Applications in Engineering Science 16 (2023) 100160

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Applications in Engineering Science

journal homepage: www.sciencedirect.com/journal/applications-in-engineering-science

Complexities for adopting 3D laser scanners in the AEC industry: Structural

equation modeling
Ahsan Waqar a, *, Idris Othman a, Noha Saad b, Abdul Hannan Qureshi a, Marc Azab b,
Abdul Mateen Khan c
a
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Universiti Teknologi PETRONAS, 32610, Seri Iskandar, Perak Darul Ridzuan, Malaysia
b
College of Engineering and Technology, American University of the Middle East, Egaila, 54200, Kuwait
c
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Universiti Teknologi PETRONAS, Bandar Seri Is-kandar, Tronoh, Perak, 32610, Malaysia

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

Keywords: The implementation of 3D laser scanning technology within the architecture, engineering, and construction
3D Laser Scanner (AEC) sector possesses the capability to enhance project efficacy and precision. Nevertheless, there exist various
AEC Industry obstacles that impede their extensive adoption. This study investigates the key challenges affecting their
Challenges
adoption in the industry. The study employed a mixed-method methodology that involved exploratory factor
Data acquisition
analysis (EFA) and structural equation modeling (SEM) to examine survey data collected from professionals
Built environment
operating within the architecture, engineering, and construction (AEC) industry. The results reveal significant
technical, operational, awareness, and economic challenges. Technical challenges include data processing
complexity, limited resources, and compatibility issues. The integration of laser scanning data and perceived
risks present operational challenges. Awareness challenges relate to legal factors and change aversion. Economic
challenges encompass affordability and time-consuming data acquisition. The ramifications for the industry are
significant. Managers should invest in resources, training programs, awareness campaigns, and cost-effective
solutions. Future research should expand the sample size and examine long-term effects. Addressing these
challenges will enable the AEC industry to fully leverage the potential of 3D laser scanners, enhancing project
outcomes and efficiency in the built environment.

1. Introduction
The architecture, engineering, and construction (AEC) industry
comprises planning, designing, constructing, and maintaining diverse
structures and infrastructure initiatives. With a projected global con­
struction market value of approximately $12.77 trillion in 2021, the
AEC industry is crucial in fostering economic expansion (Arianna Har­
issa Mohammad Azlan et al., 2022; Hosamo and Hosamo, 2022). In
2020, the industry will employ more than 180 million people globally,
or roughly 7 % of the global labor force. In addition, it is anticipated that
the global construction market will increase to $14.07 trillion by 2030,
highlighting the sustained importance of the AEC industry in defining
the built environment. With its combination of inventive design, tech­
nical expertise, and project management skills, the AEC industry con­
tinues to shape our world (Li et al., 2022; Ahmad Jamal et al., 2022).
3D laser scanning has revolutionized the AEC by providing greater
precision, time savings, and cost efficiencies. With the ability to capture
millions of data points per second, 3D laser scanners produce highly
accurate, as-built models that reduce measurement errors by as much as
70 % (Waqar et al., 2023a, 2023b). This level of precision enhances the
quality of the design and construction processes. In addition, 3D laser
scanning significantly reduces the time required for data acquisition
because manual measurements are eliminated. This expedites project
completion, allowing for more efficient decision-making and fewer de­
lays (Hosamo and Hosamo, 2022; Waqar et al., 2023c).
The AEC industry has witnessed remarkable technological ad­
vancements, revolutionizing numerous design, construction, and main­
tenance practices. Adopting 3D laser scanners is a technological
advancement that has garnered considerable attention. These devices
provide highly accurate and detailed representations of as-built envi­
ronments through an innovative data collection and visualization
approach. The ability of 3D laser scanners to capture millions of data
points per second can potentially revolutionize how AEC professionals
approach their work (Abd Hamid et al., 2018; Wei et al., 2019). A

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: ahsan_21002791@utp.edu.my (A. Waqar).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apples.2023.100160
Received 26 July 2023; Received in revised form 13 October 2023; Accepted 20 October 2023
Available online 21 October 2023
2666-4968/© 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-
nc-nd/4.0/).
A. Waqar et al.
time-of-flight scanner is a 3D laser scanner that measures the time it
takes for a laser pulse to travel from the scanner to an object and return.
This form of the scanner is renowned for its ability to accurately capture
expansive environments (Hamid and Embi, 2020; AlMashjary et al.,
2020). The phase-based scanner, which employs the principle of phase
shift to determine distances, is another form of 3D laser scanner. In
addition, hybrid scanners incorporate the characteristics of
time-of-flight and phase-based technologies. These scanners provide a
balance between speed and accuracy, making them useful for a variety
of AEC applications (Fanos et al., 2020; Abbas et al., 2020).
This paper investigates the critical issues that impede the seamless
integration and application of 3D laser scanners in the AEC industry. By
identifying and comprehending these obstacles, industry professionals,
researchers, and other stakeholders can develop effective strategies and
solutions to surmount them, thereby maximizing the potential of 3D
laser scanning technology.
More research needs to be conducted to investigate the obstacles
associated with adopting 3D laser scanners within the AEC industry.
Numerous studies have examined the technical capabilities and benefits
of 3D laser scanners, but there needs to be more literature regarding the
obstacles to widespread adoption (Waqar et al., 2023c, 2023d). This
manuscript seeks to contribute to the existing body of knowledge and
provide valuable insights into the practical implementation of 3D laser
scanners in the AEC industry by conducting an in-depth analysis of the
obstacles.
This study aims to thoroughly analyze the obstacles encircling the
adoption of 3D laser scanners in the AEC industry. By investigating these
obstacles, we hope to foster a deeper understanding of the existing ob­
stacles and identify potential solutions. In addition, this manuscript in­
tends to emphasize the significance of addressing these obstacles and the
potential benefits that can be released by overcoming them.
This research is novel due to its exhaustive examination of the ob­
stacles impeding the implementation of 3D laser scanners in the AEC
industry. By compiling and analyzing existing research, industry reports,
and expert opinions, we hope to provide a comprehensive understand­
ing of the obstacles that must be overcome. In addition, this manuscript
will propose potential strategies and solutions to mitigate these chal­
lenges, enabling AEC professionals to make informed decisions and
incorporate 3D laser scanning technology into their workflows
effectively.
This paper addresses the imperative need to investigate the obstacles
encircling the implementation of 3D laser scanners in the AEC industry.
By elucidating the obstacles and proposing potential solutions, this
study intends to promote the widespread adoption of this transformative
technology, resulting in increased efficiency, accuracy, and productivity
in the AEC industry.
2. Related work
In the AEC industry, 3D laser scanners have numerous applications,
including architectural documentation, structural analysis, monitoring
of construction sites, and facility management. These scanners enable
architects and engineers to create precise 3D models by capturing highly
accurate as-built environments, facilitating design and renovation pro­
cesses. The comprehensive point cloud data captured by 3D laser scan­
ners provide structural analysis with accurate measurements and
assessments of structural integrity (Pica and Abanda, 2021; Murshidi
et al., 2021).
Adopting 3D laser scanning can be hindered by resistance to change
and a lack of knowledge about its benefits. It is imperative to overcome
scepticism and address concerns through effective communication and
education (Lo Brutto et al., 2021; Kadhim et al., 2021). The use of 3D
laser scanners raises safety and privacy concerns, especially when col­
lecting data in public or sensitive areas. Establishing guidelines and
protocols for data collection and storage helps address these concerns.
3D laser scanners and related equipment may be limited in some regions
2
Applications in Engineering Science 16 (2023) 100160
or countries, making them less accessible to smaller businesses or ini­
tiatives (Waqar et al., 2023e; Waqar and Ahmed, 2023). Ensure the
precision and calibration of 3D laser scanners for reliable data collection
(Almukhtar et al., 2021; Waqar et al., 2022). Maintaining accurate
measurements requires routine calibration and verification. Analyzing
and interpreting the enormous data generated by 3D laser scanners can
be challenging. It is essential to develop automated algorithms and
software tools to interpret data (Shehzad et al., 2022; Salleh et al.,
2022).
Due to compatibility issues, integrating 3D laser scanning technology
into existing project workflows and software systems can take time and
effort. Effective adoption requires the development of seamless inte­
gration solutions. The AEC industry’s need for standardized guidelines
and best practices for 3D laser scanning presents a challenge (Razali
et al., 2022; Ramonell and Chacón, 2022). Establishing industry-wide
guidelines can help assure consistency and promote effective imple­
mentation. The accumulation and utilization of data obtained through
3D laser scanning raise ethical concerns, particularly regarding privacy
and consent (Waqar et al., 2023f, 2023g). It is essential to implement
ethical frameworks and guidelines to resolve these issues (Rajabi et al.,
2022; Poux et al., 2022). Access to exhaustive and specialized 3D laser
scanning training resources may be limited in certain regions or
educational institutions. Increasing training opportunities and educa­
tional programmes can aid in overcoming this obstacle.
Large point cloud datasets generated by 3D laser scanners can be
difficult and resource-intensive to process and manage. It is necessary to
develop efficient algorithms and software tools for processing point
clouds (Neza et al., 2022; Myint Naing et al., 2022). The accuracy and
efficacy of 3D laser scanners can be impacted by unfavorable environ­
mental conditions such as high temperatures, high humidity, and poor
illumination. It is essential to develop strategies and apparatus for
mitigating the effects of environmental factors. Protecting the integrity
and secrecy of 3D laser scanning data from unauthorized access or cyber
threats is a difficult task. It is essential to implement robust data security
measures and cybersecurity protocols (Li et al., 2022; Mirzaei et al.,
2022). A lack of awareness and understanding of the benefits and future
applications of 3D laser scanning can hinder its adoption in the AEC
industry (Waqar et al., 2023h, 2023i). This challenge can be overcome
by increasing awareness and facilitating knowledge transmission
through conferences, seminars, and industry collaboration (Waqar et al.,
2023b; Waqar and Othman, 2023). Interference from external sources,
such as other equipment or electromagnetic radiation, can introduce
noise into 3D laser scanning measurements and reduce their precision
(Waqar et al., 2023j; Waqar and Almujibah, 2023). It is necessary to
implement measures to reduce interference and disturbance (Arianna
Harissa Mohammad Azlan et al., 2022; Hosamo and Hosamo, 2022). It
cannot be easy to comply with local regulations, permits, and legal re­
quirements when using 3D laser scanners (Waqar et al., 2023c, 2023k).
Keeping abreast of regulatory changes and ensuring compliance with
legal obligations is crucial.
This study is novel in three significant ways. First, it addresses
regional originality by concentrating on the construction industry in
Malaysia, where more research needs to be conducted on the adoption of
3D laser scanners in the AEC industry. This study fills a critical void in
the existing literature by analyzing the challenges and opportunities in
this context. Utilizing an in-depth structural equation modeling
approach, this manuscript presents a novel methodology (Ahmad Jamal
et al., 2022; Rajabi et al., 2022). While prior research has examined the
technical capabilities and benefits of 3D laser scanners, the use of
structural equation modeling in this study enables a comprehensive
analysis of the complex relationships and interactions between various
factors that influence the adoption of 3D laser scanners in the AEC in­
dustry (Zhang et al., 2016; Rosli and Razak, 2016). This methodology
provides a solid framework for comprehending interdependencies and
assessing the influence of various variables on the adoption process
(Waqar et al., 2023l, 2023m). This study examines the relationship
A. Waqar et al.
between the AEC industry and 3D laser scanners, focusing on the unique
challenges and opportunities that result from this interaction. This
research provides valuable insights into the practical considerations and
implications of implementing 3D laser scanners in real-world AEC pro­
jects by investigating the perspectives of industry professionals, such as
architects, engineers, and construction managers (Tkáč and Mésároš,
2016; Nguyen et al., 2016). This relationship analysis adds depth and
specificity to the existing corpus of knowledge, allowing for a more
nuanced understanding of adoption dynamics.
3. Methodology
The present study employs a mixed-method research design to
evaluate the obstacles encountered in implementing 3D laser scanners
within the AEC. A preliminary step involved conducting a thorough
review of relevant literature to identify the challenges commonly asso­
ciated with adopting 3D laser scanners, as indicated in Fig. 1. Further­
more, insights from 13 construction engineering practitioners in
Malaysia were obtained via interviews and discussions to provide expert
perspectives. After this, a preliminary survey was dispensed to a subset
of individuals, and the gathered information was subjected to Explor­
atory Factor Analysis (EFA) to hone the questionnaire items and eval­
uate the fundamental factors. Following this, a primary survey
questionnaire was administered to a more extensive cohort of partici­
pants within the AEC sector. The present study employed Structural
Equation Modelling (SEM) to analyze the data gathered from the survey.
The aim was to investigate the correlations between the challenges
identified and their influence on the adoption of 3D laser scanners. A
conclusive validation procedure was conducted to authenticate the SEM
model, encompassing an evaluation of the model’s congruence,
dependability, and authenticity (Waqar and Othman, 2023b; Waqar
et al., 2023p).
3.1. Identification of challenges
The process of identifying challenges related to integrating 3D laser
scanners in the AEC sector was initiated by conducting an extensive
review of relevant literature. The investigation involved scrutinizing
articles from credible platforms, including MDPI, ScienceDirect, Web of
Science, and Google Scholar, to acquire knowledge and comprehension
of the current research and discoveries concerning the subject matter
Fig. 1. Flowchart of research method.
3
Applications in Engineering Science 16 (2023) 100160
(Waqar et al., 2023c, 2023l). Furthermore, the study solicited the
viewpoints of 13 construction engineering professionals who possessed
significant experience and expertise in the field. Conducting interviews
and engaging in discussions, valuable insights were obtained to pinpoint
the foremost obstacles in implementing 3D laser scanners (Waqar et al.,
2023b, 2023c). By integrating the literature review findings with expert
perspectives, a comprehensive set of 19 challenges has been identified as
the primary subject of further scrutiny, as indicated in Table 1.
3.2. Data collection
The research methodology comprised two phases, commencing with
a preliminary survey to collect data. The preliminary questionnaire
comprised inquiries about the 19 identified challenges, utilizing a 5-
point Likert scale. The pilot survey was aimed at individuals employed
in the AEC industry in Malaysia who possess knowledge of the latest
technologies. A pilot survey was conducted with a sample size of 103
participants, selected through a random sampling method. The main
questionnaire survey incorporated the significant challenges identified
by analyzing the pilot survey results. The primary survey questionnaire
integrated the challenges mentioned earlier into its inquiries and was
distributed to a more extensive population of 234 participants within the
Malaysian AEC sector. The demographic attributes of the sample,
including their familiarity with contemporary technologies, exhibited
conformity with those of the preliminary investigation. The main
questionnaire survey employed a random sampling technique akin to
the pilot survey. The pilot and main questionnaire surveys yielded
important data that aided in analyzing and assessing the obstacles
encountered in implementing 3D laser scanners in the AEC sector.
3.3. Data analysis
The analysis used data obtained from both the pilot survey, which
had 103 participants, and the full survey, which involved 234 in­
dividuals. The data obtained from the pilot survey, which consisted of
103 participants, were used in the EFA at the preliminary stage of our
research. Subsequently, the data obtained from the first survey, which
consisted of 234 individuals, were used for the following analysis using
SEM. Hence, the inclusion of data from both the pilot and main surveys
had a pivotal role in determining the outcomes and deductions of our
study.
A. Waqar et al. Applications in Engineering Science 16 (2023) 100160

Table 1 items (Ramonell and Chacón, 2022; Khan et al., 2023). The utilization of
Challenges to implementation of 3D Laser Scanner. Cronbach’s alpha coefficient aided in verifying the dependability of the
Sr. Description Mean gathered data and the questionnaire’s capacity to precisely capture the
No difficulties linked with implementing 3D laser scanners within the AEC
1 Data processing and analysis complexity (Salleh et al., 2022; Noor sector.
necessitate dedicated software and hardware et al., 2020)
infrastructure. 3.3.2. Structure equation modeling (SEM)
2 The perception is that laser scanning only (Mustafa et al., 2019) The survey’s primary objective was to evaluate the obstacles
applies to project types or industries, thereby
limiting its adoption in the AEC sector.
encountered in adopting 3D laser scanners within the AEC sector by
3 Limited interoperability between laser (Ahmad Jamal et al., administering a questionnaire to a representative sample of individuals.
scanning platforms and systems. 2022) The study gathered demographic data on the participants, including
4 Difficulties in precisely depicting intricate (Hamid and Embi, 2020) their organizational affiliations, levels of experience, and job titles, to
architectural and structural details.
thoroughly understand the sample’s characteristics (Zakaria et al., 2019;
5 A need for cognizance and comprehension of (Pica and Abanda, 2021;
laser scanning technology among Ismail et al., 2019) Singh et al., 2020). Convergent and discriminant validity were evaluated
professionals in the AEC industry. to ascertain the survey instrument’s validity. Convergent validity was
6 Integration of laser scanning data into existing (Tkáč and Mésároš, 2016) assessed by examining the factor loadings and the average variance
design and construction workflows is extracted (AVE) for each construct. The discriminant validity assessment
challenging.
7 Dependence on external service providers for (Hosamo and Hosamo,
was conducted by comparing the AVE values and the correlations be­
laser scanning services, resulting in additional 2022; Du et al., 2017) tween constructs that were squared. SEM was used to examine the
costs and delays. identified challenges’ structural connections (Abbas et al., 2020;
8 Limited resources and support for resolving (Shehzad et al., 2022; Almukhtar et al., 2021). The study employed path analysis to investigate
technical issues and ensuring software Sinoh et al., 2020)
challenges’ direct and indirect impacts on the adoption of 3D laser
compatibility.
9 A limited understanding of laser scanning (Ramonell and Chacón, scanners. Subsequent examinations encompassed the evaluation of the
technology’s long-term benefits and return on 2022) prognostic significance of the SEM framework. The
investment (ROI) makes it difficult to justify Heterotrait-Monotrait (HTMT) ratio was computed to assess the
the upfront costs to stakeholders. discriminant validity among constructs (Li et al., 2022; Ahmad Jamal
10 Scalability limitations for certain reflective or (Abd Hamid et al., 2018;
et al., 2022). The Fornell and Larcker criteria were employed to assess
transparent materials or surfaces. Zhang et al., 2016)
11 Special training and knowledge are needed to (Abbas et al., 2020) the dependability and soundness of the constructs. In general, using SEM
operate and interpret laser scanning data. facilitated a thorough examination of the connections among the ob­
12 Absence of standardized protocols and (Zakaria et al., 2019) stacles and the implementation of 3D laser scanners in the AEC sector,
guidelines for the acquisition and processing
furnishing significant perceptions into the determinants that affect the
of laser scanning data.
13 Lack of affordable and readily available laser (Fanos et al., 2020) adoption procedure.
scanning solutions.
14 Laser scanning technology has limited (Murshidi et al., 2021; 3.3.3. Model validation survey
scalability for large projects and rapid data Husin et al., 2020) To verify the results of the present investigation, a survey was carried
acquisition requirements.
out to validate the structural model, which involved a sample of 10
15 Perceived risk associated with combining (Lo Brutto et al., 2021)
laser scanning technology into existing project professionals from the industry. This survey aimed to gather expert
timelines and schedules. opinions and insights regarding the identified challenges in adopting 3D
16 There are legal and regulatory factors to (Nguyen et al., 2016; laser scanners in the AEC industry (Neza et al., 2022; Tkáč and Mésároš,
consider regarding data privacy, ownership, Sepasgozaar et al., 2017)
2016). The selection of the experts was based on their demonstrated
and intellectual property.
17 High cost of apparatus and maintenance for (Razali et al., 2022; López
expertise and extensive experience within the relevant field. The vali­
laser scanning. et al., 2018) dation survey encompassed a set of four pivotal validation inquiries
18 Change aversion and unwillingness to (Tahar, 2017; Rashidi specifically crafted to evaluate the pertinence and precision of the
embrace new technologies. et al., 2020) identified obstacles (Arianna Harissa Mohammad Azlan et al., 2022;
19 The particularly time-consuming data (Mirzaei et al., 2022;
SHARIF et al., 2020). The purpose of these inquiries was to obtain the
acquisition process for large-scale initiatives. Elhassan, 2016)
viewpoints of specialists regarding the significance and consequences of
the obstacles, as well as their recommendations for ameliorating or
3.3.1. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) surmounting them. The set of validation inquiries is presented below:
The pilot survey questionnaire was utilized to investigate the chal­
lenges associated with adopting 3D laser scanners in the AEC industry. 1 In your expert opinion, how significant are the identified challenges
The data collected from the survey was subjected to EFA. EFA was in hindering the adoption of 3D laser scanners in the AEC industry?
employed to ascertain the latent variables and structures inherent in the 2 What potential strategies or solutions would you recommend for
dataset (Lo Brutto et al., 2021; Rajabi et al., 2022). The EFA procedure addressing these challenges?
involved a rotated component matrix utilizing Varimax rotation, which 3 Based on your experience, which challenges are the most critical and
aided comprehension and derivation of significant factors. The EFA deserving of immediate attention?
yielded significant findings regarding the interrelationships among the 4 How do you foresee the adoption of 3D laser scanners evolving in the
survey items and facilitated the enhancement of the questionnaire AEC industry in light of these challenges?
(Hamid and Embi, 2020; Fanos et al., 2020). The analysis facilitated the
identification of clusters of challenges that exhibited a high degree of The insights and responses from the validation survey were
coherence and formed distinct factors. The interpretability of the factors employed to validate and enhance the final model of challenges asso­
was improved through the utilization of Varimax rotation, which aimed ciated with adopting 3D laser scanners in the AEC industry.
to maximize the variance of the factor loadings and streamline the
structure.
Furthermore, the dependability of the information was evaluated
through the utilization of Cronbach’s alpha coefficient. This metric
assessed the degree of internal consistency and reliability of the survey

4
A. Waqar et al. Applications in Engineering Science 16 (2023) 100160

4. Results and analysis Table 3

Challenges with named constructs.
4.1. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) Phases Assigned Challenges
Code
The exploratory factor analysis (EFA) outcomes of the variables Technical CH-R5 A lack of cognizance and comprehension of laser
associated with the challenges of adopting 3D laser scanners in the AEC Challenges scanning technology among professionals in the
industry are presented in Table 2 through the rotated component matrix. AEC industry.
The presented table displays the factor loadings of each variable CH-R1 Data processing and analysis complexity
necessitate dedicated software and hardware
distributed among four components (Ting and Taib, 2018; Ibrahim et al., infrastructure.
2019). Cronbach’s alpha coefficients are furnished to evaluate each CH-R10 Scalability limitations for certain reflective or
constituent’s internal consistency or reliability. Variables, specifically transparent materials or surfaces.
CH-R3, CH-R14, and CH-R9, were eliminated from the analysis due to CH-R8 Limited resources and support for resolving
technical issues and ensuring software
inadequate factor loadings (below 0.5) or cross-loading errors. The
compatibility.
report includes the eigenvalues and the proportion of variance Operational CH-R15 Perceived risk associated with combining laser
accounted for by each component, which offers insights into the Challenges scanning technology into existing project
importance and impact of each factor in elucidating the total variance in timelines and schedules.
the dataset. The findings presented in this study serve to enhance and CH-R11 Special training and knowledge are needed to
operate and interpret laser scanning data.
authenticate the factor configuration of the obstacles encountered in CH-R6 Integration of laser scanning data into existing
implementing 3D laser scanners within the AEC sector. design and construction workflows is
Table 3 delineates the challenges that have been identified con­ challenging.
cerning the adoption of 3D laser scanners within the AEC industry. These CH-R4 Difficulties in precisely depicting intricate
architectural and structural details.
challenges have been classified into four distinct constructs: Technical
CH-R12 Absence of standardized protocols and
Challenges, Operational Challenges, Awareness Challenges, and Eco­ guidelines for the acquisition and processing of
nomic Challenges. laser scanning data.
The technical challenges refer to the aspects of laser scanning tech­ Awareness CH-R16 There are legal and regulatory factors to
nology related to its technical features. The challenges faced in the AEC Challenges consider regarding data privacy, ownership, and
intellectual property.
industry include insufficient awareness and comprehension among
CH-R18 Change aversion and unwillingness to embrace
professionals (CH-R5), intricacies in data processing and analysis (CH- new technologies.
R1), restricted scalability for specific materials or surfaces (CH-R10), CH-R2 The perception is that laser scanning only
and insufficient resources and assistance for addressing technical applies to project types or industries, thereby
limiting its adoption in the AEC sector.
problems (CH-R8).
Economic CH-R13 Lack of affordable and readily available laser
The operational challenges pertain to the pragmatic execution and Challenges scanning solutions.
assimilation of laser scanning technology within pre-existing workflows. CH-R17 High cost of apparatus and maintenance for
The challenges, as mentioned earlier, include perceived risks of project laser scanning.
timelines and schedules (CH-R15), the necessity for specialized training CH-R7 Dependence on external service providers for
laser scanning services, resulting in additional
and knowledge (CH-R11), obstacles in the integration of laser scanning
costs and delays.
data into design and construction workflows (CH-R6), and difficulties in CH-R19 The particularly time-consuming data
accurately representing complex architectural and structural details acquisition process for large-scale initiatives.
(CH-R4). Furthermore, the need for established protocols and guidelines
for acquiring and processing data (CH-R12) presents additional opera­
tional obstacles. technology are a significant concern. The factors mentioned earlier
The challenges of awareness and perception of laser scanning comprise legal and regulatory aspects of data privacy and intellectual
property (CH-R16), reluctance to adopt novel technologies and resis­
tance to change (CH-R18), and a restricted perception of laser scan­
Table 2 ning’s applicability to certain project types or industries, thereby
Rotated component matrix. constraining its adoption in the AEC domain (CH-R2).
The economic challenges associated with implementing laser scan­
Variables Component Cronbach Alpha
ning technology are related to the financial ramifications. Several
1 2 3 4 challenges have been identified in the literature, namely the absence of
CH-R5 .832 0.877 reasonably priced and conveniently available solutions (CH-R13), the
CH-R1 .782 elevated expenses linked to equipment and upkeep (CH-R17), the
CH-R10 .736
dependence on external service providers leading to supplementary
CH-R8 .679
CH-R15 .807 0.814 costs and delays (CH-R7), and the laborious data acquisition procedure
CH-R11 .773 for extensive undertakings (CH-R19).
CH-R6 .702 The study comprehensively comprehends the various hindrances and
CH-R4 .662 factors involved in implementing 3D laser scanners in the AEC industry
CH-R12 .618
CH-R16 .812 0.857
by classifying the challenges into these four constructs.
CH-R18 .747 Following the findings from EFA, four research hypotheses, as indi­
CH-R2 .684 cated in the hypothesized framework of Fig. 2, were devised as follows.
CH-R13 .814 0.805
CH-R17 .756
• H1: Operational challenges significantly impact the adoption of 3D
CH-R7 .667
CH-R19 .613 laser scanner adoption in the AEC industry.
Eigen Value 4.268 4.844 3.227 3.652 • H2: Technical challenges significantly impact the adoption of 3D
% Variance 13.423 12.577 12.274 11.212 laser scanner adoption in the AEC industry.
CH-R3, CH-R14 and CH-R9 were excluded due to loading less than 0.5 or cross-loading • H3: Awareness challenges significantly impact the adoption of 3D
error. laser scanner adoption in the AEC industry.

5
A. Waqar et al.
Fig. 2. Hypothesized framework.
• H4: Economic challenges significantly impact the adoption of 3D
laser scanner adoption in the AEC industry.
4.2. Demographics
The main questionnaire sample consisted of individuals with diverse
educational backgrounds, organizational affiliations, and positions
within the AEC industry, as indicated in Fig. 3. Regarding educational
attainment, a significant proportion of participants obtained a Bache­
lor’s degree (BSc), 42 %, while 36 % held a Master’s degree (MSc).
Furthermore, 12 % of the population held a diploma, 8 % possessed a
PhD, and the remaining 2 % had alternative educational credentials. The
study sample predominantly comprised individuals serving in
contractor positions, accounting for 63 % of the sample, followed by
clients at 26 %, and consultants at 11 %, in terms of their organizational
affiliations. As mentioned earlier, the distribution indicates the varied
viewpoints and backgrounds present across various segments of the AEC
sector. Concerning present job positions, the majority of participants,
constituting 37 %, occupied managerial positions, followed by site en­
gineers at 22 %, senior managers at 13 %, design engineers at 21 %, and
directors at 7 %. The aforementioned position categories denote the
manifestation of distinct tiers of accountability and proficiency within
the AEC sector, thereby augmenting the diversity of viewpoints in the
investigation.
Fig. 3. Demographics.
6
Applications in Engineering Science 16 (2023) 100160
4.3. Structure equation modeling (SEM)
4.3.1. Measurement model
Table 4 presents the statistical measures of reliability and validity for
the four constructs identified in the study: Awareness Challenges, Eco­
nomic Challenges, Operational Challenges, and Technical Challenges.
The reliability evaluation was conducted using Cronbach’s alpha coef­
ficient, a statistical measure that gauges the internal consistency of the
items within each construct (Wei et al., 2019; Kadhim et al., 2021). The
reliability of the constructs was deemed satisfactory, as evidenced by
Cronbach’s alpha values that fell within the range of 0.736–0.873. This
suggests that each construct’s components exhibit reliable alignment
with the targeted notion (Rosli and Razak, 2016; Massoud et al., 2016).
The composite reliability, measured by the coefficients of rho-a and
rho-c, assesses the general reliability of the construct in its entirety. The
results indicate that the composite reliability values for the constructs
were within an acceptable range, ranging from 0.772 to 0.891.
Comparative statistics of reliability are presented in Fig. 4.
The validity evaluation was conducted using the Average Variance
Extracted (AVE) technique, which quantifies the extent to which the
construct accounts for variance in relation to measurement error. The
obtained AVE values ranged from 0.589 to 0.797 and surpassed the
recommended threshold of 0.5, thus signifying satisfactory convergent
validity. In general, the statistical measures of reliability and validity
suggest that the measurement model employed to evaluate the obstacles
encountered in the implementation of 3D laser scanners in the AEC
sector is dependable and sound, instilling assurance in the precision and
uniformity of the measurements of the construct (Waqar et al., 2023c;
Poux et al., 2022).
The outcomes of the Fornell-Larcker criterion are displayed in
Table 5, which evaluates the discriminant validity of the constructs
through an analysis of the correlations between constructs and the
square root of the AVE values. The table’s diagonal elements denote the
square root of the AVE values corresponding to each construct. The non-
diagonal elements denote the interrelationships among the constructs
Table 4
Model reliability and validity statistics.
CA CR (rho-a) CR (rho-c) AVE
Awareness Challenges 0.796 0.799 0.88 0.71
Economic Challenges 0.736 0.771 0.847 0.65
Operational Challenges 0.873 0.891 0.922 0.797
Technical Challenges 0.767 0.772 0.851 0.589
A. Waqar et al. Applications in Engineering Science 16 (2023) 100160

Fig. 4. Comparison of model reliability and validity statistics.

components. Lower values indicate a greater degree of discriminant

Table 5
validity, suggesting that the constructs being measured are more sepa­
Fornell Larker criteria results.
rate from each other, which is in accordance with Ahmad Jamal et al.
Constructs Awareness Economic Operational Technical (2022). Conversely, larger values reflect the possibility of overlap or
Challenges Challenges Challenges Challenges
convergent validity between the constructs. The numerical values
Awareness 0.843 represent the extent to which the constructs overlap or share variance,
Challenges and it is widely accepted that values below 0.85 show satisfactory
Economic 0.134 0.806
Challenges
discriminant validity.
Operational 0.304 − 0.076 0.893 Table 7 displays the cross-loadings of the variables onto the four
Challenges constructs, namely Awareness Challenges, Economic Challenges, Oper­
Technical 0.426 0.17 0.214 0.768 ational Challenges, and Technical Challenges. The table displays the
Challenges
correlations between the constructs and each variable. The findings
demonstrate how every variable exhibits a loading effect on the inten­
(Waqar et al., 2023p; Mustafa et al., 2019). The findings suggest that the ded construct. A variable should exhibit a stronger correlation with its
discriminant validity is confirmed as the correlations between the con­ intended construct to ensure convergent validity than other constructs
structs are lower than the square root of the AVE values for each (Ahmad Jamal et al., 2022; Sharif et al., 2020). The variables CH-R16,
construct. The correlation coefficient between Awareness Challenges CH-R18, and CH-R2 demonstrate significant correlations with the
and Economic Challenges is 0.134, indicating a weak positive relation­ Awareness Challenges construct, suggesting that they are well-aligned
ship (Abd Hamid et al., 2018; Zhang et al., 2016). This value is lower with the intended construct. The Economic Challenges construct ex­
than the square root of the AVE for both constructs, which are 0.843 and hibits robust associations with CH-R13, CH-R19, and CH-R17. The
0.806, respectively. As mentioned earlier, the pattern is noted across all convergent validity of the measurement model is supported by the
pairs of constructs, thereby signifying adequate discriminant validity cross-loadings, showing that the variables mainly correspond with the
among the constructs. The findings presented in this study offer sub­ intended constructs and have weaker correlations with other constructs
stantiation that the constructs under investigation embody different (Kadhim et al., 2021; Ibrahim et al., 2019). The results strengthen the
ideas and are not significantly associated with one another, thereby correlation between the variables and their fundamental constructs in
corroborating the discriminant validity of the measurement model evaluating the difficulties associated with implementing 3D laser scan­
employed. ning technology within the AEC sector.
The HTMT (Heterotrait-Monotrait) statistic in Table 6 is used to Table 8 displays the rank of the variables’ group impact on their
assess the discriminant validity inside a correlation matrix. The study corresponding constructs: Technical Challenges, Economic Challenges,
examines the correlations across several dimensions, such as awareness, Operational Challenges, and Awareness Challenges. The ranking of
economic, operational, and technological issues, in order to determine
whether these correlations exhibit a statistically significant difference
Table 7
compared to correlations within the same construct. The matrix supplied
Cross ladings.
contains values that reflect the HTMT values between the specified
Variables Awareness Economic Operational Technical
Challenges Challenges Challenges Challenges
Table 6 CH-R16 0.825 0.091 0.237 0.329
HTMT statistics. CH-R18 0.863 0.151 0.274 0.376
CH-R2 0.84 0.094 0.257 0.372
Constructs Awareness Economic Operational Technical
CH-R13 0.097 0.725 − 0.011 − 0.057
Challenges Challenges Challenges Challenges
CH-R19 0.053 0.843 − 0.079 0.17
Awareness CH-R17 0.163 0.845 − 0.078 0.232
Challenges CH-R15 0.326 − 0.074 0.922 0.205
Economic 0.167 CH-R4 0.32 − 0.082 0.918 0.214
Challenges CH-R6 0.143 − 0.042 0.835 0.148
Operational 0.352 0.09 CH-R8 0.258 0.125 0.238 0.758
Challenges CH-R5 0.433 0.113 0.15 0.804
Technical 0.541 0.255 0.269 CH-R1 0.312 0.16 0.058 0.719
Challenges CH-R10 0.297 0.131 0.204 0.787

7
A. Waqar et al. Applications in Engineering Science 16 (2023) 100160

Table 8 significance in influencing the adoption trajectory (Poux et al., 2022;

Group impact rank. Mustafa et al., 2019). Fig. 5 presents the total effect on the path along
Variable to Construct Relation Loadings Collinearity Group Rank with p-values. The t-statistics of the variables with their paths are pre­
sented in Fig. 6.
CH-R1 <- Technical Challenges 0.719 1.43 Rank=1
CH-R10 <- Technical Challenges 0.787 1.577 The results of the model’s predictive significance for the construct
CH-R5 <- Technical Challenges 0.804 1.603 "3D Laser Scanner in AEC industry" are shown in Table 11, including the
CH-R8 <- Technical Challenges 0.758 1.517 sum of squares due to the model (SSO), the sum of squares due to error
CH-R13 <- Economic Challenges 0.725 1.42 Rank=4 (SSE), and the coefficient of determination (Q2). The SSO value of
CH-R17 <- Economic Challenges 0.845 1.421
CH-R19 <- Economic Challenges 0.843 1.652
4320.000 denotes the complete variance accounted for by the model.
CH-R15 <- Operational Challenges 0.922 2.897 Rank=3 The residual variation, also known as the unexplained variation, is
CH-R4 <- Operational Challenges 0.918 2.826 represented by the SSE value of 3320.751. The model’s predictive
CH-R6 <- Operational Challenges 0.835 1.908 relevance can be classified as moderate based on the Q2 value of 0.231.
CH-R16 <- Awareness Challenges 0.825 1.638 Rank=2
This implies that the variables and model provided can accurately pre­
CH-R18 <- Awareness Challenges 0.863 1.781
CH-R2 <- Awareness Challenges 0.84 1.68 dict approximately 23.1 % of the variance in the construct (Abd Hamid
et al., 2018; Malini and Putri, 2020). The findings evaluate the model’s
capacity to anticipate and elucidate the fluctuations in implementing 3D
group impact is determined by the loadings of the variables and their laser scanners within the AEC sector.
collinearity with other variables within the same construct (Li et al., The importance and performance map is presented in Fig. 7. All
2022; SHARIF et al., 2020). The Operational Challenges construct is challenges are presented in the map from the perspective of their
strongly associated with CH-R15, CH-R4, and CH-R6, as evidenced by importance and performance in the generated structure model. It is
their highest loadings. The top three variables for operational challenges indicated that CH-R13 has the least importance in the model, while its
have been ranked. The variables CH-R16, CH-R18, and CH-R2 exhibit performance impact cannot be ignored as it is significant enough to
the greatest loadings on the Awareness Challenges construct and are create change in the latent variable. CH-R18 is found to be significant
positioned as the only three variables for Awareness Challenges. The from an important perspective, but its performance is relatively lower
variables CH-R13, CH-R17, and CH-R19 display the most substantial than other challenges in the construct (Waqar et al., 2023a). All other
loadings and are the three highest-ranking factors within the Economic variables lie in the adequate performance range, which ultimately re­
Challenges construct. The Technical Challenges construct exhibits high sults in engaging in a highly appropriate structure model.
loadings for CH-R1, CH-R10, CH-R5, and CH-R8, with CH-R1 being the
highest-ranked variable. The utilization of the group impact rank can 4.4. Model validation
offer valuable insights into the comparative significance and sway of
individual variables within their respective constructs when evaluating Table 12 displays the outcomes of the validation process, which
the difficulties associated with adopting 3D laser scanners in the AEC involved ten professionals from the industry. These experts were asked
sector. four specific questions to assess the difficulties of implementing 3D laser
The inter-correlation matrix of the variables in the study is presented scanners in the AEC sector. Inquiry number one entailed soliciting the
in Table 9. The presented matrix depicts the interrelationships among expert viewpoint of the participants regarding the magnitude of the
various obstacles to the assimilation of 3D laser scanners within the AEC identified challenges. The findings suggest that a significant proportion
sector. The degree of association between pairs of variables is repre­ of the participants (80 %) rated the challenges with a score of 4 or 5,
sented in the matrix by correlation coefficients. There is a moderately signifying their perception of these challenges as substantial impedi­
positive relationship between CH-R1 and CH-R10 (r = 0.424). The ments to the adoption of 3D laser scanners. The second inquiry was
correlation coefficient between CH-R4 and CH-R6 is 0.657, signifying a designed to elicit prospective approaches or remedies suggested by the
robust positive correlation. The matrix facilitates the comprehension of specialists to tackle these difficulties. Although the table does not
the interconnections and correlations among the obstacles (Waqar et al., furnish precise responses, it is possible to conduct a more in-depth
2023a, 2023c). Identifying potential patterns or dependencies among analysis of the experts’ answers to discern shared patterns or method­
variables can facilitate comprehension of the intricate interplay of ologies that may prove efficacious in surmounting the challenges that
challenges in adopting 3D laser scanners in the AEC industry. have been identified. The objective of Question 3 was to ascertain the
foremost obstacles based on the expertise of the respondents, which
4.3.2. Structure path analysis warrant prompt consideration. The responses exhibited variability;
The outcomes of the path analysis aimed at investigating the asso­ however, a systematic examination of the trends present within the re­
ciations between the various obstacles and the implementation of 3D sponses can facilitate the identification of the obstacles consistently
laser scanners in the AEC sector are displayed in Table 10. The tabular deemed pivotal by the specialists. Considering the challenges, the fourth
representation comprises data on the aggregate impact, average, stan­ question was designed to investigate the experts’ predictions regarding
dard error, statistical significance, and variance inflation factor of every the future implementation of 3D laser scanners in the AEC sector. The
pathway. The findings suggest that the adoption of 3D laser scanners is presentation of individual responses is not available (Malini and Putri,
significantly influenced by four distinct types of challenges, namely 2020). However, examining the aggregated viewpoints can yield valu­
Awareness Challenges, Economic Challenges, Operational Challenges, able perspectives on the expected course of adoption and the probable
and Technical Challenges, all of which have a positive impact. The re­ consequences of the identified obstacles. The validation outcomes ob­
sults indicate that the challenges examined in this study significantly tained from the feedback of 10 industry experts are of great value as they
impact the adoption process, with total effects ranging from 0.342 to offer insights and viewpoints on the importance of the challenges, po­
0.432. The statistical significance of the relationships between the tential strategies, crucial areas for focus, and future adoption trends of
challenges and the adoption of 3D laser scanners is indicated by the p- implementing 3D laser scanners in the AEC sector. The final validated
values associated with each path, all of which are less than 0.001. framework is presented in Fig. 8.
Furthermore, the Variance Inflation Factor (VIF) values, which range
from 1.091 to 1.269, suggest that the issue of multicollinearity does not 5. Discussion
pose a significant concern in the current model. The path analysis offers
significant insights into the direct impacts of various obstacles on Operational Challenges construct includes CH-R15, CH-R6, and CH-
implementing 3D laser scanners in the AEC sector, underscoring their R4. The hypothesis, "H1: Operational challenges have a significant

8
A. Waqar et al. Applications in Engineering Science 16 (2023) 100160

Table 9
Empirical correlation matrix.

impact on the adoption of 3D laser scanner adoption in AEC industry", is considerable operational challenges, including perceived risks, inte­
fully accepted considering the significant results. Prior research has gration difficulties, and the intricacy of capturing details. These insights
recognized the existence of operational impediments when implement­ are distinct and valuable (Mirzaei et al., 2022; Khan et al., 2023). This
ing novel technologies within the AEC sector. The study has identified research contributes to the existing body of literature by elucidating the

9
A. Waqar et al. Applications in Engineering Science 16 (2023) 100160

Table 10 CH-R8. The hypothesis, "H2: Technical challenges have a significant

Path analysis results. impact on the adoption of 3D laser scanner adoption in the AEC in­
Path Total Mean SE p- VIF dustry", is fully accepted considering the significant results. Prior
Effect values research has acknowledged the existence of technical obstacles in the
Awareness Challenges -> 3D 0.421 0.419 0.031 <0.001 1.244 integration of novel technologies within the AEC sector. However, the
Laser Scanner in the AEC present investigation has identified distinct challenges that have yet to
industry be previously reported (Hosamo and Hosamo, 2022; Myint Naing et al.,
Economic Challenges -> 3D 0.342 0.340 0.025 <0.001 1.178 2022). The successful adoption of 3D laser scanners necessitates
Laser Scanner in the AEC
Industry
addressing specific technical obstacles, including cognizance and
Operational Challenges -> 3D 0.365 0.364 0.026 <0.001 1.269 comprehension, scalability limitations, and limited resources and sup­
Laser Scanner in the AEC port. The present study adds to the extant literature by elucidating the
industry distinct technical obstacles encountered by practitioners in the AEC
Technical Challenges -> 3D 0.432 0.431 0.030 1.091
<0.001
sector. It underscores the significance of mitigating these challenges to
Laser Scanner in the AEC
industry facilitate the broader acceptance of 3D laser scanning technology.
Awareness challenges construct includes CH-R16, CH-R18, and CH-
R2. The hypothesis, "H1: Awareness challenges have a significant
unique operational barriers practitioners face when adopting 3D laser
scanning technology. The successful integration of laser scanning tech­ Table 11
nology into existing project processes is contingent upon addressing the Model predictive relevance.
challenges. Of particular importance are the unique operational chal­
Construct SSO SSE Q2
lenges arising in adopting 3D laser scanners in the AEC industry.
Technical challenges construct includes CH-R5, CH-R1, CH-R10, and 3D Laser Scanner in the AEC industry 4320.000 3320.751 0.231

Fig. 5. Total effect and p-value of model links.

Fig. 6. t-statistic of paths in the model.

10
A. Waqar et al. Applications in Engineering Science 16 (2023) 100160

Fig. 7. Importance-performance map.

perception, which offer novel perspectives (Waqar et al., 2022; Razali

Table 12
et al., 2022). The results underscore the necessity of tackling legal im­
Validation results.
plications and fostering a favourable outlook towards technological
Respondent Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 advancements within the AEC sector. The research outcomes of the
1 4 5 4 4 difficulties in raising awareness make notable scholarly contributions by
2 4 4 4 4 highlighting the specific factors that impact the uptake of 3D laser
3 4 4 5 5
scanners within the AEC sector.
4 4 4 4 3
5 4 4 3 5 Economic challenges construct includes CH-R13, CH-R17, and CH-
6 4 5 4 4 R19. The hypothesis, "H1: Economic challenges have a significant
7 4 5 4 5 impact on the adoption of 3D laser scanner adoption in the AEC in­
8 5 5 3 4 dustry", is fully accepted considering the significant results. Prior studies
9 5 5 4 4
have acknowledged that economic factors are pivotal in adopting
10 4 5 5 4
11 5 3 4 5 technology. The study has identified distinct economic challenges that
12 5 3 4 3 offer valuable insights, including affordability and the laborious process
13 5 5 5 3 of data acquisition (Shehzad et al., 2022; Poux et al., 2022). The results
underscore the significance of mitigating cost-related obstacles and
optimizing the data acquisition process to augment the uptake of 3D
laser scanners within the AEC. This study’s distinctive merit is its
identification and scrutiny of precise economic obstacles that pertain to
the AEC industry, furnishing valuable discernments for professionals
and scholars in the domain.
Comparing the results of the study on challenges to the adoption of
3D laser scanners in the AEC industry in Malaysia with other countries
such as China, the USA, UK, Australia, Germany, Canada, Indonesia,
Japan, and Thailand could provide valuable insights into the univer­
sality of these challenges and how they vary across different regions
with diverse levels of digital technology adoption. China has expedi­
tiously adopted digital technologies and advancements within the AEC
domain. The issues mentioned in Malaysia, including technological
complications and economic limits, may also be applicable in the
context of China. Nevertheless, the extensive acceptance rate, imple­
mentation of larger-scale projects, and complex regulatory environment
in China may provide more obstacles. The United States, renowned for
its technical breakthroughs, may have similar obstacles as Malaysia,
although is expected to possess a better developed ecosystem to tackle
these concerns. In the United Kingdom, where there is a significant
prevalence of BIM implementation, the difficulties associated with
interoperability and integration may be more conspicuous. Australia,
due to its expansive and varied geographical features, may suffer
distinctive operational difficulties, while Germany’s construction sector,
Fig. 8. Final framework of challenges of 3D laser scanner adoption in the which is subject to stringent regulations, may face specific hurdles
AEC industry.
related to awareness and regulatory compliance. Canada, like to the
United States, may have comparable difficulties, but with greater
impact on the adoption of 3D laser scanner adoption in AEC industry", is emphasis on the intricacies of regional construction laws and regula­
fully accepted considering the significant results. Prior research has tions. Indonesia, Japan, and Thailand may have comparable difficulties
recognized the significance of awareness of obstacles in adopting tech­ to Malaysia, particularly with economic limitations and awareness
nology. The study has identified distinct challenges related to aware­ concerns. Nevertheless, the differences in legislative frameworks,
ness, including legal and regulatory factors and limited applicability

11
A. Waqar et al.
building methodologies, and the pace of technology integration may
lead to changes in the magnitude and characteristics of these difficulties.
The difficulties highlighted in this research are derived from a
comprehensive review of worldwide literature and are expected to
possess broad applicability. However, it is important to note that the
extent and characteristics of these issues may exhibit substantial varia­
tion across different countries. Various factors, including legal frame­
works, cultural attitudes towards technology, and the maturity of the
AEC business, might have an impact on the particular issues encoun­
tered. A cross-country comparative research would be of significant
value from a future viewpoint, as it would contribute to a more
comprehensive knowledge of the manifestation and resolution of these
difficulties across various global settings.
5.1. Empirical and theoretical contributions
This study’s empirical contributions are rooted in its thorough
analysis of the obstacles that impact the integration of 3D laser scanners
within the AEC sector. The study utilizes a systematic questionnaire and
statistical methods to present empirical findings regarding the consid­
erable influence of awareness and economic, operational, and technical
difficulties on the adoption process. The discoveries enhance the current
knowledge pool by affirming the postulated connections and accentu­
ating the obstacles that impede implementation.
The study’s theoretical contributions are derived from its conceptual
framework and the discernment of distinct challenges inherent in each
construct. This study adds to what is already known about how the AEC
sector adopts new technologies. Specifically, it sheds light on the unique
obstacles associated with awareness, economic, operational, and tech­
nical factors. As mentioned earlier, the statement enhances the theo­
retical underpinnings by emphasizing the significance of tackling these
obstacles to promote the effective implementation of 3D laser scanners.
This study contributes to the theoretical framework by enhancing the
comprehension of the obstacles that affect adopting technology in the
AEC context.
5.2. Managerial suggestions
Drawing from the results of this investigation, several managerial
recommendations may be posited to surmount obstacles and encourage
the implementation of 3D laser scanners within the AEC sector. To
enhance knowledge dissemination, it is recommended to create tailored
awareness initiatives to educate professionals on the advantages and
potential uses of 3D laser scanning technology. These programmes
should also address concerns regarding data privacy and dispel mis­
conceptions about the technology’s restricted applicability. This study
also addresses economic considerations by investigating feasible alter­
natives for cost-effective and easily accessible laser scanning solutions,
negotiating competitive pricing for equipment and upkeep, and opti­
mizing the data acquisition process to minimize expenses and time
consumption. To address technical challenges, allocating appropriate
resources towards developing specialized software and hardware
infrastructure is necessary.
Additionally, fostering collaboration among stakeholders is crucial
to ensure the compatibility and scalability of the technology. Through
the implementation of managerial recommendations, entities operating
within the AEC sector can effectively address the challenges that have
been identified and promote the successful integration of 3D laser
scanning technology. This, in turn, can lead to enhanced project effi­
ciency and improved outcomes.
5.3. Limitations and future implications
This research provides significant contributions towards under­
standing the obstacles that impede the integration of 3D laser scanners
in the AEC sector. However, it is crucial to recognize the study’s
12
Applications in Engineering Science 16 (2023) 100160
constraints. The results may be limited in applicability to other situa­
tions because the study was conducted in a specific location. The study’s
methodology relied upon self-reported data obtained from a limited
sample size, potentially leading to response bias and compromising the
representativeness of the findings. Subsequent investigations may
overcome these constraints by conducting extensive studies in varied
geographical areas and integrating empirical measures to authenticate
the outcomes. Furthermore, delving into the enduring impacts of sur­
mounting these obstacles and examining the possible advantages of
incorporating technology would enhance scholarly inquiry in this field.
6. Conclusion
The present study sought to examine the impediments that affect the
implementation of 3D laser scanning technology in the AEC sector. The
results of the empirical study indicate that technical, operational,
awareness, and economic challenges significantly influence the adop­
tion of this technology. The outcomes of this study augment the extant
corpus of knowledge by furnishing a comprehensive comprehension of
the obstacles that impede the extensive adoption of 3D laser scanners in
the AEC sector. The study’s theoretical significance pertains to its ability
to recognize and verify the primary obstacles professionals encounter
when embracing 3D laser scanners. Findings corroborate earlier
research stressing the need to address technical, operational, awareness,
and economic factors to facilitate the successful adoption of emerging
technologies in the AEC sector. The study’s distinctive contribution
pertains to its particular emphasis on 3D laser scanners and its thorough
analysis of the challenges within this framework. The research results
propose various suggestions from a managerial standpoint.
To begin with, resolving technical obstacles necessitates allocating
sufficient resources, ensuring software compatibility, and augmenting
the expertise of practitioners. The mitigation of operational challenges
can be effectively addressed by implementing training initiatives, inte­
grating laser scanning technology within established workflows, and
managing perceived risks. Thirdly, addressing awareness challenges
necessitates the implementation of awareness campaigns, legal frame­
works, and initiatives to foster technology acceptance. Finally, economic
obstacles can be alleviated by implementing cost-efficient strategies,
ensuring the availability of reasonably priced alternatives, and opti­
mizing data collection procedures. Although the research offers signif­
icant contributions, it is not exempt from constraints. The study’s
limited sample size restricts the extent to which the results can be
applied to a broader population.
Furthermore, the research was centered on a particular geographical
area, which may affect the generalizability of the findings. Subsequent
investigations ought to redress these constraints and scrutinize the
enduring impacts and advantages of surmounting these obstacles. Using
3D laser scanners, the AEC sector can proficiently adopt and exploit their
capabilities, resulting in superior project results and heightened efficacy
within the constructed context.
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.
Data availability
Data will be made available on request.
References
Abbas, M.A., Chong, A.K., Mohamad Azmi, M.A.A., Fuad, N.A., Aspuri, A., Mohd
Salleh, M.F., Majid, Z., Idris, K.M., Opaluwa, Y.D., Mustafar, M.A., et al., 2020.
A. Waqar et al.
Quality assessment of terrestrial laser scanner surface deviation analysis in
vegetation slope monitoring. Eng. Lett.
Abd Hamid, A.B., Mohd Taib, M.Z., Abdul Razak, A.H.N., Embi, M.R, 2018. Building
information modelling: challenges and barriers in implement of BIM for interior
design industry in malaysia. In: Proceedings of the IOP Conference Series: Earth and
Environmental Science.
Ahmad Jamal, K.A., Shu, C.E.E., Khiyon, N.A., Wahab, N.A.A.B.D., 2022. Scan-to-BIM
approach towards producing quantity take-off of heritage buildings in Malaysia.
J. Eng. Sci. Technol.
AlMashjary, B., Zulkifly, U.K.Z., Razak, A.S.A., 2020. Establishing key factors towards
implementing integrated building information modeling (BIM) in AEC industry:
Malaysia study. J. Build. Perform.
Almukhtar, A., Saeed, Z.O., Abanda, H., Tah, J.H.M., 2021. Reality capture of buildings
using 3D laser scanners. CivilEng. https://doi.org/10.3390/civileng2010012.
Arianna Harissa Mohammad Azlan, N., Omar, R., Mohamed, S., 2022. The augmented
reality (AR) technology modernized the evolution of construction industry in
Malaysia. Res. Manag. Technol. Bus.
Du, H., Chen, X., Xi, J., Yu, C., Zhao, B., 2017. Development and verification of a novel
robot-integrated fringe projection 3D scanning system for large-scale metrology.
Sensors (Switzerland). https://doi.org/10.3390/s17122886.
Elhassan, W., 2016. 3D modeling of indoor building geometry using unmanned aerial
systems. Thesis Msc.
Fanos, A.M., Pradhan, B., Alamri, A., Lee, C.W., 2020. Machine learning-based and 3d
kinematic models for rockfall hazard assessment using LiDAR data and GIS. Remote
Sens. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs12111755.
Hamid, A.B.A., Embi, M.R., 2020. Key factors of BIM implementation for interior design
firms in Malaysia. Int. J. Sustain. Constr. Eng. Technol. https://doi.org/10.30880/
ijscet.2020.11.01.017.
Hosamo, H.H., Hosamo, M.H., 2022. Digital twin technology for bridge maintenance
using 3D laser scanning: a review. Adv. Civ. Eng.
Husin, N.A., Khairunniza-Bejo, S., Abdullah, A.F., Kassim, M.S.M., Ahmad, D., Azmi, A.N.
N., 2020. Application of ground-based LiDAR for analysing oil palm canopy
properties on the occurrence of basal stem rot (BSR) disease. Sci. Rep. https://doi.
org/10.1038/s41598-020-62275-6.
Ibrahim, F.S., Shariff, N.D., Esa, M., Rahman, R.A., 2019. The barriers factors and driving
forces forbimimplementationin Malaysian AEC companies. J. Adv. Res. Dyn. Control
Syst.
Ismail, A.S., Ali, K.N., Mustaffa, N.E., A, Iahad, N., Yusuf, B.Y., 2019. Enhancing the
graduates’ employability and career development through building information
modelling intensive training. Int. J. Built Environ. Sustain. https://doi.org/
10.11113/ijbes.v6.n1-2.387.
Kadhim, N., Mhmood, A.D., Abd-Ulabbas, A.H., 2021. The creation of 3D building
models using laser-scanning data for BIM modelling. IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng.
https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899x/1105/1/012101.
Khan, M.; Waqar, A.; Bheel, N.; Shafiq, N.; Sor, N.; Radu, D.; Benjeddou, O. Optimization
of fresh and mechanical characteristics of carbon fiber-reinforced concrete
composites using response surface technique. 2023, 13.
López, F.J., Lerones, P.M., Llamas, J., Gómez-García-Bermejo, J., Zalama, E., 2018.
A review of heritage building information modeling (H-BIM). Multimodal Technol.
Interact.
Li, F., Li, H., Kim, M.K., 2022. Registration-free point cloud generation technique using
rotating mirrors. Comput. Civ. Infrastruct. Eng. https://doi.org/10.1111/
mice.12707.
Lo Brutto, M., Iuculano, E., Lo Giudice, P., 2021. Integrating topographic,
photogrammetric and laser scanning techniques for a scan-to-BIM process. In:
Proceedings of the International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing
and Spatial Information Sciences - ISPRS Archives.
Massoud, M.M.H., Alam, M.K., Rahman, N.A., Kida, A., Mizushima, H., Osuga, N., 2016.
Validity and reliability of arch size measurements using laser scanned 3D model.
J. Hard Tissue Biol. https://doi.org/10.2485/jhtb.25.335.
Malini, H., Putri, A.N., 2020. Competitiveness and market concentration of Islamic
banking industry: a comparison study between Indonesia and Malaysia. Sriwij. Int. J.
Dyn. Econ. Bus. https://doi.org/10.29259/sijdeb.v4i3.175-190.
Mirzaei, K., Arashpour, M., Asadi, E., Masoumi, H., Bai, Y., Behnood, A., 2022. 3D point
cloud data processing with machine learning for construction and infrastructure
applications: a comprehensive review. Adv. Eng. Informatics.
Murshidi, F., Syafuan, W.M., Ab Rahman, A.A., Ismail, N., Husin, R.M., Hj Sulaiman, S.
A., 2021. Application of terrestrial laser scanner for three dimensional (3D) as-built
indoor civil engineering department UPNM laboratory. In: Proceedings of the 2021
IEEE 11th International Conference on System Engineering and Technology, ICSET
2021 - Proceedings.
Mustafa, M.H., Ali, M., Mohd Ismail, K., Has Yun Hashim, K.S., Mohd Suhaimi, M.S.,
2019. BIM backed decision support system in the management of heritage building.
Int. J. Built Environ. Sustain. https://doi.org/10.11113/ijbes.v6.n2.357.
Myint Naing, T., Nobahar Sadeghifam, A., Selowara Joo, M., 2022. Identifying the
critical barriers factors to the implementation of building information modelling
(BIM) in the Sarawak’s construction industry. Civ. Sustain. Urban Eng. https://doi.
org/10.53623/csue.v2i1.83.
Neza, I., Mohamed, M.I., Syafuan, W.M., 2022. Surface waviness evaluation of two
different types of material of a multi-purpose hall using terrestrial laser scanner
(TLS). IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899x/1229/1/
012002.
Nguyen, L.V., La, H.M., Sanchez, J., Vu, T., 2016. A smart shoe for building a real-time
3D map. Autom. Constr. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2016.03.001.
13
Applications in Engineering Science 16 (2023) 100160
Noor, N.M., Ibrahim, I., Abdullah, A., Aiman Abdullah, A.A., 2020. Information fusion
for cultural heritage three-dimensional modeling of malay cities. ISPRS Int. J. Geo-
Information. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi9030177.
Pica, D., Abanda, F.H., 2021. Emerging BIM-3D-laser scanning integration in
construction practice. Adv. Sci., Technol. Innov.
Poux, F., Mattes, C., Selman, Z., Kobbelt, L., 2022. Automatic region-growing system for
the segmentation of large point clouds. Autom. Constr. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
autcon.2022.104250.
Rajabi, M.S., Radzi, A.R., Rezaeiashtiani, M., Famili, A., Rashidi, M.E., Rahman, R.A.,
2022. Key assessment criteria for organizational BIM capabilities: a cross-regional
study. Buildings. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings12071013.
Ramonell, C., Chacón, R., 2022. Open-source terrestrial laser scanner for the
virtualization of geometrical entities in AEC classrooms. Comput. Appl. Eng. Educ.
https://doi.org/10.1002/cae.22499.
Rashidi, M., Mohammadi, M., Kivi, S.S., Abdolvand, M.M., Truong-Hong, L., Samali, B.,
2020. A decade of modern bridge monitoring using terrestrial laser scanning: review
and future directions. Remote Sens.
Razali, A.F., Ariff, M.F.M., Majid, Z., 2022. A hybrid point cloud reality capture from
terrestrial laser scanning and UAV-photogrammetry. In: Proceedings of the
International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial
Information Sciences - ISPRS Archives.
Rosli, M.F., Razak, A.S., Amer Younus, M., 2016. To BIM or Not to BIM: a pilot study on
university of malaya’s architectural students’ software preference. J. Des. Built
Environ. https://doi.org/10.22452/jdbe.vol16no1.2.
Salleh, H., Jee, Y.J., Abdul-Samad, Z., Hanid, M., Mohamed Sabli, N.A., 2022.
Implementation of heritage building information modelling (HBIM) for construction
and demolition waste management. Plan. Malaysia. https://doi.org/10.21837/pm.
v20i24.1207.
Sepasgozaar, S.M.E., Shirowzhan, S., Wang, C., 2017. A scanner technology acceptance
model for construction projects. In: Proceedings of the Procedia Engineering.
Sharif, M.D., Hazumi, H., Hishamuddin, H., A, I., 2020. The advantages of scan-to-BIM in
documenting cultural heritage assets in Malaysia. Int. J. Creat. Futur. Herit. https://
doi.org/10.47252/teniat.v8i1.289.
Shehzad, H.M.F., Ibrahim, R., Khaidzir, K.A.M., Maqbool, F., Fuady, M.J., Ilyas, M.,
Yusof, A.F., 2022. Bin determinants of building information modeling adoption: the
case of the Malaysian construction industry. J. Inf. Technol. Manag. https://doi.org/
10.22059/JITM.2022.84885.
Singh, R., Khurana, A., Kumar, S., 2020. Optimized 3D laser point cloud reconstruction
by gradient descent technique. Ind. Rob. https://doi.org/10.1108/IR-12-2019-0244.
Sinoh, S.S., Othman, F., Ibrahim, Z., 2020. Critical success factors for BIM
implementation: a Malaysian case study. Eng. Constr. Archit. Manag. https://doi.
org/10.1108/ECAM-09-2019-0475.
Tahar, K., 2017. 3D slope based on different scanning resolution using geodetic laser
scanner at Tanah Rata Cameron Highland. Open Access J. Sci. https://doi.org/
10.15406/oajs.2017.01.00008.
Ting, T.Y., Taib, M., 2018. The awareness of building information modeling in Malaysia
construction industry from contractor perspective. Malaysian Constr. Res. J.
Tkáč, M., Mésároš, P., 2016. Terrestrial laser scanning – point cloud in building
construction. Czech J. Civ. Eng. https://doi.org/10.51704/cjce.2016.vol2.iss2.
pp156-161.
Waqar, A., Ahmed, W., 2023. Reimagining construction safety: unveiling the impact of
building information modeling (BIM) implementation. Saf. Extrem. Environ. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s42797-023-00086-4.
Waqar, A.; Almujibah, H. Factors influencing adoption of digital twin advanced
technologies for smart city development : evidence from Malaysia. 2023, doi:
10.3390/buildings13030775.
Waqar, A.; Othman, I. Challenges to the implementation of BIM for the risk management
of oil and gas construction projects : structural equation modeling approach
sustainability challenges to the implementation of BIM for the risk management of
oil and gas construction project. 2023, doi: 10.3390/su15108019.
Waqar, A.; Othman, I. Impact of 3D printing on the overall project success of residential
construction projects using structural equation modelling. 2023.
Waqar, A., Khan, M.B., Othman, I., Mansoor, M.S., Shafiq, N., 2022. A systematic
literature review on risk analysis of health and safety in oil refinery and onshore
pipeline construction projects. In: Proceedings of the 2022 International Conference
on Data Analytics for Business and Industry (ICDABI). IEEE, pp. 1–8. October 25.
Waqar, A., Qureshi, A.H., Alaloul, W.S., 2023a. Barriers to building information
modeling (BIM) deployment in small construction projects: malaysian construction
industry. Sustain. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15032477.
Waqar, A.; Othman, I.; Skrzypkowski, K. Evaluation of success of superhydrophobic
coatings in the oil and gas construction industry using structural. 2023.
Waqar, A., Othman, I., Shafiq, N., Mansoor, M.S., 2023c. Applications of AI in oil and gas
projects towards sustainable development: a systematic literature review. Artif.
Intell. Rev. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10462-023-10467-7.
Waqar, A., Othman, I., Shafiq Aiman, M., Basit Khan, M., Islam, M.M., Almujibah, H.,
Abdul Karim, M., 2023d. Analyzing the success of adopting metaverse in
construction industry: structural equation modelling. J. Eng. 2023, 8824795 https://
doi.org/10.1155/2023/8824795.
Waqar, A., Othman, I., Almujibah, H., Hayat, S., 2023e. Implementing building
information modeling (BIM) for the success of geotechnical offshore construction
projects: Malaysian construction industry. Qual. Quant. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s11135-023-01730-8.
Waqar, A., Alharbi, L.A., Abdullah Alotaibi, F., Othman, I., Almujibah, H., 2023f.
Impediment to implementation of internet of things (IOT) for oil and gas
construction project safety: structural equation modeling approach. Structures 57,
105324. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.istruc.2023.105324.
A. Waqar et al.
Waqar, A., Othman, I., Hayat, S., Radu, D., Khan, M.B., Galatanu, T.F., Almujibah, H.R.,
Hadzima-Nyarko, M., Benjeddou, O., 2023g. Building information
modeling&mdash;empowering construction projects with end-to-end life cycle
management. Buildings 13.
Waqar, A., Othman, I., Hayat, S., Radu, D., Khan, M.B., Galatanu, T.F., Almujibah, H.R.,
Hadzima-Nyarko, M., Benjeddou, O., 2023h. Building information
modeling—empowering construction projects with end-to-end life cycle
management. Buildings 13. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings13082041.
Waqar, A., Othman, I., Shafiq, N., Deifalla, A., Ragab, A.E., Khan, M., 2023i.
Impediments in BIM implementation for the risk management of tall buildings. Res.
Eng. 20, 101401 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rineng.2023.101401.
Waqar, A., Othman, I., Radu, D., Ali, Z., Almujibah, H., Hadzima-Nyarko, M., Khan, M.B.,
2023j. Modeling the relation between building information modeling and the success
of construction projects: a structural-equation-modeling approach. Appl. Sci. 13,
0–23. https://doi.org/10.3390/app13159018.
Waqar, A., Hannan Qureshi, A., Othman, I., Saad, N., Azab, M., 2023k. Exploration of
challenges to deployment of blockchain in small construction projects. Ain Shams
Eng. J., 102362 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2023.102362.
Waqar, A., Othman, I., Almujibah, H., Khan, M.B., Alotaibi, S., Elhassan, A.A.M., 2023l.
Factors influencing adoption of digital twin advanced technologies for smart city
development: evidence from Malaysia. Buildings. https://doi.org/10.3390/
buildings13030775.
Waqar, A., Skrzypkowski, K., Almujibah, H., Zagórski, K., Khan, M.B., Zagórska, A.,
Benjeddou, O., 2023m. Success of implementing cloud computing for smart
development in small construction projects. Appl. Sci. https://doi.org/10.3390/
app13095713.
Waqar, A., Khan, M.B., Shafiq, N., Skrzypkowski, K., Zagórski, K., Zagórska, A., 2023p.
Assessment of challenges to the adoption of IOT for the safety management of small
14
Applications in Engineering Science 16 (2023) 100160
construction projects in Malaysia: structural equation modeling approach. Appl. Sci.
13 https://doi.org/10.3390/app13053340.
Wei, O.C., Majid, Z., Setan, H., Ariff, M.F.M., Idris, K.M., Darwin, N., Yusoff, A.R.,
Zainuddin, K., 2019. Three-dimensional recording and photorealistic model
reconstruction for virtual museum application - an experience in Malaysia. In:
Proceedings of the ISPRS Annals of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and
Spatial Information Sciences.
Zakaria, M.H., Idris, K.M., Majid, Z., Ariff, M.F.M., Darwin, N., Abbas, M.A.,
Zainuddin, K., Shukor, R.A., Aziz, M.A., 2019. Practical terrestrial laser scanning
field procedure and point cloud processing for BIM applications - TNB control and
relay room 132/22KV. In: Proceedings of the International Archives of the
Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences - ISPRS
Archives.
Zhang, J., Long, Y., Lv, S., Xiang, Y., 2016. BIM-enabled modular and industrialized
construction in China. In: Proceedings of the Procedia Engineering.
Further Reading
Khan, M.B.; Waqar, A. Carbon fiber-reinforced concrete composites using response.
2023, doi:10.3390/buildings13040852.
Lee, M., Lee, S., Kwon, S., Chin, S., 2017. A study on scan data matching for reverse
engineering of pipes in plant construction. KSCE J. Civ. Eng. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s12205-016-0929-z.
Marzouk, M., 2023. HBIM Framework for Rehabilitation of Heritage Buildings. Springer
Geology.