Evaluating 4D Multiuser Construction Plan Reviews Using Augmented Reality
Open Access
- Author:
- Alghamdi, Saleh
- Graduate Program:
- Architectural Engineering (MS)
- Degree:
- Master of Science
- Document Type:
- Master Thesis
- Date of Defense:
- June 12, 2023
- Committee Members:
- John Messner, Thesis Advisor/Co-Advisor
Rob Leicht, Committee Member
Yuqing Hu, Committee Member
Julian Wang, Program Head/Chair - Keywords:
- Augmented Reality (AR)
Construction Plan Review
4D Modeling
Collaboration
Interactivity
Shared Spatial Anchors SSA
BIM
Augmented Reality (AR)
Construction Plan Review
4D Modeling
Collaboration
Interactivity
Shared Spatial Anchors SSA
BIM
Augmented Reality (AR)
Construction Plan Review
4D Modeling
Collaboration
Interactivity
Shared Spatial Anchors SSA
BIM - Abstract:
- Construction plan review meetings are valuable for stakeholders to discuss construction logistics and sequencing issues. Visualization is essential during these meetings and can significantly influence the outcomes. Construction plans can be visualized in 2D, 3D, or 4D environments where the time dimension is integrated with the 3D model elements. Means of visualization media differ and can take many forms, such as paper-based, screen-based, or immersive technologies. Immersive technologies add another level of interactivity that has yet to be thoroughly investigated in construction research. Collaboration is integral to construction plan review meetings, but limited research has focused on collaborative plan reviews that leverage immersive technologies such as visualization mediums. This research investigates the effects of immersive, multi-user Augmented Reality (AR) to support construction plan review meetings using 4D construction models. The study compares head-mounted AR to traditional screen-based 4D model reviews. A 4D Multiuser AR (4DMAR) application was developed to measure the effectiveness of AR as a review environment. A questionnaire was used to measure the participants’ overall experience and their preferences, along with observational data. Participants found the interaction in both environments easy while also perceiving that AR provided more options for interactivity. Participants also perceived the 4DMAR environment as more suitable for collaboratively reviewing 4D construction plans. Limitations included the limited scope of the 4D model and the selected sample's low experience level with AR and 4D modeling. Future work should consider adding more interactive features within AR applications and identify better methods to support the interoperability between 4D modeling software and AR platforms.