The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

https://www.emerald.com/insight/1726-0531.htm

Robotics and
Mapping out research focus for automation
robotics and automation research research

in construction-related studies
A bibliometric approach 1063
Douglas Omoregie Aghimien, Clinton Ohis Aigbavboa, Received 12 September 2019
Revised 4 November 2019
Ayodeji Emmanuel Oke and Wellington Didibhuku Thwala Accepted 7 December 2019
Faculty of Engineering and the Built Environment,
SARChl in Sustainable Construction Management and Leadership in the Built
Environment, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg, South Africa

Abstract
Purpose – The adoption of robotics and automation (R&A) within the construction industry has been
adjudged as slow, despite the possibility of it reducing the high risk posed on health and safety of humans by
the activities of the industry. The call for research and development in this area of technology to improve its
adoption in the delivery of construction projects is evident in past studies. Thus, this paper aims to conduct a
review of R&A in construction-related fields with a view to revealing the area of focus of past studies.
Design/methodology/approach – A bibliometric approach was adopted for this study, and data used
were gathered from the Scopus database. Keywords such as “robotics”, “automation” and “construction” were
used to extract papers from the database. VOSviewer was used to prepare a co-authorship and co-occurrence
map based on the bibliographic data gathered.
Findings – The findings revealed that focus is placed on construction automation, industrial robots and
application, robots’ systems and designs, robotics in earthworks, and robots’ control and information system.
Furthermore, currently, research focus in this area is tending towards a more digitalised application of R&A
especially in the areas of 3D manufacturing.
Research limitations/implications – The findings of this study are limited due to the use of a single
database.
Practical implications – Despite its limitations, the findings open a knowledge gap that can be explored
in developing countries particularly in Africa to improve construction delivery in the continent through R&A.
Originality/value – The study adopted the bibliometric approach in mapping out research focus in R&A –
an aspect of digital technology that has not been given considerable attention in recent bibliometric and
scientometric studies.
Keywords Robots, Additive manufacturing, Automation, Autonomous robots, Digitalization,
Construction robotics, Construction, Robotics
Paper type Literature review

Introduction
The mode of operations of most societal functions is currently being altered significantly by
advancement in technology. The advent of the fourth industrial revolution (4IR) has
contributed to this situation as people are getting more aware of the inherent benefits of the
adoption of the digital technology features of the 4IR in their everyday activities. However, Journal of Engineering, Design
and Technology
though some features of the 4IR have been adopted by different industries within most Vol. 18 No. 5, 2020
pp. 1063-1079
countries around the world, the complete adoption of these features is still a dream hoped © Emerald Publishing Limited
1726-0531
for, especially in developing countries. More specifically, the construction industry is known DOI 10.1108/JEDT-09-2019-0237
JEDT to be reluctant in the adoption of various technological innovations, while other industries
18,5 such as banking, manufacturing and retailing have been open to adopting advanced
technologies to boost their competitive advantage (Aghimien et al., 2018a; Castagnino et al.,
2016; Osunsanmi et al., 2018).
One of such 4IR feature that could be highly beneficial to the construction industry is
Robotics and Automation (R&A). Considering the highly repetitive nature of construction
1064 activities especially in developing countries where construction is still highly labour
dependent, the adoption of R&A in the delivery of construction projects can be very helpful.
Repetitive works on-site can be conducted using automation while human-resources can be
put into more meaningful use. Similarly, the construction industry has been adjudged as one
of the most dangerous industry as the safety of construction workers are not assured. Every
day construction workers execute works that put them in danger of injuries and fatalities
(Cai et al., 2018; Brace and Gibb, 2005; Lipscomb et al., 2006). The adoption of robots to
conduct these risky jobs under the control of humans can prove highly beneficial to the safe
delivery of construction projects (Bahrin et al., 2016; Cottle, 2014). Chu et al. (2013) have also
noted that traditionally, the construction industry has never favoured the use of robotics.
However, as a result of critical issues such as labour shortage and need for safety of
construction workers, the industry is beginning to buy into the concept of adopting these
robotic technologies for construction project delivery.
Despite the inherent benefits of the adoption of R&A in the delivery of construction
works, its adoption is still very low. Hasegawa (2006) has earlier noted that its adoption in
construction when compared to the manufacturing industry is still far behind. The reason
alludes to this poor adoption was that construction sites changes as projects changes,
building structure members are big and heavy, and most of the construction activities are
done outdoors (Balaguer and Abderrahim, 2008). Aside the inconsistency in construction
sites and its products, the construction industry has been noted for its inadequate
investment in research and development (R&D) (Chilipunde, 2010; Fadhil and Tan, 2001).
This is also evident in the aspect of researches relating to R&A in construction (Balaguer
and Abderrahim, 2008). This shortcoming is bound to affect the knowledge and
understanding of the existence and applicability of available R&A that can be beneficial to
the construction industry, particularly in developing countries where construction projects
are still poorly delivered. It is based on these submissions that this study set out to identify
research focus in R&A within construction-related fields. This was deemed necessary to
promote researches in the area of R&A and improve its adoption within the built
environment.

Robotics and automation in construction

According to Balaguer and Abderrahim (2008), despite being one of the oldest
industries with high impact on the economic sector, the construction industry has been
inactive in R&D fields for R&A. Traces of R&A research in the industry only began in
recent times with more interest in service robots. It was further noted that the 1990s
saw R&D in R&A in construction emanating from Japan with focus placed on
developing new robotic systems and the automation of existing machines. Today R&D
in using R&A in construction to deliver more efficient projects are emanating from
different parts of the world. Making a case for the use of R&A in construction, Cai et al.
(2018) stated that as a result of the ageing population in most countries around the
world, there is a huge decrease in the number of young workers on construction sites.
This decrease is also not unconnected with the lack of safety and fear associated with
construction particularly that of high-rise buildings. Previous studies have also
emphasised the danger of the construction work as the industry records the highest Robotics and
occurrences of injuries and fatalities on a yearly basis (Aghimien et al., 2018b; Brace automation
and Gibb, 2005; Lipscomb et al., 2006). This obvious situation of lack of labour and non-
assurance of the safety of the few available workers has led to the obvious need to
research
leverage machines and robots to replace human effort in construction (Cai et al., 2018).
Similarly, Jung et al. (2013) and Yoo et al. (2012) have noted that the construction
industry is a dangerous environment to work in, while the replacement of human effort
with robotics can help improve safety and, at the same time, increase quality and
1065
productivity.
Bahrin et al. (2016) describe industrial R&A as a key driver of the 4IR. The study
revealed that due to continuous improvement, robots are becoming more autonomous,
more flexible, and more cooperative. Rüßmann et al. (2015) also noted that robots are
becoming more autonomous, flexible, and cooperative day by day and of certain they
will interact with one another and work safely side by side with humans and learn from
them. Bahrin et al. (2016) further noted that in areas where human workers are
restricted or where using human effort can prove risky, the use of an autonomous robot
is most preferable. Aside from that, the use of robot gives more precise autonomous
production as task are completed intelligently within the given time frame while
ensuring safety, flexibility and versatility.
Balaguer and Abderrahim (2008) observed that one of the major challenges of the use of
R&A in construction is the unstructured nature of the construction environment. This
environment was described as one that:
Involves handling heavy objects, elements made with big tolerances, low level of standardisation,
medium level of industrialization and prefabrication, in addition to the intervention of numerous
non-coordinated actors (architects, builders, suppliers, etc.)
Pereira et al. (2002) in a study on the use of robots on construction sites submitted that the
use of robots will only be practically possible in a factory where pre-fabrication of building
components is carried out than on actual construction site where movements need to be
controlled. This submission has been proven somewhat inaccurate as the use of robots and
autonomous vehicles are now evident on actual construction sites as in the case of the
Crossrail project in London (Castagnino et al., 2016). Cai et al. (2018) also assessed the
application of R&A technology in high-rise building construction through a systematic
review of previously published works from 2000 to 2017. The study concluded that there are
three major perspectives to automation and robotics technology in high-rise building
construction in terms of recent R&D. These perspectives are; earth and foundation work,
superstructure erection and façade installation.
Drawing from studies conducted on the use of robotics and automation in manufacturing
and construction (Cai et al., 2018; Cusack, 1994; Mistri and Rathod, 2016; Tambi et al., 2014;
Vähä et al., 2013), an important lesson to learn is the fact that the choice to use robotics and
autonomous vehicles on a project must be decided from the early design stage of the project.
Plans must be made to inculcate its usage all through from start to completion of the project.
Taylor et al. (2003) have earlier submitted that for successful application of robotics in
construction, proper structuring of the environment and controlling of same is essential.
Kim et al. (2015) also mentioned that the use of robots will influence the design of the
building, the planning and organisation of the processes, the methods to be adopted and the
process of construction itself.
Bock (2015) in an assessment of the future of construction automation was of the
opinion that the traditional methods of delivering construction projects are no longer
JEDT efficient. It was further suggested that if construction project delivery is to improve
18,5 using R&A, then considering its application in five key aspects is necessary. These
aspects are “robot-oriented design, robotic industrialisation, construction robots, site
automation, and ambient robotics”. The application of R&A in earth and foundation
works has also been noted. Cai et al. (2018) stated that the application of R&A in earth
and foundation works in construction has been significantly covered in researches. The
1066 past interest in this aspect of construction was as a result of the repetitive nature of the
operations involved and the danger associated with foundation works especially in
building construction. In fact, Edwards and Holt (2008) have earlier noted that
excavation works possess high risk to safety on construction site as contact with live
electricity underground cables, and collapse of trenches are some occurrences.
Therefore, using robotics and automation for earth and foundation operations where
safety of workers is not assured became necessary.
The introduction of robotics in construction to a large extent helps to avoid site fatalities
which tend to occur as a result of the hazardous nature of construction sites. With robots,
human involvement is reduced and so is fatality issue (Bahrin et al., 2016). Although, some
see this technological advancement as a problem for construction workers due to the fear of
robots displacing workers on site (Oke et al., 2017), Bahrin et al. (2016) noted that the
introduction of robots in production will allow the effective use of human workers for tasks
that are more important for which they can be more productive.

Research methodology
This study set out to ascertain the major areas of concentration in published works on
R&A within construction-related fields. A bibliometric approach was adopted to
identify and map knowledge areas through the identification of research patterns. The
study based its data collection solely on previous literature within Scopus database.
Scopus has been identified as one of the major databases that cover different scientific
fields, and it is most frequently used by researchers in gathering literature (Guz and
Rushchitsky, 2009). Earlier, Web of Science (ISI) was considered as the major database
for scientific research. However, since its introduction in 2004 by Elsevier Science,
Scopus has rapidly become a leading choice for literature search and has been adopted
in most review works (Chadegani et al., 2013; Vieira and Gomes, 2009). Hong et al. (2012)
and Hosseini et al. (2018) noted that Scopus has wider coverage when compared to other
databases. Also, Olawumi et al. (2017) have earlier noted that no clear distinction exists
between Scopus and Web of Science, as they are both considered as the two major
science research databases, and in some cases, there exist considerable overlap in their
records. This current study focused on research works from Scopus which is a more
recent and fast-growing database recognised among scientific researchers as observed
by Chadegani et al. (2013).
The search for relevant literature focused on published journal articles and
conference proceedings within construction-related study areas such as engineering,
energy, material science and environmental science. The choice of selecting journal
articles was premised on the fact that articles from journals are considered more
reliable sources of knowledge and are deemed more concise and detailed than other
sources of information (Ramos-Rodríguez and Ruíz-Navarro, 2004; Zheng et al., 2016).
Similarly, Webster and Watson (2002) have earlier recognised the importance of
conference proceedings as reliable sources of literature review, hence their inclusion in
this study. A similar approach was taken by Vuksic et al. (2018) while conducting a
preliminary literature review on digital transformation case studies. The key search
words adopted were “Robotics”, “Automation”, AND “Construction”. Publications Robotics and
having these search words in their title, abstracts and keywords were extracted. The automation
time component for this study was a 10 years’ time frame which spans from 2009 to
2019. This time frame was geared towards understanding the most current robotics
research
issues within the study area. The literature search was conducted on September 2019
with initial search producing 729 papers with the stated keywords. Since the initial
extracted 729 covered a wide range of fields, most of which are not construction-related,
and some published in languages other than English, the careful refining of these 1067
extractions using the earlier mentioned construction-related field, language of
publication (English only) and publication type (published journal articles and
conference proceedings) was necessary. After careful refining, a total of 91 articles were
extracted. Figure 1 shows the framework adopted for the research.
Results are presented based on the number of publications per year, the number of
publications per country, top-cited documents, the number of publications per document
sources, publication per authors, co-authorship and keywords co-occurrence network. The
co-occurrence network maps were developed using VOSviewer – a literature review
software which offers the basic functionality needed for visualising bibliometric networks in
the easiest way possible. The software displays only the nodes in a bibliometric network
and in its visualisation. By providing distance-based visualisations rather than graph-based
ones, VOSviewer is especially suitable for picturing larger networks (Van Eck and
Waltman, 2014).

Figure 1.
Research framework
JEDT Result and discussion
18,5 Publications per year
A total of 91 articles on R&A were extracted, 49 of which came from conferences, while the
remaining 42 were journal articles. Based on the number of publications per year, result in
Figure 2 shows a rise in the number of publications on R&A in construction-related fields
from 2009 to 2012 with 5 publications in 2009 rising to 11 publications in 2012. However, a
1068 drop in the number of publications can be seen from 2013 through to 2015. From then on,
there was a rise and fall in the number of publications in this area with 2018 experiencing
the highest number of 18 published papers. It is important to note that despite the launch of
the whole concept of Industry 4.0 which was first established at the Hannover Fair in 2011 in
Germany (Sung, 2018) and has since become a topical issue in most industries due to its
focus on the creation of a smart environment (Crnjac et al., 2017) through the use of digital
technologies, research focus on the adoption and implementation of R&A within the built
environment is still low. The finding is in contrast with the findings of Reis et al. (2018) and
Vuksic et al. (2018) that discovered increase in literature on digital technologies and
transformation from 2016 to 2018. Reason for this disparity can be attributed to the fact that
while the previous studies assessed digital technologies, this current study is specific to
R&A.

Publications per country

In terms of the number of studies per country of origin, the result revealed that some articles
have more than one country in their title or affiliation hence there exist some overlap.
Similarly, some countries have produced just one article within the 10 years span and as
such were eliminated base on the assumption that they might just exist as possible overlap.
Thus, only countries with at least two research articles originating from them were
considered. Figure 3 shows only countries with at least three documents, and the USA tops
the list with a total of 18 research papers with 90 citations. This is followed by China (14
papers, 9 citations), South Korea (10 papers, 113 citations), Germany (7 papers, 58 citations),
UK (5 papers, 21 citations), Canada (5 papers, 37 citations), Finland (5 papers, 47 citations),
Japan (4 papers, 10 citations), Switzerland (3 papers, 37 citations), Hong Kong (3 papers, 0
citation) and Poland (3 papers, 15 citations). Other countries with 2 publications include
India, Italy, Malaysia, Portugal, Romania, Russian Federation, Singapore, Spain, Taiwan
and United Arab Emirates. This finding further affirms Vuksic et al. (2018) submission
which noted that research relating to the use of digital technologies such as R&A are more
from European countries (such as Germany and Baltic), the USA and Canada. Findings of
this study are also consistent with the Institute of Management Development (IMD) “world
digital competitiveness” ranking which revealed that the top ten most digitally competitive
countries in the world are the USA, Canada, Hong Kong and seven European countries

16 15
14
Number of publications

12 11 11
10
10
8 9
6 7
6 5
6 6
4 5
2
Figure 2.
0
Number of 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
publications per year
Year of Publication
 Robotics and
automation
research

1069

Figure 3.
Number of
publications per
country

[Institute of Management Development (IMD), 2018]. A quick look at the figure shows that
no Africa country can be found in this area of research. This shows a knowledge gap in the
area of digital technology specifically on R&A in Africa.

Publications per document source

The number of extracted papers per source title was evaluated. The 91 extracted publications
were published in 47 different journals and conference proceedings out of which 35 have only
one publication within the assessed time frame. The result in Table I shows only those
sources with at least two published papers on R&A. Automation in construction topped the
list with 17 publications and 226 citations. This is not surprising as the journal focuses on
researches that investigate the use of information technology for design, engineering,
construction technologies, management and maintenance of construction facilities. This is
followed by Lecture note in Electrical Engineering (7 papers, 7 citations), Institute of

Source title Documents Citations

Automation in Construction 17 226

Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering 7 7
IEEE systems journal 6 21
Applied Mechanics and Materials 5 4
Construction Research Congress 2018 4 3
IFAC Proceedings Volumes (IFAC-Papers Online) 4 9
Procedia Engineering 3 10
IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering 2 1
Journal of Construction Engineering and Management 2 27 Table I.
Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology 2 18 Number of
Journal of Ship Production 2 2 publications per
SPE/IADC Drilling Conference, Proceedings 2 14 source
JEDT Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) systems journal (6 papers, 21 citations) and
18,5 Applied Mechanics and Materials (5 papers, citations).

Most cited publications

To fully grasp the understanding of researches in R&A, analysing the extracted papers
to see the most cited documents and their areas of concentration was necessary. Out of
1070 the 91 extracted papers, only 15 have been cited at least ten times as seen on Table II.
From the table, it is evident that most of these publications focused on construction
automation, additive manufacturing/3D printing, and robotics in earthworks. Also,
most of these studies were experimental and case study in nature. Reason for this can

Source Title Citations Method Focus

Bock (2015) The future of construction automation: 36 Review Construction

Technological disruption and the upcoming automation
ubiquity of robotics
Seo et al. Task planner design for an automated 29 Case study Robotics in
(2011) excavation system earthworks
Koivumäki High-performance nonlinear motion/force 27 Experimental Control systems
and Mattila controller design for redundant hydraulic
(2015) construction crane automation
Shahandashti Data-fusion approaches and applications for 25 Review Data fusion/
et al. (2011) construction engineering intelligent systems
Willmann Robotic timber construction - Expanding 23 Case study Additive
et al. (2016) additive fabrication to new dimensions manufacturing
Chu et al. Robot-based construction automation: An 23 Case study Construction
(2013) application to steel beam assembly (Part I) automation
Edwards and Construction plant and equipment 18 Review Construction plant
Holt (2009) management research: Thematic review and equipment
Jung et al. Robot-based construction automation: An 16 Case study Construction
(2013) application to steel beam assembly (Part II) automation
Garcia de Productivity of digital fabrication in 14 Case study Additive
Soto et al. construction: Cost and time analysis of a manufacturing/
(2018) robotically built wall walling
partitioning
Son et al. Trend analysis of research and 14 Review R&A Research and
(2010) development on automation and robotics Development
technology in the construction industry
de Wardt Drilling systems automation - Preparing for 13 Review Automation
et al. (2013) the big jump forward adoption
Kuenzel et al. SmartSite: Intelligent and autonomous 12 Case study Artificial
(2016) environments, machinery, and processes to intelligence in
realize smart road construction projects R&A
Davtalab Perspectives on a BIM-integrated software 10 Experimental BIM and additive
et al. (2018) platform for robotic construction through manufacturing
Contour Crafting
Yoo et al. Genetic algorithm-based steel erection 10 Case study Construction
(2012) planning model for a construction automation
automation system
Table II. Myung et al. Robotic SHM and model-based positioning 10 Experimental Construction
Top cited (2012) system for monitoring and construction automation
publications automation
be attributed to the fact that R&A in construction is still at its early stages as observed Robotics and
by Chu et al. (2013) and Garcia de Soto et al. (2018), understanding the various means of automation
adopting the concept within the built environment is paramount. This can only be research
achieved through experiment and case studies in a bid to get the right blend for the
construction industry.

Publication per author and co-authorship network 1071

In terms of authorships, the assessed 91 documents had 289 authors. This includes both
the lead authors and their collaborators. With the minimum number of documents per
author set at 2, only 18 authors were revealed. From Table III it can been seen that the
top authors that have written in the area of R&A in the built environment and are well-
cited are Chu, B. (3papers, 47 citations), Hong, D. (3papers, 47 citations), Jung, K.
(3papers, 47 citations) and Tiezer, J. (3papers, 41 citations). It can also be seen that while
Bock only have only two documents, those documents have been cited 37 times. The
overlay visualisation co-authorship network on Figure 4 shows seven clusters of
co-authorship. Tiezer, J, Lu, M., Shen, X, Chu, B., Hong D., Jung, K., were the earliest set
of authors that started publishing in R&A. These co-authorships can be seen in the
deep blue colour on the map and existed from 2012 to 2014. However, the most recent
authors publishing in R&A are Agusti-Juan, I., Gracia de Soto, B., Hunhevics, J., and
Joss, S. Their publication is from 2018 to date and can be seen in the yellow cluster in
the centre of the map.

Authors Affiliation Documents Citations

Chu, B. Kumoh National Institute of Technology, Yangho-dong, Gumi-si, 3 47

Gyeongbuk, 730-701, Republic of Korea
Hong, D. Korea University, 5-1, Anam-dong, Sungbuk-gu, Seoul, 136-701, 3 47
Republic of Korea
Jung, K. Korea University, 5-1, Anam-dong, Sungbuk-gu, Seoul, 136-701, 3 47
Republic of Korea
Tiezer, J. Ed. Züblin AG, Germany 3 41
Agusti-Juan, I. University College London, London, UK 2 14
Gracia de New York University Abu Dhabi United Arab Emirates 2 14
Soto, B.
Hunhevics, J. Institute of Construction and Infrastructure Management, ETH 2 14
Zurich,Switzerland
Joss, S. Gahler und partner AG, Ennetbaden, Switzerland 2 14
Bock, T. Technical University, Germany 2 37
Kamat, V.R. Univ. of Michigan, 2350 Hayward St., 2105 GG Brown Bldg., Ann 2 5
Arbor, MI 48109-2125
Lundeen, K.M. Univ. of Michigan, 2350 Hayward St., 2105 GG Brown Bldg., Ann 2 5
Arbor, MI 48109-2125
Mcgee, W. Univ. of Michigan, 2000 Bonisteel Blvd., Ann Arbor, MI 48109-2069 2 5
Menassa, C.C. Univ. of Michigan, 2350 Hayward St., 2105 GG Brown Bldg., Ann 2 5
Arbor, MI 48109-2125
Lu, M. University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB T6G 2W2, Canada 2 4
Shen, X. University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB T6G 2W2, Canada 2 4 Table III.
Chen, I.M. Nanyang Technological University, Singapore 2 3 Number of
Kayacan, E. Aarhus University, Aarhus, 8200, Denmark 2 3 publications per
Tiong, I. K Nanyang Technological University, Singapore 2 3 author
JEDT
18,5

1072

Figure 4.
Overlay visualisation
co-authorship
network

Research focus base on co-occurring keywords

In creating a co-occurrence map based on the bibliographic data gathered, it is important to
set the minimum number of co-occurrence for the keywords to be extracted. This is
important for proper clustering of keywords into themes that can be used to explain the
areas of concentration for these past studies. While the Vosviewer predefined minimum
number of co-occurring keywords is 5, Saka and Chan (2019) earlier adopted a minimum of
two co-occurrence. For this current study, it was observed that adopting the default
minimum of 5 will give very scanty output while adopting 2 or 3 gave significant number of
repeated keywords. Hence, a co-occurrence minimum number of 4 was adopted and full
counting was used. This implies that for a keyword to be extracted, it must have at least 4
co-occurrences in the author and source indexed keywords. The analysis revealed a total
number of 1217 of Keywords for all 91 extracted publications. Out of these keywords, 41 met
the threshold of 4 co-occurrences and were further grouped into 5 clusters. It is important to
note that the closer the keywords to each other the higher their co-occurrence (Van Eck and
Waltman, 2014). Figure 5 shows the network visualisation map for the 41 co-occurring
keyword and their 5 different clusters. At the centre of it is the keywords “Robotics” and
“Automation” to which all other keywords are linked.
(1) Cluster 1 – Construction Automation: is the red region on the map which has 14
co-occurring keywords. Significant of these with strong links to the main keyword
in the centre (Robotics and Automation) are construction automation, construction
industry, construction, machinery, productivity, architectural design and walls
(structural partitioning). Others include 3D printing, 3D printers, technology, cost,
project management, scanning, and research. This cluster can subsequently be
seen as keywords relating Construction Automation. Although Garcia de Soto et al.
(2018) have earlier noted that despite the popularity of automation in other
industries since the 1970s, the construction industry is still lagging in exploring
the potential benefits inherent in automation, research reveals that significant
consideration is being given to construction automation as most studies are
beginning to beam their searchlights in this direction. This confirms the
 Robotics and
automation
research

1073

Figure 5.
Network
visualisation map for
co-occurring
keywords

submission of Bock (2015) which noted that construction automation is still at its
early stages in the construction industry, however, it is expected that this will
improve as time goes by and as R&D in this area are improved. Also, in a bid to
understand the application of R&A in construction and its inherent benefits,
several studies have placed focus on issues surrounding R&A adoption, the
different areas of its applications, and the likes. Ruggiero et al. (2016) assessed
robotics in construction and highlighted its application in terms of 3D printing,
drones for monitoring and the likes. The role of robotics in the successful
attainment of 3D printing/additive manufacturing has also been pinpointed by
several studies (Garcia de Soto et al., 2018; Hager et al., 2016; Nadal et al., 2017;
Sobotka and Pacewicz, 2016).
(2) Cluster 2 – Industrial robots and application: represented in green has nine
keywords and these are industrial robots, machine design, welding, construction
robotics, intelligent robots, kinematics, sensors, robot’s application and computer-
aided design. This cluster is therefore seen to consider issues relating to Industrial
robots and application. Bahrin et al. (2016) have earlier noted the inherent benefits
of industrial robots to Malaysia and concluded that the development of R&A has
the capability to lead the country towards 4IR through initiatives by government
and industry player alike. Bock (2015) also recognised the importance of industrial
robots for proper improved construction project delivery using R&A. Ruggiero
et al. (2016) assessed robotics in construction and highlighted its application in
terms of welding, lifting etc. Similarly, Shahandashti et al. (2011) also assessed the
application of data-fusion for intelligent systems needed for construction
engineering.
(3) Cluster 3 – Robots systems and designs: is represented in blue and has eight
keywords. These are robots, robot programming, manufacture, application
programmes, computer vision, robotic assembly, construction sites and
JEDT construction applications. Critically evaluating these terms shows that they all
18,5 relate to the Robots systems and designs. Studies surrounding the programming of
robots for it to carry out the function for which it has been designed are evident.
For example, von Essen et al. (2014) assessed some robotics software and models
needed for automated handling of teleoperated and automated sequences. In the
same vein, Davtalab et al. (2018) conducted an experiment on the possible
1074 integration of building information modelling (BIM) software platform in 3D
manufacturing. Also, Kuenzel et al. (2016) conducted a study on intelligent and
autonomous machines and process with emphasis on some software agents and
real-time sensory input needed for automated road construction.
(4) Cluster 4 – Robotics in Earthworks: is represented in yellow with six keywords
which are automation, excavation, excavators, robotic excavator, construction
equipment and three dimensional. This cluster subsequently named Robotics in
Earthworks. The application of R&A in earthworks has also been noted in past
literature and this was as a result of the repetitiveness of works in this aspect of
construction and its associated danger (Cai et al., 2018; Edwards and Holt, 2008).
This finding is in tandem with Cai et al. (2018) which earlier noted that past
literature on R&A in high-rise construction is mostly related to earth and
foundation works. Similarly, looking at the extracted co-occurring keywords, it can
be deduced that existing literature believes certain construction equipment are
automatic equipment use is handling repetitive and complicated jobs that cannot
be done manually. In fact, Moolam (2013) noted that robots are important in
construction automation as they help humans in the tedious and hazardous work
environment, and at the same time ensures increased productivity. Seo et al. (2011)
also reported that a Korean research consortium developed a robotic excavator
that has the capability to model sites. This was done in a bid to improve the
productivity, quality, and safety of conventional earthwork.
(5) Cluster 5 – Robots control and information system: has four keywords which are
robotics, digital storage, control systems and manipulators. These keywords can
be seen to relate to Robots control and information system. This cluster is indicated
with the purple colour on the map. Through proper control systems and
information programming, robots can be autonomous. Autonomous robots have
been described as those sets of robots that can perform their task with a high
degree of independence. They are considered as subfield of artificial intelligence,
robotics and information engineering (Information Engineering, 2018). It has been
observed that following constant improvement, robots are becoming more
autonomous, more flexible and more cooperative, and soon they will be able to
interact with one another and work safely side by side with humans and learn from
them (Bahrin et al., 2016; Rüßmann et al., 2015). In terms of information systems,
Davtalab et al. (2018) conducted an experiment on the possible integration of BIM
software platform in 3D manufacturing. At the end of the study, a “Planning and
Operations Control Software for Automated Construction” was developed for a
complete integration of BIM and 3D manufacturing through robotics construction.

Research focus base on the year of publication

Figure 6 shows the overlay visualisation network map for the co-occurring keywords in the
different year of publication. With a minimum of four occurrences, it was observed that from
2012 up until 2014 research focusing on robotics for earthworks, and industrial robots and
 Robotics and
automation
research

1075

Figure 6.
Overlay visualisation
map for co-occurring
keywords

its application related issues were more evident. Keywords evident in this period include
machine design, three-dimensional, welding, robots, robotics, automation, industrial robots,
intelligent robots, exaction, excavators, robotic excavator, construction equipment,
kinematics and machinery. These keywords are depicted in purple and blue clusters of the
map. From 2014 to 2016, research focus placed emphasis on issues such as construction
automation, construction industry, robot programming, construction application and cost.
These are indicated in green on the map. However, publications from 2017 till date has seen
more focus of R&A on productivity, construction robotics, architectural design, 3D printing,
3D printers, walls (structural partitioning) and scanning. These identified keywords are
more design and productivity-oriented with emphasis on 3D manufacturing for construction
project delivery. Thus, it can be deduced that as technological advancement, and the
clamour for more digitalised construction increases, research focus is being affected. A
significant example is the work of Davtalab et al. (2018) which probed into the integration of
BIM software platform in 3D manufacturing and observed that 3D printing is currently
promoting the use of robotics construction in the construction industry. Nadal et al. (2017)
however noted that issues surrounding optimisation of material and procedures have
created a chokehold on the increasing adoption of 3D printing for construction. Significant
issues exist in the area of specific knowledge needed, cost of investment and the lack of
unequivocal guidelines needed. These areas need to be given substantial attention as studies
on construction robotics in 3D printing continue to emerge.

Conclusion
This study sets out to identify research focus in R&A within construction-related fields
through a bibliometric approach. Based on extracted studies published within a 10-year
period and indexed in the Scopus database, the study has been able to identify the key
area of concentration in research relating to R&A within the built environment. Based
on the findings, it can be concluded that research publication on R&A is low with 2018
experiencing the highest number of publications of 15. This is worrisome considering
the need for an in-depth understanding of the concept of R&A in the built environment
and what the construction industry stands to gain from its holistic adoption. The
JEDT countries with the most publications in R&A are USA, China, South Korea, Germany,
18,5 UK, Canada and Finland with at least five publications. There is no evidence of
publication in this area from Africa. This reveals a knowledge gap that can be explored
in other to improve construction delivery in the continent. Based on the different
clusters extracted, research on R&A within construction-related fields have placed
focus on the use of construction automation, industrial robots and application, robots’
1076 systems and designs, robotics in earthworks and robots control and information
system. Furthermore, current research focus in this area is tending towards a more
digitalised application of R&A especially in the areas of 3 D manufacturing within the
construction industry and the built environment at large.
This study contributes to the body of knowledge as it reveals areas wherein research
focus has been placed in issues relating to R&A within construction-related fields. Its
findings have also mapped out possible areas for research in R&A in construction,
particularly in African countries were lack of literature in this regard exist. However, while
this study contributes immensely to the body of existing literature on R&A, care must be
taken in generalising its results as data used were gathered from only Scopus database.
Although significant overlap is believed to exist between Scopus and other databases,
further studies can be conducted using other databases or the combination of several ones to
compare results and have a broader view of the research topic through collection of larger
sample size than what is obtainable in this current study.

References
Aghimien, D.O., Oke, A.E., Aigbavboa, C.O. and Ontlametse, K. (2018b), “Factors contributing to
disabling injuries and fatalities in the South African construction industry”, Joint CIB W099 and
TG59 International Safety, Health, and People in Construction Conference, held in Salvador, in
Brazil in 1st-3rd of August 2018, pp. 337-345.
Aghimien, D.O., Aigbavboa, C.O. and Oke, A.E. (2018a), “Digitalisation for effective construction
project delivery in South Africa”, Contemporary Construction Conference: Dynamic and
Innovative Built Environment (CCC2018), Coventry United Kingdom, 5-6 July 2018
pp. 3-10.
Bahrin, M.A.K., Othman, M.F., Nor, N.H. and Azli, M.F.T. (2016), “Industry 4.0: a review on industrial
automation and robotic”, Jurnal Teknologi (Sciences and Engineering), pp. 137-143.
Balaguer, C. and Abderrahim, M. (2008), “Trends in robotics and automation in construction”, Robotics
and Automation in Construction, In-Tech, Croatia, pp. 1-20.
Bock, T. (2015), “The future of construction automation: technological disruption and the upcoming
ubiquity of robotics”, Automation in Construction, Vol. 59, pp. 113-121.
Brace, C.L. and Gibb, A.G.F. (2005), “A health management process for the construction industry”, in
Haupt, T. and Smallwood, J. (Eds), Rethinking and Revitalizing Construction Safety, Health and
Quality, Port Elizabeth.
Cai, S., Ma, Z., Skibniewski, M., Guo, J. and Yun, L. (2018), “Application of automation and robotics
technology in High-Rise building construction: an overview”, 35th International Symposium on
Automation and Robotics in Construction (ISARC 2018), pp. 1-8.
Castagnino, S. Rothballer, C. and Gerbert, P. (2016), “What’s the future of the construction industry?”,
World Economic Forum, available at: www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/04/building-in-the-fourth-
industrial-revolution/
Chadegani, D.A.A., Salehi, H., Yunus, M.M., Farhadi, H., Fooladi, M., Farhadi, M. and Ebrahim, N.A.
(2013), “A comparison between two main academic literature collections: web of science and
scopus”, Asian Social Science, Vol. 5, pp. 18-26.
Chilipunde, R.L. (2010), “Constraints and challenges faced by small, medium and micro enterprise Robotics and
contractors in Malawi”, A Treatise Submitted to the Faculty of Engineering, the Built
Environment and Information Technology, Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University, School of
automation
the Built Environment. research
Chu, B., Jung, K., Lim, M. and Hong, D. (2013), “Robot-based construction automation: an application to
steel beam assembly (part I)”, Automation in Construction, Vol. 32, pp. 46-61.
Cottle, E. (2014), “The transformation of the construction sector in South Africa since apartheid: Social
inequality and labour”, Unpublished thesis. State University of Campinas. 1077
Crnjac, M., Veža, I. and Banduka, N. (2017), “From concept to the introduction of industry 4.0”,
International Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 21-30.
Cusack, M. (1994), “Automation and robotics the interdependence of design and construction systems”,
Industrial Robot: An International Journal, Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 10-14.
Davtalab, O., Kazemian, A. and Khoshnevis, B. (2018), “Perspectives on a BIM-integrated software
platform for robotic construction through contour crafting”, Automation in Construction,
Vol. 89, pp. 13-23.
De Wardt, J.P., Behounek, M., Chapman, C. and Putra, D. (2013), “Drilling systems automation –
preparing for the big jump forward”, SPE/IADC Drilling conference, 5-7 March,
Amsterdam.
Edwards, D. and Holt, G. (2009), “Construction plant and equipment management research: thematic
review”, Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology, Vol. 7 No. 2, pp. 186-206.
Edwards, D.J. and Holt, G.D. (2008), “Protecting capital investment in plant and equipment: case study
observations of post-theft recovery”, Journal of Financial Management of Property and
Construction, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 96-110.
Fadhil, M.D. and Tan, F.H. (2001), “Developing world class construction companies in Singapore”,
Construction Management and Economics, Vol. 19 No. 6, pp. 591-599.
Garcia de Soto, B., Agusti-Juan, I., Hunhevics, J., Joss, S., Graser, K., Habert, G. and Adey, T. (2018),
“Productivity of digital fabrication in construction: cost and time analysis of a robotically built
wall”, Automation in Construction, Vol. 92, pp. 297-311.
Guz, A.N. and Rushchitsky, J.J. (2009), “Scopus: a system for the evaluation of scientific journals”,
International Applied Mechanics, Vol. 45 No. 4, pp. 351-362.
Hager, I., Golonka, A. and Putanowicz, R. (2016), “3D printing of buildings and building components as
the future of sustainable construction?”, Procedia Engineering, Vol. 151, pp. 292-299.
Hasegawa, Y. (2006), “Construction automation and robotics in the 21st century”, 23rd International
Symposium on Robotics and Automation in Construction (ISARC’06).
Hong, Y., Chan, D.W.M., Chan, A.P.C. and Yeung, J.F.Y. (2012), “Critical analysis of partnering
research trend in construction journals”, Journal of Management in Engineering, Vol. 28
No. 2, pp. 82-95.
Hosseini, M.R., Maghrebi, M., Akbarnezhad, A., Martek, I. and Arashpour, M. (2018), “Analysis of
citation networks in building information modeling”, Research. J. Constr. Eng. Manag, Vol. 144
No. 8, pp. 1-13.
Information Engineering (2018), “Autonomous robots”, available at: www.robots.ox.ac.uk
Institute of Management Development (IMD) (2018), “World digital competitiveness ranking”, available at:
www.imd.org/wcc/world-competitiveness-center-rankings/world-digital-competitiveness-rankings-
2018/
Jung, K., Chu, B. and Hong, D. (2013), “Robot-based construction automation: an application to steel
beam assembly (part II)”, Automation in Construction, Vol. 32, pp. 62-79.
Kim, M.J., Chi, H., Wang, X. and Ding, L. (2015), “Automation and robotics in construction and civil
engineering”, Journal of Intelligent and Robotic Systems, Vol. 79 Nos 3/4, pp. 347-350.
JEDT Koivumäki, J. and Mattila, J. (2015), “High performance nonlinear motion/force controller design for
redundant hydraulic construction crane automation”, Automation in Construction, Vol. 51,
18,5 pp. 7-77.
Kuenzel, R., Teizer, J., Mueller, M. and Blickle, A. (2016), “SmartSite: intelligent and autonomous
environments, machinery, and processes to realize smart road construction projects”,
Automation in Construction, Vol. 71, pp. 21-33.
1078 Lipscomb, H.J., Dement, J.M., Nolan, J. and Patterson, D. (2006), “Nail gun injuries in apprentice
carpenters: risk factors and control measures”, American Journal of Industrial Medicine, Vol. 49
No. 7, pp. 505-513.
Mistri, P.S. and Rathod, H.A. (2016), “Remedies over barriers of automation and robotics for
construction industry”, International Journal of Advanced Research in Engineering, Science and
Management, Vol. 21 No. 3, pp. 1-4.
Moolam, R.K. (2013), “Dynamic modeling and control of flexible manipulators”, Unpublished PhD
thesis submitted to the Department of Mechanical Engineering, Politecnico Di Milano.
Myung, H., Jung, J. and Jeon, H. (2012), “Robotic SHM and model-based positioning system for
monitoring and construction automation”, Advances in Structural Engineering, Vol. 15 No. 6,
pp. 943-954.
Nadal, A., Pavon, J. and Liébana, O. (2017), “3D printing for construction: a procedural and material-
based approach”, Informes de la Construccion, Vol. 69 No. 546, pp. 1-10.
Oke, A.E., Aigbvaboa, C.O. and Mabena, S. (2017), “Effects of automation on construction industry
performance”, Advances in Engineering Research (AER), Vol. 102, pp. 370-374.
Olawumi, T.O., Chan, D.W.M. and Wong, J.K.W. (2017), “Evolution in the intellectual structure of BIM
research: a bibliometric analysis”, Journal of Civil Engineering and Management, Vol. 23 No. 8,
pp. 1060-1081.
Osunsanmi, T.O., Aigbavboa, C.O. and Oke, A.E. (2018), “Construction 4.0: the future of South Africa
construction industry”, World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology International
Journal of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 206-212.
Pereira, T., Santos, C. and Pires, N. (2002), “The use of robots in the construction industry”, IAHS World
Congress on Housing, University of Coimbra – Faculty of Sciences and Technology Department of
Civil Engineering - Constructions Laboratory Portugal, pp. 1-10.
Ramos-Rodríguez, A.-R. and Ruíz-Navarro, J. (2004), “Changes in the intellectual structure of strategic
management research: a bibliometric study of the strategic management journal, 1980-2000”,
Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 25 No. 10, pp. 981-1004.
Reis, J., Amorim, N. and Matos, P. (2018), “Transformation: a literature review and guidelines for future
in trends and advances in information systems and technologies. WorldCIST’18”, Advances in
Intelligent Systems and Computing, Vol. 745, pp. 411-421.
Ruggiero, A., Salvo, S. and St. Laurent, C. (2016), Robotics in construction, Worcester Polytechnic
Institute.
Rüßmann, M., Lorenz, M., Gerbert, P. and Waldner, M. (2015), “Industry 4.0: The Future of Productivity
and Growth in Manufacturing Industries”, Boston Consulting Group, 2015 Report.
Saka, A.B. and Chan, D.W.M. (2019), “A scientometric review and metasynthesis of building
information modelling (BIM) research in Africa”, Buildings, Vol. 9 No. 85, pp. 1-21, doi: 10.3390/
buildings9040085
Seo, J., Lee, S., Kim, J. and Kim, S. (2011), “Task planner design for an automated excavation system”,
Automation in Construction, Vol. 20 No. 7, pp. 954-966. .
Shahandashti, S.M., Razavi, S.N. and Soibelman, L. (2011), “Data-fusion approaches and applications
for construction engineering”, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, Vol. 137
No. 10, pp. 863-869.
Sobotka, A. and Pacewicz, K. (2016), “Building site organization with 3D technology in use”, Procedia Robotics and
Engineering, Vol. 161, pp. 407-413.
automation
Son, H., Kim, C., Kim, H., Han, S.H. and Kim, M.K. (2010), “Trend analysis of research and development
on automation and robotics technology in the construction industry”, KSCE Journal of Civil research
Engineering, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 131-139.
Sung, T.K. (2018), “Industry 4.0: a Korea perspective”, Technological Forecasting and Social Change,
Vol. 132, pp. 40-45.
Tambi, A.S., Kolhe, A.R. and Saharkar, U. (2014), “Remedies over the obstacles in implementing
1079
automation in indian infrastructure projects”, International Journal of Research in Engineering
and Technology, Vol. 3 No. 5, pp. 606-608.
Taylor, M., Wamuziri, S. and Smith, I. (2003), “Automated construction in Japan”, Proceedings of the
Institution of Civil Engineers – Civil Engineering, Vol. 156 No. 1, pp. 34-41.
Vähä, P., Heikkilä, T. and Kilpeläinen, P. (2013), “Extending automation of building construction –
survey on potential sensor technologies and robotic applications”, Automation in Construction,
Vol. 36, pp. 168-178.
Van Eck, N.J. and Waltman, L. (2014), “Visualizing bibliometric networks”, in Ding, Y., Rousseau, R.
and Wolfram, D. (Eds), Measuring Scholarly Impact: Methods and Practice, pp. 285-320.
Vieira, E.S. and Gomes, J.A.N.F. (2009), “A comparison of scopus and web of science for a typical
university”, Scientometrics, Vol. 81 No. 2, pp. 587-600.
von Essen, M., Hirvonen, J., Kuikka, S. and Kallio, P. (2014), “Robotic software frameworks and
software component models in the development of automated handling of individual natural
fibers”, Journal of Micro-Bo Robotics, Vol. 9, pp. 29-45.
Vuksic, V.B., Invansic, L. and Vugec, D.S. (2018), “A preliminary literature review on digital
transformation case studies”, Conference Proceedings, Rome Italy Sep 17-18, 2018, 20 (9) Part
VIII, 952-957.
Webster, J. and Watson, R. (2002), “The past to prepare for the future: writing a literature”, MIS
Quarterly, Vol. 26 No. 2, pp. 13-23.
Willmann, J., Knauss, M., Bonwetsch, T., Apolinarska, A., Gramazio, F. and Kohler, M. (2016), “Robotic
timber construction – expanding additive fabrication to new dimensions”, Automation in
Construction, Vol. 61, pp. 16-23.
Yoo, W.S., Lee, H.-J., Kim, D.-I., Kang, K.-I. and Cho, H. (2012), “Genetic algorithm-based steel erection
planning model for a construction automation system”, Automation in Construction, Vol. 24,
pp. 30-39.
Zheng, X., Le, Y., Chan, A.P.C., Hu, Y. and Li, Y. (2016), “Review of the application of social network
analysis (SNA) in construction project management research”, International Journal of Project
Management, Vol. 34 No. 7, pp. 1214-1225.

Corresponding author
Douglas Omoregie Aghimien can be contacted at: [email protected]

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: [email protected]