Background: The FAA has new regulations already for small UAS (commonly called these days as drones but not just drones but any radio controlled aircraft including blimps), although currently the new registration program is for recreational/hobby (non-commercial or governmental) use. New regulations in the registration for commercial are pending. I am beginning to implement a new branch into my business structure under a sort of restructured business enterprise involving different types of business activities from building design & related activities such as historic preservation consultant and other services, software/video game development, and now including a new branch involving the use of small UAS. While this branch is not 'live' yet pending all the regulatory procedures. There is currently a huge range of possible activities being implemented with small UAS and other UAS. Some of those activities are implemented in video games use as well as architecture in forms of aerial photography and other kinds of data collection.
How does architects and other design professionals see the use of UAS or drones, as is popularly called these days, in the practice of their respective professions? This isn't a discussion about the laws but the application of drones in this profession.
no_form
Jan 7, 16 10:35 am
Bloopox thank you.
no_form
Jan 7, 16 10:37 am
Only problem is that he doesn't know how to use a tape measure. He asked me how to use one in a previous forum. He can't measure a rectangle as he previously explained.
archiwutm8
Jan 7, 16 10:58 am
Just spoke to a colleague, he says " We can get under 1mm to a fraction of 1mm however that means extremely highend hardware, skill level and how much time you spend on the model" but advises 10mm on contract. whilst a pointcloud from laser scanning is 7mm on contract.
So there you have it.
curtkram
Jan 7, 16 11:15 am
my experience when measuring as-builts is that buildings are not built to 1/16" accuracy. i shoot for within about 2" (this depends on some stuff of course). any given measurement should be a lot closer of course, but if you're off by an 1/8" or 1/16" a few times along a dimension string it starts to add up.
if you're measuring something like lap siding, the distance from the top and bottom of the siding is far more than 1/16". sometimes walls are not perfectly plumb, so measuring at the base compared to 4' aff or 8' aff is different, sometimes by a lot more than 1/16". sometimes walls are not perfectly square, so measuring from the middle of a room v. the corner of a room gives you a different number that is off by more than 1/16". a normal gyp. bd. wall is wider at the end than the middle because the mud is built up at the corner bead. the wall thickness changes by more than 1/16".
routine errors occur to. if you measure against the base instead of the wall itself you're going to be off by something like 1/8". if there is any sag in the tape measure you'll be off. if the tape is not perfectly perpendicular to the wall you're going to be off. i'm pretty sure laser tape measures end up with similar discrepancies.
i'm fairly certain you could have 10 people measure a building and get 10 different sizes, even if they're all within 1/16" accuracy.
archiwutm8
Jan 7, 16 11:41 am
as-builts are never perfect, I regularly work with walls that have bowed by as much as 50cm-1m over time usually listed buildings and most older buildings will have out of plumb walls where they've been plastered or painted so many times they're always uneven. Have you ever worked on a square room? I haven't, lucky you if you have.
mightyaa
Jan 7, 16 12:05 pm
meh... learn to measure (and just the critical ones). As much as you can, get as long of a run as you can on the tape. So as much as possible is pinned back to a specific point. So instead of wall to wall, it'd be this wall distance or jamb back to the exterior. Your exterior dimensions and long run ones will be the most accurate.
And lol at a 1/16th; I'm with archiwutm8. You'll be lucky if it's plumbed and squared. Hell, just remember your structural l/120 for deflection which basically means in a 10' room, the floor is still 'perfect' if it sags an inch.
Jan 7, 16 1:24 pm
SpontaneousCombustion,
You're right, I misinterpreted what archiwutm8 meant and over-reacted a little bit. Aside from the Oregon law which we can and should move pass. Lets not dwell on that subject. I think we were moving past that.
Jan 7, 16 2:37 pm
Bloopox,
In my locale, most of the housing or other buildings are Victorian and Craftsman/Bungalow buildings with much more elaborate level of architectural detail.
An as-built of those or to make additions or otherwise needs very high accuracy/precision with the data. This isn't the run of the mill plywood box.
Sure, the one project isn't the most sophisticated of our buildings. Come to Astoria sometime and see the architecture. A lot of buildings here used milled components that you won't find in your typical home depot and today would be custom wood milling. This means, you need precise measurements and profiles. While, I may still need to use the contour profile tool, the level of detail for such a project would require significant measurements and frankly, sir, you can't completely measure these buildings in 2 hours with a measuring tape because you aren't just measuring, you have to draw the building and document many individual components.
Take for example, my own house with spindle work.
When you are documenting a historic building (like 2/3 or more of the buildings in Astoria), the TOTAL cumulative error in measuring should not exceed 1/2". In fact, you should be as accurate as possible.
The porch spindle work on my house would actually be an example where photogrammetry or laser scanning would be perfect. Frankly, there is no practical way you are going to accurately record and document the porch work with a measuring tape and if you did manage to do so, it would take an extremely long time to do it. A good photogrammetric or 3d laser scan could conceivably replicate accurately enough.
While the one project I am documenting may not be shining examples of historic architecture in Astoria and the level of architectural detail that you have to accurately document before doing any historic preservation, restoration, renovation, alterations, additions, etc.
As the design professional, it is MY JOB by law that the plans are A) buildable, B) Accurate and C) does not contain excessive errors or omissions., D) contains the information that a builder can carry out the construction work without having to remeasure everything. They maybe measuring but they shouldn't be out there redoing your job in measuring so they can place the porch or addition where it is suppose to be located.
Builders are suppose to rely on your plans for instruction. You say the projecting wall of the addition must be 3'-4" from the outside corner. The builder is suppose to only have to go from that corner and measure out 3'-4" and mark where the wall is to be located. That's a specification and you are responsible for the accuracy of that location. They are expecting the correct information on the plans. Therefore, it is YOUR job to be correct to maximum extent possible. That is professional standard of care.
In the age of computer vector drawings, we should be accurate to within material tolerance. This means, when you specify nominal 2x6 S4S Douglas Fir #2 & Better studs, the measurements should be tolerant to within industry milling of the wood which will be 1.5 x 5.5" give or take a maybe +/- 5% or so in dimensions for milling variance and moisture content level.
If you state dimensions on a set of plans for where walls, door ways, windows,etc. are located in relation to an existing building, they you need to have your shit in order in regards to the existing building and the information you are operating from.
I don't rely on client's measurements. It's a risk I prefer not to take. I may accept documentation from other professionals that have been previously done but I may still have to verify a few things depending upon what the information is such as original plans to check for A) changes and B) deviations from the plans during construction and C) deformation caused by a myriad of reasons like from ground movement.
I haven't read every ones comments yet. I'm just saying, if you are doing comprehensive historic building documentation or historic building survey or even if the building isn't a historic building but needing accurate building survey documentation so the information you are basing on for the design phase is as accurate and precise. I agree, there isn't any absolute perfect measurements but your error level should be less than construction tolerance.
A rushed and sloppy measurement that lacks informational detail is exactly that.... sloppy and rushed.
Is that the information you want to rely on?
Jan 7, 16 2:51 pm
curtkram,
You have rough framing and finish carpentry. However, craftsmen are about that precise with all critical measurements. If the building plans in the first place was designed by someone who knows and understand material dimensions and all that then yes. It can be as precise as 1/16" on all specified dimensions. While plywood that has to be sawed may have variations but then you need to think about that in the design and employ the use of say.... moulding and all that.
The quality you get depends a lot on the skill level and competence of the builders. If architects takes a finish carpenters/expert craftsman diligence and care to the attention of detail in the preparation of their deliverables... the quality of the plans would be great.
Those who rush and be sloppy, it'll show.
curtkram
Jan 7, 16 2:59 pm
An as-built of those or to make additions or otherwise needs very high accuracy/precision with the data. This isn't the run of the mill plywood box.
nope. typically those details were built from standard stock sizes. look at it and see if it's closer to a 2x4 or 2x6 and you'll probably be about right. put a note on the drawing saying 'pound to fit' or some other field verification and any builder can make it work.
by 'drive' i mean i searched google just now. it's the same as everywhere else.
MY JOB by law
you should probably just start breaking the law more. you don't seem to have a very good grasp of what the law is, or what it does.
Bloopox
Jan 7, 16 3:00 pm
Rick I don't know how many times I and others have told you this already, but it would help you sooooo much to get some hands on experience with a real architecture firm. Much of what you wrote above is incorrect or off-target.
Another option: have you considered getting CSI's CDT certification? There are no education or experience pre-reqs, and it would give you a better understanding of the established, documented industry standards that are used in professional practice (and in legal proceedings, when it comes to that).
You're talking to people on this forum who do this work on a daily basis - I've done over 300 residential projects including new homes, additions and renovations all over the US and beyond, many historic preservation projects, and several hundred commercial projects. When I tell you it can and should be able to be done accurately in much less time than it's apparently taking you, and with no fancy tools, I'm basing that on experience.
There are many great applications for drones. But for what you're doing you don't need drones, you need a few years of observation and practice in a professional office.
By the way, the spindlework on your house is not original, and is not historically accurate. Also it looks like a cartoon mushroom. It should be removed.
curtkram
Jan 7, 16 3:09 pm
if you were the craftsman (not the architect or building designer) working on this house:
you could take one of the pieces of the porch and use it as a template to make more, then just stick them in place. assuming a few of them needed to be replaced during a restoration. no measurement needed, and using a template would probably be more accurate than using a drone. your job as a building designer would simply be to communicate that you wanted the existing pattern to be continued or something to that effect, right?
SneakyPete
Jan 7, 16 3:25 pm
Having worked on a HABS documentation project, I can say, without malice, that what Rick posted above is untrue.
That level of specificity is only useful if you're attempting to duplicate a fine detail or are making modifications that need to interface existing elements. Otherwise it's expensive and a waste of time.
SpontaneousCombustion
Jan 7, 16 3:38 pm
Drones seem more useful for my practice (mid-sized national firm) for applications requiring less accuracy but access to viewpoints that don't exist yet. For example, investors in multi-story resort projects often want to know what the view will be from their condo on the 16th floor of a building that doesn't exist yet. Measuring ornate existing spindle work doesn't require this technology, and any benefit of using it for that seems like it will be far eclipsed by expenses: equipment, training, time involved in getting and interpreting data, etc.
As for HABS: there's an official book for that, that even includes recommended methods, down to the types of tape measures, and the tolerances for various elements and overalls are all stated - and don't approach Rick's level of specificity. Rick have you worked on any HABS drawings on your own, professionally (not as part of a degree program exercise)?
Aluminate
Jan 7, 16 4:14 pm
Rick I imagined that part of the reason you were doing field measurements with a theodolite was that it's a way to conspicuously use equipment that most people don't have and don't know how to use - i.e. it's overkill, but it's a bit of showmanship. You're trying to demonstrate some skill that justifies hiring you instead of doing it themselves - which they could do, with a tape measure. But for the same reason I could see this drone idea backfiring. It's clear from past posts that you don't have the means to buy high end capture and imaging technology. Can you imagine the impression on clients (current and potential) if you're out there flying hobby-store quadcopters around their little houses? It's a level of ridiculousness above and beyond the "why couldn't I do that myself" question - now they're going to have the same concerns about you that they'd have if their child were out there playing with their toy spy helicopter (broken windows, someone's going to lose an eye, oh look out for the roses!...) It seems more than a little unprofessional and silly.
mightyaa
Jan 7, 16 4:50 pm
Take for example, my own house with spindle work.
Oh geez, lol. Why measure those at all? "Match existing" or you can even provide a 'full scale mockup' for them to duplicate. Some things are not worth measuring at all when you have a actual physical sample you will be replicating. Seriously; did that on my office to replace 20 or so rotted spindles. Just pulled a good one and sent it off to be duplicated. Ditto with the crown and base mouldings. A historic photo of the mantle was also 'good enough' to work with and hand to a skilled millwork guy.
How I've used the drone is to see things like how that custom tin profile is connected together (rivets versus welded are hard to see 5 stories above you), how it's integrated into the facade, and flashed. It's not at all for construction really other than a photograph that says "match existing" profile and some reasonable idea how this is going to fit together and how i can justify it with the code.
no_form
Jan 7, 16 5:12 pm
Get a job Balkins. You're wasting your time.
archiwutm8
Jan 7, 16 5:40 pm
You use drones when you can't capture something easily from the ground or any other way, that's it.
Jan 7, 16 8:49 pm
curtkram,
First, I'm not talking explicitly about studs and measurement of studs. When I am talking about millwork, I am talking about mouldings and fish scale patterned sidings, spindles and knobs, etc. Add to it, it isn't just the spindle and knows that I am talking about. Yes, a drone wouldn't be required for that. I didn't say that. That's what photogrammetry methodology can be used for. When it comes to drones, it would be photographing the harder to reach parts of a building like the roofs, chimneys, etc. at close range to the building.
Second, regarding the millwork, they may have been made from standard catalog products from mills 75 to 150 years ago but those products are not available. The mills that made them, no longer exists or no longer makes those products and the equipment, jigs, etc. are no longer set up. Part of a historic preservation consultant work can include documenting the profiles to mouldings and other components or otherwise be able to collect and ascertain the level and quality of detail for that. You might like to pass off the work to other people and leave yourself with just doing only what every human being on earth can do.... your job! If all you are is a delegator mouth piece then the client can do that. They don't need an architect to visualize space. Everybody has the skill. It's an innate skill of every person with visual sight and even a well-disciplined blind person. People have the knowledge and skills to do that by the nature of living.
Aluminate,
Yes, a client can certainly collect photos but they don't necessarily know how to generate a building model and set of drawings out of the images. They don't necessarily know how to perform the photogrammetric process. Using a drone is merely a means and methods of getting photographic image but just getting photographs isn't the only thing. Capturing photos is merely the data collection. The photogrammetry process is a process of what you do with the photographic data. The analysis and processing phase of the process-chain. The process-chain may begin with photographic data collection but it doesn't necessarily end with that. Anyone can get photos. For me, capturing photographic data is just part of the process chain whether or not it is collected on the ground or in the air via a drone. A drone is a tool for getting a camera in a location without dragging a ladder or renting a boom lift. For the cost of renting a boom lift and all that, one can probably just as easily buy a drone.
You don't need very expensive digital cameras. The reason is the images are collected at very close range. I'm not talking about taking a photograph from an air plane at 1500 ft A.G.L. I am talking about under 200 ft. A.G.L. and at ranges close to the buildings at about 10ft. to 25-ft. from the building. A drone being about the same distance as medium distance from the building as I would on the ground. Medium distance would be 15-20 ft. Long stance might be from 30-50 or so ft. but this is relative to building scale. A larger building might be further distances.
At that distance, sub-millimeter data can be easily obtained with images from a 2 Megapixel camera at closer distances like <5-ft distances. At 5 megapixels or even 20 Megapixels, it is even more so but then one photo doesn't encompass the whole building but parts of a building. There is a systematic process where you get enough photos that you have got every part of the building covered at different views. The key is to link enough data points to each other accurately enough to common points and then the computer software computes and resolves a huge amount of the data and can produce fairly accurate data.
In the photogrammetric method process, I am referring to what is called 'bundled adjustment'.
You can think of each pixel of an image from a camera is an angle over the field of view of the lens. It's a point matrix over the curvature of the field of view. The same as projection but projection is the inverse in that it is a cast out versus a funnel focus of light to an point area (the image sensor). As you know in projection, the farther you are, a pixel covers a bigger area. The closer you are, the pixel would consume a smaller surface area (provide you have the image in focus). A camera is much alike in that sense. With enough common points in 3 or more photos, you have a 3d point. Every point found common in each photo, the more accurate it is. The referential accuracy and precision of polygonal data resolution can be very accurate. Capturing everything from cracks in concrete, chipped corner or edges of bricks due to years of abrasion, to a myriad of other information. The embodied information is much much more than just a quick & dirty field measurements and a vector drawing.
This is computational but software already exists to for a person to perform that. If a client knows how to do this, they wouldn't be a client in the first place. My competitors are not my clients. That's pretty much the universal nature of business. Why would an architect hire their competitor (another architect?) to design their project if they would do it themselves. Clients hires or commissions people to do things they can or are willing to do themselves.
Jan 7, 16 9:12 pm
curtkram wrote:
if you were the craftsman (not the architect or building designer) working on this house:
you could take one of the pieces of the porch and use it as a template to make more, then just stick them in place. assuming a few of them needed to be replaced during a restoration. no measurement needed, and using a template would probably be more accurate than using a drone. your job as a building designer would simply be to communicate that you wanted the existing pattern to be continued or something to that effect, right?
What if you have to obtain the information without removing components? They have to stay in place? What if you are recording to document what is so there is the data to A) replicate or B) Restore in the future. The first thing you do in historic preservation before you do anything to the building which includes physical removal of ANY component is to document. For example, my porch would put me through public hell if they were removed even temporarily aside from the issues of removing them outside the confines of the frame and post and beam structure. Elastic rebound issues that could occur.
The key would be to accurately document without removing anything that causes irrepairable harm. Ethos in historic preservation is to not cause irreversible harm. This documentation does not harm the building itself. Does not cause changes to the building or anything that can not be reversed. Documentation are part the means so physical changes that are proposed to be made can be restored via reconstruction of removed components in the future. The ethos is what you do or propose to do can be restored back and documentation is one of the key ways to be able to do that even if restoration is made 30-50 or even 100 years later. Documentation includes drawings, photograph or any information that will provide the information. Preservation of that documentation is the second key thing. Whole building documentation of the level I am talking about is key to even restoration or reconstruction.
Jan 7, 16 9:16 pm
archiwutm8,
You use drones when you can't capture something easily from the ground or any other way, that's it.
I don't recall disagreeing with you. I think I said that. A drone itself is not photogrammetry. It's a tool. Architectural photogrammetry is a method of the larger work of building survey / building documentation work. I think we can agree on that.
I rather send a drone with a camera over a building than dragging a ladder and standing on the roof of a 12:12 pitch roof just to take photographs.
Jan 8, 16 12:12 am
Bloopox:
By the way, the spindlework on your house is not original, and is not historically accurate. Also it looks like a cartoon mushroom. It should be removed.
While it may not be absolutely original in the sense that it was built when the house was built but it has been and is still historic. In that it was installed a very long time ago. It was there in historic photographs over 100 years old. Something like 1904 or something. It was in the years between 1904 and 1910. Guess what, those spindle work was there.... then.
Over 100 years ago. If I were to remove it, it would be a major change in the character defining feature of the front elevation especially with it being there for over a century. If it were removed, the community would probably crucify me.
There are 100+ year old photos that supports the spindle (the rod and knob and that mushroom shaped steam bended wood work being around throughout a major significant portion of this building's history throughout a major period of significance of the house.
I do agree with it that it wasn't there when the house was originally built. Presuming 1-2 prior owners to T.S. Cornelius. This house was one of the first residences he lived at in Astoria when he came to Astoria in ca. 1890. The house is projected to trace back to ~1875. While the spindle and knob wood work might not have been there in 1875, it was certainly been there throughout a very significant portion of the 20th century. 90-100+ years of the 20th century. In Astoria, you don't see Victorian/Queen Anne features installed or implemented much after 1900. 1905 is about the cutoff year and after that, architecture trends moved into post Victorian style architecture.
Given the extent and level of photographing of my house including the fact that a drawing of my house, by an artist who makes very nice drawings of Astoria architecture, is at the City Hall. Simply put, it would be a bad move for me in this community to do that.
Sorry Bloopox.
Jan 8, 16 2:42 am
Mightyaa wrote:
Oh geez, lol. Why measure those at all? "Match existing" or you can even provide a 'full scale mockup' for them to duplicate. Some things are not worth measuring at all when you have a actual physical sample you will be replicating. Seriously; did that on my office to replace 20 or so rotted spindles. Just pulled a good one and sent it off to be duplicated. Ditto with the crown and base mouldings. A historic photo of the mantle was also 'good enough' to work with and hand to a skilled millwork guy.
How I've used the drone is to see things like how that custom tin profile is connected together (rivets versus welded are hard to see 5 stories above you), how it's integrated into the facade, and flashed. It's not at all for construction really other than a photograph that says "match existing" profile and some reasonable idea how this is going to fit together and how i can justify it with the code.
That's assuming you are taking things apart in the first place. What if you are documenting a building (that includes houses... they are buildings, too!) If you aren't authorized to take apart but the task is to document what is. The point for the documentation is to not remove any components of the building (especially historic buildings). The idea is for a non-destructive process of documenting. The point of building survey documentation is to do this BEFORE any physical work is done on a building. Sometimes, this can be weeks, months or even years before any actual physical preservation work such as renovations, rehabilitation, etc. or even additions be made. If you are providing services as a building survey documentation consultant, prior to any building design/architectural services being performed, this is what you do... there may not even be a construction contractor involved. Projects in such pre-design work / master planning / etc. Hypothetically speaking, the client is in preliminary project planning. There is no decision which direction the project is to go. They are looking for professional involvement with a preservation / design / planning consultant who will prepare basic documentation work prior to moving into any direct project planning. Client doesn't have a plan for what to do. Whether to make an addition, or renovate interior space, or whatever. Sometimes, the task is mainly preparation for restoration and provisional rehabilitation but they have absolutely no building plans. The idea there is to prepare comprehensive building survey documentation which depicts what it is currently. Part of that work would usually include a structural conditions assessment or that may be involved in a separate phase in between building survey documentation and historic structures report documentation where a competent professionals would be involved providing their input in the assessment of conditions like wood rot or other conditions that would need to be abated. The detail of documentation required, the quality of the information gathering, etc. It isn't about doing the absolute minimum. If you are doing that in a race to the bottom, then lets be honest, that the rat race to the bottom is a push downwards towards incompetency.
While this work can lead on to the next phase specific project planning. I'm looking to employ state of the art technology, increased quality of documentation and precision and make that affordable to the client. I would put the information I would want to see on the drawings if I were the builder/contractor. If I were the builder, I would not be spending a bunch of man hours redoing every damn measurement of the a--h-le who made the construction documents. That costs the client twice. Clients aren't paying the contractors to re-measure building. That isn't what they are expecting to pay. That's not in the contractor's bids. Guess what, that is the kind of bullshit that causes the project to exceed the bid aside from already what often is an underbid to get the work. If I was doing say... design-build... I might as well had the measurements done right from the get go as the drawings are prepared. Measurement done during construction are for marking and placing the walls, the individual studs within the wall, doors, windows, etc.
Jan 8, 16 2:43 am
Part II:
You said:
How I've used the drone is to see things like how that custom tin profile is connected together (rivets versus welded are hard to see 5 stories above you), how it's integrated into the facade, and flashed. It's not at all for construction really other than a photograph that says "match existing" profile and some reasonable idea how this is going to fit together and how i can justify it with the code.
That's all part of it. Why not that be in the virtual building model of the existing building and the documentations produced. While the photographs are good in their own right. The synthesis of the images produced provides comprehensive detail of the images and ability to analyze this later. I think the comprehensive data information is all part of our move towards virtual building models. Even the traditional building plans model is changing. With technology such as virtual and aumented reality become more and more part of the day and age. There is ago segway into 3d printing technologies. This type of data is exactly on that line to achieve it.
In photogrammetric / image based modeling, drones would be a support role. It is a tool that supports the process. The point of this thread topic is certainly about how drones can be used and a fair debate is made and I think the discussion in one way or another is good whether you or I are right or wrong it isn't just about how the drone is the primary aspect. While I see the day to day use of drones in our work is likely a process support role like getting the camera to places that are a pain in the butt.
The images I gather in vast volume that is suitable for architectural photogrammetry process chain, the images do in fact have multiple uses such as like you mentioned. While, I do see it for getting that information like you are saying, I am looking at additional applications such as production of image based 3d models of the building which will have several applications down the process chain. Remember, clients are looking for more and more photorealistic product output. A good 3d model obtained out of architectural photogrammetric process with high quality rendering of the addition, you literally can visualize with fairly high accuracy of how the project WILL look like if built accordingly. I do understand issues such as construction phase deviations from the set of building plans. There is this high demand for this level of information. It doesn't necessarily completely replace field measuring with measuring tape but it can reduce alot of what you need to measure that way. I can focus on field measuring critical measurements while the photogrammetric software can pretty much computationally resolve a lot of the stuff that isn't physically measured. The same way a 3d laser scan when it creates that 3d point cloud information.
The use of photogrammetry-based image modeling process would allow me to attain similar product output of a 3d building model as a 3d laser scan. A 3d laser scan equipment is a lot more expensive than even a GoPro camera let alone other less expensive sports cameras and such. Bundled adjustment doesn't necessarily require the high steep image quality of the current state of the art manned aircraft mounted camera/steroscopic camera systems that are used today such as the UltraCam line of cameras. Really, I don't need that level of camera equipment and consumer digital cameras can be used to produce very good 3d building models.
Sure, if your 5700 ft. to 15000 or more feet up, these cameras would be needed. I wouldn't need something like that for a drone at less than 200-ft. A.G.L. Especially when at less than 50-ft. A.G.L. That exact height depend on the building of course. Height of building + 25 ft. is a fair calculated height. Indoors is another talk altogether but still a fair point. Because of close range, I can achieve considerably denser 3d point cloud data even with inexpensive consumer grade digital cameras.
Jan 8, 16 2:44 am
One person made a comment:
But for the same reason I could see this drone idea backfiring. It's clear from past posts that you don't have the means to buy high end capture and imaging technology. Can you imagine the impression on clients (current and potential) if you're out there flying hobby-store quadcopters around their little houses? It's a level of ridiculousness above and beyond the "why couldn't I do that myself" question - now they're going to have the same concerns about you that they'd have if their child were out there playing with their toy spy helicopter (broken windows, someone's going to lose an eye, oh look out for the roses!...) It seems more than a little unprofessional and silly.
Here's an argument: Why would I use a very expensive quad. If there was a malfunction and it crashed to the ground, I wouldn't be out a whole lot of money add to that, using a quad that is say.... relatively frangible, it would be much safer if it is way. Add to it being as light as possible. Add to that, an inexpensive camera and it should be rather modest if the quad had a problem. Add to that, the client either stays inside or is elsewhere so they aren't in the flight area. There is basic practices to safeguard the area that you are working. This way, no one is harmed. It might seem odd that I would use something light weight like a WLToys V666 quadcopter or other quadcopters that are lightweight, frangible and then use general safety precaution to safeguard others. I wouldn't just fly a drone without discussing it with a client, anyway and general safety precautions and general suggestions that way, harm would be minimized. Additionally, having some signage made and use of caution tape or whatever else is needed but the bottom line, the use of a modest and expensive quadcopter that can life a small, lightweight camera is sensible.
While, it is cool and all to use a fancy DJI Inspire 1 but hey, it is a lot heavier and can present a more serious hazard to anyone below if it fell from considerable height.
There are practical reasons to keep people out of the particular area at time of flight.
While getting on the roof would represent more risk to myself. Assessment of the area is a factor in deciding whether to use a drone or not. It isn't always practical and if that is the case, I have to adjust to other options.
A drone is a support tool to support the process chain in performing a task.
archiwutm8
Jan 8, 16 3:53 am
"virtual building models" What? we've been "virtually" building models for oinks.
"With technology such as virtual and aumented reality become more and more part of the day and age. There is ago segway into 3d printing technologies."
But it isn't, that's the problem there is no real augmented reality tech or need at the moment, its very slow. Even virtual reality which has billions investments already with real HMD's out there working is still slow progress, the new Rift CV1 was a hit and miss at the same time and it was only released 6th Jan. I wouldn't 3D print a house that was modelled using photogrammetry...and even "3D printing" which is just rapid prototyping is coming on slow in architecture, worst of all its been here for what..20 years? maybe 30?
I'm not trying to put any of the tech down, they're my source of income but be real here, don't just get hyped about everything you read on websites and see on television.
"While, it is cool and all to use a fancy DJI Inspire 1 but hey, it is a lot heavier and can present a more serious hazard to anyone below if it fell from considerable height. "
What? do you understand anything about quad tech at all?
Nothing you've typed makes sense at all, you've literally just googled a bunch of stuff and spewing it over several paragraphs to distract the reader from coming to the conclusion that you have no idea about any of the stuff you've been saying in this whole thread. You've come up with a bunch of arguments for things that you have no idea about or experience in.
I challenge you to actually do something for once...go take a bunch of photos of a banana and use 123D Catch to create a model. Even kid could do it, here >
Yes I do. I have used quads for some time. Although I avoid using it for 'commercial' use for some time due to obviously legal reason doesn't mean I don't know how the things work. I probably know how they work all the way down to the silicon wafer level.
I know how digital cameras work, too. I'm pretty sure, you can find all the information via a search engine if you dig around. If you had any clue, search engines has access directly and indirectly to absolutely every website and web content, online PDFs, etc. and links your computer to just about any computer server system accessible from the internet.
There is more information on the web than the entire Library of Congress.
It is totally stupid to say what I am saying can be sourced on the internet. So can everything you say. In fact, the moment you post it, it is.
archiwutm8
Jan 8, 16 6:44 am
Do the challenge, it isn't hard.
Jan 8, 16 7:03 am
Not at 4:03AM my time.
Jan 8, 16 7:11 am
A few years ago, just for the hell of it, I used the 123d app on the iPad where I did that exercise but in that case, the object wasn't a banana but my Theodolite on the tripod.
Schoon
Jan 8, 16 7:56 am
The owner of my previous place of employment bought a small RC-type drone with a built-in camera so that he could take it to jobsites and snap photos of the construction. He flew it around the office all day, which amused him and annoyed everyone else. He took it outside to test it and it was immediately blown against the side of our office by a tiny gust of wind.
He didn't use it at all after that.
no_form
Jan 8, 16 10:02 am
"I probably know how they work all the way down to the silicon wafer level."
There you go again. Making up total nonsense.
You don't even know how to use a thin metal stick with some tick marks on it to derive lengths and widths of objects perpendicular to each other.
Get a job!
archiwutm8
Jan 8, 16 10:32 am
A few years ago? when was that?
Jan 8, 16 1:29 pm
archiwutm8,
2012. I was just toying with it at that time just to learn the app a little bit and see what it can do. Of course, more photos and systematic process and it would probably be a bit better. It was enough to show its potential.
no_form
Jan 8, 16 1:37 pm
Glad Rick b from Oregon gave 123d catch the old stamp of approval. I'm sure autodesk was biting their nails about it.
It's 2016! Get a job!
Jan 8, 16 2:10 pm
Schoon,
First and foremost, no one can just buy a drone and expect to use it unless they have piloting experience as in piloting RC aircrafts and quadcopters.
For outdoors, I would recommend say... a WL Toys 262. It's larger profile with the foam protection guard helps to make the flight more gentle. A very small and very light quad would be harder to fly outdoor with wind due to its mass. It is best to work with it recreationally out in an open field away from people and airports and things like that. Then with a small amount of wind, it might drift a little but he or anyone can learn the controls and to set the trim. It is important to set that. When you do that, it will help to make the flight more reliable. If you just buy a drone and never flown one before, and then expect to go out and do something with it commercially, you are setting yourself up for failure. It's okay to bang up a cheap WL Toys v262 (a WL Toys V666 is basically a version of the v262 with a FPV digital camera on board) or example. Work with it. Gain confidence and control. Operating a drone is like operating a car in the sense that you can't expect to somehow get a driver's license and just buy a car and never driven before and expect to do it perfectly.
Larger and generally heavier drones will naturally resist being pushed by light wind more but more mass means more force is needed to be applied but when they are in the air, there isn't much resistance factor with air so you need to be aware of the wind and how it would push the craft.
It is easy to get scared off by a crash especially if you crash something you spent a lot of money on it.
You basically have to learn how to actively control the craft's flight and make gentle adjustments to compensate with the wind. Add to that, read the Chinglish manuals and what not to know the settings like the gyroscopic settings. It takes practice.
You can think of that time spent like driving school or going to flight school and learning to fly a real manned aircraft and getting flight hours behind you. Flying a drone requires practice flying it so you can fly the aircraft reliably. Yes, you don't learn that by a just googling via a search engine. You can, however, look at videos online that can tutor you and so forth but ultimately it takes practice. While it isn't rocket science, it is a little bit of hean, eye coordination and learning to operate the controls to a level of confidence that you can fly it and get it to a point that you aren't spending time 'thinking' what you need to do but in fact just doing it more to reaction so your reaction/response time to making corrections are more instantly than sitting their wondering 'what do I do... it's going to towards the building.... what do I do... what do I do.'.... now, if you are thinking that, you are not really ready to fly the drone for commercial use or near obstructions like trees, buildings, etc. An open / unpopulated field is a good place to start.
This is a suggestion. I recommend something cheap so when you will invariably crash the drone, you aren't ought a ridiculous amount of money. I believe there are flight simulators as well. A good thing to invest and practice on before flying a drone but there is a little difference between the simulator and real life flying an aircraft so you will want to practice as well. Practice in a clear open unpopulated field a little bit and then when you get confidence & competence over the controls and can control the aircraft reliably even in light wind, then using it commercially would be reasonable.
Get the operational controls down.
no_form
Jan 8, 16 2:42 pm
Balkins, you're the last person that should advising people on "getting operational controls down."
"Get a job down."
Jan 8, 16 4:26 pm
mightyaa wrote:
Seriously no_form, give it a break... You are stalking and posting after he post anything not adding diddly to the conversation.
^_________________________________ You're not adding to the conversation, no form.
While, there is some little distraction over the course of this page. I am sure that the I and others can recircle back into focus to the topic at hand.
no_form
Jan 8, 16 4:58 pm
Get a job Balkins. Get a job. You're not drone captain of tomorrow or a lawyer. You're just posting the usual text wall bs of nonsense. Get a job get a job get a job.
Jan 8, 16 11:17 pm
no_form,
You don't even know how to use a thin metal stick with some tick marks on it to derive lengths and widths of objects perpendicular to each other.
and
Get a job Balkins. Get a job. You're not drone captain of tomorrow or a lawyer. You're just posting the usual text wall bs of nonsense. Get a job get a job get a job.
no_form,
you can shove that metal stick up your well laid ass.
no_form
Jan 8, 16 11:28 pm
Hey Balkins, "these are not the drones you're looking for." Get a job.
Background: The FAA has new regulations already for small UAS (commonly called these days as drones but not just drones but any radio controlled aircraft including blimps), although currently the new registration program is for recreational/hobby (non-commercial or governmental) use. New regulations in the registration for commercial are pending. I am beginning to implement a new branch into my business structure under a sort of restructured business enterprise involving different types of business activities from building design & related activities such as historic preservation consultant and other services, software/video game development, and now including a new branch involving the use of small UAS. While this branch is not 'live' yet pending all the regulatory procedures. There is currently a huge range of possible activities being implemented with small UAS and other UAS. Some of those activities are implemented in video games use as well as architecture in forms of aerial photography and other kinds of data collection.
How does architects and other design professionals see the use of UAS or drones, as is popularly called these days, in the practice of their respective professions? This isn't a discussion about the laws but the application of drones in this profession.
Bloopox thank you.
Only problem is that he doesn't know how to use a tape measure. He asked me how to use one in a previous forum. He can't measure a rectangle as he previously explained.
Just spoke to a colleague, he says " We can get under 1mm to a fraction of 1mm however that means extremely highend hardware, skill level and how much time you spend on the model" but advises 10mm on contract. whilst a pointcloud from laser scanning is 7mm on contract.
So there you have it.
my experience when measuring as-builts is that buildings are not built to 1/16" accuracy. i shoot for within about 2" (this depends on some stuff of course). any given measurement should be a lot closer of course, but if you're off by an 1/8" or 1/16" a few times along a dimension string it starts to add up.
if you're measuring something like lap siding, the distance from the top and bottom of the siding is far more than 1/16". sometimes walls are not perfectly plumb, so measuring at the base compared to 4' aff or 8' aff is different, sometimes by a lot more than 1/16". sometimes walls are not perfectly square, so measuring from the middle of a room v. the corner of a room gives you a different number that is off by more than 1/16". a normal gyp. bd. wall is wider at the end than the middle because the mud is built up at the corner bead. the wall thickness changes by more than 1/16".
routine errors occur to. if you measure against the base instead of the wall itself you're going to be off by something like 1/8". if there is any sag in the tape measure you'll be off. if the tape is not perfectly perpendicular to the wall you're going to be off. i'm pretty sure laser tape measures end up with similar discrepancies.
i'm fairly certain you could have 10 people measure a building and get 10 different sizes, even if they're all within 1/16" accuracy.
as-builts are never perfect, I regularly work with walls that have bowed by as much as 50cm-1m over time usually listed buildings and most older buildings will have out of plumb walls where they've been plastered or painted so many times they're always uneven. Have you ever worked on a square room? I haven't, lucky you if you have.
meh... learn to measure (and just the critical ones). As much as you can, get as long of a run as you can on the tape. So as much as possible is pinned back to a specific point. So instead of wall to wall, it'd be this wall distance or jamb back to the exterior. Your exterior dimensions and long run ones will be the most accurate.
And lol at a 1/16th; I'm with archiwutm8. You'll be lucky if it's plumbed and squared. Hell, just remember your structural l/120 for deflection which basically means in a 10' room, the floor is still 'perfect' if it sags an inch.
SpontaneousCombustion,
You're right, I misinterpreted what archiwutm8 meant and over-reacted a little bit. Aside from the Oregon law which we can and should move pass. Lets not dwell on that subject. I think we were moving past that.
Bloopox,
In my locale, most of the housing or other buildings are Victorian and Craftsman/Bungalow buildings with much more elaborate level of architectural detail.
An as-built of those or to make additions or otherwise needs very high accuracy/precision with the data. This isn't the run of the mill plywood box.
Sure, the one project isn't the most sophisticated of our buildings. Come to Astoria sometime and see the architecture. A lot of buildings here used milled components that you won't find in your typical home depot and today would be custom wood milling. This means, you need precise measurements and profiles. While, I may still need to use the contour profile tool, the level of detail for such a project would require significant measurements and frankly, sir, you can't completely measure these buildings in 2 hours with a measuring tape because you aren't just measuring, you have to draw the building and document many individual components.
Take for example, my own house with spindle work.
When you are documenting a historic building (like 2/3 or more of the buildings in Astoria), the TOTAL cumulative error in measuring should not exceed 1/2". In fact, you should be as accurate as possible.
The porch spindle work on my house would actually be an example where photogrammetry or laser scanning would be perfect. Frankly, there is no practical way you are going to accurately record and document the porch work with a measuring tape and if you did manage to do so, it would take an extremely long time to do it. A good photogrammetric or 3d laser scan could conceivably replicate accurately enough.
While the one project I am documenting may not be shining examples of historic architecture in Astoria and the level of architectural detail that you have to accurately document before doing any historic preservation, restoration, renovation, alterations, additions, etc.
As the design professional, it is MY JOB by law that the plans are A) buildable, B) Accurate and C) does not contain excessive errors or omissions., D) contains the information that a builder can carry out the construction work without having to remeasure everything. They maybe measuring but they shouldn't be out there redoing your job in measuring so they can place the porch or addition where it is suppose to be located.
Builders are suppose to rely on your plans for instruction. You say the projecting wall of the addition must be 3'-4" from the outside corner. The builder is suppose to only have to go from that corner and measure out 3'-4" and mark where the wall is to be located. That's a specification and you are responsible for the accuracy of that location. They are expecting the correct information on the plans. Therefore, it is YOUR job to be correct to maximum extent possible. That is professional standard of care.
In the age of computer vector drawings, we should be accurate to within material tolerance. This means, when you specify nominal 2x6 S4S Douglas Fir #2 & Better studs, the measurements should be tolerant to within industry milling of the wood which will be 1.5 x 5.5" give or take a maybe +/- 5% or so in dimensions for milling variance and moisture content level.
If you state dimensions on a set of plans for where walls, door ways, windows,etc. are located in relation to an existing building, they you need to have your shit in order in regards to the existing building and the information you are operating from.
I don't rely on client's measurements. It's a risk I prefer not to take. I may accept documentation from other professionals that have been previously done but I may still have to verify a few things depending upon what the information is such as original plans to check for A) changes and B) deviations from the plans during construction and C) deformation caused by a myriad of reasons like from ground movement.
I haven't read every ones comments yet. I'm just saying, if you are doing comprehensive historic building documentation or historic building survey or even if the building isn't a historic building but needing accurate building survey documentation so the information you are basing on for the design phase is as accurate and precise. I agree, there isn't any absolute perfect measurements but your error level should be less than construction tolerance.
A rushed and sloppy measurement that lacks informational detail is exactly that.... sloppy and rushed.
Is that the information you want to rely on?
curtkram,
You have rough framing and finish carpentry. However, craftsmen are about that precise with all critical measurements. If the building plans in the first place was designed by someone who knows and understand material dimensions and all that then yes. It can be as precise as 1/16" on all specified dimensions. While plywood that has to be sawed may have variations but then you need to think about that in the design and employ the use of say.... moulding and all that.
The quality you get depends a lot on the skill level and competence of the builders. If architects takes a finish carpenters/expert craftsman diligence and care to the attention of detail in the preparation of their deliverables... the quality of the plans would be great.
Those who rush and be sloppy, it'll show.
An as-built of those or to make additions or otherwise needs very high accuracy/precision with the data. This isn't the run of the mill plywood box.
nope. typically those details were built from standard stock sizes. look at it and see if it's closer to a 2x4 or 2x6 and you'll probably be about right. put a note on the drawing saying 'pound to fit' or some other field verification and any builder can make it work.
i drove through astoria recently
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Astoria,+OR/@46.1836059,-123.8349012,3a,75y,63.79h,82t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sXdzs24nEk6CDj5hJbw3yUA!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DXdzs24nEk6CDj5hJbw3yUA%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D109.09474%26pitch%3D0!7i3328!8i1664!4m2!3m1!1s0x54937b440995fb8b:0xf7dd72f1a11b8abf!6m1!1e1
by 'drive' i mean i searched google just now. it's the same as everywhere else.
MY JOB by law
you should probably just start breaking the law more. you don't seem to have a very good grasp of what the law is, or what it does.
Rick I don't know how many times I and others have told you this already, but it would help you sooooo much to get some hands on experience with a real architecture firm. Much of what you wrote above is incorrect or off-target.
Another option: have you considered getting CSI's CDT certification? There are no education or experience pre-reqs, and it would give you a better understanding of the established, documented industry standards that are used in professional practice (and in legal proceedings, when it comes to that).
You're talking to people on this forum who do this work on a daily basis - I've done over 300 residential projects including new homes, additions and renovations all over the US and beyond, many historic preservation projects, and several hundred commercial projects. When I tell you it can and should be able to be done accurately in much less time than it's apparently taking you, and with no fancy tools, I'm basing that on experience.
There are many great applications for drones. But for what you're doing you don't need drones, you need a few years of observation and practice in a professional office.
By the way, the spindlework on your house is not original, and is not historically accurate. Also it looks like a cartoon mushroom. It should be removed.
if you were the craftsman (not the architect or building designer) working on this house:
https://www.google.com/maps/@46.1852824,-123.8348412,3a,75y,85.81h,92.67t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sdW-lANff0ZnqSVzVvBTBUw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1
you could take one of the pieces of the porch and use it as a template to make more, then just stick them in place. assuming a few of them needed to be replaced during a restoration. no measurement needed, and using a template would probably be more accurate than using a drone. your job as a building designer would simply be to communicate that you wanted the existing pattern to be continued or something to that effect, right?
Having worked on a HABS documentation project, I can say, without malice, that what Rick posted above is untrue.
That level of specificity is only useful if you're attempting to duplicate a fine detail or are making modifications that need to interface existing elements. Otherwise it's expensive and a waste of time.
Drones seem more useful for my practice (mid-sized national firm) for applications requiring less accuracy but access to viewpoints that don't exist yet. For example, investors in multi-story resort projects often want to know what the view will be from their condo on the 16th floor of a building that doesn't exist yet. Measuring ornate existing spindle work doesn't require this technology, and any benefit of using it for that seems like it will be far eclipsed by expenses: equipment, training, time involved in getting and interpreting data, etc.
As for HABS: there's an official book for that, that even includes recommended methods, down to the types of tape measures, and the tolerances for various elements and overalls are all stated - and don't approach Rick's level of specificity. Rick have you worked on any HABS drawings on your own, professionally (not as part of a degree program exercise)?
Rick I imagined that part of the reason you were doing field measurements with a theodolite was that it's a way to conspicuously use equipment that most people don't have and don't know how to use - i.e. it's overkill, but it's a bit of showmanship. You're trying to demonstrate some skill that justifies hiring you instead of doing it themselves - which they could do, with a tape measure.
But for the same reason I could see this drone idea backfiring. It's clear from past posts that you don't have the means to buy high end capture and imaging technology. Can you imagine the impression on clients (current and potential) if you're out there flying hobby-store quadcopters around their little houses? It's a level of ridiculousness above and beyond the "why couldn't I do that myself" question - now they're going to have the same concerns about you that they'd have if their child were out there playing with their toy spy helicopter (broken windows, someone's going to lose an eye, oh look out for the roses!...) It seems more than a little unprofessional and silly.
Take for example, my own house with spindle work.
Oh geez, lol. Why measure those at all? "Match existing" or you can even provide a 'full scale mockup' for them to duplicate. Some things are not worth measuring at all when you have a actual physical sample you will be replicating. Seriously; did that on my office to replace 20 or so rotted spindles. Just pulled a good one and sent it off to be duplicated. Ditto with the crown and base mouldings. A historic photo of the mantle was also 'good enough' to work with and hand to a skilled millwork guy.
How I've used the drone is to see things like how that custom tin profile is connected together (rivets versus welded are hard to see 5 stories above you), how it's integrated into the facade, and flashed. It's not at all for construction really other than a photograph that says "match existing" profile and some reasonable idea how this is going to fit together and how i can justify it with the code.
Get a job Balkins. You're wasting your time.
You use drones when you can't capture something easily from the ground or any other way, that's it.
curtkram,
First, I'm not talking explicitly about studs and measurement of studs. When I am talking about millwork, I am talking about mouldings and fish scale patterned sidings, spindles and knobs, etc. Add to it, it isn't just the spindle and knows that I am talking about. Yes, a drone wouldn't be required for that. I didn't say that. That's what photogrammetry methodology can be used for. When it comes to drones, it would be photographing the harder to reach parts of a building like the roofs, chimneys, etc. at close range to the building.
Second, regarding the millwork, they may have been made from standard catalog products from mills 75 to 150 years ago but those products are not available. The mills that made them, no longer exists or no longer makes those products and the equipment, jigs, etc. are no longer set up. Part of a historic preservation consultant work can include documenting the profiles to mouldings and other components or otherwise be able to collect and ascertain the level and quality of detail for that. You might like to pass off the work to other people and leave yourself with just doing only what every human being on earth can do.... your job! If all you are is a delegator mouth piece then the client can do that. They don't need an architect to visualize space. Everybody has the skill. It's an innate skill of every person with visual sight and even a well-disciplined blind person. People have the knowledge and skills to do that by the nature of living.
Aluminate,
Yes, a client can certainly collect photos but they don't necessarily know how to generate a building model and set of drawings out of the images. They don't necessarily know how to perform the photogrammetric process. Using a drone is merely a means and methods of getting photographic image but just getting photographs isn't the only thing. Capturing photos is merely the data collection. The photogrammetry process is a process of what you do with the photographic data. The analysis and processing phase of the process-chain. The process-chain may begin with photographic data collection but it doesn't necessarily end with that. Anyone can get photos. For me, capturing photographic data is just part of the process chain whether or not it is collected on the ground or in the air via a drone. A drone is a tool for getting a camera in a location without dragging a ladder or renting a boom lift. For the cost of renting a boom lift and all that, one can probably just as easily buy a drone.
You don't need very expensive digital cameras. The reason is the images are collected at very close range. I'm not talking about taking a photograph from an air plane at 1500 ft A.G.L. I am talking about under 200 ft. A.G.L. and at ranges close to the buildings at about 10ft. to 25-ft. from the building. A drone being about the same distance as medium distance from the building as I would on the ground. Medium distance would be 15-20 ft. Long stance might be from 30-50 or so ft. but this is relative to building scale. A larger building might be further distances.
At that distance, sub-millimeter data can be easily obtained with images from a 2 Megapixel camera at closer distances like <5-ft distances. At 5 megapixels or even 20 Megapixels, it is even more so but then one photo doesn't encompass the whole building but parts of a building. There is a systematic process where you get enough photos that you have got every part of the building covered at different views. The key is to link enough data points to each other accurately enough to common points and then the computer software computes and resolves a huge amount of the data and can produce fairly accurate data.
In the photogrammetric method process, I am referring to what is called 'bundled adjustment'.
You can think of each pixel of an image from a camera is an angle over the field of view of the lens. It's a point matrix over the curvature of the field of view. The same as projection but projection is the inverse in that it is a cast out versus a funnel focus of light to an point area (the image sensor). As you know in projection, the farther you are, a pixel covers a bigger area. The closer you are, the pixel would consume a smaller surface area (provide you have the image in focus). A camera is much alike in that sense. With enough common points in 3 or more photos, you have a 3d point. Every point found common in each photo, the more accurate it is. The referential accuracy and precision of polygonal data resolution can be very accurate. Capturing everything from cracks in concrete, chipped corner or edges of bricks due to years of abrasion, to a myriad of other information. The embodied information is much much more than just a quick & dirty field measurements and a vector drawing.
This is computational but software already exists to for a person to perform that. If a client knows how to do this, they wouldn't be a client in the first place. My competitors are not my clients. That's pretty much the universal nature of business. Why would an architect hire their competitor (another architect?) to design their project if they would do it themselves. Clients hires or commissions people to do things they can or are willing to do themselves.
curtkram wrote:
if you were the craftsman (not the architect or building designer) working on this house:
https://www.google.com/maps/@46.1852824,-123.8348412,3a,75y,85.81h,92.67t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sdW-lANff0ZnqSVzVvBTBUw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1
you could take one of the pieces of the porch and use it as a template to make more, then just stick them in place. assuming a few of them needed to be replaced during a restoration. no measurement needed, and using a template would probably be more accurate than using a drone. your job as a building designer would simply be to communicate that you wanted the existing pattern to be continued or something to that effect, right?
What if you have to obtain the information without removing components? They have to stay in place? What if you are recording to document what is so there is the data to A) replicate or B) Restore in the future. The first thing you do in historic preservation before you do anything to the building which includes physical removal of ANY component is to document. For example, my porch would put me through public hell if they were removed even temporarily aside from the issues of removing them outside the confines of the frame and post and beam structure. Elastic rebound issues that could occur.
The key would be to accurately document without removing anything that causes irrepairable harm. Ethos in historic preservation is to not cause irreversible harm. This documentation does not harm the building itself. Does not cause changes to the building or anything that can not be reversed. Documentation are part the means so physical changes that are proposed to be made can be restored via reconstruction of removed components in the future. The ethos is what you do or propose to do can be restored back and documentation is one of the key ways to be able to do that even if restoration is made 30-50 or even 100 years later. Documentation includes drawings, photograph or any information that will provide the information. Preservation of that documentation is the second key thing. Whole building documentation of the level I am talking about is key to even restoration or reconstruction.
archiwutm8,
You use drones when you can't capture something easily from the ground or any other way, that's it.
I don't recall disagreeing with you. I think I said that. A drone itself is not photogrammetry. It's a tool. Architectural photogrammetry is a method of the larger work of building survey / building documentation work. I think we can agree on that.
I rather send a drone with a camera over a building than dragging a ladder and standing on the roof of a 12:12 pitch roof just to take photographs.
Bloopox:
By the way, the spindlework on your house is not original, and is not historically accurate. Also it looks like a cartoon mushroom. It should be removed.
While it may not be absolutely original in the sense that it was built when the house was built but it has been and is still historic. In that it was installed a very long time ago. It was there in historic photographs over 100 years old. Something like 1904 or something. It was in the years between 1904 and 1910. Guess what, those spindle work was there.... then.
Over 100 years ago. If I were to remove it, it would be a major change in the character defining feature of the front elevation especially with it being there for over a century. If it were removed, the community would probably crucify me.
There are 100+ year old photos that supports the spindle (the rod and knob and that mushroom shaped steam bended wood work being around throughout a major significant portion of this building's history throughout a major period of significance of the house.
I do agree with it that it wasn't there when the house was originally built. Presuming 1-2 prior owners to T.S. Cornelius. This house was one of the first residences he lived at in Astoria when he came to Astoria in ca. 1890. The house is projected to trace back to ~1875. While the spindle and knob wood work might not have been there in 1875, it was certainly been there throughout a very significant portion of the 20th century. 90-100+ years of the 20th century. In Astoria, you don't see Victorian/Queen Anne features installed or implemented much after 1900. 1905 is about the cutoff year and after that, architecture trends moved into post Victorian style architecture.
Given the extent and level of photographing of my house including the fact that a drawing of my house, by an artist who makes very nice drawings of Astoria architecture, is at the City Hall. Simply put, it would be a bad move for me in this community to do that.
Sorry Bloopox.
Mightyaa wrote:
Oh geez, lol. Why measure those at all? "Match existing" or you can even provide a 'full scale mockup' for them to duplicate. Some things are not worth measuring at all when you have a actual physical sample you will be replicating. Seriously; did that on my office to replace 20 or so rotted spindles. Just pulled a good one and sent it off to be duplicated. Ditto with the crown and base mouldings. A historic photo of the mantle was also 'good enough' to work with and hand to a skilled millwork guy.
How I've used the drone is to see things like how that custom tin profile is connected together (rivets versus welded are hard to see 5 stories above you), how it's integrated into the facade, and flashed. It's not at all for construction really other than a photograph that says "match existing" profile and some reasonable idea how this is going to fit together and how i can justify it with the code.
That's assuming you are taking things apart in the first place. What if you are documenting a building (that includes houses... they are buildings, too!) If you aren't authorized to take apart but the task is to document what is. The point for the documentation is to not remove any components of the building (especially historic buildings). The idea is for a non-destructive process of documenting. The point of building survey documentation is to do this BEFORE any physical work is done on a building. Sometimes, this can be weeks, months or even years before any actual physical preservation work such as renovations, rehabilitation, etc. or even additions be made. If you are providing services as a building survey documentation consultant, prior to any building design/architectural services being performed, this is what you do... there may not even be a construction contractor involved. Projects in such pre-design work / master planning / etc. Hypothetically speaking, the client is in preliminary project planning. There is no decision which direction the project is to go. They are looking for professional involvement with a preservation / design / planning consultant who will prepare basic documentation work prior to moving into any direct project planning. Client doesn't have a plan for what to do. Whether to make an addition, or renovate interior space, or whatever. Sometimes, the task is mainly preparation for restoration and provisional rehabilitation but they have absolutely no building plans. The idea there is to prepare comprehensive building survey documentation which depicts what it is currently. Part of that work would usually include a structural conditions assessment or that may be involved in a separate phase in between building survey documentation and historic structures report documentation where a competent professionals would be involved providing their input in the assessment of conditions like wood rot or other conditions that would need to be abated. The detail of documentation required, the quality of the information gathering, etc. It isn't about doing the absolute minimum. If you are doing that in a race to the bottom, then lets be honest, that the rat race to the bottom is a push downwards towards incompetency.
While this work can lead on to the next phase specific project planning. I'm looking to employ state of the art technology, increased quality of documentation and precision and make that affordable to the client. I would put the information I would want to see on the drawings if I were the builder/contractor. If I were the builder, I would not be spending a bunch of man hours redoing every damn measurement of the a--h-le who made the construction documents. That costs the client twice. Clients aren't paying the contractors to re-measure building. That isn't what they are expecting to pay. That's not in the contractor's bids. Guess what, that is the kind of bullshit that causes the project to exceed the bid aside from already what often is an underbid to get the work. If I was doing say... design-build... I might as well had the measurements done right from the get go as the drawings are prepared. Measurement done during construction are for marking and placing the walls, the individual studs within the wall, doors, windows, etc.
Part II:
You said:
How I've used the drone is to see things like how that custom tin profile is connected together (rivets versus welded are hard to see 5 stories above you), how it's integrated into the facade, and flashed. It's not at all for construction really other than a photograph that says "match existing" profile and some reasonable idea how this is going to fit together and how i can justify it with the code.
That's all part of it. Why not that be in the virtual building model of the existing building and the documentations produced. While the photographs are good in their own right. The synthesis of the images produced provides comprehensive detail of the images and ability to analyze this later. I think the comprehensive data information is all part of our move towards virtual building models. Even the traditional building plans model is changing. With technology such as virtual and aumented reality become more and more part of the day and age. There is ago segway into 3d printing technologies. This type of data is exactly on that line to achieve it.
In photogrammetric / image based modeling, drones would be a support role. It is a tool that supports the process. The point of this thread topic is certainly about how drones can be used and a fair debate is made and I think the discussion in one way or another is good whether you or I are right or wrong it isn't just about how the drone is the primary aspect. While I see the day to day use of drones in our work is likely a process support role like getting the camera to places that are a pain in the butt.
The images I gather in vast volume that is suitable for architectural photogrammetry process chain, the images do in fact have multiple uses such as like you mentioned. While, I do see it for getting that information like you are saying, I am looking at additional applications such as production of image based 3d models of the building which will have several applications down the process chain. Remember, clients are looking for more and more photorealistic product output. A good 3d model obtained out of architectural photogrammetric process with high quality rendering of the addition, you literally can visualize with fairly high accuracy of how the project WILL look like if built accordingly. I do understand issues such as construction phase deviations from the set of building plans. There is this high demand for this level of information. It doesn't necessarily completely replace field measuring with measuring tape but it can reduce alot of what you need to measure that way. I can focus on field measuring critical measurements while the photogrammetric software can pretty much computationally resolve a lot of the stuff that isn't physically measured. The same way a 3d laser scan when it creates that 3d point cloud information.
The use of photogrammetry-based image modeling process would allow me to attain similar product output of a 3d building model as a 3d laser scan. A 3d laser scan equipment is a lot more expensive than even a GoPro camera let alone other less expensive sports cameras and such. Bundled adjustment doesn't necessarily require the high steep image quality of the current state of the art manned aircraft mounted camera/steroscopic camera systems that are used today such as the UltraCam line of cameras. Really, I don't need that level of camera equipment and consumer digital cameras can be used to produce very good 3d building models.
Sure, if your 5700 ft. to 15000 or more feet up, these cameras would be needed. I wouldn't need something like that for a drone at less than 200-ft. A.G.L. Especially when at less than 50-ft. A.G.L. That exact height depend on the building of course. Height of building + 25 ft. is a fair calculated height. Indoors is another talk altogether but still a fair point. Because of close range, I can achieve considerably denser 3d point cloud data even with inexpensive consumer grade digital cameras.
One person made a comment:
But for the same reason I could see this drone idea backfiring. It's clear from past posts that you don't have the means to buy high end capture and imaging technology. Can you imagine the impression on clients (current and potential) if you're out there flying hobby-store quadcopters around their little houses? It's a level of ridiculousness above and beyond the "why couldn't I do that myself" question - now they're going to have the same concerns about you that they'd have if their child were out there playing with their toy spy helicopter (broken windows, someone's going to lose an eye, oh look out for the roses!...) It seems more than a little unprofessional and silly.
Here's an argument: Why would I use a very expensive quad. If there was a malfunction and it crashed to the ground, I wouldn't be out a whole lot of money add to that, using a quad that is say.... relatively frangible, it would be much safer if it is way. Add to it being as light as possible. Add to that, an inexpensive camera and it should be rather modest if the quad had a problem. Add to that, the client either stays inside or is elsewhere so they aren't in the flight area. There is basic practices to safeguard the area that you are working. This way, no one is harmed. It might seem odd that I would use something light weight like a WLToys V666 quadcopter or other quadcopters that are lightweight, frangible and then use general safety precaution to safeguard others. I wouldn't just fly a drone without discussing it with a client, anyway and general safety precautions and general suggestions that way, harm would be minimized. Additionally, having some signage made and use of caution tape or whatever else is needed but the bottom line, the use of a modest and expensive quadcopter that can life a small, lightweight camera is sensible.
While, it is cool and all to use a fancy DJI Inspire 1 but hey, it is a lot heavier and can present a more serious hazard to anyone below if it fell from considerable height.
There are practical reasons to keep people out of the particular area at time of flight.
While getting on the roof would represent more risk to myself. Assessment of the area is a factor in deciding whether to use a drone or not. It isn't always practical and if that is the case, I have to adjust to other options.
A drone is a support tool to support the process chain in performing a task.
"virtual building models" What? we've been "virtually" building models for oinks.
"With technology such as virtual and aumented reality become more and more part of the day and age. There is ago segway into 3d printing technologies."
But it isn't, that's the problem there is no real augmented reality tech or need at the moment, its very slow. Even virtual reality which has billions investments already with real HMD's out there working is still slow progress, the new Rift CV1 was a hit and miss at the same time and it was only released 6th Jan. I wouldn't 3D print a house that was modelled using photogrammetry...and even "3D printing" which is just rapid prototyping is coming on slow in architecture, worst of all its been here for what..20 years? maybe 30?
I'm not trying to put any of the tech down, they're my source of income but be real here, don't just get hyped about everything you read on websites and see on television.
"While, it is cool and all to use a fancy DJI Inspire 1 but hey, it is a lot heavier and can present a more serious hazard to anyone below if it fell from considerable height. "
What? do you understand anything about quad tech at all?
Nothing you've typed makes sense at all, you've literally just googled a bunch of stuff and spewing it over several paragraphs to distract the reader from coming to the conclusion that you have no idea about any of the stuff you've been saying in this whole thread. You've come up with a bunch of arguments for things that you have no idea about or experience in.
I challenge you to actually do something for once...go take a bunch of photos of a banana and use 123D Catch to create a model. Even kid could do it, here >
http://www.123dapp.com/
Yes I do. I have used quads for some time. Although I avoid using it for 'commercial' use for some time due to obviously legal reason doesn't mean I don't know how the things work. I probably know how they work all the way down to the silicon wafer level.
I know how digital cameras work, too. I'm pretty sure, you can find all the information via a search engine if you dig around. If you had any clue, search engines has access directly and indirectly to absolutely every website and web content, online PDFs, etc. and links your computer to just about any computer server system accessible from the internet.
There is more information on the web than the entire Library of Congress.
It is totally stupid to say what I am saying can be sourced on the internet. So can everything you say. In fact, the moment you post it, it is.
Do the challenge, it isn't hard.
Not at 4:03AM my time.
A few years ago, just for the hell of it, I used the 123d app on the iPad where I did that exercise but in that case, the object wasn't a banana but my Theodolite on the tripod.
The owner of my previous place of employment bought a small RC-type drone with a built-in camera so that he could take it to jobsites and snap photos of the construction. He flew it around the office all day, which amused him and annoyed everyone else. He took it outside to test it and it was immediately blown against the side of our office by a tiny gust of wind.
He didn't use it at all after that.
"I probably know how they work all the way down to the silicon wafer level."
There you go again. Making up total nonsense.
You don't even know how to use a thin metal stick with some tick marks on it to derive lengths and widths of objects perpendicular to each other.
Get a job!
A few years ago? when was that?
archiwutm8,
2012. I was just toying with it at that time just to learn the app a little bit and see what it can do. Of course, more photos and systematic process and it would probably be a bit better. It was enough to show its potential.
Glad Rick b from Oregon gave 123d catch the old stamp of approval. I'm sure autodesk was biting their nails about it.
It's 2016! Get a job!
Schoon,
First and foremost, no one can just buy a drone and expect to use it unless they have piloting experience as in piloting RC aircrafts and quadcopters.
For outdoors, I would recommend say... a WL Toys 262. It's larger profile with the foam protection guard helps to make the flight more gentle. A very small and very light quad would be harder to fly outdoor with wind due to its mass. It is best to work with it recreationally out in an open field away from people and airports and things like that. Then with a small amount of wind, it might drift a little but he or anyone can learn the controls and to set the trim. It is important to set that. When you do that, it will help to make the flight more reliable. If you just buy a drone and never flown one before, and then expect to go out and do something with it commercially, you are setting yourself up for failure. It's okay to bang up a cheap WL Toys v262 (a WL Toys V666 is basically a version of the v262 with a FPV digital camera on board) or example. Work with it. Gain confidence and control. Operating a drone is like operating a car in the sense that you can't expect to somehow get a driver's license and just buy a car and never driven before and expect to do it perfectly.
Larger and generally heavier drones will naturally resist being pushed by light wind more but more mass means more force is needed to be applied but when they are in the air, there isn't much resistance factor with air so you need to be aware of the wind and how it would push the craft.
It is easy to get scared off by a crash especially if you crash something you spent a lot of money on it.
You basically have to learn how to actively control the craft's flight and make gentle adjustments to compensate with the wind. Add to that, read the Chinglish manuals and what not to know the settings like the gyroscopic settings. It takes practice.
You can think of that time spent like driving school or going to flight school and learning to fly a real manned aircraft and getting flight hours behind you. Flying a drone requires practice flying it so you can fly the aircraft reliably. Yes, you don't learn that by a just googling via a search engine. You can, however, look at videos online that can tutor you and so forth but ultimately it takes practice. While it isn't rocket science, it is a little bit of hean, eye coordination and learning to operate the controls to a level of confidence that you can fly it and get it to a point that you aren't spending time 'thinking' what you need to do but in fact just doing it more to reaction so your reaction/response time to making corrections are more instantly than sitting their wondering 'what do I do... it's going to towards the building.... what do I do... what do I do.'.... now, if you are thinking that, you are not really ready to fly the drone for commercial use or near obstructions like trees, buildings, etc. An open / unpopulated field is a good place to start.
This is a suggestion. I recommend something cheap so when you will invariably crash the drone, you aren't ought a ridiculous amount of money. I believe there are flight simulators as well. A good thing to invest and practice on before flying a drone but there is a little difference between the simulator and real life flying an aircraft so you will want to practice as well. Practice in a clear open unpopulated field a little bit and then when you get confidence & competence over the controls and can control the aircraft reliably even in light wind, then using it commercially would be reasonable.
Get the operational controls down.
Balkins, you're the last person that should advising people on "getting operational controls down."
"Get a job down."
mightyaa wrote:
Seriously no_form, give it a break... You are stalking and posting after he post anything not adding diddly to the conversation.
^_________________________________ You're not adding to the conversation, no form.
While, there is some little distraction over the course of this page. I am sure that the I and others can recircle back into focus to the topic at hand.
Get a job Balkins. Get a job. You're not drone captain of tomorrow or a lawyer. You're just posting the usual text wall bs of nonsense. Get a job get a job get a job.
no_form,
You don't even know how to use a thin metal stick with some tick marks on it to derive lengths and widths of objects perpendicular to each other.
and
Get a job Balkins. Get a job. You're not drone captain of tomorrow or a lawyer. You're just posting the usual text wall bs of nonsense. Get a job get a job get a job.
no_form,
you can shove that metal stick up your well laid ass.
Hey Balkins, "these are not the drones you're looking for." Get a job.
haha that's god from yo no_form