Next Article in Journal
The Use of Support Vector Machine to Classify Potential Customers for the Wealth Management of a Bank
Previous Article in Journal
Understanding Public Perceptions of Artificial Intelligence in China in Relation to Advanced Air Mobility
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Engineering Proceedings
Volume 84
Issue 1
10.3390/engproc2025084075
engproc-logo
Submit to this Journal
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Proceeding Paper

A Bibliometric Analysis of International Structural Engineering Standards Using VOS Viewer †

by
Andri Irfan Rifai
1,*,
Darius Angtony
1,
Ade Jaya Saputra
1 and
Joewono Prasetijo
2
1
Faculty of Civil Engineering and Planning, Universitas Internasional Batam, Kota Batam 29426, Indonesia
2
Department of Transportation Engineering, Faculty of Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia, Johor Bahru 80536, Malaysia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
†
Presented at the 8th Mechanical Engineering, Science and Technology International Conference, Padang Besar, Perlis, Malaysia, 11–12 December 2024.
Eng. Proc. 2025, 84(1), 75; https://doi.org/10.3390/engproc2025084075
Published: 28 February 2025
(This article belongs to the Proceedings of The 8th Mechanical Engineering, Science and Technology International Conference)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
This study aims to conduct bibliometric analysis based on the keyword data mapping process. Using Publish or Perish Harzing 8, a total of 1000 studies from the year 2000 to 2023 were gathered. These are subsequently reduced to 561 studies due to their relevance to the study’s topic. Documents are obtained as journal articles, books, datasets, reports, components, monographs, and references formatted in RIS data. The network and density of the keywords are visualized using VOS Viewer. The outcome indicates that “standards” and “structure” are still trending topics in global discourse. Studies on these keywords have also grown for the last couple of years, with 2019 being the peak, with 55 studies issued. From a total of 561 studies, North America is at the top, with 164 studies; Asia and Europe are second and third, with 112 and 95 studies, respectively; and Africa and Oceania are last, with 11 and 10 studies, respectively. Therefore, this review can serve as a reference point for additional studies.

1. Introduction

Our cities, homes, and infrastructure are all shaped through construction, a vital element of human civilization. It plays a crucial role in our daily lives, providing shelter, transportation, and essential services. Construction standards are guidelines, specifications, and codes defining the materials, methods, and practices to be followed during construction. A complete system of construction standards has been created and expanded to ensure that building projects are of the highest safety, quality, and sustainability [1]. With construction standards, most of our infrastructure could rise like it is today.
Civil engineering standards are a collection of rules, requirements, and standards that control different facets of civil engineering projects. To guarantee that civil engineering projects are designed, constructed, and maintained to meet safety, quality, and performance requirements, these standards are created and maintained by professional organizations, governmental organizations, and industry bodies [2]. Construction standards are a silent but essential force in the intricate and constantly changing world of construction, where towering skyscrapers reach for the heavens and complex infrastructure networks weave through urban landscapes. These standards, frequently disregarded by the public, are the sector’s unsung heroes, subtly forming the buildings that characterize our contemporary civilization. They are the foundation of safety, quality, and sustainability in the construction sector [3].
Civil engineering standards have evolved throughout time. This is due to the rapid growth of the world and its demand for sustainability in construction [4]. The vibration control of innovative structures [5], which includes sustainability considerations [6], along with creative and efficient structural design, sustainable building design, and sustainability in high-rise building design, has been covered, in addition to a model for the structural health monitoring of high-rise buildings [7]. To put things in perspective, most older structures needed to meet the high standards we do today, but they are less effective and efficient. They need to have the same level of innovation as our current structures. This is merely to demonstrate how far our standards have advanced.
One example of the modern-day usage of construction standards is Raffles City, Chongqing, China, a crucial development for this fast-growing country. This city has two tall skyscrapers, including a tower with a “bow” at roof level. Additionally, every building has a vertical curve resembling sails [8]. Advanced design codes, materials standards, and environmental certifications demonstrate how construction standards can help engineers achieve ambitious goals under challenging environments [9]. This analysis emphasizes the standards that enable Raffles City’s iconic design and the importance of evolving construction codes in shaping the future of high-rise urban developments in seismically active, densely populated areas [10]. Examples of standards for significant high-rise buildings can also be found in countries like the United Arab Emirates, Malaysia, Taiwan, the United States, and the United Kingdom.
Therefore, this study aims to compare different standards throughout the world using VOSviewer Harzing 8 software. VOSviewer is a software used to map data [11]. Bibliometric analysis is believed to be effective at producing datasets that can be used to raise the caliber of research [12]. The bibliometric map’s data distribution includes keyword association, the total studies issued per year, the keyword density, the study based on publisher and type, and the study’s origin by continent. This study is novel in that it covers a wide range of representative papers to reflect the overall status of this subject on civil engineering standards.

2. Literature Review

2.1. Civil Engineering

Before diving into the vast sector of civil engineering, we must first understand the history of civil engineering based on previous articles. Artisans like stonemasons and carpenters, who later became master builders, performed most architectural design and building throughout the ancient and medieval periods [13]. Guilds preserved knowledge, which was rarely replaced by new developments. The infrastructure, roads, and structures already in place were repetitive, and scale increases were gradual. The works of Archimedes, who lived in the third century BC, are among the first instances of a scientific approach to mathematical and physical problems that are relevant to civil engineering [14]. These include Archimedes’ screw and principle, which serve as the foundation for our understanding of buoyancy.
Based on previous articles, there must be a sustainability component to civil engineering, an area of engineering that focuses on the planning, creation, building, and management of the built environment, both natural and artificial [15]. Project development and management for infrastructure, public works, and large-scale construction fall within the purview of civil engineers. This includes a broad range of initiatives and activities that support the advancement and enhancement of the built environment. Therefore, civil engineering is related to knowledge regarding structures, materials science, geography, geology, soils, hydrology, environmental science, mechanics, project management, and other areas [16].
In the broad discipline of civil engineering, there are several sub-disciplines. Based on previous studies, general civil engineers, sometimes called site engineers, collaborate with surveyors and specialist civil engineers to create infrastructure such as cut levels, drainage, paving, sewage services, electricity and communications supplies, and more [16]. In addition to visiting project sites and holding stakeholder meetings [17], site engineers also create construction plans [18]. Engineers utilize the principles of geotechnics, structure, environment, construction engineering [19], and transportation for residential [20], commercial, industrial, and public works initiatives across every aspect and development phase.

2.2. Structural Standards

Structure in civil engineering refers to a constructed object or system comprising linked parts that cooperate to withstand loads and offer a stable configuration. According to previous articles, structures are made to accomplish tasks like carrying weights, enclosing areas, or enabling mobility [21]. Their scale, complexity, and purpose can differ significantly, and they can be anything from tiny residential structures to enormous bridges, towers, and infrastructure. Structural elements include beams, columns, slabs, walls, and foundations. These components create a coherent and reliable system [22].
Construction standards guarantee construction projects’ efficiency, quality, and safety [23]. Standards offer a set of rules that specify the minimal requirements regarding building supplies, techniques, and procedures. These standards were created by professionals in the construction sector and are supported by a great deal of investigation, testing, and analysis. Standards are also evolving to adapt to modern conditions [24]. This study mainly focuses on construction standards. Therefore, based on previous articles, knowing what construction standards genuinely mean is essential. A building standard, sometimes called a construction standard, is a particular collection of rules, guidelines, and requirements that control different facets of construction projects [25]. Within the construction industry, construction standards cover a wide variety of subjects and are necessary for fostering consistency, safety, and effectiveness in the construction of buildings and infrastructure.
When designing a structure, one must consider how these forces will impact the various components and ensure that the system can safely support and distribute the loads [26]. Structural engineers use mathematical and physical principles to create structures that can withstand loads and applied forces [27]. In addition to using physical and mathematical principles, engineers can also use construction standards. Construction standards ensure that safety is considered during a project’s planning and building stages. By establishing minimal safety requirements for tools, materials, and construction techniques, standards ensure that every part of the project complies with safety regulations. Guidelines for safeguarding the public and employees during construction operations are part of the standards for safety in the construction industry [28].
Structural standards also play a role in compliance and innovation, as construction standards guarantee adherence to legal obligations. Building codes establish minimum standards for building supplies, machinery, and construction methods in numerous nations and areas. Compliance with these codes is imperative to secure building permits and approvals, guaranteeing that construction endeavors fulfill legal prerequisites [29]. Meanwhile, innovation in the modern era reflects efforts to gain a competitive edge and raise the total effectiveness of systems and goods regarding technology, economy, and the environment [30]. Innovation standards also stimulate R&D in the building sector, resulting in new and enhanced tools, materials, and building techniques that raise construction efficiency, quality, and safety standards.

2.3. Types and Materials of Structures

According to Asperti and Longo, structures can be broadly classified into different types according to their intended use and design. Buildings, bridges, tunnels, towers, dams, and retaining walls are common structure types [31]. Various structural systems are used, depending on the use and design of the structure. Examples include framed structures, truss systems, arches, and cable-stayed systems. The span, height, and load-bearing requirements are a few variables that influence the structural system selection. At the same time, the efficiency and diversity of finite element modeling and analysis tools have increased significantly. Still, it has proven more complex to generate a systematic increase in the precision and dependability of the finite element analysis of structural dynamics [32].
The performance and longevity of a structure are significantly influenced by the materials used in its construction [33]. Steel, wood, composites, masonry, and concrete are common structural materials. The kind of structure, the surrounding environment, and the desired qualities, such as strength and flexibility, all influence the material choice [34]. Regular inspections and ongoing maintenance are necessary for structures to remain safe and functional. This entails checking for indications of wear, corrosion, or structural damage and acting appropriately when required [35].
Numerous engineering specialties, such as structural, geotechnical, and materials engineering, are involved in the planning and building of structures [36]. As new materials, technologies, and construction techniques are developed, the field of structural engineering keeps up with these developments, helping to create creative and sustainable structures worldwide. Structures are fundamental components of the built environment because they shape our environments and provide the infrastructure required for societies to advance. To produce more resilient, sustainable, and efficient structures, structural engineering is constantly changing to incorporate new materials, technologies, and design strategies [37].

2.4. International Standards Used Currently

The ASTM (American Society for Testing and Materials) is one of the most used standards in the world [38], and based on previous articles, was founded in 1898. The ASTM is a well-known international organization that creates and distributes technical standards for various products, services, systems, and materials [39]. Industries and regulatory agencies frequently utilize ASTM standards to guarantee materials and goods’ performance, safety, and quality [40]. The broad adoption of ASTM standards facilitates international trade and cooperation, contributing to global standardization [41]. The global use of ASTM standards is widespread. ASTM International has members and stakeholders from over 150 countries.
Besides ASTM, ANSI is also one of the most used standards. ANSI is The American National Standards Institute. It is a non-profit, private company that manages the creation of voluntary consensus standards for US systems, services, goods, and procedures. ANSI is responsible for organizing and managing the voluntary standardization system in the United States [42]. It facilitates cooperation between different stakeholders. ANSI actively participates in international standardization efforts even though its primary focus is on American standards [43]. The American Engineering Standards Committee (AESC), which was established in 1918 by three government agencies, five engineering societies, and other parties, created ANSI [44,45]. Members of ANSI include individuals, academic and international bodies, government agencies, and organizations. The International Organization of Standards (ISO) was subsequently created by merging ANSI with the national standardizing bodies of 25 additional countries. The goal of ISO was to support the creation of global standards in domains other than electronics and electricity [46].
The third standard is the Australian Standard. These standards are essential to guaranteeing construction projects’ performance, safety, and quality in various industries, including infrastructure, commercial, industrial, and residential. Materials, design, construction techniques, and safety considerations are just a few of the many topics covered by the Australian construction standards [47,48,49]. The building code used in Australia Standards is the NCC or National Construction Code. NCC is an extensive collection of guidelines and standards applicable to building design and construction across Australia [50]. It contains the Australian Plumbing Code (PCA) and the Building Code of Australia (BCA) [51]. The NCC is updated regularly, and adhering to its guidelines is required. Because of their thoroughness and reputation for quality, Australian Standards are occasionally cited or adopted by other nations, particularly those in Asia-Pacific. However, different countries’ adoption of Australian Standards could be influenced by various elements, including international harmonization initiatives, industry standards, and legal systems.
Japanese standards are also considered international standards. Japanese Industrial Standards for Architecture are known as JIS-A. The Japanese Industrial Standards Committee (JISC), which oversees the establishment of industrial standards in Japan, is the body that creates and disseminates these standards. JIS-A particularly relates to standards concerning architecture and building construction. Aspects of construction such as materials, design, testing procedures, and performance requirements are all covered by JIS-A standards [52]. They aim to guarantee the building industry’s use of safe, high-quality products and practices. A consensus-based process involving input from manufacturers, researchers, industry experts, and other stakeholders is used to develop these standards. Given Japan’s emphasis on building earthquake resistance, specific standards may address seismic design considerations.
The most widely used engineering standards in the world today are those developed by globally recognized standardizing bodies such as the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), and the European Standards (EN) [53]. These standards are widely used in various industries, including construction, manufacturing, and engineering, which is why this study includes those standards [54]. Although JIS and Australian Standard adoption is less common worldwide, they are widely accepted and are known for their high quality, mainly in Asia and Oceania [55]. Another reason is that different regions have different seismic and disaster preparedness; each area has other adaptations and standards [56].

3. Methodology

This study employs a bibliometric methodology and performs descriptive qualitative research. Bibliometrics is the use of statistical techniques to communicate the outcomes of article reviews regarding information searches, as well as perform grouping through literature reviews of publications [57]. In short, analyzing books, articles, and other magazines using statistical techniques, particularly in science, is known as bibliometrics [58]. One can comprehend the different features of those publications by organizing publications based on their source, country of origin, author, citation, affiliated institution, keywords, and topic [59].
In this study, PoP Harzing 8, VOS Viewer, Google Scholar, and Sci-Hub were used for data searching. The first step in this study was to collect 1000 papers by selecting relevant keywords and entering them into the PoP Harzing 8. All references were globally indexed and released for data review between 2000 and 2023. Documents were obtained as journal articles, books, datasets, reports, components, monographs, and references formatted in RIS data. The most optimal database is one that uses free access. But of course, the quality of research is not as good as that in databases with limited and paid access, such as Scopus and WoS. The database was collected in May 2024 using an Indonesian IP Address. PnP was used to pull data simultaneously. Before the analysis, it was ensured that all data had a good level of validation. After that, the 1000 papers were examined for relevance to our study’s topic and visualized using VOS Viewer. VOS viewer then provided the density, a keyword network, and overlay visualizations. Through a more thorough comprehension of the major themes, patterns, and connections among the gathered publications, this visualization made it possible to conduct a more sophisticated analysis of international structural engineering standards.

4. Result and Discussion

As mentioned, we initially gathered 1000 papers for this study, which were then examined. The author of this study manually selected 1000 papers from eight publish or perish databases between 1 December and 16 December 2023, and carefully read them. A total of 439 papers were eliminated, meaning that only 561 papers were used in this study. The author then divided the study’s findings into numerous sections, including keyword association, total studies issued per year, keyword density, studies based on publisher and type, and the study’s origin by continent.

4.1. Keywords Association

Crossref was selected as the database for this bibliometric study due to its accessibility and coverage flexibility. Using the keywords ‘standards’, ‘engineering’, ‘structure’, and ‘international’, the author narrowed down the research discussion topics with the crossref database’s advanced searches.
Figure 1 shows the keyword occurrences and Figure 2 shows the keyword relevance, with the aid of VOS Viewer; these figures show the overall keyword occurrences and relevance of all 561 studies that we gathered from publish or perish. With these keyword occurrences and relevance, we then mapped the result of the visual representation of the keywords network, as shown in Figure 3.
The bibliometric analysis reveals a precise concentration around the keywords “standards” and “structure”, which have the highest volume and strongest correlation in the literature. This emphasizes the focus of structural engineering research on fundamental concepts such as standards and structural integrity. Furthermore, terms such as “engineering standard”, “standards column”, and “international standards” rank second in volume and correlation. This demonstrates the significant focus on developing and applying standardized structural engineering practices in various contexts and regions. The findings highlight the importance of standardized approaches as a critical component in ensuring consistency, safety, and innovation in structural engineering, with a strong global interest in harmonizing practices through international standards.
Understanding the significance of prior research in developing credible scientific work is essential. In conducting research, researchers must analyze studies that have been carried out. Not only is existing research used as a reference, but it also serves as a comparison for new research against previously conducted studies. Naturally, previous research can only be utilized if its titles relate to the topic of the research you intend to conduct. This earlier research is referred to as prior research. Therefore, the relevance of earlier studies greatly impacts current research.
Keywords Network Visualization in VOSviewer refers to the visual representation of the relationships between keywords that frequently appear in datasets such as scientific publications, articles, or other documents. VOSviewer is a software tool designed for creating and analyzing visual maps based on bibliometric or text data. Additionally, terms like “engineering standard”, “standards column”, and “international standards” show high volume and correlation, indicating significant attention to the development and implementation of standardized structural engineering practices across different contexts and regions. The significance of this keyword network visualization lies in its capacity to visually map the keyword network and highlight key focus areas in structural engineering research. This suggests that a standardized approach is essential for ensuring consistency, safety, and innovation in structural engineering, with strong global interest in harmonizing practices through international standards.

4.2. Total Study Issued per Year (Trend Analysis)

This section will show us the trends from 2000 to 2023. The data from the 561 studies we collected were analyzed using the cumulative method to display easily understood visualizations. The result can be seen in Figure 4, which shows the total studies issued per year. The results show a fluctuating trend in research output on international structural engineering standards over time. From 2000 to 2019, there was a general upward trend, with notable peaks in specific years. The most significant increase occurred in 2019, when 55 studies were published, representing the highest point in the data. This peak could indicate a greater emphasis on structural engineering standards, possibly due to changing industry demands or new international regulatory requirements.
Following 2019, the number of studies decreased, most likely due to disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. Although there was a minor recovery in 2021 and 2022, with 28 studies each, the volume remained below the 2019 peak. By 2023, the number of studies issued had dropped slightly to 18, indicating that while interest in structural engineering standards continues, it may not be as strong as in previous years. This may also indicate a shift in research focus within the field.
In conclusion, these data show a peak in research activity around 2019, followed by a gradual decline. This indicates external influences and possibly a shifting landscape in structural engineering standards research.

4.3. Keywords Density

The keyword density analysis visualization identifies key terms and their importance in international structural engineering standards. The densest cluster, centered on “standards” and “structure”, indicates that these are the study’s most frequently occurring and closely related concepts. This central focus suggests that most of the research aims to understand and implement structural engineering standards.
Other notable terms, such as “engineering standard”, “international standards”, and “standards column”, form smaller but meaningful clusters around the primary terms. These terms are closely related to the core topics, emphasizing areas where research investigates specific types of standards, their application, and international scope; as mentioned previously, each region has different challenges in making these standards work.
Smaller clusters of terms such as “engineering education”, “comparison model” codes”, and “systems engineering” indicate that research also focuses on educational aspects, comparison frameworks, regulatory codes, and systems-level approaches within structural engineering guidelines.
In conclusion, this keyword density map demonstrates that research is primarily interested in the foundation of structural engineering standards, with secondary interests in educational, comparative, and regulatory aspects. The map also emphasizes the international dimension of standards. It depicts the field’s major research areas, with a primary emphasis on standards and structure and a significant, albeit secondary, interest in specific engineering standards and international standardization.
Density visualization in VOSviewer is a method used to display the density of keywords or topics in a dataset, such as scientific publications or other text documents. This visualization aids users in understanding how intense or dominant a keyword or topic is within the analyzed dataset. Keyword density refers to the concentration of keywords in a specific area on the visual map. This visualization utilizes color to indicate keyword density, with warmer colors (like red or yellow) representing areas of high density (Figure 5).

4.4. Study Based on Publisher

Table 1, displaying the total studies issued per publisher from 2000 to 2023, shows the focus of research publications on structural engineering standards among a few leading publishers, with IEEE, Informa UK Limited, and Elsevier leading the way. These three publishers are far ahead of the competition, demonstrating their importance in publishing research on structural engineering standards. These major academic and professional publishing platforms drive a significant portion of the field’s knowledge production.
The secondary and noteworthy publishers are those other than the big three. While their contributions are notable, they are significantly smaller in volume than the top three publishers. This second tier comprises specialized technical and academic publishers contributing to niche and specialized research fields. The “Others” category includes 132 studies, accounting for a significant portion of the research. This implies that many smaller publishers, journals, and institutions contribute to the literature on structural engineering standards. This diversity exemplifies the broad interdisciplinary nature of standards research, which draws on input from various fields and publications.

4.5. Study’s Origin by Continent

The analysis of study origins by continent reveals a precise geographic distribution in research contributions (Figure 6), with notable regional concentrations and gaps. North America leads the way in structural engineering standards research, with 164 studies. This dominance implies that North American institutions, researchers, and publishers play a critical role in advancing and disseminating knowledge on engineering standards, most likely due to the region’s solid academic infrastructure and emphasis on regulatory standards in construction and engineering, and as one of the most used standards around the world.
Asia has 112 studies, followed by Europe, which has 95, indicating that these regions are also actively involved in structural standard research. Asia’s significant contributions reflect rapid infrastructure growth and an increased emphasis on global standards in countries such as China, Japan, and South Korea. Europe’s contribution is consistent with its longstanding focus on thorough engineering standards and sustainable construction practices.
Africa and Oceania each contributed 11 and 10 studies, accounting for a small portion of the total research output. The lower numbers may reflect a need for more research funding, publication resources, or a regional emphasis on other pressing issues in these continents. However, these regions may have distinct approaches and insights into engineering standards that, if supported further, could make significant contributions. Unidentified origins account for 169 studies, the greatest proportion among the categories. This suggests a data-tracking and reporting flaw, which could obscure the full geographic distribution of research contributions. It emphasizes the need for better reporting practices in bibliometric studies to improve the accuracy and completeness of data on research origin.
This bibliometric analysis of structural engineering standards provides a thorough overview of research trends, key themes, geographic distribution, and publication patterns in the field. This study collected, analyzed, and visualized data from 1000 initial studies, narrowed to 561 relevant publications spanning 2000 to 2023, using tools such as Publish or Perish Harzing 8, VOS Viewer, Google Scholar, and Sci-Hub. The keyword density and association analysis indicated that “standards” and “structure” were the most frequently used words, emphasizing their importance in the field. Secondary keywords like “engineering standard”, “international standards”, and “standards column” indicate the significance of global and engineering-specific guidelines. These terms form interconnected clusters that strongly emphasize the fundamental principles of standardization in structural engineering, as well as educational and comparative considerations.
The trend analysis of publications per year shows an overall increase in research production, with a peak in 2019 and soon afterward a decline, most likely influenced by the COVID-19 pandemic. This trend reflects the increasing importance of structural standards over time and the external challenges impacting research output.
According to the publisher analysis, IEEE, Informa UK Limited, and Elsevier are at the forefront of publications in this field, emphasizing the importance of major academic publishers in promoting engineering standards. Furthermore, many studies from smaller or diverse sources show a widespread interest in structural standards among different research communities.
Geographically, North America, Asia, and Europe contribute the most to this research, reflecting their established academic and industrial infrastructures. The limited contributions from Africa and Oceania indicate potential areas for additional research support. At the same time, many studies with unknown origins suggest improved bibliometric data reporting.

5. Conclusions

The bibliometric analysis demonstrates a growing emphasis on structural engineering standards, driven by academic and industry stakeholders, with significant contributions from leading regions and publishing houses. The focus on critical themes and evolving geographic and temporal trends emphasizes the field’s global relevance and the crucial role of standardized practices in ensuring structural integrity and safety worldwide. These findings provide a solid foundation for future research into underrepresented regions and emerging topics within structural engineering standards. The outcome indicates that “standards” and “structure” are still trending topics in global discourse. Studies on these keywords have also grown for the last couple of years, with 2019 being the peak, with 55 studies issued. From a total of 561 studies, North America is at the top, with 164 studies; Asia and Europe are second and third, with 112 and 95 studies, respectively; and Africa and Oceania are last, with 11 and 10 studies, respectively. Therefore, this review can serve as a reference point for additional studies.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, A.I.R. and A.J.S.; methodology, A.I.R.; software, D.A.; validation, J.P.; formal analysis, J.P.; investigation, A.I.R.; resources, D.A.; data curation, A.I.R.; writing—original draft preparation, A.I.R.; writing—review and editing, J.P.; visualization, A.I.R.; supervision, J.P. and A.J.S.; project administration, A.J.S.; funding acquisition, A.I.R. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the Research and Community Service of Universitas Internasional Batam.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Data are contained within this paper.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Bredillet, C.N. Genesis and role of standards: Theoretical foundations and socio-economical model for the construction and use of standards. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 2003, 21, 463–470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Bado, M.F.; Casas, J.R. A review of recent distributed optical fiber sensors applications for civil engineering structural health monitoring. Sensors 2021, 21, 1818. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Hiyassat, M.A. Applying the ISO standards to a construction company: A case study. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 2000, 18, 275–280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Zavadskas, E.K.; Antucheviciene, J.; Vilutiene, T.; Adeli, H. Sustainable decision-making in civil engineering, construction, and building technology. Sustainability 2017, 10, 14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Soto, M.G.; Adeli, H. Multi-agent replicator controller for sustainable vibration control of smart structures. J. Vibroeng. 2017, 19, 4300–4322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Rafiei, M.H.; Adeli, H. Sustainability in highrise building design and construction. Struct. Des. Tall Speéc. Build. 2016, 25, 643–658. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Oh, B.; Kim, K.; Kim, Y.; Park, H.; Adeli, H. Evolutionary learning based sustainable strain sensing model for structural health monitoring of high-rise buildings. Appl. Soft Comput. 2017, 58, 576–585. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Wang, A.J. Design and construction innovations on a skyscraper cluster in China. In Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers-Civil Engineering, London, UK, 1 November 2017; Volume 171, pp. 91–95. [Google Scholar]
  9. Jamoussi, B.; Abu-Rizaiza, A.; AL-Haij, A. Sustainable building standards, codes and certification systems: The status quo and future directions in Saudi Arabia. Sustainability 2022, 14, 10314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Al-Kodmany, K. Constructing Tall Buildings in China: With a Focus on Shanghai. Int. J. High-Rise Build. 2024, 13, 33–56. [Google Scholar]
  11. Iliescu, A.N. Conceptual atlas of the known literature: Visual mapping with VOSviewer. Manag. Dyn. Knowl. Econ. 2021, 9, 379–392. [Google Scholar]
  12. Suradkar, P.A.; Kalbande, D.T.; Patil, D.T. Mapping the Landscape: A Bibliometric Analysis of CALIBER 2022 Convention Publications. In Transforming Libraries in 21st Century; Studera Press: New Delhi, India, 2023; pp. 201–210. [Google Scholar]
  13. Miccoli, L.; Gerrard, C.; Perrone, C.; Gardei, A.; Ziegert, C. A collaborative engineering and archaeology project to investigate decay in historic rammed earth structures: The case of the medieval preceptory in ambel. Int. J. Archit. Herit. 2017, 11, 636–655. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Chondros, T.G. Natural philosophy and the development of mechanics and engineering from the 5th century BC to Middle-Ages. FME Trans. 2017, 45, 603–619. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Bunz, K.R.; Henze, G.P.; Tiller, D.K. Survey of sustainable building design practices in North America, Europe, and Asia. J. Archit. Eng. 2006, 12, 33–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Shamma, J.; Purasinghe, R. Introduction to Sub-Branches of Civil Engineering Fields through a Creative Freshmen Civil Engineering Design Course. In Proceedings of the ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Seattle, WA, USA, 14–17 June 2015. [Google Scholar]
  17. Chinyio, O.P. Construction Stakeholder Management; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2009; p. 419. [Google Scholar]
  18. Hendrickson, C.; Zozaya-Gorostiza, C.; Rehak, D.; Baracco-Miller, E.; Lim, P. Expert system for construction planning. J. Comput. Civ. Eng. 1987, 1, 253–269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Basu, D.; Misra, A.; Puppala, A.J. Sustainability and geotechnical engineering: Perspectives and review. Can. Geotech. J. 2015, 52, 96–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Correia, G.A.; Winter, M.G.; Puppala, A.J. A review of sustainable approaches in transport infrastructure geotechnics. Transp. Geotech. 2016, 7, 21–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Chaurasia, D.; Srivastava, H.; Sonker, A.; Mishra, U. Comparision of Steel Structure and Composite Structure on Etabs Under Blast Load. Int. Res. J. Mod. Eng. Technol. Sci. 2023, 2582–5208. [Google Scholar]
  22. Johnson, R.P.; Buckby, R.J. Composite Structures of Steel and Concrete: Beams, Slabs, Columns, and Frames for Buildings; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2004; p. 247. [Google Scholar]
  23. Rosli, N.M.; Mustaffa, N.E.; Ariffin, H.L.T.; Ya’acob, I.A.M.; Rahmat, M.; Leu, K.S. Crucial conditions of domestic sub-contract in Malaysian construction industry. In E3S Web of Conferences; EDP Sciences: Paris, France, 2022; Volume 357. [Google Scholar]
  24. Cooklev, T. The role of standards in engineering education. Int. J. IT Stand. Stand. Res. (IJITSR) 2013, 8, 129–137. [Google Scholar]
  25. Yates, J.K.; Aniftos, S. International standards and construction. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 1997, 123, 127–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Blyth, A.; Napolitano, R.; Glisic, B. Documentation, structural health monitoring and numerical modelling for damage assessment of the Morris Island Lighthouse. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. A Math. Phys. Eng. Sci. 2019, 377, 20190002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Ghuku, S.; Saha, K.N. A review on stress and deformation analysis of curved beams under large deflection. Int. J. Eng. Technol. 2017, 11, 13–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Torrent, R.J. Bridge durability design after EN standards: Present and future. Struct. Infrastruct. Eng. 2018, 15, 886–898. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Tso-Sutter, K.H.; Karg, L.M. Generic compliance check tool in examining the conformity of company-specific standards to public standards. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management, Macao, China, 7–10 December 2010; pp. 2139–2143. [Google Scholar]
  30. Terzis, D. Monitoring innovation metrics in construction and civil engineering: Trends, drivers and laggards. Dev. Built Environ. 2022, 9, 100064. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Asperti, A.; Longo, G. Categories, Types and Structures; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1991; pp. 1–300. [Google Scholar]
  32. Alvin, K.; Robertson, A.; Reich, G.; Park, K. Structural system identification: From reality to models. Comput. Struct. 2003, 81, 1149–1176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Borri, A.; Castori, G.; Corradi, M. Masonry columns confined by steel fiber composite wraps. Materials 2011, 4, 311–326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Dominguez-Santos, D.; Mora-Melia, D.; Pincheira-Orellana, G.; Ballesteros-Pérez, P.; Retamal-Bravo, C. Mechanical properties and seismic performance of wood-concrete composite blocks for building construction. Materials 2019, 12, 1500. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Bismut, E.; Straub, D. Optimal adaptive inspection and maintenance planning for deteriorating structural systems. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 2021, 215, 107891. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Clarke, B.; Middleton, C.; Rogers, C. The future of geotechnical and structural engineering research. In Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers-Civil Engineering; Thomas Telford Ltd.: London, UK, 2016; Volume 169, pp. 41–48. [Google Scholar]
  37. Kc, S.; Gautam, D. Progress in sustainable structural engineering: A review. Innov. Infrastruct. Solut. 2021, 6, 68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Nadkarni, R.A.; Nadkarni, R.A. Guide to ASTM Test Methods for the Analysis of Petroleum Products and Lubricants; ASTM International: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2007; Volume 44, p. 315. [Google Scholar]
  39. Siewert, T.A.; Manahan, M.P.; McCowan, C.N.; Holt, J.M.; Marsh, F.J.; Ruth, E.A. The history and importance of impact testing. ASTM Spec. Tech. Publ. 2000, 1380, 3–16. [Google Scholar]
  40. Bringas, J.E. Hand Book of Comparative World Steel Standards; ASTM Data Series Publication: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2004. [Google Scholar]
  41. Swann, G.P. International Standards and Trade: A Review of the Empirical Literature; OECD Trade Policy Papers; OECD Publishing: Paris, France, 2010; Volume 97, pp. 1–51. [Google Scholar]
  42. Maier, M.W.; Emery, D.; Hilliard, R. ANSI/IEEE 1471 and systems engineering. Syst. Eng. 2004, 7, 257–270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Struck, C.J. An overview of the ANSI/ASA standards program. In INTER-NOISE and NOISE-CON Congress and Conference Proceedings; Institute of Noise Control Engineering: Wakefield, MA, USA, 2015; Volume 250, pp. 324–333. [Google Scholar]
  44. Yates, J.; Murphy, C.N. Coordinating international standards: The formation of the ISO. MIT Sloan Res. Pap. 2007, 4638-07. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Park, B.; Bell, C.G.; Huskey, H.D. Self-Study Questions. Ann. Hist. Comput. 1984, 6, 401. [Google Scholar]
  46. Burkard, R. Development of ANSI Standards: An Audiologist’s View. ASHA Lead. 2004, 9, 2–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Tao, Z.; Brian, U.Y.; Han, L.H.; He, S.H. Design of concrete-filled steel tubular members according to the Australian Standard AS 5100 model and calibration. Aust. J. Struct. Eng. 2008, 8, 197–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Borys, D. The role of safe work method statements in the Australian construction industry. Saf. Sci. 2011, 50, 210–220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. McCarthy, S.F. Developing an Australian code of construction ethics. Australas. J. Constr. Econ. Build. 2012, 12, 87–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Burgess, T.J.D. National construction codes and their inadequacies: Australia’s arrangements and difficulties. In Proceedings of the 19th International Symposium on Advancement of Construction Management and Real Estate Chongqing University, Chongqing, China, 7–9 November 2014; Volume 104, p. 1027. [Google Scholar]
  51. Armstrong, A.; Wright, C.; Ashe, B.; Nielsen, H. Enabling Innovation in Building Sustainability: Australia’s National Construction Code. Procedia Eng. 2017, 180, 320–330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Ozaki, K. Revision of the Japanese Industrial Standardization Act. SHS Web Conf. 2018, 49, 01013. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Yates, J.; Murphy, C.N. Engineering Rules: Global Standard Setting Since 1880; JHU Press: Baltimore, MD, USA, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  54. Lee, J.-Y.; Nagalingam, A.P.; Yeo, S.H. A review on the state-of-the-art of surface finishing processes and related ISO/ASTM standards for metal additive manufactured components. Virtual Phys. Prototyp. 2020, 16, 68–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Mejorin, A.; Trabucco, D.; Stelzer, I. Cyclone-Resistant Façades: Best Practices in Australia, Hong Kong, Japan, and the Philippines; Council of Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat: Chicago, IL, USA, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  56. Zhang, Y.; Fung, J.F.; Johnson, K.J.; Sattar, S. Review of seismic risk mitigation policies in earthquake-prone countries: Lessons for earthquake resilience in the United States. J. Earthq. Eng. 2021, 26, 6208–6235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Suharso, P.; Setyowati, L.; Arifah, M.N. Bibliometric Analysis Related to Mathematical Research through Database Dimensions. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2021, 1776, 012055. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Ersozlu, A.; Karakus, M.; Clark, A.C. Augmented Reality Research in Education: A Bibliometric Study. Eurasia J. Math. Sci. Technol. Educ. 2019, 15, 10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  59. Rahayu, N.S.; Liddini, U.H.; Maarif, S. Berpikir Kreatif Matematis: Sebuah Pemetaan Literatur dengan Analisis Bibliometri Menggunakan Vos Viewer. Mosharafa J. Pendidik. Mat. 2022, 11, 179–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Engproc 84 00075 g001
Figure 1. Keyword occurrences.
Figure 1. Keyword occurrences.
Engproc 84 00075 g001
Engproc 84 00075 g002
Figure 2. Keywords relevance.
Figure 2. Keywords relevance.
Engproc 84 00075 g002
Engproc 84 00075 g003
Figure 3. Keywords network visualization.
Figure 3. Keywords network visualization.
Engproc 84 00075 g003
Engproc 84 00075 g004
Figure 4. Number of publications.
Figure 4. Number of publications.
Engproc 84 00075 g004
Engproc 84 00075 g005
Figure 5. Keywords density.
Figure 5. Keywords density.
Engproc 84 00075 g005
Engproc 84 00075 g006
Figure 6. Study origin mapping.
Figure 6. Study origin mapping.
Engproc 84 00075 g006
Table 1. Total study issued per publisher.
Table 1. Total study issued per publisher.
PublisherPublication
IEEE96
Informa UK Limited80
Elsevier76
CRC Press33
ASME Press28
De Gruyter25
Wiley18
IGI Global16
American Society of Mechanical Engineer7
Cambridge University Press7
IEE7
National Institute of Standards and Technology7
Atlantis Press6
Routledge6
SCITEPRESS—Science and Technology Publications6
Springer International Publishing6
Springer Berlin Heidelberg5
Others132
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Rifai, A.I.; Angtony, D.; Saputra, A.J.; Prasetijo, J. A Bibliometric Analysis of International Structural Engineering Standards Using VOS Viewer. Eng. Proc. 2025, 84, 75. https://doi.org/10.3390/engproc2025084075

AMA Style

Rifai AI, Angtony D, Saputra AJ, Prasetijo J. A Bibliometric Analysis of International Structural Engineering Standards Using VOS Viewer. Engineering Proceedings. 2025; 84(1):75. https://doi.org/10.3390/engproc2025084075

Chicago/Turabian Style

Rifai, Andri Irfan, Darius Angtony, Ade Jaya Saputra, and Joewono Prasetijo. 2025. "A Bibliometric Analysis of International Structural Engineering Standards Using VOS Viewer" Engineering Proceedings 84, no. 1: 75. https://doi.org/10.3390/engproc2025084075

APA Style

Rifai, A. I., Angtony, D., Saputra, A. J., & Prasetijo, J. (2025). A Bibliometric Analysis of International Structural Engineering Standards Using VOS Viewer. Engineering Proceedings, 84(1), 75. https://doi.org/10.3390/engproc2025084075

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop