Automation in Construction 139 (2022) 104294

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Automation in Construction
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/autcon

BIM integrated smart contract for construction project progress

payment administration
Rifat Sonmez *, Salar Ahmadisheykhsarmast, Aslı Akçamete Güngör
Department of Civil Engineering, Middle East Technical University, Ankara 06531, Turkey

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: In recent years few blockchain based progress payment methods have been proposed to improve the traditional
Blockchain technologies payment process for construction projects. The blockchain based methods require the off-chain real world in­
Smart contracts formation to be connected to the blockchain which could be challenging for construction projects. This paper
Building information modeling
presents a novel building information modeling (BIM) integrated smart contract progress payment administra­
Progress payments
Construction contracts
tion system, in which as-constructed BIM is used to link the real world with the blockchain. Results of a survey of
construction professionals revealed that the proposed system has a significant potential for improving the
traditional payment procedure by accelerating the process and by making the progress payments less prone to
disputes, especially for lump sum projects. The results also indicate the potential of future research on semi-
autonomous BIM integrated smart contract systems to accelerate the adoption of the BIM and smart contract
technologies for progress payment administration within the construction sector.

1. Introduction business processes, which are mainly based on centralized architectures

In construction projects, the employer makes periodic progress
payments to the contractor for the work performed so that the contractor
can finance the resources required to complete the project. The progress
payment is made after the employer approves the value of the progress
claimed by the contractor. Disagreements on the value of the progress
may arise between the employer and the contractor especially when the
payment terms of the contract are not clear [1–4] or are not adminis­
tered properly [2,5]. These disagreements may cause conflicts, could
delay the payments, hence could impact the project performance
negatively [6,7].
The developments in building information modeling (BIM) enabled a
new technology for improving the traditional construction progress
payment process. BIM not only enables digitization of building infor­
mation but also provides a collaborative platform to the project stake­
holders for accommodating contracting methodologies including
administration of progress payments [8]. Despite the potential of BIM
for contract administration, the majority of cost-related BIM research
has studied cost estimation or cash flow management, only a few have
focused on contract progress payment administration with BIM [8–10].
In recent years, blockchain has emerged as a novel technology and
facilitated a paradigm shift in the traditional management of traditional
requiring trusted third parties [11]. Blockchain not only provides a
globally consistent and secure database but also enables the execution of
financial and database transactions without the need for a central au­
thority through a decentralized consensus protocol. Blockchain includes
a variety of unique properties simultaneously including; security,
transparency, reliability (trustworthiness), decentralization, immuta­
bility, and has received interest across a wide span of sectors [12]. De­
velopments in blockchain technology have enabled a platform for the
implementation of smart contracts, which are computerized protocols
whose execution is guaranteed through a code that runs on the decen­
tralized blockchain. Smart contracts provide the technology for the
development of decentralized trustless automated systems and promise
a novel alternative for reshaping the traditional business processes as
they can decrease administration costs, improve efficiency, and build
trust among stakeholders [13]. Hence, blockchain-based decentralized
smart contracts enable reliable automation of progress payments, which
is one of the main limitations of the current payment systems [14].
Integration of BIM with smart contract technologies provides a
powerful alternative for improving the traditional progress payment
administration process, as BIM enables digitization of the construction
projects and smart contracts enable automated and guaranteed execu­
tion of contract conditions. Hence, the interest in BIM and blockchain

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: rsonmez@metu.edu.tr (R. Sonmez).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2022.104294
Received 16 January 2022; Received in revised form 18 April 2022; Accepted 24 April 2022
Available online 29 April 2022
0926-5805/© 2022 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
R. Sonmez et al.
integration has received increasing attention in recent years [15].
However, despite the availability of digitized progress data and recent
developments in blockchain technologies, projects still rely on tradi­
tional payment applications that are time-consuming [10,16] and open
for potential disputes.
Smart contracts have a major potential for improving traditional
business processes including payment administration, however, the
decentralized blockchain has to be connected to the off-chain informa­
tion for handling the majority of the real world processes. This feed of
real-world information is usually performed by the platforms called
“oracles”. Few oracle alternatives have been proposed for providing the
off-chain actual progress data to the decentralized automated progress
payment systems. In an autonomous payment administration solution
that relies on smart contract technology, the construction progress is
captured and analyzed using a camera-equipped unmanned aerial
vehicle, an unmanned ground vehicle, machine intelligence, and as-
constructed BIMs [14]. A performance based smart contract prototype
system was proposed as an alternative in which the payments are made
in the operational phase instead of the construction phase, and the
performance was determined by digital twins and sensors [17]. Both
oracle solutions enable automated solutions for providing the off-chain
actual progress data, however, each method had major practical limi­
tations. Robotic reality capture solutions are prone to inaccuracy and
error [14] and may produce disagreements. Well-developed and main­
tained digital building twins are not available for the majority of the
projects and defining a fair logic for performance-based contracts could
be challenging [17]. Hence, to fill the gap in the literature the main
objective of this research is to design and develop a BIM integrated smart
contract progress payment administration system that can be adopted
for construction projects in which building information models are
available during bidding. The proposed system aims to eliminate the
ambiguity of contract payment terms and improve the progress payment
administration by digitizing the building elements and automating the
payment terms as a computerized protocol that runs on a decentralized
blockchain.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows: In section two, a review
of BIM, blockchain, and smart contract research that focuses on payment
administration is provided. The proposed BIM integrated smart contract
progress payment administration system is presented in section three,
and the system is applied to a real construction project in section four.
Section five includes a structured questionnaire survey that was con­
ducted to identify the opinions of the construction professionals on the
new payment administration system. The benefits and limitations of the
proposed system are discussed in section six. Finally, concluding re­
marks are made in section seven.
2. BIM, Blockchain, and smart contracts for payment
administration
Delay of progress payments is a very common problem hindering the
success of construction projects globally [7,18]. The ambiguity of con­
tract payment terms [1–4], and poor progress payment administration
[2,5] are among the major reasons for the delays. BIM provides a digital
alternative for reducing or eliminating the ambiguity of contract pay­
ment terms and poor progress payment administration. Even though
several BIM contract protocols have been established for administrating
contracts and BIM itself is gaining momentum, the use of BIM for con­
tract administration remains low [8]. Few research mentioned the po­
tential of BIM for improving the traditional progress payment
administration process. Chong et al. [8] pointed out the lack of clarity of
legal responsibilities required for BIM's project requirements and the
need for an alternative contract structure to accommodate the con­
struction contracting methodologies including progress payments. Feng
et al. [9] proposed BIM based ontology for generating subcontractor
payment requests and ledger.
Blockchain and smart contract technologies have been receiving
2
Automation in Construction 139 (2022) 104294
increasing attention in recent years as a new alternative for improving
the traditional progress payment process of construction projects. The
potential of blockchain and smart contracts to protect main contractors,
subcontractors, and suppliers against the insolvency of the principal or
late payments was highlighted in Cardeira [19], Wang et al. [20], Mason
[21], Ahmadisheykhsarmast, and Sonmez [22], Li et al. [23], and Tezel
et al. [24]. Few studies included frameworks or systems for progress
payments. A blockchain-based framework was presented for enforcing
the payment terms and sharing payment records transparently [25]. A
smart contract was used to execute the procurement contract payment
conditions for a distillation tower to illustrate the benefits and chal­
lenges of public blockchain technologies in the construction domain
[26]. Execution of retention clauses of a typical project contract is per­
formed through a smart contract application by making retention pay­
ments immediately after approval of partial completion of works [27]. A
smart contract system enabled the security of payment of construction
contracts by locking the projected progress payment each month and
automatically transferring the payments to the contractor, sub­
contractors, and suppliers immediately after the employer's approval of
the progress payments [28].
Researchers have focused on integrating BIM and blockchain for
achieving advancements in the progress payment process as these
technologies provide complementary advantages. Ye and König [10]
pointed out that currently cost information integrated BIM technology
(i.e. 5D BIM) is at a very early stage for automating the construction
payment procedure and presented a framework for automated billing by
combining the BIM with smart contracts. A framework based on proof of
concept enabled information management of financial transactions for
integrated project delivery [29]. Another framework proposed integra­
tion of smart sensors, oracles, BIM, blockchain, and smart contracts and
provided insights into the application of these advanced technologies for
automated payments of subcontractors [30]. The role of smart contracts
in automating construction progress payments was investigated in
another study in which a use case was presented [31]. An integrated
digital twin and blockchain framework was developed and tested for
information sharing of construction project data, including payment
records [32]. Lu et al. [33] presented smart construction objects as
blockchain oracles to link the blockchain with the real-life physical
project which can be adopted for payments.
Recently a method that includes smart contracts and robotic reality
capture technologies [14], was proposed to automate the progress
payment process. The robotic reality capture enabled method was
applied to progress payments of seven subcontractors in two real-world
construction projects, which included partitions, plumbing, and heating
ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) building elements. An alter­
native blockchain based automated payment system proposed a per­
formance based method that integrated the blockchain with digital
twins [17]. The performance based prototype was tested on the real-
world commercial building equipped with sensors and controlled via
its digital twin. Robotic reality capture technologies and performance
based methods including digital twins are promising techniques for
automating and decentralizing the progress measurements but there are
several limitations before these technologies are ready for adoption in
practice [14,17]. Hence, within this context, the main objective of this
paper is to present a BIM and blockchain based contract progress pay­
ment administration system that can easily be adopted by practitioners
for improving the traditional progress payment process and for nar­
rowing the gap between construction management practice and the
recent developments in BIM and blockchain technologies.
3. BIM integrated smart contract Progress payment
administration system
A novel BIM integrated smart contract progress payment adminis­
tration system named BIMSMTPAY (BIM Integrated Smart Contract
Payment Administration) is presented to improve the traditional
R. Sonmez et al.
construction progress payment process. The system is designed and
developed so that it can easily be adopted by the employers, contractors,
and subcontractors for design-bid-build projects that are contracted on a
lump sum or unit price basis in which a BIM with a minimum level of
development (LOD) 300 is available during tendering stage. In this
section, the proposed system is described.
3.1. Research method
BIMSMTPAY was developed based on the waterfall method in which
the requirements, design, implementation, and verification phases are
performed sequentially. The waterfall method was selected as its linear
model is easy to implement, and it requires a minimal amount of re­
sources [34]. The requirements of the proposed system are identified
through a general analysis. The design phase consisted of the design of
the architecture of the BIMSMTPAY and the modules required along
with their relationships, and the choice of development platforms for the
modules including the selection of the decentralized blockchain. The
blockchain platform for the proposed payment administration system is
determined based on a blockchain decision framework [35]. The deci­
sion framework of Sonmez et al. [35] was selected as it was developed
for blockchain applications in project management. A BIM software
plugin, a smart contract, and a software application that links the BIM
software plugin to the smart contract are developed in the next stage. A
real construction project is used to verify the BIMSMTPAY. Computa­
tional experiments are performed to reveal the relation between the
number of BIM objects included in the smart contract and the blockchain
deployment costs. Finally, a structured questionnaire survey method
was adopted to identify the opinions of the construction professionals on
BIMSMTPAY. Structured questionnaire survey method is adopted as it
enables an effective method for finding out the opinions of construction
professionals. The details of the research methods including determi­
nation of a procedure for the payment system, design of architecture and
modules, selection of the software development and blockchain plat­
forms, development and coding, case project implementation, and
structured questionnaire survey are provided in the following sections.
3.2. Procedure of the payment administration system
In the proposed progress payment administration system, during the
tendering phase, the employer provides a building information model to
the contractors that are interested in bidding on the project. The pro­
posed system requires a BIM with a minimum level of development
(LOD) 300, however, LOD 350 [36] should be preferred, as provides
additional information that enables a quantity take-off with better detail
and accuracy [37], which is crucial not only during bid preparation but
also during measurement of the actual progress. BIMSMTPAY relies on
the as-constructed BIM to provide the off-chain actual progress data to
the blockchain. Hence, LOD 350 will enable an accurate representation
of partially completed construction works.
In a lump sum project, the employer will require the contractors to
provide a breakdown for the total lump sum price using the BIM, hence
contractors should include a price for each of the building elements that
are included in the BIM. In a unit price project, the employer will include
BIM-based quantity take-off for each work item, along with the infor­
mation of the automated BIM based quantity take-off procedure and the
software applications which will also be used for calculation of the
quantities in progress payments. The contractors are asked to include
the unit prices in the BIM for each work item. As for certain work items,
some BIM-based automated quantity take-off procedures may not pro­
vide very accurate results [37,38], the inclusion of the automated
quantity take-off procedure and software applications that will be used
in the determination of actual quantities would enable the contractors to
adjust the unit prices according to the automated quantity take-off
procedure during bidding.
In the tendering stage, the employer will also make the code of the
3
Automation in Construction 139 (2022) 104294
decentralized smart contract available to the contractors which will be
linked to the BIM to execute the payments. Hence, the contractors will
have an exact definition of how the progress payment process will be
carried out. The building elements will be represented with a unique
BIM object ID in the smart contract for a lump sum project. In a unit
price project, the work items will be represented with a unique BIM
work item ID in the smart contract.
Once the contractor is selected, the employer and the contractor will
open decentralized blockchain accounts to digitally sign the requests,
approvals, and execute transactions. The employer and the contractor
will then sign the smart contract digitally along with the regular con­
tract. By signing the smart contract digitally both parties confirm that
they agree on the code of the decentralized smart contract along with the
conditions of the BIM integrated smart contract progress payment
administration system. Since the smart contract code includes clearly
defined conditions, a mutually agreed smart contract could eliminate
some of the probable future disputes between the employer and the
contractor due to ambiguity in the payment terms of the regular con­
tract. SHA-256 hash of the BIM file which includes the price breakdown
that was provided by the contractor for lump sum projects or the unit
prices of the work items for unit price projects will also be recorded in
the decentralized blockchain along with the smart contract. Hash of the
BIM file will enable a secure encryption system to enable checking the
integrity of the agreed BIM file that will be used for the progress pay­
ments. Recording the hash of a BIM file to a decentralized blockchain
requires significantly less storage space and deployment cost compared
to storing the BIM file.
BIMSMTPAY does not require any manual calculation of quantities,
progress amounts, preparation of progress payment reports, or bank
payment orders; the payment process is executed by the decentralized
smart contract based on the approved as-constructed BIM [39]. As in the
majority of construction projects, interim payments are made on
monthly basis, the progress payments are assumed to be made monthly
in the proposed procedure. Hence, the contractor submits the as-
constructed BIM to the employer (or the employee representative)
every month (within the required progress payment submission time),
which is used to determine the actual progress. The employer compares
the progress claimed in the as-constructed BIM with the actual progress
visually. Once the employer approves the as-constructed BIM and au­
thorizes the transaction, the payments are executed on the decentralized
blockchain immediately. The as-constructed BIM is used to reach an
agreement on the completed construction works that the payments
could be made according to contract conditions (completed works that
conform to specifications and other requirements). The progress pay­
ment amount is calculated by the decentralized smart contract based on
the agreed code and calculation procedure. The agreed as-constructed
BIM for each progress payment will be stored in the BIM server (could
be a cloud or local server) for future reference. BIMSMTPAY will also
record the hash of the as-constructed BIM file of each progress payment
to the decentralized blockchain using the SHA-256 cryptographic hash
algorithm for verification. The hashes of the BIM files that are available
in the decentralized blockchain enable trustworthy proof for the agreed
as-constructed BIM files that are stored in the BIM server which are
usually under the control of a central organization (the employer or the
owner of the cloud server). In case of a dispute, the originality of the BIM
files can be easily checked using their hashes.
Integration of the procedure of the BIMSMTPAY to the BIM Project
Execution Plan [40] will provide a guide for the implementation of the
proposed payment administration system. The execution plan will not
only enable the project participants to understand their roles and re­
sponsibilities but also would outline additional resources or training
required. The execution plan should include a description of the LOD
required for the BIM, the procedure for how unique BIM object IDs or
unique BIM work item IDs will be set, and the criteria for selection of the
automated quantity take-off procedure and the software applications.
Determination of the training requirements for the employer and the
R. Sonmez et al.
contractor personnel along with a training plan, requirements for the as-
constructed BIM, and the frequency that as-constructed BIM will be
updated should also be included in the BIM Project Execution Plan.
BIMSMTPAY is designed to include three modules. The first module
is a BIM software plugin that provides the actual progress data to the
smart contract using the as-constructed BIM. The second module is a
smart contract that guarantees execution of the payment terms based on
the actual progress data provided by the first module. The third module
includes user interfaces and a software application that links the actual
progress data provided by BIMSMTPAY to the smart contract. The pro­
cedure of the BIM integrated smart contract progress payment admin­
istration system and the modules of BIMSMTPAY are illustrated in Fig. 1.
3.3. BIM software plugin
In the proposed payment administration system, Autodesk Revit is
selected as the BIM software due to its widespread use [41], however,
the payment procedure can be applied to any BIM software that enables
plugins and automated quantity take-off. A plugin named PROGITVIS
(Progress Integration and Visualization Plugin) was developed for Revit
2021 using Revit Application Programming Interface (API) and Micro­
soft C# as the first module of the BIMSMTPAY. The plugin is developed
to ease selection and visualization of the building elements that have
been completed for a progress payment period, to automate the calcu­
lation of the quantities according to the agreed procedure and software
(for unit price projects), and to integrate the actual progress data to the
smart contract that has been deployed on the decentralized blockchain.
The plugin will be used by the contractor first, to claim the actual
progress using the as-constructed BIM. At the end of the progress pay­
ment period, the contractor will select the building elements that have
been completed according to the contract using the plugin as shown in
Fig. 2. The contractor can visualize the cumulative progress claimed and
visually compare it with the actual progress to check any missing or
overstated building elements using the “Visualize Progress” option of the
plugin. Similarly, PROGITVIS enables the employer to compare the
claimed progress with the actual progress visually. After the contractor
finishes selection of the building elements (BIM objects) that have been
100% completed, the contractor should upload the as-constructed BIM
to the BIM server (could be a cloud or local server) so that the employer
Fig. 1. BIM integrated smart contract progress payment administration system-BIMSMTPAY.
4
Automation in Construction 139 (2022) 104294
has access to the model. The as-constructed models that are used for
payments should be recorded for each progress payment period in the
BIM server. Once the “Prepare Progress Data” option is selected, the
plugin will create a progress report as a text file, which will then be used
by the decentralized smart contract to determine the progress payment
amount. In a lump sum project, the progress report will include the BIM
object IDs of the building elements that have been 100% completed for
the period. In a unit price project, the plugin will calculate the quantities
of the building elements that have been 100% completed by using the
pre-defined automated calculation method and will determine total
quantities for each work item. Hence, the progress report text file
created by the plugin for a unit project will include the BIM work item
IDs and total quantities of work items that have been completed for the
progress payment period. The plugin will also get the hash of the BIM as-
constructed file using the SHA-256 cryptographic hash algorithm and
will include the hash in the text file for both lump sum and unit price
projects for verification which will also be stored in the decentralized
blockchain.
3.4. Smart contract
The design of the blockchain system is crucial for the successful
adoption of blockchain technologies [42]. Selection of the blockchain
platform and the cryptocurrency that will be used in payments are
among the important technical design decisions for the development
and adoption of the proposed payment administration system.
BIMSMTPAY requires a blockchain platform that both enables the
execution of decentralized smart contracts and cryptocurrency trans­
actions. Ethereum has been the most commonly used platform among
the decentralized blockchains supporting smart contracts [43] which
were also used in the previous research for the execution of procurement
payment contract terms [26], retention payments [27], security of
payments [28], autonomous payment administration [14] and
performance-based smart contract prototype system [17]. The block­
chain platform for the proposed payment administration system is
determined by using the blockchain decision framework of Sonmez et al.
[35] which was developed to guide implementers and researchers on
blockchain design decisions about privacy, transparency, decentraliza­
tion, efficiency, maturity, blockchain type, and platform selection,
R. Sonmez et al. Automation in Construction 139 (2022) 104294

Fig. 2. BIM Software plugin of BIMSMTPAY- PROGITVIS.

particularly for project management applications. Since for the appli­
cations that require payments and transparency the framework suggest a
decision between EOSIO and Ethereum platforms, Ethereum blockchain
has been selected for the proposed system as it provides a powerful
smart contract engine [44] and a mature platform [23] enabling avail­
ability and diversity of the development resources and community
support [28,45].
The smart contract is developed using the Solidity 0.5.2 language in
the Remix integrated development environment. Solidity is the most
popular programming language for Ethereum smart contracts [46]. The
smart contract consisted of five parts, which are shown, in Fig. 3. The
first part embeds the prices or unit prices of BIM objects in the smart
contract along with their unique IDs. The second part enables the pay­
ment request of the contractor to invoke the smart contract. The
contractor has to make this request using the specific blockchain account
that has been included in the smart contract. The third part imports the
progress payment data and calculates the progress payment amount.
The external exchange rate data source (oracle) which will be used to
convert the currency of the progress payments to ETH (Cryptocurrency
of the Ethereum blockchain) should be included in the third part since
the proposed payment system makes the payment transactions in ETH.
The fourth part manages the employer's approval. Finally, the fifth part
transfers the payment amount from the employer's blockchain account
to the contractor's account, stores the payment information and the hash

Fig. 3. Summary of the smart contract of BIMSMTPAY.

5
R. Sonmez et al. Automation in Construction 139 (2022) 104294

of the as-constructed BIM file for the period. The smart contract checks beam, bracing, stair and guardrail item, pipe fitting, pipe piece, and
the previous month's payment information to prevent double payment. mechanical equipment was modeled as a single object in the BIM so that
The tests for the smart contract of BIMSMTPAY were performed on the the as-constructed BIMs could include all possible partial completion
Ganache blockchain, which is a virtual Ethereum blockchain that does alternatives. Similarly, the foundations and elevated slabs were also
not require any fees. modeled considering the pour schedule so that there are also sufficient
BIM objects to reflect all possible partial completion alternatives for
concrete activities. Similarly, each wall was modeled as a single BIM
3.5. Software application
object. Hence, the BIM included sufficient objects to include possible
partial completion alternatives to reflect the actual progress precisely.
The third module of the BIMSMTPAY is designed as a software
The price of each BIM object was determined according to the lump
application, which includes a user interface part and a code that links
sum amounts and the price breakdown procedure agreed between the
the BIM plugin with the smart contract. In the user interface, PHP Lar­
employer and the contractor during the execution of the project. Since
avel 5.8 Framework is used in the back-end, and HTML5, CSS3, and
the payments are made in the United States (U.S.) Dollar ($), U.S. Dollar
JavaScript are employed in the front-end. The user interface is designed
($), is used as the fiat currency. The external source for ETH/$ is spec­
for contractor's payment requests and employer's approvals. The web
ified as the CoinMarketCap oracle. The smart contract is deployed to the
part is connected to the smart contract by using the Web3.js JavaScript
Ethereum blockchain after the IDs and prices of the BIM objects are
library.
imported from Revit by PROGITVIS and are embedded in the smart
In Ethereum blockchain and in the majority of the blockchains the
contract. The smart contract is activated after both the employer and the
interactions with the accounts are handled with an application called a
contractor approve the contract by using their MetaMask accounts.
wallet. MetaMask wallet is integrated into the third module for account
The deployment cost of the proposed smart contract depends mainly
management on the Ethereum blockchain. MetaMask is known to be a
on the number of BIM objects included in the contract. Since the IDs,
secure web wallet, which stores the private keys on the employer's and
costs or unit costs, and the progress data are stored in the Ethereum
contractor's browsers, not on a remote server [35]. MetaMask also en­
blockchain; as the number of BIM objects increases, the deployment cost
ables connection to the hardware wallets when extra security is needed.
increases. The deployment cost of the smart contract for the case project
The modules of BIMSMTPAY and their interaction are summarized in
with 2487 BIM objects was 1.197 ETH or $4907.7 on the Ganache
Fig. 4.
blockchain, at an exchange rate of 4100 ETH/$. Experiments for smart
contracts with 500, 1000, 1500, 2000, 2500, and 3000 BIM objects were
4. Case project by simulation of a real construction project
performed on the Ganache blockchain to reveal the relation between the
number of BIM objects included in the smart contract and the deploy­
BIMSMTPAY is applied to a real construction project to illustrate the
ment costs. The results of the experiments reveal that for the proposed
procedure along with the benefits of the proposed system. The case
payment system there is a direct relation between the number of BIM
project is an $8.6 Million process building project contracted on a lump
objects and the deployment costs as shown in Fig. 5.
sum basis in which traditional progress payment administration pro­
At the end of the progress payment period, the contractor first
cedure had been used. Since a building information model was not
specifies the progress period and then selects the BIM objects that have
available for the project the LOD 350 model was developed for the
been completed for the period by using the PROGITVIS Revit plugin. The
process building using Revit 2021 to simulate the application of
contractor could visualize the as-constructed progress by selecting the
BIMSMTPAY for the project. The BIM included a total of 2487 BIM ob­
“Visualize Progress” option in the PROGITVIS as shown in Fig. 6. Once
jects for the foundations, elevated slabs, walls, doors, structural steel,
the contractor verifies the progress, the contractor should select the
stair and guardrail items, pipe fittings, pipes, and mechanical equip­
“Prepare Progress Data” of the PROGITVIS so that the progress data and
ment. Since the data of electrical and instrumentation items were not
hash of the as-constructed BIM file are exported to a text file. The
sufficient to construct a LOD 350 model, electrical and instrumentation
contractor then should upload the as-constructed BIM file along with the
works were not included in the BIM. Each door, structural steel column,

Fig. 4. Modules of BIMSMTPAY and their interaction.

6
R. Sonmez et al.
Fig. 5. Relation between the number of BIM objects and blockchain deployment cost.
Fig. 6. Visualization of the progress for the case project.
text file created by the PROGITVIS to the cloud or local server and
initiate the payment process by selecting the “Request” option of the
contractor's user interface (Fig. 7.). The contractor's request will invoke
the smart contract which will first import the progress data from the
contractor's computer through the text file, then will calculate the
progress payment for the period in U.S. Dollar ($) based on the
embedded costs of the BIM objects. The smart contract will convert the
progress payment amount to ETH using the latest ETH/$ exchange rate
provided by the CoinMarketCap oracle and would display the payment
amount on the contractor's screen. Once the contractor approves the
payment amount using MetaMask, the smart contract will ask for the
employer's approval using the employer's user interface. The employer
should then download the as-constructed file for the progress period and
then use PROGITVIS to visualize progress for the payment period. The
employer could compare the claimed progress with the actual progress
using the visualization property of PROGITVIS. The employer could also
check the BIM objects that are included in the progress period and the
hash of the as-constructed BIM file by using the PROGITVIS. If needed
the employer could also create the text file using the PROGITVIS and
compare this text file with the text file provided by the contractor. The
employer could approve the payment or ask for a revision using the
employer's user interface. If the employer approves the progress, the
7
Automation in Construction 139 (2022) 104294
smart contract will update the ETH value of the payment according to
the latest ETH/$ exchange rate and will show the updated value on the
employer's screen. The employer should make the necessary ETH
amount available in the wallet before approving the transaction. Once
the employer approves the transaction through MetaMask, the smart
contract will transfer the payment to the contractor's wallet and will
notify the contractor. The contractor should immediately convert the
ETH to U.S. Dollar ($) using a cryptocurrency exchange in order not to
be affected by the fluctuations in the ETH/$ exchange rate.
Fig. 7 also reveals that the gas fees for the contractor's and employer's
operations are different. The fees of the Ethereum blockchain depend on
many factors including the computational effort required to execute
specific operations on the Ethereum network [47]. Since both of the
operations were executed almost at the same time, this difference is
mainly because the operations invoked by the employer (transfer of the
payment amount as well as, storage of the payment information and the
hash of the as-constructed BIM file in the blockchain) require more
computational effort than the operations invoked by the contractor (the
progress payment calculation), as the transaction fee for the employer is
more than the transaction fee of the contractor.
R. Sonmez et al.
Fig. 7. User interfaces for the contractor and employer.
5. Questionnaire survey on BIMSMTPAY
A structured questionnaire survey method was adopted to identify
the opinions of the construction professionals on BIMSMTPAY. Selective
sampling was used in the questionnaire survey to include those re­
spondents who have at least some basic knowledge of BIM. Since
blockchain and smart contracts are very new technologies in the con­
struction industry compared to BIM, basic knowledge of blockchain or
smart contracts was not required to have a sufficient number of re­
sponses. The proposed progress payment administration system was
presented to the participants of the survey in a 15-min live remote
presentation first. The presentation included a brief introduction to the
blockchain and smart contracts along with the demonstration of the
BIMSMTPAY including the application of the BIMSMTPAY to the pro­
cess building case project. The participants were allowed to have
questions about BIMSMTPAY during the presentation. The participants
were asked to answer the questionnaire survey after the presentation.
The questionnaire included six questions about the participants' back­
ground and 14 questions about the BIMSMTPAY.
The survey participants consisted of 36 professionals with different
backgrounds within the construction industry. The participants included
one site engineer, one contract engineer, one project control manager,
one tender manager, one project coordinator, three contract managers,
three construction managers, three technical office managers, three
project managers, five project control engineers, and 14 technical office
engineers. Nine participants had 5 years or less experience, 14 partici­
pants had experience between six and 10 years, seven participants had
experience between 11 and 15 years, and six participants had 16 years or
more experience in the construction industry. The respondents included
the site project controls manager of the case project who has partici­
pated during the actual progress payment process that was performed
with the traditional procedure. The total contract amounts of projects
worked were between $100 Million to $300 Million for nine partici­
pants, $301 Million to $700 Million for 19 participants, and was larger
than $700 Million for eight participants. The participants were also
asked to evaluate their familiarity with BIM, blockchain, and smart
contract technologies using a five-point Likert scale that included
“none”, “low”, “medium”, “high”, and “very high” options. The re­
sponses for the BIM consisted of 27.8% low, 44.5% medium, 19.4%
8
Automation in Construction 139 (2022) 104294
high, and 8.3% “very high” familiarity levels. The answers for block­
chain included 22.2% “none”, 52.8% “low,” 19.4%, “medium”, and
5.6% “high” levels, and the responses for the smart contracts consisted
of 55.5% “none, 30.6 % “low,” 11.1%, “medium”, and 2.8% “high”
levels. The information of the participants is provided in Table 1. Some
of the participants did have any prior knowledge about the blockchain
and smart contracts. However, after the 15-min live remote presentation
which included a brief introduction to the blockchain and smart con­
tracts, all of the participants had the sufficient level of information to
evaluate the BIMSMTPAY, as using and understanding the system does
not require an advanced knowledge in blockchain, smart contracts, or
BIM.
The survey about the BIMSMTPAY consisted of seven questions that
were used to evaluate the potential improvements which could be
achieved by the new contract administration system for the lump sum
and unit price projects. The participants were asked to respond to the
potential improvements using a five-point Likert scale including
“strongly disagree”, “disagree”, “neutral”, “agree”, and “strongly agree”
options. The questions and responses are summarized in Table 2.
The majority of the survey participants agree or strongly agree that
BIMSMTPAY makes the preparation of the progress payments signifi­
cantly easier (83.4% for lump sum projects, 83.4% for unit price pro­
jects), make review and approval of the progress payments significantly
easier (97.2% for lump sum projects, 86.1% for unit price projects), and
has a potential to accelerate the progress payment process (91.7% for
lump sum projects, 97.2% for unit price projects). 55.5% of the partic­
ipants agree or strongly agree that the new progress payment system has
the potential to reduce potential disputes between the employer and the
contractor on progress payments for lump sum contracts. However,
55.6% of participants are neutral for the statement that BIMSMTPAY has
the potential to reduce potential disputes on progress payments for unit
price contracts. The majority of the participants selected the “neutral”
option for the statement that the new progress payment administration
system has the potential to build trust between the employer and the
contractor (58.3% for lump sum projects, 61.1% for unit price projects).
When asked whether they would use the BIMSMTPAY majority of the
respondents agreed or strongly agreed with this statement for the lump
sum projects (77.8%), whereas the majority of the participants were
neutral for the unit price projects (72.2%).
R. Sonmez et al. Automation in Construction 139 (2022) 104294

Table 1
Information of the participants.
No Current position Years of experience Projects worked Familiarity with the

(Million US$) BIM Blockchain Smart contracts

1 Project control engineer 5 150 High High High

2 Technical office engineer 4 120 Medium Low Low
3 Technical office engineer 6 183 High Medium Low
4 Technicl office manager 13 Over 360 High Medium Low
5 Technical office engineer 4 250 Very High High Medium
6 Project coordinator 18 Over 600 Medium Medium Medium
7 Technical office engineer 6 Over 200 High Low Low
8 Contract manager 14 Over 700 Low Medium Medium
9 Technical office engineer 6 300 Medium Low Low
10 Project control engineer 12 Over 500 Medium Low Low
11 Technical office engineer 5 350 Medium Low None
12 Project manager 24 Over 1 billion Low Low None
13 Contract manager 18 Over 1 billion Low Low Medium
14 Construction manager 9 600 Medium None None
15 Construction manager 15 700 to 1 billion Medium Low None
16 Technical office engineer 4 200 High None None
17 Contract manager 15 Over 1 billion Medium Medium Low
18 Project control engineer 4 255 Medium Low None
19 Technical office manager 10 580 Low None None
20 Technical office engineer 6 300 Medium Low None
21 Project control engineer 7 400 Medium Medium Low
22 Technical office engineer 6 325 Very High Low None
23 Technical office engineer 6 280 Medium None None
24 Tender manager 12 685 Medium None None
25 Project manager 22 Over 1 billion Medium Low None
26 Technical office engineer 5 150 Low None None
27 Construction manager 18 800 Low Low None
28 Technical office engineer 6 150 Low None None
29 Project control engineer 6 Over 300 Medium Low None
30 Contract engineer 8 Over 500 Low Low Low
31 Technical office engineer 8 Over 450 High Low None
32 Technical office engineer 5 250 Very High Low Low
33 Technical office manager 12 430 Medium Low None
34 Site engineer 4 120 Low None None
35 Project control manager 9 600 High Medium Low
36 Project manager 20 Over 1 billion Low Low None

Table 2
Results of the questionnaire survey.
Contact type Question Strongly Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly
disagree (%) (%) (%) (%) agree (%)

Lump Sum The proposed progress payment system makes preparation of the progress 0.0 8.3 8.3 69.5 13.9
Contracts payments easier
The proposed progress payment system makes review and approval of the progress 0.0 0.0 2.8 77.8 19.4
payments easier
The proposed progress payment system has a potential to reduce potential disputes 0.0 5.6 38.9 50.0 5.5
between the employer and the contractor on progress payments
The proposed progress payment system has a potential to build trust between the 0.0 2.8 58.3 38.9 0.0
employer and the contractor
The proposed progress payment system has a potential to accelerate the progress 0.0 0.0 8.3 63.9 27.8
payment process
I would use the progress payment system for lump sum contracts 0.0 5.5 16.7 61.1 16.7
Unit Price The proposed progress payment system makes preparation of the progress 0.0 11.1 5.5 80.6 2.8
Contracts payments easier
The proposed progress payment system makes review and approval of the progress 0.0 2.8 11.1 80.6 5.5
payments easier
The proposed progress payment system has a potential to reduce potential disputes 0.0 11.1 55.6 33.3 0.0
between the employer and the contractor on progress payments
The proposed progress payment system has a potential to build trust between the 0.0 5.6 61.1 33.3 0.0
employer and the contractor
The proposed progress payment system has a potential to accelerate the progress 0.0 0.0 2.8 83.3 13.9
payment process
I would use the progress payment system for unit price contracts 0.0 11.1 72.2 16.7 0.0

The survey included two open ended questions about the BIMSMT­
PAY. The first question asked the reasons that the respondents would/
would not use BIMSMTPAY as a progress payments administration
system. Among the three participants that believed that the proposed
system has a significant potential particularly for lump sum projects, one
participant replied that “One of the main problems in construction
works is the quite long process of payment procedures and disagree­
ments between the employer and the contractor. In a lump sum works,
since the total amount will not change (except change order etc.), in near
future I strongly believe that this system will be used in practice. For unit

9
R. Sonmez et al.
price works, the system should be very flexible so that the smart contract
could be revised/changed in a dynamic way.” The second participant
stated that “The proposed system significantly accelerates preparation,
submission, and approval process for lump sum projects. For the unit
price, the system does not allow changes in the unit prices which may be
a major limitation.” The third participant responded that “The system
improves the traditional payment process in which preparation, review,
and control stages take much time. This system reduces time and effort
in payment process”.
Two respondents highlighted the potential of BIM and blockchain
technologies for improving the payment process. The responses were as
follows: “All of the processes and the information are transparent with
the support of BIM and blockchain technologies which should enable
building trust in the system”, and “The new technologies such as BIM, AI
are already being used in the construction projects. These technologies
along with the blockchain technology has a potential for improving the
payment process”. Five participants responded that they would use the
new system for the lump sum projects but not for the unit price projects,
as BIMSMTPAY does not provide the required flexibility for the unit
price projects such as the revisions in the unit prices. Two participants
commented that they would use the new system for the lump sum pro­
jects but not for the unit price projects as the unit price projects require
the automated calculation of the quantities by using a BIM software and
although the use of BIM within the construction industry has increased
significantly, they think that the industry is not ready for the automated
calculation of progress payments for unit price projects yet, as the par­
ticipants of the project may not have the sufficient background in this
technology and may not trust the quantities that are calculated by a BIM
software. Five respondents replied that they are not sure about using
BIMSMTPAY as the smart contracts are very new technology and most of
the project stakeholders are not familiar with this technology and do not
have the necessary technical personnel to support this new system.
Three participants responded that they could use BIMSMTPAY after
sufficient legal and accounting infrastructure is available for smart
contracts.
In the second open ended question the respondents were asked to
mention their suggestions for the BIMSMTPAY. Five participants
responded that BIMSMTPAY should enable revisions in the unit prices.
One participant suggested that BIMSMTPAY should also focus on quality
approvals. Another participant suggested the use of stablecoins instead
of ETH to minimize the risk of fluctuations in the ETH/$ exchange rate.
Inclusion of the retention payments, and automated delay penalties for
late payments in the BIMSMTPAY were the other comments included.
6. Discussion
The survey results indicate that majority of the respondents had
positive opinions about the new progress payment administration sys­
tem, particularly for lump sum projects. Even though blockchain and
smart contracts are very new technologies and there is very limited legal
infrastructure for these tools majority of the survey participants recog­
nize the potential benefits of the new BIM integrated smart contract
progress payment administration system and are willing to adopt
BIMSMTPAY for lump sum projects. However, the respondents on the
other hand point out the lack of a legal and accounting infrastructure for
blockchain payments and smart contracts as a barrier to the adaptation
of these new technologies. The survey results also revealed that the
participants were neutral about using BIMSMTPAY for unit price pro­
jects as it did not provide the required flexibility particularly for revising
the unit prices.
Despite the potential benefits of the new progress payment admin­
istration system, BIMSMTPAY has some limitations. Although the pro­
posed system does not require progress payment calculations, the
contractor has to update the as-constructed BIM every month, and the
employer has to determine if the as-constructed model is reflective of
real-world construction. Hence, some of the time saving achieved by the
10
Automation in Construction 139 (2022) 104294
proposed system could be offset with this monthly updating and
checking of the as-constructed model, which is not required in the
traditional progress payment administration systems.
The real world project used in the case study did not include a BIM,
hence a LOD 350 model was developed for the process building to
simulate the application of BIMSMTPAY for the project. The application
of BIMSMTPAY to a real construction project in parallel to the con­
ventional payment system would provide more information for the
evaluation of the proposed system. In the case study, the data of elec­
trical and instrumentation items were not included since the required
data to construct a LOD 350 model were not available for these items.
Application of BIMSMTPAY for a real world project would require a BIM
that includes all of the building items, including electrical and instru­
mentation works. The main focus of BIMSMTPAY is the administration
of progress payments hence the proposed system payment only con­
siders completed construction works that the payments could be made
according to contract conditions. BIMSMTPAY does not perform quality
or scope management, or enables payment for materials on site.
In the proposed payment system the payment transactions are made
in ETH. The contractors could minimize the risk of fluctuations in the
ETH/$ exchange rate by immediately converting their ETH to U.S.
Dollars ($) after the transactions are completed. However, depending on
the congestion level of the Ethereum network sometimes the trans­
actions may take longer, hence the fluctuations in the ETH/$ exchange
rate may impact the contractor's budget especially when profit margins
are tight. In recent years, numerous stablecoins are created for major
blockchain platforms including the Ethereum blockchain [48]. Some of
the stablecoins are pegged to fiat currencies such as the U.S. Dollar ($).
Hence, stablecoins provide a powerful decentralized payment alterna­
tive, especially for the blockchain payment systems which require sta­
bility in the cryptocurrency values.
In the proposed payment system, the security of the progress pay­
ments is not guaranteed. The smart contract payment security procedure
of Ahmadisheykhsarmast and Sonmez [28] can be integrated into the
proposed payment system. However, such a BIM integrated smart con­
tract progress payment administration system that guarantees the se­
curity of payments would require the inclusion of the schedule
information in the BIM, to determine projected progress payment
amounts based on the planned schedule of each BIM object. BIMSMT­
PAY requires very detailed pricing information from the contractors
during bidding which could be a concern for some contractors due to
privacy of the information. A future research which considers the pri­
vacy and security of the contractors' bid data with an encryption method
might eliminate these concerns and could increase participation of the
contractors for the proposed bidding system.
Previous research focused on the use of unmanned aerial and ground
vehicles, and digital twins and sensors to connect the off-chain real-
world project progress information to the decentralized blockchain. This
study presented an oracle solution that uses of as-constructed BIM to link
the real world with the blockchain. As updating the BIM according to the
actual progress could be performed by the majority of the contractors
that are familiar with BIM, the proposed blockchain based payment
administration system can easily be adopted in practice. This research
also revealed the trade-off between the precision of real world project
information and the blockchain deployment costs. In the case study,
2487 BIM objects were sufficient to represent the real-world progress
information precisely with a blockchain deployment cost of $4907.7.
However, significantly more BIM objects may be required for precise
representation of the real world progress information for large size
projects, which will increase the blockchain deployment costs substan­
tially. Storing BIM object information to decentralized storage and
linking the decentralized storage with the smart contract might be an
alternative to reduce blockchain deployment costs for large size projects.
R. Sonmez et al.
7. Conclusions
In this paper a novel BIM integrated smart contract progress payment
administration system is designed and developed for improving the
traditional progress payment procedure for construction projects. The
proposed system is applied to a real construction project to illustrate the
procedure and to identify the opinions of the construction professionals
through a questionnaire survey. The results of the survey indicate that
the new system has a significant potential for accelerating the existing
progress payment process by making preparation and approval of
progress payments easier and less prone to disputes, especially for lump
sum projects. The majority of the participants of the survey indicated
that they would adopt the new progress payment administration system
for lump sum projects particularly when there is sufficient legal and
accounting infrastructure for smart contracts and blockchain payments.
The construction professionals however were neutral on using the
new system for unit price projects. The survey results revealed that some
of the participants had reservations about adopting the system for unit
price projects as the system did not enable updating the unit prices. Few
participants that have responded to the survey indicated their concerns
on using the quantities calculated by BIM software as a basis for progress
payment calculations. A future study focusing on a flexible smart con­
tract architecture that enables updating of unit prices could enhance the
adoption of the BIM integrated smart contract progress payment
administration system for unit price projects. The smart contract could
use an oracle to escalate the unit prices automatically based on the
agreed contract escalation conditions.
The proposed BIM integrated smart contract progress payment
administration system enables partial automation of the progress pay­
ment process. Although the system provides an advancement over the
traditional progress payment system, the system requires the involve­
ment of the contractor and the employer and does not provide a fully
autonomous payment administration system. However, the survey re­
sults reveal that majority of construction professionals that participated
in the survey will consider using semi-autonomous payment systems
such as the proposed system, which is designed and developed, by
considering the needs of the practice. Hence, future research on semi-
autonomous BIM integrated smart contract progress payment adminis­
tration systems could accelerate the adoption of the BIM and smart
contract technologies within the construction sector for improving the
traditional progress payment system.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
References
[1] S.H. Choi, Y.S. Kim, Priority analysis of dispute factors in overseas construction
based on FIDIC contract conditions, KSCE J. Civ. Eng. 20 (6) (2016) 2124–2133,
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12205-015-0174-x.
[2] I.S. Abotaleb, I.H. El-adaway, Administering employers’ payment obligations
under national and international design–build standard forms of contract, J. Leg.
Aff. Disput. Resolut. Eng. Constr. 9 (2) (2017), https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)
LA.1943-4170.0000213, pp. 04517003.
[3] A. Azghandi Roshnavand, M. Nik-Bakht, S.H. Han, Towards automated analysis of
ambiguity in modular construction contract documents (a qualitative &
quantitative study), in: Advances in Informatics and Computing in Civil and
Construction Engineering, Springer International Publishing, Cham, 2019,
pp. 343–350, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-00220-6_41.
[4] E.E. Chan, M. Nik-Bakht, S.H. Han, Sources of ambiguity in construction contract
documents, reflected by litigation in supreme court cases, J. Leg. Aff. Disput.
Resolut. Eng. Constr. 13 (4) (2021) 04521031, https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)
LA.1943-4170.0000498.
[5] F.S. Demachkieh, M.-A.U. Abdul-Malak, Administration of construction contract
interim payments based on earned-value reduction techniques, J. Leg. Aff. Disput.
Resolut. Eng. Constr. 11 (4) (2019) 04519023, https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)
LA.1943-4170.0000309.
11
Automation in Construction 139 (2022) 104294
[6] M. Sambasivan, Y.W. Soon, Causes and effects of delays in Malaysian construction
industry, Int. J. Proj. Manag. 25 (5) (2007) 517–526, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ijproman.2006.11.007.
[7] T. Ramachandra, J.O. Rotimi, The nature of payment problems in the New Zealand
construction industry, Australasian Journal of Construction Economics and
Building. 11 (2) (2011) 22–33, https://doi.org/10.5130/ajceb.v11i2.2171.
[8] H.Y. Chong, S.-L. Fan, M. Sutrisna, S.-H. Hsieh, C.-M. Tsai, Preliminary contractual
framework for BIM-enabled projects, Journal of Construction Engineering and
Management - ASCE 143 (7) (2017) 04017025, https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)
CO.1943-7862.0001278.
[9] C.W. Feng, Y.J. Chen, H.Y. Yu, Employing ontology and BIM to facilitate the
information for subcontractor’s payment requests and ledger generation, in: The
International Association for Automation and Robotics in Construction, ISARC,
Taipei, Taiwan, 2017, pp. 783–792, https://doi.org/10.22260/ISARC2017/0109.
[10] X. Ye, M. König, Framework for automated billing in the construction industry
using BIM and smart contracts, in: International Conference on Computing in Civil
and Building Engineering, Springer, Cham, 2021, pp. 824–838, https://doi.org/
10.1007/978-3-030-51295-8_57.
[11] F. Casino, T.K. Dasaklis, C. Patsakis, A systematic literature review of blockchain-
based applications: current status, classification and open issues, Telematics
Inform. 36 (2019) 55–81, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2018.11.006.
[12] L. Hughes, Y.K. Dwivedi, S.K. Misra, N.P. Rana, V. Raghavan, V. Akella, Blockchain
research, practice and policy: applications, benefits, limitations, emerging research
themes and research agenda, Int. J. Inf. Manag. 49 (2019) 114–129, https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2019.02.005.
[13] Z. Zheng, S. Xie, H.-N. Dai, W. Chen, X. Chen, J. Weng, M. Imran, An overview on
smart contracts: challenges, advances and platforms, Futur. Gener. Comput. Syst.
105 (2020) 475–491, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.future.2019.12.019.
[14] H. Hamledari, M. Fischer, Construction payment automation using blockchain-
enabled smart contracts and robotic reality capture technologies, Autom. Constr.
132 (2021), 103926, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2021.103926.
[15] F. Xue, W. Lu, A semantic differential transaction approach to minimizing
information redundancy for BIM and blockchain integration, Autom. Constr. 118
(2020), 103270, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2020.103270.
[16] B. Penzes, Blockchain Technology in the Construction Industry: Digital
Transformation for High Productivity, Institute of Civil Engineers (ICE), London,
UK, 2018, pp. 19–20, https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.14164.45443.
[17] J.J. Hunhevicz, M. Motie, D.M. Hall, Digital building twins and blockchain for
performance-based (smart) contracts, Autom. Constr. 133 (2022), 103981, https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2021.103981.
[18] H. Abdul-Rahman, M. Kho, C. Wang, Late payment and nonpayment encountered
by contracting firms in a fast-developing economy, J. Prof. Issues Eng. Educ. Pract.
140 (2) (2014) 04013013, https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)EI.1943-
5541.0000189.
[19] H. Cardeira, Smart contracts and possible application to the construction industry,
in: New Perspectives in Construction Law Conference, Bucharest, 2015, pp. 35–39.
http://rscl.ro/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/06_Helder-Cardeira_red.pdf
(accessed December 27, 2021).
[20] J. Wang, P. Wu, X. Wang, W. Shou, The outlook of blockchain technology for
construction engineering management, Frontiers of Engineering Management 4
(2017) 67–75, https://doi.org/10.15302/J-FEM-2017006.
[21] J. Mason, Intelligent contracts and the construction industry, J. Leg. Aff. Disput.
Resolut. Eng. Constr. 9 (3) (2017), https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)LA.1943-
4170.0000233, pp. 04517012.
[22] S. Ahmadisheykhsarmast, R. Sonmez, Smart contracts in construction industry, in:
5th International Project and Construction Management Conference (IPCMC2018),
North Cyprus, 2018, pp. 767–774, in: http://pcmc2018.ciu.edu.tr/index.ph
p/ipcmc-2018-proceedings/ (accessed December 20, 2021).
[23] J. Li, D. Greenwood, M. Kassem, Blockchain in the built environment and
construction industry: a systematic review, conceptual models and practical use
cases, Autom. Constr. 102 (2019) 288–307, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
autcon.2019.02.005.
[24] A. Tezel, P. Febrero, E. Papadonikolaki, I. Yitmen, Insights into blockchain
implementation in construction: models for supply chain management, Journal of
Management in Engineering-ASCE. 37 (4) (2021), https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)
ME.1943-5479.0000939, 04021038.
[25] M. Das, H. Luo, J.C.P. Cheng, Securing interim payments in construction projects
through a blockchain-based framework, Autom. Constr. 118 (2020), 103284,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2020.103284.
[26] R. Yang, R. Wakefield, S. Lyu, S. Jayasuriya, F. Han, X. Yi, X. Yang,
G. Amarasinghe, S. Chen, Public and private blockchain in construction business
process and information integration, Autom. Constr. 118 (2020), 103276, https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2020.103276.
[27] S. Ahmadisheykhsarmast, F.Ö. Sönmez, R. Sönmez, Smart contracts for contract
management: a retention payment system, in: Blockchain for Cybersecurity and
Privacy, 1st edition, CRC Press, 2022, pp. 307–319, e-ISBN: 9780429324932.
[28] S. Ahmadisheykhsarmast, R. Sonmez, A smart contract system for security of
payment of construction contracts, Autom. Constr. 120 (2020), 103401, https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2020.103401.
[29] F. Elghaish, S. Abrishami, M.R. Hosseini, Integrated project delivery with
blockchain: an automated financial system, Autom. Constr. 114 (2020), 103182,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2020.103182.
[30] H.-Y. Chong, A. Diamantopoulos, Integrating advanced technologies to uphold
security of payment: data flow diagram, Autom. Constr. 114 (2020), 103158,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2020.103158.
R. Sonmez et al.
[31] H. Hamledari, M. Fischer, Role of blockchain-enabled smart contracts in
automating construction progress payments, J. Leg. Aff. Disput. Resolut. Eng.
Constr. 13 (1) (2021) 04520038, https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)LA.1943-
4170.0000442.
[32] D. Lee, S.H. Lee, N. Masoud, M.S. Krishnan, V.C. Li, Integrated digital twin and
blockchain framework to support accountable information sharing in construction
projects, Autom. Constr. 127 (2021), 103688, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
autcon.2021.103688.
[33] W. Lu, X. Li, F. Xue, R. Zhao, L. Wu, A.G.O. Yeh, Exploring smart construction
objects as blockchain oracles in construction supply chain management, Autom.
Constr. 129 (2021), 103816, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2021.103816.
[34] S. Balaji, M.S. Murugaiyan, Waterfall vs. V-Model vs. Agile: a comparative study on
SDLC, International Journal of Information Technology and Business Management
2 (1) (2012) 26–30. ISSN: 2304-0777.
[35] R. Sonmez, F.Ö. Sönmez, S. Ahmadisheykhsarmast, Blockchain in project
management: a systematic review of use cases and a design decision framework,
J. Ambient. Intell. Humaniz. Comput. (2021) 1–15, https://doi.org/10.1007/
s12652-021-03610-1.
[36] BIMForum, Level of Development (Lod) Specification 2019 for Building
Information Models, Part I, pp. 13–17, Available at: https://bimforum.org/wp-co
ntent/uploads/2022/02/BIMForum_LOD_2019_reprint.pdf (accessed December 27,
2021).
[37] C. Khosakitchalert, N. Yabuki, T. Fukuda, Automated modification of compound
elements for accurate BIM-based quantity takeoff, Autom. Constr. 113 (2020),
103142, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2020.103142.
[38] S. Kim, S. Chin, S. Kwon, A discrepancy analysis of BIM-based quantity take-off for
building interior components, Journal of Management in Engineering-ASCE 35 (3)
(2019), https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000684, pp. 05019001.
[39] S. Ahmadisheykhsarmast, Smart Contract Systems for Guaranteed and Timely
Payment of Construction Projects (Master's thesis, Middle East Technical
12
Automation in Construction 139 (2022) 104294
University, Ankara, Turkey), 2020, pp. 60–71. available at: http://etd.lib.metu.edu
.tr/upload/12625184/index.pdf (accessed January 11, 2022).
[40] J. Messner, C. Anumba, C. Dubler, S. Goodman, C. Kasprzak, R. Kreider, R. Leicht,
C. Saluja, N. Zikic, BIM Project Execution Planning Guide (v. 2.2), 2019, pp. 11–23.
Available at: https://openlibrary-repo.ecampusontario.ca/jspui/handle/1234
56789/768 (accessed January 22, 2022).
[41] P.H. Chen, T.C. Nguyen, A BIM-WMS integrated decision support tool for supply
chain management in construction, Autom. Constr. 98 (2019) 289–301, https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2018.11.019.
[42] M. Janssen, V. Weerakkody, E. Ismagilova, U. Sivarajah, Z. Irani, A framework for
analysing blockchain technology adoption: integrating institutional, market and
technical factors, Int. J. Inf. Manag. 50 (2020) 302–309, https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.ijinfomgt.2019.08.012.
[43] X. Li, P. Jiang, T. Chen, X. Luo, Q. Wen, A survey on the security of blockchain
systems, Futur. Gener. Comput. Syst. 107 (2020) 841–853, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.future.2017.08.020.
[44] M. Valenta, P. Sandner, Comparison of Ethereum, Hyperledger Fabric and Corda,
2017, pp. 1–8. Available at: http://explore-ip.com/2017_Comparison-of-Ethereum-
Hyperledger-Corda.pdf (accessed December 27, 2021).
[45] I. Mokdad, N.M. Hewahi, Empirical evaluation of blockchain smart contracts, in:
Decentralised Internet of Things 2020: pp. 45–71, doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/
978-3-030-38677-1_3.
[46] I. Nikolić, A. Kolluri, I. Sergey, P. Saxena, A. Hobor, Finding the greedy, prodigal,
and suicidal contracts at scale, in: Proceedings of the 34th Annual Computer
Security Applications Conference, ACM, New York, NY, USA, 2018, pp. 653–663,
https://doi.org/10.1145/3274694.3274743.
[47] Ethereum Developer Resources, GAS AND FEES, available at: https://ethereum.
org/en/developers/docs/gas/, 2022 (accessed March 6, 2022).
[48] L. Ante, I. Fiedler, E. Strehle, The influence of stablecoin issuances on
cryptocurrency markets, Financ. Res. Lett. 41 (2021), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
frl.2020.101867, pp. 101867.