Next Article in Journal
MaxEnt Modeling for Predicting the Current and Future Potential Geographical Distribution of Quercus libani Olivier
Next Article in Special Issue
Identifying the Major Construction Wastes in the Building Construction Phase Based on Life Cycle Assessments
Previous Article in Journal
Assessment of Power Generation Using Biogas from Landfills in an Equatorial Tropical Context
Previous Article in Special Issue
Development of a BIM-Based Web Tool as a Material and Component Bank for a Sustainable Construction Industry
Review

BIM-Based End-of-Lifecycle Decision Making and Digital Deconstruction: Literature Review

1
Faculty of Science, Technology and Medicine, Campus Kirchberg, University of Luxembourg, 1359 Luxembourg, Luxembourg
2
Faculty of Science, Technology and Medicine, Campus Belval, University of Luxembourg, 4365 Esch-sur-Alzette, Luxembourg
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2020, 12(7), 2670; https://doi.org/10.3390/su12072670
Received: 29 January 2020 / Revised: 18 March 2020 / Accepted: 23 March 2020 / Published: 28 March 2020
This article is the second part of a two-part study, which explored the extent to which Building Information Modelling (BIM) is used for End-of-Lifecycle (EoL) scenario selection to minimise the Construction and Demolition Waste (CDW). The conventional literature review presented here is based on the conceptual landscape that was obtained from the bibliometric and scientometric analysis in the first part of the study. Seven main academic research directions concerning the BIM-based EoL domain were found, including social and cultural factors, BIM-based Design for Deconstruction (DfD), BIM-based deconstruction, BIM-based EoL within LCA, BIM-aided waste management, Material and Component Banks (M/C Banks), off-site construction, interoperability and Industry Foundation Classes (IFC). The analysis highlights research gaps in the path of raw materials to reusable materials, i.e., from the deconstruction to M/C banks to DfD-based designs and then again to deconstruction. BIM-based EoL is suffering from a lack of a global framework. The existing solutions are based on local waste management policies and case-specific sustainability criteria selection. Another drawback of these ad hoc but well-developed BIM-based EoL prototypes is their use of specific proprietary BIM tools to support their framework. This disconnection between BIM tools and EoL tools is reportedly hindering the BIM-based EoL, while no IFC classes support the EoL phase information exchange. View Full-Text
Keywords: Building Information Modelling; deconstruction; design for deconstruction; reusable materials; interoperability; life cycle assessment; offsite construction; Construction and Demolition Waste; digital twin; Building Stock 4.0 Building Information Modelling; deconstruction; design for deconstruction; reusable materials; interoperability; life cycle assessment; offsite construction; Construction and Demolition Waste; digital twin; Building Stock 4.0
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Akbarieh, A.; Jayasinghe, L.B.; Waldmann, D.; Teferle, F.N. BIM-Based End-of-Lifecycle Decision Making and Digital Deconstruction: Literature Review. Sustainability 2020, 12, 2670. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12072670

AMA Style

Akbarieh A, Jayasinghe LB, Waldmann D, Teferle FN. BIM-Based End-of-Lifecycle Decision Making and Digital Deconstruction: Literature Review. Sustainability. 2020; 12(7):2670. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12072670

Chicago/Turabian Style

Akbarieh, Arghavan; Jayasinghe, Laddu B.; Waldmann, Danièle; Teferle, Felix N. 2020. "BIM-Based End-of-Lifecycle Decision Making and Digital Deconstruction: Literature Review" Sustainability 12, no. 7: 2670. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12072670

Find Other Styles
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Search more from Scilit
 
Search
Back to TopTop