützkendorf, T.; Habert, G.; Kromp-Kolb, H.; Monsberger, M.; Eder, M.; Truger, B. Sustainable built environment:
Transition towards a net zero carbon built environment. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2020, 25, 1160–1167. [CrossRef]
35. Marrero, M.; Wojtasiewicz, M.; Martínez-Rocamora, A.; Solís-Guzmán, J.; Alba-Rodríguez, M.D. BIM-LCA integration for the
environmental impact assessment of the urbanization process. Sustainability 2020, 12, 4196. [CrossRef]
36. Obrecht, T.P.; Röck, M.; Hoxha, E.; Passer, A. BIM and LCA integration: A systematic literature review. Sustainability 2020, 12,
5534. [CrossRef]
37. Lützkendorf, T. Sustainability in building construction—A multilevel approach. In Proceedings of the IOP Conference Series:
Earth and Environmental Science, Prague, Czech Republic, 2–4 July 2019; Volume 290.
38. Palumbo, E.; Soust-Verdaguer, B.; Llatas, C.; Traverso, M. How to Obtain Accurate Environmental Impacts at Early Design Stages
in BIM when Using Environmental Product Declaration. A Method to Support Decision-Making. Sustainability 2020, 12, 6927.
[CrossRef]
39. Brockmann, T. Digitalization of building LCA and international activities—In the context of German assessment system for
sustainable building. In Proceedings of the IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, Graz, Austria, 11–14
September 2019; Volume 323.
40. Signorini, M.; Frigeni, S.; Spagnolo, S.L. Integrating environmental sustainability indicators in BIM-based product datasheets. In
Proceedings of the IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, Milan, Italy, 4–5 September 2019; Volume 296.
41. Shadram, F.; Johansson, T.D.; Lu, W.; Schade, J.; Olofsson, T. An integrated BIM-based framework for minimizing embodied
energy during building design. Energy Build. 2016, 128, 592–604. [CrossRef]
42. Shadram, F.; Johansson, T.; Lu, W.; Olofsson, T. An integrated BIM-based framework for the energy assessment of building
upstream flow. In Proceedings of the ICCREM 2015—Environment and the Sustainable Building—Proceedings of the 2015
International Conference on Construction and Real Estate Management, Lulea, Sweden, 11–12 August 2015; American Society of
Civil Engineers (ASCE): Reston, VA, USA, 2015; pp. 107–118.
43. Tomasi, R.; Sottile, F.; Pastrone, C.; Mozumdar, M.M.R.; Osello, A.; Lavagno, L. Leveraging BIM Interoperability for UWB-Based
WSN Planning. IEEE Sens. J. 2015, 15, 5988–5996. [CrossRef]
44. Howell, S.; Rezgui, Y.; Hippolyte, J.L.; Mourshed, M. Semantic interoperability for holonic energy optimizationtimisation of
connected smart homes and distributed energy resources. In Proceedings of the eWork and eBusiness in Architecture, Engineering
and Construction—Proceedings of the 11th European Conference on Product and Process Modelling, ECPPM 2016, Limassol,
Cyprus, 7–9 September 2016; pp. 259–268.
45. Chiaia, B.; Davardoust, S.; Osello, A.; Aste, N.; Mazzon, M. BIM and Interoperability for Energy Simulations. 2015. pp. 93–97.
Available online: http://www.ibpsa.org/proceedings/BSA2015/9788860460745_13.pdf (accessed on 6 April 2021).
46. Honic, M.; Kovacic, I. Model and data management issues in the integrated assessment of existing building stocks. Organ. Technol.
Manag. Constr. Int. J. 2020, 12, 2148–2157. [CrossRef]
47. Chardon, S.; Brangeon, B.; Bozonnet, E.; Inard, C. Construction cost and energy performance of single family houses: From
integrated design to automated optimizationtimisation. Autom. Constr. 2016, 70, 1–13. [CrossRef]
48. Dong, Z.; Yang, B.; Hu, P.; Scherer, S. An efficient global energy optimizationtimisation approach for robust 3D plane segmentation
of point clouds. ISPRS J. Photogramm. Remote Sens. 2018, 137, 112–133. [CrossRef]
49. Petri, I.; Kubicki, S.; Rezgui, Y.; Guerriero, A.; Li, H. Optimizing energy efficiency in operating built environment assets through
building information modeling: A case study. Energies 2017, 10, 1167. [CrossRef]
50. Samuel, E.I.; Joseph-Akwara, E.; Richard, A. Assessment of energy utilization and leakages in buildings with building information
model energy. Front. Archit. Res. 2017, 6, 29–41. [CrossRef]
51. Petri, I.; Alhamami, A.; Rezgui, Y.; Kubicki, S. A virtual collaborative platform to support building information modeling
implementation for energy efficiency. In IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology; Springer: New York, NY,
USA, 2018; Volume 534, pp. 539–550.
52. Echeverria, E.; D’amico, F.C.; Martin, F.d.C.; Sánchez, M.d.M.; Gómez, P.D.; Conde, I.D.; Santander, Á.M.; Gata, K.M.; Ballesteros,
J.M.V.; Cristóbal, F.M.S. Integrated system for energy optimizationtimisation and reduction of building co2 footprint. Int. J.
Sustain. Build. Technol. Urban. Dev. 2017, 8, 228–236. [CrossRef]
53. Kim, S.; Kim, S.H. Lessons learned from the Existing Building Energy Optimizationtimisation workshop: An initiative for the
analysis-driven retrofit decision making. KSCE J. Civ. Eng. 2017, 21, 1059–1068. [CrossRef]
54. Zhang, C.; Nizam, R.S.; Tian, L. BIM-based investigation of total energy consumption in delivering building products. Adv. Eng.
Inform. 2018, 38, 370–380. [CrossRef]
55. Cui, Y.; Li, Q.; Yang, B.; Xiao, W.; Chen, C.; Dong, Z. Automatic 3-D Reconstruction of Indoor Environment with Mobile Laser
Scanning Point Clouds. IEEE J. Sel. Top. Appl. Earth Obs. Remote Sens. 2019, 12, 3117–3130. [CrossRef]
56. Bianconi, F.; Filippucci, M.; Buffi, A. Automated design and modeling for mass-customized housing. A web-based design space
catalog for timber structures. Autom. Constr. 2019, 103, 13–25. [CrossRef]
57. Coumans, F. Combining BIM and GIS for a sustainable society: Community-scale assessment of energy performance. GIM Int.
2018, 32, 29–31.
Sustainability 2021, 13, 4108 16 of 17

58. Enshassi, A.; AbuHamra, L. Investigación de las funciones del modelado de la información de construcción en la industria de la
construcción en Palestina. Rev. Ing. Constr. 2016, 31, 127–138. [CrossRef]
59. Minneci, G.; Schweigkofler, A.; Marcher, C.; Monizza, G.P.; Tillo, T.; Matt, D.T. Computer vision approach for indoor location
recognition within an augmented reality mobile application. In Proceedings of the Cooperative Design, Visualization, and
Engineering: 16th International Conference, CDVE 2019, Mallorca, Spain, 6–9 October 2019; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg,
Germany, 2019; Volume 11792, pp. 45–53.
60. Hossain, M.A.; Nadeem, A. Towards digitizing the construction industry: State of the art of construction 4.0. In Proceedings of
the ISEC 2019—10th International Structural Engineering and Construction Conference, Chicago, IL, USA, 20–25 May 2019.
61. Wahbeh, W.; Kunz, D.; Hofmann, J.; Bereuter, P. Digital twinning of the built environment-an interdisciplinary topic for innovation
in didactics. ISPRS Ann. Photogramm. Remote Sens. Spat. Inf. Sci. 2020, 5, 231–237. [CrossRef]
62. Dounas, T.; Lombardi, D.; Jabi, W. Framework for decentralised architectural design BIM and Blockchain integration. Int. J. Archit.
Comput. 2020, 18. [CrossRef]
63. Delbrügger, T.; Lenz, L.T.; Losch, D.; Roßmann, J. A navigation framework for digital twins of factories based on building
information modeling. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Emerging Technologies and Factory Automation,
ETFA, Limassol, Cyprus, 12–15 September 2017; pp. 1–4.
64. Lin, Y.-C.P.; Cheung, W.-F. Developing WSN/BIM-Based Environmental Monitoring Management System for Parking Garages in
Smart Cities. J. Manag. Eng. 2020, 36. [CrossRef]
65. Schweigkofler, A.; Monizza, G.P.; Domi, E.; Popescu, A.; Ratajczak, J.; Marcher, C.; Riedl, M.; Matt, D. Development of a digital
platform based on the integration of augmented reality and BIM for the management of information in construction processes. In
IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2018; Volume 540, pp. 46–55.
66. Gerhard, D.; Wolf, M.; Huxoll, J.; Vogt, O. Digital Twin Representations of Concrete Modules in an Interdisciplinary Context of
Construction and Manufacturing Industry. IFIP Adv. Inf. Commun. Technol. 2020, 594, 101–115. [CrossRef]
67. Smarsly, K.; Fitz, T.; Legatiuk, D. Metamodeling wireless communication in cyber-physical systems. In Proceedings of the CEUR
Workshop 2019, Leuven, Belgium, 30 June–3 July 2019; Volume 2394.
68. Stojanovic, V.; Trapp, M.; Richter, R.; Hagedorn, B.; Döllner, J. Towards the generation of digital twins for facility management
based on 3D point clouds. In Proceedings of the 34th Annual ARCOM Conference, ARCOM, Belfast, Northern Ireland, 3–5
September 2018; pp. 270–279.
69. Dallasega, P.; Revolti, A.; Sauer, P.C.; Schulze, F.; Rauch, E. BIM, augmented and virtual reality empowering lean construction
management: A project simulation game. Procedia Manuf. 2020, 45, 49–54. [CrossRef]
70. Hong, H.R.; Lan, C.G.; Wang, L. Design of Dynamic Building Information System Based on Structural Health Monitoring
Information. In Proceedings of the SPIE—The International Society for Optical Engineering, Online, 27 April–8 May 2020; Volume
11382.
71. Scheffer, M.; Konig, M.; Engelmann, T.; Tagliabue, L.C.; Ciribini, A.L.C.; Rinaldi, S.; Pasetti, M. Evaluation of Open Data Models
for the Exchange of Sensor Data in Cognitive Building. In Proceedings of the 2018 Workshop on Metrology for Industry 4.0 and
IoT, MetroInd 4.0 and IoT, Brescia, Italy, 16–18 April 2018; pp. 151–156.
72. Xing, K.; Kim, K.P.; Ness, D. Cloud-BIM enabled cyber-physical data and service platforms for building component reuse.
Sustainability 2020, 12, 329. [CrossRef]
73. Fitz, T.; Theiler, M.; Smarsly, K. A metamodel for cyber-physical systems. Adv. Eng. Inform. 2019, 41. [CrossRef]
74. Theiler, M.; Smarsly, K. IFC Monitor—An IFC schema extension for modeling structural health monitoring systems. Adv. Eng.
Inform. 2018, 37, 54–65. [CrossRef]
75. Ding, K.; Shi, H.; Hui, J.; Liu, Y.; Zhu, B.; Zhang, F.; Cao, W. Smart steel bridge construction enabled by BIM and Internet of
Things in industry 4.0: A framework. In Proceedings of the ICNSC 2018—15th IEEE International Conference on Networking,
Sensing and Control, Zhuhai, China, 27–29 March 2018; pp. 1–5.
76. Zulkefli, N.S.; Mohd-Rahim, F.A.; Zainon, N. Integrating building information modelling (Bim) and sustainability to greening
existing building: Potentials in malaysian construction industry. Int. J. Sustain. Constr. Eng. Technol. 2020, 11, 76–83. [CrossRef]
77. De Lange, P.; Bähre, B.; Finetti-Imhof, C.; Klamma, R.; Koch, A.; Oppermann, L. Socio-Technical challenges in the digital gap
between building information modeling and industry 4.0. In Proceedings of the CEUR Workshop, Essen, Germany, 12–13 June
2017; Volume 1854, pp. 33–46.
78. Schimanski, C.P.; Marcher, C.; Toller, G.; Pasetti Monizza, G.; Matt, D.T. Enhancing Automation in the Construction Equipment
Industry Through Implementation of BIM. In Proceedings of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Including Subseries Lecture Notes
in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics); Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2019; Volume 11792, pp. 64–73.
79. Neves, J.; Sampaio, Z.; Vilela, M. A Case Study of BIM Implementation in Rail Track Rehabilitation. Infrastructures 2019, 4, 8.
[CrossRef]
80. Li, J.; Yang, H. A research on development of construction industrialization based on BIM technology under the background of
industry 4.0. In Proceedings of the MATEC Web of Conferences, Zhengzhou, China, 28–30 November 2017; Volume 100.
81. Pulman, N. Standardising pharmaceutical builds using BIM. Clean Air Contain. Rev. 2017, 22. [CrossRef]
82. Karl, C.K.; Spengler, A.J. Einfluss der Digitalisierung auf die Kommunikation und Kooperation in der Stahlbauausführung.
Stahlbau 2018, 87, 102–107. [CrossRef]
Sustainability 2021, 13, 4108 17 of 17

83. Newman, C.; Edwards, D.; Martek, I.; Lai, J.; Thwala, W.D.; Rillie, I. Industry 4.0 deployment in the construction industry: A
bibliometric literature review and UK-based case study. Smart Sustain. Built Environ. 2020, 9. [CrossRef]
84. Da Silva, A.; Gil, M.M. Industrial processes optimization in digital marketplace context: A case study in ornamental stone sector.
Results Eng. 2020, 7. [CrossRef]
85. Daniotti, B.; Pavan, A.; Spagnolo, L.S.; Caffi, V.; Pasini, D.; Mirarchi, C. Benefits and Challenges Using BIM for Operation and
Maintenance. Springer Tracts Civ. Eng. 2020, 167–181. [CrossRef]
86. Wang, M.; Wang, C.C.; Sepasgozar, S.; Zlatanova, S. A systematic review of digital technology adoption in off-site construction:
Current status and future direction towards industry 4.0. Buildings 2020, 10, 204. [CrossRef]
87. King, M. How industry 4.0 and BIM are shaping the future of the construction environment. GIM Int. 2017, 31, 24–25.
88. Fargnoli, M.; Lombardi, M. Building information modelling (BIM) to enhance occupational safety in construction activities:
Research trends emerging from one decade of studies. Buildings 2020, 10, 98. [CrossRef]
89. Darko, A.; Chan, A.P.C.; Yang, Y.; Tetteh, M.O. Building information modeling (BIM)-based modular integrated construction risk
management—Critical survey and future needs. Comput. Ind. 2020, 123. [CrossRef]
90. Schimanski, C.P.; Monizza, G.P.; Marcher, C.; Matt, D.T. Pushing digital automation of configure-to-order services in small
and medium enterprises of the construction equipment industry: A design science research approach. Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 3780.
[CrossRef]
91. Pavan, A.; Cunico, A.; Mirarchi, C.; Mocellin, D.; Sattanino, E.; Napoleone, V. BIM electric objects plug-in for industry 4.0. Res.
Dev. 2020, 73–83. [CrossRef]
92. Al-Saeed, Y.; Edwards, D.J.; Scaysbrook, S. Automating construction manufacturing procedures using BIM digital objects (BDOs):
Case study of knowledge transfer partnership project in UK. Constr. Innov. 2020, 20, 345–377. [CrossRef]
93. Panteli, C.; Kylili, A.; Fokaides, P.A. Building information modelling applications in smart buildings: From design to commission-
ing and beyond A critical review. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 265. [CrossRef]
94. Magera, T. Socio-psychological aspects of the introduction of information modeling technologies in construction. In Proceedings
of the E3S Web of Conferences, Divnomorskoe village, Russian Federation, 9–14 September 2019; Volume 135.
95. Hosseini, M.R.; Jupp, J.; Papadonikolaki, E.; Mumford, T.; Joske, W.; Nikmehr, B. Position paper: Digital engineering and building
information modelling in Australia. Smart Sustain. Built Environ. 2020, 9. [CrossRef]
96. Pruskova, K. Beginning of Real Wide us of BIM Technology in Czech Republic. IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2019, 471, 102010.
[CrossRef]
97. Fargnoli, M.; Lleshaj, A.; Lombardi, M.; Sciarretta, N.; Di Gravio, G. A BIM-based PSS approach for the management of
maintenance operations of building equipment. Buildings 2019, 9, 139. [CrossRef]
98. Bucher, D.F.; Hall, D.M. Common data environment within the AEC ecosystem: Moving collaborative platforms beyond the open
versus closed dichotomy. In Proceedings of the EG-ICE 2020 Workshop on Intelligent Computing in Engineering, Online, 1–4
July 2020; pp. 491–500.
99. Hotový, M. Dynamic model of implementation efficiency of Building Information Modelling (BIM) in relation to the complexity
of buildings and the level of their safety. MATEC Web Conf. 2018, 146, 01010. [CrossRef]
100. Daniotti, B.; Pavan, A.; Spagnolo, L.S.; Caffi, V.; Pasini, D.; Mirarchi, C. Collaborative Working in a BIM Environment (BIM
Platform). Springer Tracts Civ. Eng. 2020, 71–102. [CrossRef]
101. Mechtcherine, V.; Nerella, V.N. 3-D-Druck mit Beton: Sachstand, Entwicklungstendenzen, Herausforderungen. Bautechnik 2018,
95, 275–287. [CrossRef]
102. Tietze, M.; Schladitz, F.; Kahnt, A.; Garibaldi, P.; Zobel, R.; Curbach, M. Future Applications in Carbon Reinforced Concrete
(CRC). In Proceedings of the IABSE Conference, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 25–27 April 2018: Engineering the Developing World—Report;
International Association for Bridge and Structural Engineering (IABSE): Nantes, France, 2018; pp. 356–357.
103. Sepasgozar, S.M.E.; Shi, A.; Yang, L.; Shirowzhan, S.; Edwards, D.J. Additive manufacturing applications for industry 4.0: A
systematic critical review. Buildings 2020, 10, 231. [CrossRef]
104. Giebat, S.; Bach, A.; Nöldgen, M.; Lim, J. Parametric, Adaptive Design and Analysis of Standardized Steel Composite Bridges. In
Proceedings of the IABSE Symposium, Nantes, France, 19–21 September 2018: Tomorrow’s Megastructures; International Association for
Bridge and Structural Engineering (IABSE): Nantes, France, 2018; pp. 103–110.
105. Ozturk, I.E.; Ozturk, G.B. 3D printing in civil engineering: A systematic literature review. In Proceedings of the ISEC 2019—10th
International Structural Engineering and Construction Conference, Chicago, IL, USA, 20–25 May 2019.
106. Krupík, P. Construction 4.0 with a focus on transport construction. In Proceedings of the International Multidisciplinary Scientific
Geo Conference Surveying Geology and Mining Ecology Management, SGEM, Albena, Bulgaria, 16–25 August 2020; Volume 20,
pp. 127–134.
107. An, J.; Wang, Z.; Jiang, T.; Chen, P.; Liang, X.; Shao, J.; Nie, J.; Xu, M.; Wang, Z.L. Reliable mechatronic indicator for self-powered
liquid sensing toward smart manufacture and safe transportation. Mater. Today 2020, 41, 10–20. [CrossRef]
108. Follini, C.; Terzer, M.; Marcher, C.; Giusti, A.; Matt, D.T. Combining the Robot Operating System with Building Information
Modeling for Robotic Applications in Construction Logistics. Mech. Mach. Sci. 2020, 84, 245–253. [CrossRef]