Building design using BIM methodology based on building performance and post-construction cost: a positive risk management approach

Depósito de investigación de la Universidad de Sevilla https://idus.us.es/ Esta es la versión aceptada del capítulo de libro publicado en: This is a accepted manuscript of a book chapter published in: Building engineering facing the challenges of the 21st century: holistic study from the perspectives of materials, construction, energy and sustainability. (2023): 13/12/2024 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-2714-2_35 Copyright: © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 “This version of the book chapter has been accepted for publication, after peer review (when applicable) and is subject to Springer Nature’s AM terms of use, but is not the Version of Record and does not reflect post-acceptance improvements, or any corrections.” Chapter 41. Building design using BIM methodology based on building performance and post-construction cost: a positive risk management approach Pedro Fernández-Valderrama a*, David Marín-García a, Daniel Antón ab, Manuel J. Carretero-Ayuso c a Departamento de Expresión Gráfica e Ingeniería en la Edificación, Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingeniería de Edificación, Universidad de Sevilla, 41012 Seville, Spain b Product Innovation Centre & The Creative and Virtual Technologies Research Lab, School of Architecture, Design and the Built Environment, Nottingham Trent University, Nottingham NG1 4FQ, UK c Department of Architecture, School of Architecture, University of Alcalá, 28801 Alcalá de Henares, Spain * Corresponding author: [email protected] Abstract The costs in the use phase of buildings are a fundamental part of the costs incurred during their life cycle. Performance-based building design involves considering different factors of post-construction building performance, including cost. This paper investigates the implications of Building Information Modelling (BIM) design on post-construction cost performance in buildings. The literature review revealed performance factors to be next verified and evaluated by experts to rank their importance. This assessment was implemented through semi-structured interviews under a risk assessment approach according to the ISO-31000 standard. The results of this research highlight the different applications of BIM to achieve post-construction cost reductions in buildings. The most important factors concern the role of BIM in detecting interferences between building components that result in repair costs, and in providing information for more efficient use, maintenance, building management, refurbishment, renovation, and retrofitting of the building. Keywords Performance-Based Building Design; Building Information Modelling; Postconstruction Cost; Performance Cost; Risk Management; Risk Assessment; Semistructured Interviews. 2 1. Introduction Use-phase costs of buildings constitute a major part of the cost generated during their life cycle. The standard ISO 15686–5: Buildings and constructed assets— Service-life planning—Part 5: Life-cycle costing [1] describes that these costs, corresponding to the post-construction (or in-use) phase of the building, represent the greatest component in the life cycle. This shows that the sustainable performance of buildings should be increasingly extended to other aspects beyond the environmental dimension. In other words, the concept of social and economic sustainability of buildings is a paradigm that should be given greater consideration in building design. Currently, the performance gap is mainly discussed from an energy point of view but should be extended to the indoor environment and building operation expenses [2]. Therefore, in the design phase, it is necessary to consider the different costs to happen during the use of the buildings; that is, the design should focus on the use phase of the buildings. Sayın and Çelebi [3] indicated that the usual building design process is prescriptive. The owner and the designer create a programme of needs to set out the functional, economic, and time-related requirements of the project. The performance target for the building is usually not set. An alternative to this approach is to establish building performance targets that guide the design process to meet them. This is Performance-Based Building Design (hereinafter, PBBD), which involves assessing the sustainability design for the performance target. PBBD is a concept that can be used in planning and design to enable buildings to perform as expected [4]. In this type of design, the satisfaction of the user’s needs plays a fundamental role. PBBD is applied to different technical aspects of building design, such as seismic resistance, energy consumption, fire safety, moisture protection, or structural safety. In this way, technical building standards establish technical performance requirements that the building must comply with. This form of PBBD encompasses what Seshadhri and Paul [5] referred to as the physical and functional components of the building’s performance. However, these authors indicated that a third group of components must be satisfied. This is the financial performance, which derives from the physical, and functional performances. This financial performance comprises the building life-cycle cost, among other elements. Therefore, a crucial objective for these users must be to ensure an adequate use cost of the building. To achieve this, the building must have efficient use costs that are both efficient and proportionate to the user’s requirements and to the territorial and socio-economic context where the building’s service life develops. Consequently, the design of buildings must consider their economic sustainability. In general, building construction costs are of the greatest concern in the real estate business, but operation and maintenance costs are often ignored [6]. Hence, to achieve better building performance, it is important to consider these operation and management phases during the design stage, and BIM applications are suitable tools for this purpose [7]. The objective of controlling the building’s economic, 3 social, and environmental aspects imposes an analysis of different performance issues. technology, as regards interoperable information models, offers a significant operational basis to achieve this need [8]. According to Harty [9], in the future, designs will be compared based on performance. This will have a direct effect on the financial return that can be expected from a good design. The author noted that increasingly more demands were being placed on buildings, which increased risk and error probability. With BIM, the ability to delete or change something in the model is much easier than with paper drawings. The BIM project also allows better control over buildability, progress, access to solutions, and the economics of the project. In this line of building financial performance, Hunhevicz et al. [10] indicated that financial evaluation of performance presents challenges. The authors proposed connecting the digital twin of the building to smart contracts for building maintenance services, thus generating rewards based on adequate building performance. Othman and Alamoudy [11] studied the integration of risk management and BIM as an approach to optimise building performance. These authors showed that the lack of consideration of life-cycle cost is one of the highest risks affecting building performance optimisation. The study presented BIM as a technology to overcome risks during the design process. This work aims to investigate the role of BIM technology in PBBD, particularly in the cost performance of the building use phase. This research hypothesises that the use of BIM technology has a positive effect on the post-construction cost performance of buildings. It also addresses how the use of BIM technologies in the design phase leads to cost efficiency in the building use phase. This issue is rarely explicitly explored in the scientific literature. Research on PBBD particularly refers to building performance in aspects related to energy efficiency, environmental sustainability, and cost performance in the construction phase. To achieve the objective of this work, an extensive exploration of recent research on this subject was carried out. As a result, a list of performance factors was obtained that refers to BIM design tools and features that provide cost-performance efficiency in the postconstruction phase of the building. In other words, BIM functions contribute to cost reductions in the use phase of the building. To contrast the results obtained in the literature review, a panel of experts was used to rank the importance of these factors. To do this, a project management approach was adopted, specifically a risk assessment approach. The semi-structured interview technique was used to identify, analyse, and evaluate the risk factors. 2. Literature review The literature review identified those aspects that highlight the relationship between BIM and building cost performance in the post-construction phase. The starting point is Seshadhri and Paul’s [5] outline of the structure of building performance. These authors established three performance segments: physical, functional, and financial (Fig. 1). Physical and functional performances are developed in the scientific literature by addressing different aspects, for example: 4 (i) thermal protection of the envelope [3]; (ii) seismic safety [12]; (iii) structural performance ([13, 14]); (iv) environmental quality ([15, 16]); (v) fire risk ([17, 18]); (vi) wind performance [19]; and (vii) energy comfort [20]. The present research focusses on the cost performance of the building in its use phase. Therefore, following the approach by Seshadhri and Paul [5], the focus should be on the financial performance component. The authors established the key elements that are part of this financial component, which are capital costs, life-cycle costs, and depreciation (Fig. 1). Among the different stages that are part of the building’s life cycle, this paper focusses on the post-construction stage (Fig. 2), which covers the use phase (operation and maintenance) and the end-of-life phase (demolition). Life-cycle costs in this phase are diverse, e.g., consumption, maintenance, refurbishment, and repairs (Fig. 3). Based on these costs, all circumstances in which the use of BIM technologies during the design phase will result in a better cost performance in the subsequent post-construction phase are studied (Fig. 4). In short, this study addresses those functionalities of BIM design that can produce economic advantages in the post-construction phase. In most cases, these advantages translate into cost reductions in the building use phase. Figure 1 – PBBD components. Source: Own elaboration based on the scheme by Seshadhri and Paul [5]. Figure 2 – Building life-cycle costs. Source: Own elaboration based on the lifecycle phases of the ISO 15686-5 standard. 5 Figure 3 – Building post-construction life-cycle costs. Source: Own elaboration. Figure 4 – Life-cycle phases where the benefits of BIM design are considered in the research. The literature review focusses on the life-cycle cost performance of the building in the use phase. The cost of energy consumption [21–25] was found to be the most commonly discussed when studying the relationship between BIM and building use-cost performance. In this line, other types of costs that are less commonly addressed in the scientific literature are operation costs [26–28], maintenance [11, 27, 29], envelope [30], refurbishment [31], and building renovation [32–34]. The analysis of the different studies revealed the advantages of BIM design in this area. To reduce energy consumption and therefore costs, BIM energy analysis to calculate the building’s consumption over time is an activity that should be incorporated into the building planning stage [24]. Different building services should be evaluated based on operation and life-cycle cost savings, energy consumption, and carbon emissions [25]. Furthermore, the use of laser scanning and BIM tools in the building use phase benefits energy renovation, resulting in lower life-cycle costs [21, 22]. According to Al-Ghamdi and Al-Gahtani [23], a BIM project helps improve the choice of appropriate energy systems that reduce lifecycle costs. However, several authors highlighted some limitations of BIM in this respect. The application of this technology to energy-efficient design and environmental optimisation faces the problem that the BIM framework is not designed to easily integrate building performance information and data [35]. Regarding operation costs, Vollmann et al. [26] noted that the contribution of a BIM application is a comprehensive digital model of the building structure with all 6 the elements installed and the information required for the operator’s tasks. For Chen et al. [36], the BIM-based cost management of the operation process can be dynamically and accurately carried out in real time, thus saving costs for all parties. Despite the limitations Patacas et al. [27] found in some of the asset management cases they analysed, this technology allows facility management data to be made available in a structured way from the early stages of project development, resulting in benefits in building use costs. In the same way, Wang et al. [28] reported that facility management considered at the initial building design stage can reduce the maintenance effort during the operation phase. In addition to this concept, building maintenance management, Matos et al. [29] evaluated the use of information modelling (BIM) with key performance indicators (KPIs), thus achieving more efficient use of the building. These authors [37] continued in this line of applying appropriate maintenance actions, particularly to extend the service life of the materials. To this end, they used BIM to collect data and evaluate the condition of the building. Further literature covers this context of efficient data management as a means of improving life-cycle costs at the use phase of buildings. Le et al. [38] indicated that conventional data management, stored in the form of documents, leads to inconsistencies, loss of data, and data inaccuracy. They proposed the use of BIM to overcome these problems and to pre-assess the cost estimate of the building at different stages of its life. In this line, Rad et al. [39] developed a BIM add-on to predict the cost of the different stages of the building project. Through this add-on, they demonstrated that an adjusted increase in the initial cost of the project considerably reduces the periodic failure costs and the total life-cycle cost in an economically favourable way. Also, Khodabakhshian and Toosi [40] proposed a building valuation system based on the costs in the use phase and used BIM to efficiently store and analyse the technical and economic-financial information of the building. Other approaches dealt with the relationship between BIM and the use-cost performance of the building. Davila Delgado and Oyedele [41] identified open-data building model standards using BIM to successfully implement circular economy systematics. The authors viewed BIM as an opportunity to reduce the cost of the building in its operation phase. Puˇcko et al. [30] and Ansah et al. [42] discussed the selection of sustainable and cost-effective building envelopes through BIM. They proposed this tool as a suitable approach to produce not only a sustainable building design solution but also economic savings in running costs. Kim and Park [31]viewed BIM technology as a suitable platform to consider alternatives for financially and ecologically affordable building refurbishment. Rodrigues et al. [32] applied BIM to optimise building refurbishment and post-refurbishment life cycle, thus contributing to achieving cost-effective operation and maintenance costs. Marzouk et al. [43] addressed the necessary environmental but also economic sustainability of low-income housing projects. They proposed BIM to optimally select sustainable materials with a positive impact on the economic performance of buildings. Similarly, Jalaei et al. [44] used BIM to optimise the selection of 7 sustainable materials and to analyse their impact over their lifetime. The authors discussed that BIM provides resources for decision-makers to evaluate cost-saving design alternatives. In this line, Jausovec and Sitar [45] explained how BIM technology helps stakeholders in the building project to make decisions. At the design stage, this technology allows selecting optimal-performance solutions during the use phase, thus having a direct economic impact on the post-construction phase of the building. Focussing on the use phase of the building, Juan and Hsing [34] reported that BIM technology plays an important role in that stage. This tool can be used to predict the benefits of the designed renovation actions and gather information from the building units, leading to better cost-in-use performance. Finally, Usman et al. [33] also discussed the benefits of using BIM in building renovation throughout their use phase. In this case, they combined BIM and Value Engineering (VE), so that three-dimensional information models analysed the different alternatives in the VE process. The literature review revealed the benefits in the use phase of a building when implementing BIM in the design phase. A common obstacle to achieving the intended building design is not having complete information on the use-phase performance of the building. This implies that non-informed decisions are made that particularly affect the operation-cost performance of the building [46]. BIM technology can make a strong contribution to bridging the usual gap between building design and building performance in the use phase, especially in cost performance. Therefore, this is a crucial factor in sustainable building performance that needs to be investigated and optimised. 3. Methodology This research analyses the advantages to the use-phase economic performance of the building derived from the use of BIM in the design phase. In other words, this research investigates the reductions in the building’s use costs because of designing using BIM. These costs relate to all costs that may occur in the use phase of the building, regardless of who is liable for payment. To achieve this objective, a risk management approach is used. Risk management is a structured process within project management, consisting of risk identification, analysis, evaluation, and control. This approach is used to detect factors that may have a positive or negative impact on the project. In the same research context, this type of management is adopted by Spinnraker et al. [47] when analysing life-cycle costs from digital models of buildings. For these authors, both inadequate identification of risks and ignoring the use costs impede the optimisation of buildings. According to the Project Management Institute [48], a risk is any uncertain event that, if it occurs, positively or negatively affects at least one project objective. In this research, given the diversity of possible objectives in a building project, improving its cost performance is considered a management objective. As indicated above, this performance improvement is generally treated as cost reductions. Given 8 that risks have a double distinction (negative and positive risks) in project management, this paper considers positive risk factors on the building use costs as a result of the use of BIM in the design phase. For this purpose, in the scientific literature, BIM-driven building use-cost performance factors have been identified, and an importance ranking of these factors has been established. To develop the risk management approach, the guidelines set out in ISO- 31000:2018 Risk management [49] are followed. This research focusses on the assessment (Fig. 5), one of the key elements indicated in this standard for the risk management process. During risk assessment, risks are identified, analysed, and evaluated. In this way, a level of severity or importance of risks can be obtained to establish priorities for risk management. Figure 5 – Risk assessment process within the core processes of risk management according to ISO-31000:2018. The methodology of this research consists of the following stages: (1) identification of risk factors through literature review and their verification with experts using the semi-structured interview technique; (2) analysis and evaluation of the importance level of factors through appraisals by experts using semistructured interviews, and adopting the risk management criteria and guidelines by the Project Management Institute [48]; (3) obtaining an importance ranking of the factors based on those expert appraisals; (4) discussion of the results; and (5) drawing conclusions. 15 6 1 To select building services (cooling, heating, ventilation, among others) with better energy performance (lower consumption) during the use phase of the building. 0.37 7 10 To increase functionality, comfort, accessibility, health, and noise protection, meaning that fewer noise deficiencies must be addressed during the use phase. 0.33 8 6 To integrate information on materials, operation and maintenance instructions, construction drawings, and additional information into the BIM project to increase the resale value of the property during its use phase. 0.26 9 3 To select building services, envelopes, and materials that have a lower environmental impact, thus resulting in lower costs during the use phase of the building (not including energy costs). 0.22 10 7 To incorporate information into the BIM project to allow a more efficient and therefore less costly demolition of the building. 0.16 5. Discussion After completing the risk identification, analysis, and evaluation processes, it can be seen (Table 3) that 9 out of the 10 factors reached the high-risk level. The risk factor below this level is number 7, which considers possible cost reductions in demolition due to the availability of information inserted into the BIM project. Still, this factor has a medium–high risk level. This shows that all factors are important to achieve cost reductions in the post-construction phase of the building by including BIM in the design stage. The most influential risk factor is number 8, which refers to the ability of BIM to detect possible interferences between building components. These interferences can result in construction defects, which require remedial actions during the use phase. In the interviews, several experts stated that, in contrast to other BIM features that are less commonly used in practice, this is one of the most explored functionalities and that it is already bringing great advantages in practice. Positions 2 and 3 of the ranking are held by factors 5 and 4, respectively. These factors highlight the importance of the information integrated into the BIM project to improve the efficiency of the building operations during its service life. This improvement in efficiency translates into cost savings in these management actions, 16 renovations, refurbishments, adaptations to new building requirements, and maintenance. One of the interviewees emphasised the importance of the IFC (Industry Foundation Classes) files in providing the building maintainer with the necessary information in a simple way to help them carry out their work more efficiently. As mentioned above, another expert mentioned the usefulness of BIM for making inventories of building contents, not only of systems but also of furniture, which is a great advantage in facility management tasks, especially in removals. The same expert also referred to refurbishments. In this case, the data included in the model provide extensive information on hidden elements, which allows for increased efficiency in these works. The fourth position in the ranking corresponds to factor 2, which refers to the usefulness of BIM to select envelopes and materials that imply lower energy consumption and, therefore, lower costs. Here, there are different opinions among experts. Two of them considered that, despite the advantages of BIM in this respect, it is not entirely necessary to use this technology to perform envelope and materials selection in an efficient and cost-saving way. In other words, traditional means could be used efficiently and still produce cost savings in the use phase. Factor 9, which stands for the cost savings due to the usefulness of BIM to improve the structural and usability fire safety of the building, is in position 5. One of the experts stated that BIM is not necessary to produce cost savings in this regard, although it is an appropriate tool for fire safety audits. Other experts stated that there are few situations in which improving safety using BIM leads to savings by avoiding the economic consequences of accidents and claims. However, these same experts pointed out that these economic consequences could be so high that, even if the contribution of BIM to avoidance is limited, there would be a potential cost gain. Rank 6 is for factor 1, which refers to the role of BIM in selecting more efficient building services with cost savings due to lower energy consumption. An expert indicated that BIM allows for comparison between different HVAC systems and simulates the one with the best life-cycle cost. However, two experts indicated that this function is performed efficiently with different programmes other than BIM. Significantly, the role of BIM in the context of energy efficiency and energy consumption is one of the most discussed topics in the scientific literature on building performance. However, according to the indices set by experts, it is not one of the most influential aspects of BIM design when addressing the use-cost performance of the building. Factor 10, ranked 7, is for the role of BIM in improving the building’s performance in the context of habitability. On this occasion, cost savings in the use phase are the result of avoiding actions to correct deficiencies due to the inadequateness of the building in terms of functionality, comfort, accessibility, health, and noise protection. This case is similar to that of factor 9 (position 5 of the ranking), where improvements in structural and fire safety were addressed. The average probability of BIM contributing to a cost reduction for the reasons referred to in factors 9 and 10 is similar (4.25 and 4.38, respectively). However, the average economic impact of the expected savings from avoiding performance improvements 17 referred to in factor 9 (4.00) is significantly lower than in factor 10 (4.25). Therefore, what was indicated in factor 9 by one of the experts can be inferred in general, that is, a greater economic impact due to the lack of fire safety than due to habitability issues. Rank 8 corresponds to factor 6 referring to increases in revenue from a higher resale value of the building. Different experts indicated that having the information from the model can be of great value. However, it depends on the seller’s knowledge of the advantages of this methodology and the use of a property. A residential building is different from a property in which an economic operation is carried out. In the latter situation, the expected benefits of having the information integrated into the model are greater. In any case, having detailed information on the model entails not only a reduction in the cost of use for different concepts but also a better state of conservation of the building, which should be interpreted as producing a higher resale value. The second last position is occupied by factor 3. This factor encompasses cost reductions due to a decrease in other environmental impacts. This factor does not cover the energy costs, which are included in factor 1. Several experts indicated that a large part of environmental impacts are caused by energy consumption. Another expert indicated that the use of BIM could contribute to better and more efficient recycling of certain building components. The last place is held by factor 7 on cost savings in the demolition of the building due to the use of BIM. During the interviews, different experts stated that this cost saving is a consequence of the information included in the model, which makes it possible to manage certain materials that require special treatment. In this sense, an expert described the case of demolitions of high-reliability buildings such as nuclear power plants, where detailed information on contents is crucial. This usefulness of BIM also makes it possible to accurately pre-estimate the quantities of recyclable materials from demolition from which a profit can occur. 6. Conclusions This paper investigates the economic benefits produced in the post-construction phase of the building by adopting BIM in the design phase. For this purpose, the scientific literature was analysed, and, using a risk evaluation approach, 10 building performance factors referring to different BIM features were identified. These factors answer the research question of how BIM enables cost efficiency in the use phase of buildings. In nine cases, these functionalities resulted in use-cost reductions; in the remaining case, they led to a higher resale value of the building. The factors were analysed and evaluated through semi-structured interviews with BIM experts to rank the importance of the factors. The first three factors in the ranking concern, on the one hand, the usefulness of BIM for detecting interferences between building components that result in repair 18 costs. On the other hand, these factors refer to the role of BIM in providing information for more efficient use, building management, refurbishment, renovation, building adaptations, and maintenance. In general, all factors considered reached a high positive risk level, thus verifying the research hypothesis. This means that designing using BIM can contribute significantly to reducing the use-cost of the building. During the interviews, it was noted that experts, being wellversed in BIM functions and possibilities, evaluated the performance factors from the literature review positively. In risk assessment, experience, professional background, and expertise have a significant influence on factor evaluation given the need for consolidated opinions based on previous experience and sound knowledge. Regardless of the widespread use of these BIM functionalities in practice, this technology has great potential to bring about economic savings in the building’s use phase. Therefore, in terms of potential applications to achieve usecost savings, it is concluded that the evaluation of factors: (i) can be understood as a widely used tool to produce cost reductions in building projects, and (ii), through the ranking of factors, it also provides information on those BIM areas whose exploration should be given priority to achieve cost savings in the post-construction stage. In view of the above, as indicated by Munir et al. [51], BIM technology promised numerous advantages in terms of improved building management. However, it is observed among the different stakeholders involved in the building life-cycle processes that these improvements are not yet seen as significant. This is because, BIM is not yet widely implemented in this regard. It is also observed that there is a common gap in practice between the parties involved in the design and construction phases of the building and those involved in the operation phase. BIM technology improves interoperability between parties, helping to bridge this gap. For all these reasons, the authors believe that it is necessary to carry out further studies to demonstrate the advantages derived from implementing BIM in the postconstruction phase of the building. The present work aims to make a contribution in this line. References 1. International Organization for Standardization (ISO) (2017) ISO 15686–5:2017 buildings and constructed assets—service life planning—part 5: life-cycle costing. https://Www.Iso.Org/ Home.Html 2. Frei B, Sagerschnig C, Gyalistras D (2017) Performance gaps in Swiss buildings: an analysis of conflicting objectives and mitigation strategies. Energy Procedia 122:421–426. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.EGYPRO.2017.07.425 3. Sayın S, Çelebi G (2019) A practical approach to performance-based building design in architectural project. 48:446–468. https://doi.org/10.1080/09613218.2019.1669008 4. Astarini SD, Utomo C, Sari AF, Arif Rohman M, Priyo Negoro N (2020) The influence of performance-based building design on the strategy of retail property in Indonesia. 19 Sustainability 12. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12218801 5. Seshadhri G, Paul VK (2017) User requirement related performance attributes for government residential buildings. J Facil Manag 15:409–422. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFM-11-2016-0047 6. Astarini SD, Utomo C (2020) Performance-based building design of high-rise residential buildings in Indonesia. Sustainability 12. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12177103 7. Oti AH, Kurul E, Cheung F, Tah JHM (2016) A framework for the utilization of building management system data in building information models for building design and operation. Autom Constr 72:195–210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2016.08.043 8. Zanchetta C, Borin P, Cecchini C, Xausa G (2017) Computational design e sistemi di classificazione per la verifica predittiva delle prestazioni di sistema degli organismi edilizi. TECHNE 13:329–336. https://doi.org/10.13128/Techne-19759 9. Harty J (2019) Rewarding performance in construction. WIT Trans Built Environ 192:15–20 10. Hunhevicz JJ, Motie M, Hall DM (2022) Digital building twins and blockchain for performance-based (smart) contracts. Autom Constr 133:103981. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.AUTCON.2021.103981 11. Othman AAE, Alamoudy FO (2021) Optimising building performance through integrating risk management and building information modelling during the design process. J Eng Des Technol 19:1233–1267. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEDT-06-2020-0246 12. Gülkan P, Sözen MA (2018) Genealogy of performance-based seismic design: is the present a re-crafted version of the past? Geotech Geol Earthq Eng 44:3–29. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-62099-2_1 13. De Almeida NM, Sousa V, Alves Dias L, Branco FA (2015) Managing the technical risk of performance-based building structures. J Civ Eng Manag 21:384–394. https://doi.org/10.3846/13923730.2014.893921 14. Petrini F, Ciampoli M (2012) Performance-based wind design of tall buildings. Struct Infrastruct Eng 8:954–966. https://doi.org/10.1080/15732479.2011.574815 15. Hens H (2016) Introduction. Appl Build Phys 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1002/9783433607114.ch00 16. Meng Z, Pelken M, Zhang J, Rice D, Chen Y, Semahegn S, Gu L, Henderson H (2014) “Magic Cube”: An integrated and coordinated process for performance-based building design. In: Indoor Air 2014–13th Int. Conf. Indoor Air Qual. Clim. pp 530–537 17. Yao W, Wang W, Zhang H, Qiao L, Yang R (2012) Fire risk mapping method for performance based building designs. Qinghua Daxue Xuebao/J Tsinghua Univ 52:885–890 18. Meacham BJ, Stromgren M, van Hees P (2021) A holistic framework for development and assessment of risk-informed performance-based building regulation. Fire Mater 45:757–771. https://doi.org/10.1002/fam.2930 19. Lin C-H, Chen M-Y, Tsay Y-S (2021) Simulation methodology based on wind and thermal performance for early building optimization design in Taiwan. Sustainability 13. https://doi.org/10.3390/su131810033 20. Grazina R, de Almeida NM, da Glória Gomes M (2021) A performance-based approach to enhance the operational energy in residential buildings. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030- 35533-3_45 21. Gonzalez-Caceres A, Karlshøj J, Arvid Vik T, Hempel E, Rammer Nielsen T (2022) Evaluation of cost-effective measures for the renovation of existing dwellings in the 20 framework of the energy certification system: a case study in Norway. Energy Build 264:112071. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2022.112071 22. Motalebi M, Rashidi A, Nasiri MM (2022) Optimization and BIM-based lifecycle assessment integration for energy efficiency retrofit of buildings. J Build Eng 49:104022. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2022.104022 23. Al-Ghamdi MA, Al-Gahtani KS (2022) Integrated value engineering and life cycle cost modeling for HVAC system selection. Sustainability 14. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14042126 24. Sharma P, Prasath Kumar VR (2022) Energy analysis in residential building for insulation roof material using building information modelling. J Eng Res 9:1–13. https://doi.org/10.36909/jer.ACMM.16303 25. Marzouk M, Abdelbasset I, Al-Gahtani K (2021) Evaluating building systems energy performance superiority and inferiority ranking. J Environ Inform 38:56–67. https://doi.org/10.3808/jei.202000448 26. Vollmann G, Stepien M, Riepe W, König M, Lehan A, Thewes M, Wahl H (2022) Use of BIM for the optimized operation of road tunnels: modelling approach, information requirements, and exemplary implementation. Geomech Tunn 15:167–174. https://doi.org/10.1002/geot.202100074 27. Patacas J, Dawood N, Vukovic V, Kassem M (2015) BIM for facilities management: evaluating BIM standards in asset register creation and service life planning. J Inf Technol Constr 20:313– 331 28. Wang Y, Wang X, Wang J, Yung P, Jun G (2013) Engagement of facilities management in design stage through BIM: framework and a case study. Adv Civ Eng 2013. https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/189105 29. Matos RV, Rodrigues FS, Rodrigues HF, Costa AG (2020) Strategies to support facility management resourcing building information modelling. In: Curr. Top. Trends Durab. Build. Mater. Components-Proc. 15th Int. Conf. Durab. Build. Mater. Components, DBMC 2020. pp 1759–1766. https://doi.org/10.23967/dbmc.2020.131 30. Pučko Z, Maučec D, Šuman N (2020) Energy and cost analysis of building envelope components using BIM: a systematic approach. Energies 13. https://doi.org/10.3390/en13102643 31. Kim KP, Park KS (2018) Delivering value for money with BIM-embedded housing refurbishment. Facilities 36:657–675. https://doi.org/10.1108/F-05-2017-0048 32. Rodrigues F, Matos R, Alves A, Ribeirinho P, Rodrigues H (2018) Building life cycle applied to refurbishment of a traditional building from Oporto, Portugal. J Build Eng 17:84–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2018.01.010 33. Usman F, Jalaluddin NA, Hamim SA (2018) Value engineering in building information modelling for cost optimization of renovation works: a case study. Int J Eng Technol 7:431– 435. https://doi.org/10.14419/ijet.v7i4.35.22856 34. Juan Y-K, Hsing N-P (2017) BIM-based approach to simulate building adaptive performance and life cycle costs for an open building design. Appl Sci 7. https://doi.org/10.3390/app7080837 35. Zhuang D, Zhang X, Lu Y, Wang C, Jin X, Zhou X, Shi X (2021) A performance data integrated BIM framework for building life-cycle energy efficiency and environmental optimization design. Autom Constr 127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2021.103712 21 36. Chen P, Shi C, Ren X (2021) A whole process cost control strategy of construction engineering based on BIM. In: Proc.-2021 6th Int. Conf. Smart Grid Electr. Autom. ICSGEA 2021. pp 555–559. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSGEA53208.2021.00131 37. Matos R, Rodrigues F, Rodrigues H, Costa A (2021) Building condition assessment supported by building information modelling. J Build Eng 38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2021.102186 38. Le HTT, Likhitruangsilp V, Yabuki N (2020) A BIM-integrated relational database management system for evaluating building life-cycle costs. Eng J-Thail 24:75–86. https://doi.org/10.4186/ej.2020.24.2.75WE-EmergingSourcesCitationIndex(ESCI) 39. Rad MAH, Jalaei F, Golpour A, Varzande SSH, Guest G (2021) BIM-based approach to conduct life cycle cost analysis of resilient buildings at the conceptual stage. Autom Constr 123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2020.103480 40. Khodabakhshian A, Toosi H (2021) Residential real estate valuation framework based on life cycle cost by building information modelling. J Archit Eng 27. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)AE.1943-5568.0000479 41. Davila Delgado JM, Oyedele LO (2020) BIM data model requirements for asset monitoring and the circular economy. J Eng Des Technol 18:1269–1285. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEDT- 10-2019-0284 42. Ansah MK, Chen X, Yang H, Lu L, Lam PTI (2020) An integrated life cycle assessment of different façade systems for a typical residential building in Ghana. Sustain Cities Soc 53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2019.101974 43. Marzouk M, Azab S, Metawie M (2016) Framework for sustainable low-income housing projects using building information modeling. J Environ Inform 28:25–38. https://doi.org/10.3808/jei.201600332 44. Jalaei F, Jrade A, Nassiri M (2015) Integrating decision support system (DSS) and building information modeling (BIM) to optimize the selection of sustainable building components. J Inf Technol Constr 20:399–420 45. Jausovec M, Sitar M (2019) Comparative evaluation model framework for cost-optimal evaluation of prefabricated lightweight system envelopes in the early design phase. WE– Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED) WE-Social Science Citation Index (SSCI). Sustainability 11. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11185106 46. Zanni M, Sharpe T, Lammers P, Arnold L, Pickard J (2019) Developing a methodology for integration of whole life costs into bim processes to assist design decision making. WE– Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED). Buildings 9. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings 9050114 47. Spinnraker E, Pauen N, Schnitzler A, Frisch J, van Treeck C (2019) Webtool for riskbasedprobabilistic life cycle cost analysis based on digital building models–BIM2pLCC. WE- Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-E). BAUINGENIEUR 94:37–44 48. Project Management Institute (2017) A guide to the project management body of knowledge (PMBOK guide). Pennsylvania 49. ISO (2018) ISO 31000:2018–Risk management—guidelines. 16 50. Taroun A (2014) Towards a better modelling and assessment of construction risk: insights from a literature review. Int J Proj Manag 32:101–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman. 2013.03.004 22 51. Munir M, Kiviniemi A, Jones S, Finnegan S (2021) BIM business value for asset owners: key issues and challenges. Int J Build Pathol Adapt 39:135–151. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJBPA- 10-2019-0090