Final AE510 Blog Post

Though I thoroughly enjoyed the course, based on the title and description provided when I registered for the class, it was not at all what I expected.  I thought the focus would be more specifically on BIM and buildings designed with BIM.  Though that would be an interesting course, I believe this course expanded my idea of what is possible in our industry despite the somewhat slower pace at which it progresses compared to other industries.

What I found to be the most interesting was the beginning AI material.  I suspect this was strategically placed in the beginning to grab our attention, which was very successful.  I agree with Barry, Jeanine and Kayleigh regarding staying up to date on the new advances in technology.  I find that I sometimes tend not to do this, and this class was a good reminder of why I should and how helpful it can be.

Although I was reluctant at first, I did like the blog aspect of the class.  It allowed us to see what the other students thought regarding topics and allowed us to learn from each other.  Too often students stay quiet in class and are unable to benefit from each other’s work and ideas, only to find out too late that we had some of the same concerns or more often that our contributions aren’t as uninteresting as we think they may be.

I agree with some of the other students that said that Dr. Song’s lecture could have replaced the discussion on databases that took place the week before, as it did cover a lot of the same material.  But, that being said I found this class to be very helpful in terms of understanding what a relational database actually is and what it entails.  Most of us (myself included prior to this class) utilize them (on the front end anyway) almost every day, but have no idea of how it actually works or what goes on “behind the scenes.”

I agree with Mitchell, in that I have always enjoyed Professor Mitchell’s courses and this one was no exception.  I hope that he continues with courses like this one that are designed to open up our minds and let us decide what it is that we want to learn and take away from it.

Group A: Teaching Hospital

The stakeholders we identified for the teaching hospital include patients, attendings/residents/nurses/PAs, facilities staff, owner/board of trustees, AEC, and the community through research.  We identified these stakeholders through the various phases they would come into contact with a teaching hospital.  The technologies that we identified for these stakeholders as being most important are: acoustic analysis, lighting/MEP systems, sensors, robots, code analysis, database, cost estimate, and models.

• Patients would most benefit from sensors, lighting/MEP systems, code analysis, database, and acoustic analysis
• Doctors/nurses/PAs would benefit also benefit from the same technology that the patients would, with sensors being the most critical to their effectiveness of care.  An effective database will also aid in their research capabilities.
• Facilities staff would benefit greatly from sensors, lighting/MEP systems, models, robots, and cost estimates
• Owner/Board of Trustees would be most interested in code analysis, database, cost estimate, and models
• AEC would benefit from all technologies involved since they are involved in almost all phases of the building's life
• The community would most benefit from the database as doctors are able to pull the patient's personal information, the care the patient received, and the final outcome of the patient from this compiled database

Presentation

Pressure Sensors

According to the National Instruments website, “because of the great variety of conditions, ranges, and materials for which pressure must be measured, there are many different types of pressure sensor designs” [1].

My fellow classmate, G. Carpenter, first addresses in her post the most common type of pressure sensor (strain gage, see Figure 1 for cross section) and what it measures and how it is translated to indicate pressure.  She then discusses different categories of pressure gauges (force collector and other) and their electrical outputs (millivolt, amplified voltage, and 4-20 mA).

Figure 1: Strain Gauge Pressure Sensor Cross Section [1]

I will now discuss the other two most universal types of force collector pressure transducers (according to National Instruments): variable capacitance and piezoelectric.

A variable capacitance pressure sensor measures “the change in capacitance between a metal diaphragm and a fixed metal plate” and the capacitance changes when the distance between the two plates changes and the degree of this change is converted into an electrical signal [1] (see Figure 2).  (Capacitance is described as the “the ability of a body to store electrical charge” [2].)  These types of sensors are also described as, “very stable and linear, but sensitive to high temperatures and more complicated to setup then most pressure sensors” [1].

Figure 2: Capacitance Pressure Sensor Diagram [1]

A piezoelectric pressure transducer utilizes the electrical properties of naturally occurring crystals such as quartz [1], and uses these stacks of crystal to convert motion into an electrical output as they become strained [3] (see Figure 3).  They require no external excitation and are "rugged" [1], however, are not effective with dc or steady-state conditions [3].  These sensors are also highly susceptible to shock and vibration [1], and also require special signal amplification as their output signal levels are low [3].

Figure 3: Piezoelectric Pressure Sensor Diagram [1]

Sources:

[1] http://www.ni.com/white-paper/3639/en

[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capacitance

[3] http://www.digikey.com/us/en/techzone/sensors/resources/articles/what-you-need-to-know-about-pressure-sensors.html

Relational Database Theory

As already described in G. Carpenter and G. Gulbenkian’s posts, the definition of a relational database is, “a collection of data items organized as a set of formally described tables from which data can be accessed easily” [1].  There are many important terms associated with relational database design/theory, some of which were already described by G. Carpenter and G. Gulbenkian, such as tuples (rows) and attributes (columns).  Another important term is relation (or table) which is defined as, “a set of tuples that have the same attributes” [1].  The relational model requires that each row of a table be unique [2].  They go on to say that this uniqueness can be achieved by “designating a primary key – a column that contains unique values for a table” [2].  The below figure shows that the primary key chosen was Customer ID [2].

Figure 1: Table with the primary key as Customer ID [2]

However, “primary keys are a function of individual tables,” therefore, if you want to join together multiple tables you may need what is called a “foreign key” which is “used to reference a primary key in another table” [2].  The figure below shows how the primary key of Customer ID is then used as a foreign key in a different table.

Figure 2: Table with Customer ID as the foreign key [2]

Utilizing the above, multiple types of relationships can be formed between related tables (i.e. one-to-one, one-to-many, or many-to-many) [2].  From there the tables forming the databases can be further optimized by a process called normalization which G. Carpenter also briefly discussed.  The above are the basics for creating an efficient and well designed database.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relational_database

[2] http://www.deeptraining.com/litwin/dbdesign/FundamentalsOfRelationalDatabaseDesign.aspx

Term Project

Similar to M. Gonzalez and E. Cilifgu, I too am researching robotics in construction, but I will be focusing on the socioeconomic impact of robots in construction.  During many of our class discussions regarding different topics we have shifted the focus of “what all of this intelligent building actually means” for our job market.  So, I decided to use this project as an opportunity to try to figure out what it actually does mean based on research into what effect robotics had on the aerospace and automotive industry.  I choose these two fields as we have also determined in class that the technologies of these industries eventually become used in some form in the building and construction industry.

I realize that the socioeconomic impact on the construction industry as a whole would be a rather large range to try to tackle in just one paper so I have decided to focus on contractors/construction workers for the time being and possibly extend it to engineers and owners if time and resources permit me to.

In my preliminary research, I have found a source [1] that proposes that robots do not always take jobs and can actually create them.  This is interesting as most assume that the introduction of robotics means a loss of human jobs, especially those that are repetitive in nature.  And if this is potentially the case, what kind of jobs are they creating.  Are they similar to the old jobs or is it an entirely new kind of job?  And if it is not necessarily creating the same or new kinds of jobs, does it allow workers to focus their attention on another aspect of the industry?  A different industry?

I, of course, will also discuss the effect that robots have on the safety of workers and the positive social impacts of this.

And in my conclusion, I plan on making projections for the future of robotics in the construction industry based on what we’ve seen in the other two industries.

[1] http://www.ifr.org/uploads/media/Metra_Martech_Study_on_robots_02.pdf

Future Outlook on BIM Tools and Parametric Modeling

As presented in my post from last week, I do not believe the progress of BIM and its tools and parametric modeling are not going to be the issue in the building and construction industry.  With time the software and hardware issues will undoubtedly be resolved as well as upgraded and the systems will become more compatible, as well as user friendly.  And, I do not doubt that drafting in BIM will become a specialty skill as mentioned by G. Carpenter and required to a certain degree for those in the industry as mentioned in J. Lancellotti’s post.  The issues that have and will most likely continue to slow down the progress of BIM are the industry conventions that all groups within the industry have built their practices around.  This was addressed by our speaker Eric Kuszewski during our week 3 class.  He addressed the fact that many of the building system drawings and efforts were being doubled as a result of wanting to use BIM to show it one way and then the system engineer or someone else wanting to see in another way, or the “old” way.  He also addressed that this not only affected the engineers and their products, but those dealing with the contracts, deliverables, and metrics.  The groups that work on the latter have built what they do around the existing conventions.

As a result, I believe the BIM execution plan that Kuszewski mentioned will be heavily involved in creating new BIM centered conventions.  I do not believe that in 5 years everything will have completely made the switch to being “BIM-centric,” but the ability for all those involved to work together to shift from the practice of making separate drawings for buildings to virtually creating the building will be much improved as a result of one building era ending as the beginning of another approaches.  These changes may indeed result in the predictions made by M. Tedesco regarding the industry in ten and twenty years.

BIM Handbook - Chapter 2

In an ideal BIM model, there would be parametric relationships within each building system that would allow it to adjust to changes in another system.  These changes would have a ripple effect across all other building systems as there would be parameters set up to do so.  But, it would appear that building design and the construction industry have so many years of previous conventions and different groups working with their own set of specific practices within those conventions, that completely pre-assembling any one building with a BIM model at this point would take a tremendous amount of manual editing, fine-tuning and collaboration.  This is not to say that it cannot be done or that the example given of the Boeing 777 did not (see G. Carpenter’s post for explanation or page 46 of the book), but the effort resulted in 1000+ planes as opposed to one, single building.  Not to mention the relationship to the site and environment, file size, and managing the different versions of the model within all contributing parties.

The author of the BIM Handbook states, “The range of functionality offered in each market is still being sorted out.  The market is the battleground” (69).  This is very much the case, currently, as each building system and specialty utilizes their specific tools and methods, without having to share a BIM model and create a BIM compatible convention.   This can be seen in the issue of something as simple as drawings.  Page 61 of the BIM Handbook discusses how the necessary drawings required by the building industry are “laid out in different ways in different stages of design” by different system designers and would require that the model be set up with very stringent rules to take into account these conventions to avoid significant manual editing after the fact.

This typically used method of design where each system is designed and contracted separately lacks the required collaboration necessary to avoid the current “clashes” discussed by R. Krall in his post regarding BIM in Construction and J. Lancellotti in her post regarding BIM for Owners and Facility Mangers.  This, I believe, is the real issue as creating interoperability (see posts by E. Cifligu and T. Ben-David) with respect to the software and networks becomes much easier once the groups of people themselves are able to do so.

Reading: BIM Handbook, Chapter 2 (2011 Edition)

Future - Analysis Techniques

During the first class, it was pointed out that the future of the civil engineering field could be previewed as a result of the current happenings in the aerospace and automotive fields.  A perfect example of this can be read in the opening two sentences of a paper found in the ASCE Journal of Aerospace Engineering (Henshaw).  It reads, “A successful autonomous spacecraft must be able to navigate intelligently.  Intelligent navigation entails finding and following collision-free paths through space which can be traversed in a ‘reasonable’ time and which can use a reasonable amount of fuel” (147).  Building off of many of our initial, in-class, week-1 posts, this definition of intelligent navigation can be applied to the definition of intelligent building.  Much like the autonomous spacecraft needs to be able follow a collision-free path and use minimal time and fuel; the intelligent building/intelligent integrated systems would need to be autonomous, utilize minimal energy (and, therefore, money), require minimal maintenance, and all the while being as efficient as possible.

The Henshaw/Sanner paper analyzes trajectory planning algorithms that are necessary for an autonomous spacecraft to navigate intelligently (155) and similar calculations will undoubtedly be required for intelligent building/building systems to optimize the “intelligent” nature of each system, the integration of the systems, and the building as a whole.  An example of such an algorithm can be found in my fellow Group A member, Gayaneh Gulbenkian’s post (see “Future Analysis Techniques”, machine-learning algorithm).  Although the algorithms currently being applied in the civil engineering field are (probably) not yet as complicated as those involved in the “obstacle-constrained trajectory planning” algorithms required by the Hershaw/Sanner article; this may become the case as we require buildings to become more and more intelligent.  This increasing complexity of algorithms will also require more sophisticated and dynamic modeling software.  Evidence of this already occurring in the field is discussed by Gabrielle Carpenter in her Future Analysis Techniques post (Group A).

But, is translating this idea from one field to another done as simply as with the definitions?  Maybe, maybe not.  It is and will most likely be different for each of the other topics of discussion (sensor capabilities, robotics capabilities, 3D manufacturing capabilities, and computer hardware technology) and have each be dependent upon the progress of the other with multiple iterations in between.

Henshaw, Carl Glen and Robert M. Sanner.  “Variational Technique for Spacecraft Trajectory Planning.” Journal of Aerospace Engineering. Volume 23, Issue 3 (July 2010): 147-156.

Flight Assembled Architecture Response

We believe that aspects of the video will be a part of the future.  However, to be a complete reality, advances in the technology will need to be accomplished.  Places where this would be useful would be in the micro-level where a designer could input a design into a computer program and the robots could construct it.  We agree that the human element in construction can never fully disappear though.

Introduction

My name is Cleonie Meraz and I am currently a Civil Engineering graduate student following the AE plan of study.  I received my bachelor’s degree in Architectural Engineering with a minor in Architecture in 2011.  During my undergraduate studies I had a few opportunities to work with Revit. I took one class specifically on Revit and utilized it in several others, such as studio.  I was also able to use Revit as one of the main tools during my senior design project as an undergraduate.

In this class I expect to refresh and expand upon my Revit skills.  Most specifically, I would like to further explore using Revit to integrate one or more AE systems I have not had much experience with this in Revit.

I would say that an intelligent buildings have to do with “smart” design or where all of the systems are integrated and work efficiently together with ever improving materials.

Graduate Students

Here is the list of Graduate students in the course.  This post is also used to create a "label" for each student so it's easy to label your posts later.

 

Group	Last Name	First Name	Major
A	Carpenter	Gabrielle	Civil Engineering
A	Gulbenkian	Gayaneh	Civil Engineering
A	Li	Xiang	Civil Engineering
A	Meraz	Cleonie	Civil Engineering
A	Wang	Chunyi	Environmental Engineering