Recent Trends of BIM Research to Enhance Construction Waste Management

In recent times, the rapid growth in construction waste generation has raised significant environmental and economic concerns in recent times. However, Building Information Modelling (BIM) has emerged as a promising solution for managing construction waste and promoting sustainability. BIM offers advanced capabilities for visualization, simulation, and data-driven decision-making, making it a valuable tool for optimizing waste reduction strategies in construction projects. This paper offers a thorough and in-depth review that examines the present and prospective trends of BIM research and its implications in the realm of construction waste management (CWM). Through a Bibliometric analysis, a total of 637 publications were collected from the "Web of Science" core database. Employing VOSviewer for analysis and visualization, co-occurrence, co-word analysis, cluster analysis, and co-citation analyses were conducted to explore influential authors and journals, high-frequency keywords, recent research trends, and potential future research directions in the field. The findings shed light on crucial topics in BIM for CWM, such as circular economy, recycling, waste estimation, and waste reduction. The study systematically analyzes and categorizes the existing literature, mapping the knowledge landscape, and highlights the main future trends in academic research on the integration of BIM and CWM. Looking ahead, future research is anticipated to focus on integrating BIM with Internet of Things (IoT) models, incorporating circular economy BIM systems, exploring green building using BIM models, implementing BIM-based design for deconstruction, and adopting multi-dimensional BIM frameworks. This comprehensive review provides innovative insights into the unique contributions of BIM for CWM, differentiating it from prior research and enhancing the paper's scholarly impact.

Building Information Modelling, BIM

1. Wang Q. Distribution features and intellectual structures of digital humanities: A bibliometric analysis. Journal of Documentation. 2018;74(1):223–46. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Duan H, Hu J, Tan Q, Liu L, Wang Y, Li J. Systematic characterization of generation and management of e-waste in China. Environmental Science and Pollution Research. 2016;23:1929–43. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Succar B. Building information modelling framework: A research and delivery foundation for industry stakeholders. Autom Constr. 2009;18(3):357–75. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Bryde D, Broquetas M, Volm JM. The project benefits of building information modelling (BIM). International journal of project management. 2013;31(7):971–80. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Abazid M, Gökçekuş H, Çelik T. Implementation of TQM and the Integration of BIM in the Construction Management Sector in Saudi Arabia. Advances in Materials Science and Engineering. 2021;2021:1–9. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Lu Y, Wu Z, Chang R, Li Y. Building Information Modeling (BIM) for green buildings: A critical review and future directions. Autom Constr. 2017;83:134–48. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Cheng JCP, Ma LYH. A BIM-based system for demolition and renovation waste estimation and planning. Waste management. 2013;33(6):1539–51. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Bakchan A, Faust KM, Leite F. Seven-dimensional automated construction waste quantification and management framework: Integration with project and site planning. Resour Conserv Recycl. 2019;146:462–74. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Bankar RS, Lihitkar SR. Journal of Advancements in Library Sciences Science Mapping and Visualization Tools Used for Bibliometric and Scientometric Studies: A Comparative Study. 2019;382–94. Available from: www.stmjournals.com [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Bakkalbasi N, Bauer K, Glover J, Wang L. Three options for citation tracking: Google Scholar, Scopus and Web of Science. Biomed Digit Libr. 2006 Jun 29;3. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Aghaei Chadegani A, Salehi H, Md Yunus MM, Farhadi H, Fooladi M, Farhadi M, et al. A comparison between two main academic literature collections: Web of science and scopus databases. Asian Soc Sci. 2013 Apr 27;9(5):18–26. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Mongeon P, Paul-Hus A. The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: a comparative analysis. Scientometrics. 2016 Jan 1;106(1):213–28. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Yalcinkaya M, Singh V. Patterns and trends in Building Information Modeling (BIM) research: A Latent Semantic Analysis. Autom Constr. 2015 Nov 5; 59: 68–80. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Su HN, Lee PC. Mapping knowledge structure by keyword co-occurrence: A first look at journal papers in Technology Foresight. Scientometrics. 2010;85(1):65–79. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. null S, Kumar SS. Scientometric Analysis of Natural Disaster Management Research. Nat Hazards Rev [Internet]. 2021 May 1;22(2):04021008. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)NH.1527-6996.0000447 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Babalola A, Musa S, Akinlolu MT, Haupt TC. A bibliometric review of advances in building information modeling (BIM) research. Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology [Internet]. 2023 Jan 1;21(3):690–710. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1108/JEDT-01-2021-0013 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Boyack KW, van Eck NJ, Colavizza G, Waltman L. Characterizing in-text citations in scientific articles: A large-scale analysis. J Informetr. 2018 Feb 1;12(1):59–73. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Martins J, Gonçalves R, Branco F. A bibliometric analysis and visualization of e-learning adoption using VOSviewer. Univers Access Inf Soc. 2022; [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Perianes-Rodriguez A, Waltman L, van Eck NJ. Constructing bibliometric networks: A comparison between full and fractional counting. J Informetr. 2016;10(4):1178–95. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Van Eck NJ, Waltman L. Manual for VOSviewer version 1.6. 8. CWTS meaningful metrics Universiteit Leiden. 2018; [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Jiang W, Martek I, Hosseini MR, Chen C. Political risk management of foreign direct investment in infrastructure projects: Bibliometric-qualitative analyses of research in developing countries. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management. 2021;28(1):125–53. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Chen C, Morris S. Visualizing Evolving Networks: Minimum Spanning Trees versus Pathfinder Networks. 2003. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Kouhizadeh M, Sarkis J. Blockchain practices, potentials, and perspectives in greening supply chains. Sustainability. 2018;10(10):3652. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Kabirifar K, Mojtahedi M, Wang C, Tam VWY. Construction and demolition waste management contributing factors coupled with reduce, reuse, and recycle strategies for effective waste management: A review. J Clean Prod [Internet]. 2020; 263:121265. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959652620313123 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. López Ruiz LA, Roca Ramón X, Gassó Domingo S. The circular economy in the construction and demolition waste sector – A review and an integrative model approach. J Clean Prod [Internet]. 2020;248:119238. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959652619341083 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Tang Q, Ma Z, Wu H, Wang W. The utilization of eco-friendly recycled powder from concrete and brick waste in new concrete: A critical review. Cem Concr Compos [Internet]. 2020;114:103807. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0958946520303139 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Aslam MS, Huang B, Cui L. Review of construction and demolition waste management in China and USA. J Environ Manage [Internet]. 2020;264:110445. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301479720303790 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Razzaq A, Sharif A, Najmi A, Tseng ML, Lim MK. Dynamic and causality interrelationships from municipal solid waste recycling to economic growth, carbon emissions and energy efficiency using a novel bootstrapping autoregressive distributed lag. Resour Conserv Recycl [Internet]. 2021;166:105372. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S092134492030687X [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Khan SAR, Razzaq A, Yu Z, Miller S. Industry 4.0 and circular economy practices: A new era business strategies for environmental sustainability. Bus Strategy Environ. 2021;30(8):4001–14. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Hossain MdU, Ng ST, Antwi-Afari P, Amor B. Circular economy and the construction industry: Existing trends, challenges and prospective framework for sustainable construction. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews [Internet]. 2020;130:109948. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032120302392 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Munaro MR, Tavares SF, Bragança L. Towards circular and more sustainable buildings: A systematic literature review on the circular economy in the built environment. J Clean Prod [Internet]. 2020;260:121134. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959652620311811 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Wang M, Wang CC, 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(11):204. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. Newman MEJ. Modularity and community structure in networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences [Internet]. 2006 Jun 6;103(23):8577–82. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0601602103 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. Olawumi TO, Chan DWM, Wong JKW, Chan APC. Barriers to the integration of BIM and sustainability practices in construction projects: A Delphi survey of international experts. Journal of Building Engineering. 2018 Jul;20:60–71. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. Saka AB, Chan DWM. Knowledge, skills and functionalities requirements for quantity surveyors in building information modelling (BIM) work environment: an international Delphi study. Architectural Engineering and Design Management. 2020;16(3):227–46. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

36. Ali KN, Alhajlah HH, Kassem MA. Collaboration and Risk in Building Information Modelling (BIM): A Systematic Literature Review. Buildings. 2022;12(5):571. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

37. Caldas LR, Silva M V, Silva VP, Carvalho MTM, Toledo RD. How Different Tools Contribute to Climate Change Mitigation in a Circular Building Environment?-A Systematic Literature Review. Sustainability. 2022;14(7). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

38. Sepasgozar SME, Mair DF, Tahmasebinia F, Shirowzhan S, Li H, Richter A, et al. Waste management and possible directions of utilising digital technologies in the construction context. J Clean Prod. 2021;324. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

39. Soyinka OA, Wadu MJ, Hewage U, Oladinrin TO. Scientometric review of construction demolition waste management: a global sustainability perspective. Environ Dev Sustain. 2022; [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

40. Zhu SY, Li DZ, Zhu J, Feng HB. Towards a Data-Rich Era: A Bibliometric Analysis of Construction Management from 2000 to 2020. BUILDINGS. 2022;12(12). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

41. Jin RY, Yuan HP, Chen Q. Science mapping approach to assisting the review of construction and demolition waste management research published between 2009 and 2018. Resour Conserv Recycl. 2019;140:175–88. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

42. Nawaz A, Chen J, Su X. Exploring the trends in construction and demolition waste (C&DW) research: A scientometric analysis approach. SUSTAINABLE ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES AND ASSESSMENTS. 2023;55. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

43. Li CZD, Zhao YY, Xiao B, Yu B, Tam VWY, Chen Z, et al. Research trend of the application of information technologies in construction and demolition waste management. J Clean Prod. 2020;263. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

44. Liao LH, Zhou KX, Fan C, Ma YY. Evaluation of Complexity Issues in Building Information Modeling Diffusion Research. Sustainability. 2022;14(5). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

45. Akbarieh A, Jayasinghe LB, Waldmann D, Teferle FN. BIM-Based End-of-Lifecycle Decision Making and Digital Deconstruction: Literature Review. Sustainability. 2020;12(7). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

46. Salehabadi ZM, Ruparathna R. User-centric sustainability assessment of single-family detached homes (SFDH): A BIM-based methodological framework. JOURNAL OF BUILDING ENGINEERING. 2022;50. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

47. Shukra ZA, Zhou Y. Holistic green BIM: a scientometrics and mixed review. ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION AND ARCHITECTURAL MANAGEMENT. 2021;28(9):2273–99. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

48. Huang T, Kou SC, Liu DY, Li DW, Xing F. A BIM-GIS-IoT-Based System for Excavated Soil Recycling. BUILDINGS. 2022;12(4). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

49. Kang K, Besklubova S, Dai YQ, Zhong RY. Building demolition waste management through smart BIM: A case study in Hong Kong. WASTE MANAGEMENT. 2022; 143:69–83. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

50. Hu XY, Zhou Y, Vanhullebusch S, Mestdagh R, Cui ZY, Li JB. Smart building demolition and waste management frame with image-to-BIM. JOURNAL OF BUILDING ENGINEERING. 2022;49. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

51. Spisakova M, Mesaros P, Mandicak T. Construction Waste Audit in the Framework of Sustainable Waste Management in Construction Projects-Case Study. BUILDINGS. 2021;11(2). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

52. Aziminezhad M, Taherkhani R. BIM for deconstruction: A review and bibliometric analysis. Journal of Building Engineering [Internet]. 2023; 73:106683. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352710223008628 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

53. Zoghi M, Kim S. Dynamic modeling for life cycle cost analysis of BIM-based construction waste management. Sustainability. 2020;12(6):2483. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

54. Wang JJ, Wei JJ, Liu ZS, Huang C, Du XL. Life cycle assessment of building demolition waste based on building information modeling. Resour Conserv Recycl. 2022;178. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

55. Xue K, Hossain MU, Liu M, Ma M, Zhang Y, Hu M, et al. BIM integrated LCA for promoting circular economy towards sustainable construction: An analytical review. Sustainability. 2021;13(3):1310. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

56. AlJaber A, Alasmari E, Martinez-Vazquez P, Baniotopoulos C. Life Cycle Cost in Circular Economy of Buildings by Applying Building Information Modeling (BIM): A State of the Art. Buildings. 2023;13(7):1858. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

57. Charef R. The use of Building Information Modelling in the circular economy context: Several models and a new dimension of BIM (8D). Clean Eng Technol. 2022;7:100414. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

58. Bin Ismail ZA. A critical study of the existing issues in circular economy practices during movement control order: can BIM fill the gap? ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION AND ARCHITECTURAL MANAGEMENT. 2022; [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

59. Shashi, Centobelli P, Cerchione R, Ertz M, Oropallo E. What we learn is what we earn from sustainable and circular construction. J Clean Prod. 2023;382. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

60. Jayasinghe LB, Waldmann D. Development of a BIM-Based Web Tool as a Material and Component Bank for a Sustainable Construction Industry. Sustainability. 2020;12(5). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

61. Guerra BC, Leite F, Faust KM. 4D-BIM to enhance construction waste reuse and recycle planning: Case studies on concrete and drywall waste streams. WASTE MANAGEMENT. 2020;116:79–90. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

62. Llatas C, Quinones R, Bizcocho N. Environmental Impact Assessment of Construction Waste Recycling versus Disposal Scenarios Using an LCA-BIM Tool during the Design Stage. RECYCLING. 2022;7(6). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

63. Miatto A, Sartori C, Bianchi M, Borin P, Giordano A, Saxe S, et al. Tracking the material cycle of Italian bricks with the aid of building information modeling. J Ind Ecol. 2022;26(2):609–26. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

64. Raskovic M, Ragossnig AM, Kondracki K, Ragossnig-Angst M. Clean construction and demolition waste material cycles through optimised pre-demolition waste audit documentation: A review on building material assessment tools. WASTE MANAGEMENT & RESEARCH. 2020;38(9):923–41. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

65. Cai GC, Waldmann D. A material and component bank to facilitate material recycling and component reuse for a sustainable construction: concept and preliminary study. Clean Technol Environ Policy. 2019;21(10):2015–32. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

66. Quinones R, Llatas C, Montes M V, Cortes I. Quantification of Construction Waste in Early Design Stages Using Bim-Based Tool. RECYCLING. 2022;7(5). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

67. Su S, Li SM, Ju JY, Wang Q, Xu Z. A building information modeling-based tool for estimating building demolition waste and evaluating its environmental impacts. WASTE MANAGEMENT. 2021; 134:159–69. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

68. Pellegrini L, Locatelli M, Meschini S, Pattini G, Seghezzi E, Tagliabue LC, et al. Information Modelling Management and Green Public Procurement for Waste Management and Environmental Renovation of Brownfields. Sustainability. 2021;13(15). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

69. Shafiq MM, Al-Mekhlafi AA, Al-Fakih A, Zawawi NA, Mohamed AM, Khallaf R, et al. Beneficial Effects of 3D BIM for Pre-Empting Waste during the Planning and Design Stage of Building and Waste Reduction Strategies. Sustainability. 2022;14(6). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

70. Hosny S, Ibrahim AH, Nabil Y. REDUCING REINFORCED CONCRETE MATERIALS WASTE IN CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS USING BUILDING INFORMATION MODELING IN EGYPT. JOURNAL OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY IN CONSTRUCTION. 2023; 28:332–45. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

71. Vasudevan G. Study on adoption of building information modelling in reducing construction waste in Malaysia. In: IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science. IOP Publishing; 2019. p. 042002. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

72. Wang WJ. Automatic System Design of Assembly Building Components for Sustainable Building Projects Based on BIM Technology. Math Probl Eng. 2022;2022. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

73. Liu HX, Sydora C, Altaf MS, Han S, Al-Hussein M. Towards sustainable construction: BIM-enabled design and planning of roof sheathing installation for prefabricated buildings. J Clean Prod. 2019; 235:1189–201. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

74. Negendahl K, Barholm-Hansen A, Andersen R. Parametric Stock Flow Modelling of Historical Building Typologies. BUILDINGS. 2022;12(9). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

75. Ismaeel WSE. Drawing the operating mechanisms of green building rating systems. J Clean Prod. 2019; 213:599–609. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

76. Guo K, Li Q, Zhang L, Wu X. BIM-based green building evaluation and optimization: A case study. J Clean Prod. 2021; 320:128824. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

77. Veselka J, Nehasilová M, Dvořáková K, Ryklová P, Volf M, Růžička J, et al. Recommendations for Developing a BIM for the Purpose of LCA in Green Building Certifications. Sustainability. 2020;12(15):6151. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

78. Uddin MN, Wei HH, Chi HL, Ni M, Elumalai P. Building information modeling (BIM) incorporated green building analysis: An application of local construction materials and sustainable practice in the built environment. Journal of building pathology and rehabilitation. 2021;6:1–25. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

79. Behún M, Behúnová A. Advanced Innovation Technology of BIM in a Circular Economy. Applied Sciences. 2023;13(13):7989. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

80. Takyi-Annan GE, Hong Z. Assessing the impact of overcoming BIM implementation barriers on BIM Usage Frequency and circular economy in the Project lifecycle using Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modelling (PLS-SEM) analysis. Energy Build. 2023;113329. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

81. Liu Z, Wu T, Wang F, Osmani M, Demian P. Blockchain Enhanced Construction Waste Information Management: A Conceptual Framework. Sustainability (Switzerland). 2022 Oct 1;14(19). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

82. Altaf M, Alaloul WS, Musarat MA, Bukhari H, Saad S, Ammad S. BIM implication of life cycle cost analysis in construction project: a systematic review. In: 2020 Second International Sustainability and Resilience Conference: Technology and Innovation in Building Designs (51154). IEEE; 2020. p. 1–7. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

83. Sivashanmugam S, Rodriguez S, Rahimian FP, Elghaish F, Dawood N. Enhancing information standards for automated construction waste quantification and classification. Autom Constr. 2023;152:104898. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

84. Ismail ER, El-Mahdy GM, Ibrahim AH, Daoud AO. Towards automated construction for safe disposal of materials waste in the Egyptian construction industry. In: E3S Web of Conferences. EDP Sciences; 2022. p. 02010. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

85. Basta A, Serror MH, Marzouk M. A BIM-based framework for quantitative assessment of steel structure deconstructability. Autom Constr. 2020;111:103064. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

86. Sanchez B, Rausch C, Haas C, Hartmann T. A framework for BIM-based disassembly models to support reuse of building components. Resour Conserv Recycl. 2021;175:105825. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

87. Ismaeel WSE, Kassim N. An environmental management plan for construction waste management. Ain Shams Engineering Journal. 2023;102244. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

88. Aftab U, Jaleel F, Aslam M, et al. Building Information Modeling (BIM) Application in Construction Waste Quantification—A Review. Engineering Proceedings 2024; 75: 8. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

89. Eze EC, Sofolahan O, Uzoma CN, et al. Impediments to building information modelling-enabled construction waste management in Nigeria. Built Environment Project and Asset Management. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

90. Akbari S, Sheikhkhoshkar M, Rahimian FP, et al. Sustainability and building information modelling: Integration, research gaps, and future directions. Autom Constr 2024; 163: 105420. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

91. Rayhan DSA, Bhuiyan IU. Review of construction and demolition waste management tools and frameworks with the classification, causes, and impacts of the waste. Waste Dispos Sustain Energy 2024; 6: 95–121. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

92. Viswalekshmi BR, Bendi D. A comprehensive model for quantifying construction waste in high-rise buildings in India. Waste Management & Research 2024; 42: 111–125. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

93. Han D, Recycling AR-, 2024 undefined. Improving the Decision-Making for Sustainable Demolition Waste Management by Combining a Building Information Modelling-Based Life Cycle. mdpi.com, https://www.mdpi.com/2313-4321/9/4/70 (accessed 29 September 2024). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

94. Mcneil-Ayuk N, Engineering AJ-OJ of C, 2024 undefined. Building Information Modeling (BIM) and Circular Economy (CE) Model for the Management of Construction and Deconstruction Waste Based on Construction …. scirp.org, https://www.scirp.org/journal/paperinformation?paperid=134036 (accessed 29 September 2024). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

95. Zubair M, Ali M, Khan M, et al. BIM-and GIS-Based Life-Cycle-Assessment Framework for Enhancing Eco Efficiency and Sustainability in the Construction Sector. mdpi.com. Epub ahead of print 2024. DOI: 10.3390/su16072980. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

96. Andriyani N, Adi TJW, Suprobo P, et al. The role of Building Information Modelling (BIM) in waste management deconstruction plan via 3D reconstruction model. In: AIP Conference Proceedings. AIP Publishing, 2024. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

97. Schamne AN, Nagalli A, Soeiro AAV, Poças Martins JP da S. BIM in construction waste management: A conceptual model based on the industry foundation classes standard. Autom Constr. 2024 Mar. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• The Impact Of UI/UX Design on User Trust and Task Completion in Civic Tech Platforms
• Solar Cell Photovoltaic Model Shell Sp 75
• Development of an Intelligent Traffic Management System to Address Visibility Obstruction at Urban Intersections: A Case Study of Ibadan Metropolis
• Optimum Placement of Facts Devices on an Interconnected Power Systems Using Particle Swarm Optimisation Technique
• Assessing Construction Transformation and Implication on Future Production Flow System