tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-76593292024-03-14T09:33:34.690+10:30Metamorphs JournalA journal on everything technological and everything to do with structure: from building structures, to organisation structures, politics, education, and business. If it has structure I will essay it, if it ought to have structure I will essay it. If it don't have structure and it is chaos, I essay that too!Conrad Harrisonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11351972303793021889noreply@blogger.comBlogger224125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7659329.post-5909507050757828002024-03-13T19:22:00.000+10:302024-03-13T19:22:04.443+10:30Ancillary Accommodation in South Australia<div><h2 style="text-align: left;">General</h2><div>In the SA planning code basic restriction is that development shall not result in more than one dwelling on an existing allotment., where an allotment is for such purpose. Some allotments are for group dwellings, and multi-dwelling buildings.</div><div><br /></div><div>Outbuildings and ancillary buildings are permitted on a residential allotment. Ancillary accommodation however was limited to that used by a member of the family, and the building dependent on the main dwelling for various services, such as bathroom, kitchen and laundry. However the extent of such dependency has become questionable as technology has changed. Obviously before mains services, the main dwelling and ancillary buildings were no different. Now the ancillary building is expected to have electrical power for lighting. With electric kettles and fry pans along with microwave ovens, cooking is permitted in a small space without need of a kitchen. If bedrooms can have ensuites, which maybe desirable for a "granny" flat, then have water supply. If have water supply, then get kitchen sink. The functions of kitchen, bathroom and laundry are available in a small space, and some can share space, and in some countries that is the normal, and technology has developed accordingly.</div><div><br /></div><div>For example in some places it is normal to have a washing machine in the kitchen, in others to have it in the bathroom, there is thus no real need for separate laundry room. Such separate rooms made sense in the past, where laundry had its own trough and separate boiler, and various other large utensils. These days the equipment used is much smaller. Also some of these rooms were separate buildings, so the ancillary building was likely a laundry. In other situations whilst the laundry is part of the main building it is only accessible from outside.</div><div><br /></div><div>We can also add the increase in outdoor living, growing veranda sizes, and outdoor kitchens. Thus external space and ancillary buildings can provide functions which overlap with and supplement those of the main dwelling. </div><div><br /></div><div>Ancillary accommodation maybe required for extended families, or for those assisting the household, such as nannies, tutors, housekeepers, gardeners, and care givers. Given the costs of child care centres and nursing homes, this maybe a more affordable option. Whilst not getting rent, paying less for child care.</div><div><br /></div><div>Again noting that average household occupancy is less than 3 persons per household, and that birth rate is less than replacement level, population growth is largely due to migration, either between towns or countries. The pressure for housing is largely due to inappropriately sized housing. The housing is inappropriate largely because its built as a financial investment for retirement rather than living in. Or property speculators building largest house for which they can demand the highest rent. The available housing is not compatible with the market need, and needed housing has been opposed because it has been seen as devaluing the over sized and priced monstrosities that are built.</div><div><br /></div><div>We don't really need more land rezoning and more houses. We need the land using better to provide more appropriate housing. For the most part that is independent sole occupancy units, and two person units, to free up the 3 bedroom dwellings which dominate the supply.</div><div><br /></div><div>The owners of a property are not necessarily the people who live in an accessory dwelling unit (ADU) or in ancillary accommodation (AA). For example an elderly couple could downsize to the ADU, and rent the main dwelling to others. This way they retain access to their gardens and neighbourhood, and a family gets a dwelling with gardens they don't need to maintain, as the owners do that. </div><div><br /></div><div>For the following I mostly referred to requirements for the neighbourhood zone in the <a href="https://code.plan.sa.gov.au/">SA Planning Code</a>, other zones may have different requirements. In some instances the code is not very clear as it just gives long lists of options, but no criteria as to which applies.</div><div><br /></div><h2 style="text-align: left;">Allotment Size</h2><div>Smallest allotment size permitted per dwelling is typically on an allotment with group dwellings, such as a retirement village or residential caravan park. The smallest site being in a caravan park, in the old council development plans it was commonly 81 sq.m, but the new state planning code has increased this to 100 sq.m. Otherwise the minimum seems to be around 150 sq.m to 250 sq.m. Though in rural areas where using a septic system, the minimum area is 1200 sq.m.</div><div><br /></div><div>So a block could have been 9m x 9m, whilst now it would need to be 10m x 10m. For an ADU it doesn't really matter as not subdividing the land, just putting an extra building on the land. However, can achieve increased privacy if can partition a piece of the land and set it aside as private to the ADU, and likewise land private to the main dwelling and that which is common space.</div><div><br /></div><div>Assuming the 1/6th of an acre blocks of the 1970's, then have a block approximately 32m long and 21.333m wide. So to create a 150 sq,m block it would need to be 7.031m long, and for a 250 sq.m block 11.719m long. To subdivide would be looking at two blocks 16m x 21.333 (341.33 sq/m), formed as a hammerhead or battle-axe allotment, which requires using land as an access road, so the areas of the blocks reduce significantly (especially when some of the old council development plans required 9m wide two way access road).</div><div><br /></div><div>So not really practical to subdivide allotments to create additional properties. Really need to merge allotments, to create group dwelling complexes, or create ancillary accommodation on existing allotments. That is make more suitable rentable accommodation available for 1 and 2 person households, to free up the existing family homes.</div><div><br /></div><div>Note that these <span style="color: red;">minimums are for the allotment size, not the size of the building</span>. There is no direct limit on minimum size of the building. The minimum size of building just comes from functionality, and meeting required performance criteria, which largely should be determined by anthropometric data and other human factors data.</div><div><br /></div><div>Most of the additional requirements of the planning code, reduce the area of the allotment which can be used to provide buildings . So mostly concerned with ensuring buildings are not too big.</div><div><br /></div><h2 style="text-align: left;">Boundary Set Backs</h2><div>An ADU/AA will typically be placed in the back garden, though it could be placed side by side with the main dwelling.</div><div><br /></div><div>The old development plans typically had set backs for front, rear and side boundaries. The new planning code doesn't consistently define these 3 set backs for each zone. It is most likely to define set backs for primary street frontage, and secondary street frontage, and side boundaries, with no mention of a rear boundary. Many of the given set backs typically do not apply to outbuildings or ancillary buildings.</div><div><br /></div><div>The main rule is wall on the boundary or 600mm from the boundary. It is an access requirement to clear litter and prevent vermin. The NCC/BCA also has a requirement of 900mm from boundary to avoid fire rated construction. Masonry is considered to provide the accepted fire rating, so if closer than 900mm then need masonry.</div><div><br /></div><div>Old development plan requirements typically had side boundary set backs of 1m. I hazard a guess this was response to the 1970's when for energy efficiency 600mm eaves overhangs became more popular, and several plan drafters , developers and builders, neglected the overhang and the gutter, with the result that the gutters overhung the neighbouring property. Also even if provide for the allowance, still have a continuous roof scape, and a lack of circulation.</div><div><br /></div><div>Personally I consider the 600mm should be measured from the face of the gutter or other extremity of the building, since need to access the gutters for maintenance, preferably without going on the roof and without entering the neighbours property. So 600mm is just wide enough for small mobile scaffolding, which is considered preferable to ladders and steps. So allowing a maximum of 200mm for width of gutter and 600mm eaves overhang, and 600mm clearance, then wall needs to be at least 1400mm from boundary.</div><div><br /></div><div>There are also ministers specifications for fire safety in caravan parks which require 3m separation of the cabins/caravans. So allowing equal spacing each property, then need 1.5m boundary set back.</div><div><br /></div><div>The required set back from a primary street frontage is typically around 5m for the main dwelling or matching existing neighbouring dwellings. The actual value depends on the zone. For ancillary buildings it is 5.5m, it has to be set back from the front line of the primary building.</div><div><br /></div><div>Set back from secondary street boundaries is typically 900mm, for main and ancillary buildings.</div><div><br /></div><div>Side boundary set back maybe 1900mm or larger depending on the zone, site area and wall height. For small sites less than 800 sq.m, it is only 900mm.</div><div><br /></div><div>The rear boundary set back at first floor level is 3m for the main dwelling, it does not apply to ancillary buildings and structures. The setback increases with wall height and site area.</div><div><br /></div><div>Some websites have indicated a 3m boundary setback. I don't believe this is a requirement and is a misreading of the code. There is a 3m separation requirement but that is a different issue.</div><div><br /></div><h2 style="text-align: left;">Walls on Boundaries</h2><div>Walls on side boundaries are limited in length, the upper limit appears to be 11.5m depending on zone it could be smaller. But sum of all wall lengths is otherwise limited to 45% of boundary length. So with a 32m long side boundary, then would be limited to 14.4m of wall on the boundary. Whilst for the rear boundary (21.333m) a limit of 9.6m for the building.</div><div><br /></div><div>As for the additional ruling, I'm not entirely sure what it means, but my interpretation is that if have more than one wall then they have to be separated by 3m. So if I have two walls on the boundary each 7.2m long, then they would have to be 3m apart. Or a single wall maximum of 11.5m, then a 3m gap, and another wall 2.9m long.</div><div><br /></div><div>Also whilst it maybe permitted to build on the boundary, I personally consider that poor design and contrary to the origin of modern building codes, and contrary to the intent of the 600mm set back.</div><div><br /></div><div>If two houses are built on the boundary there will be a gap between the two walls and water and other objects can get in that gap. Also note that water pressure is dependent on height not volume. Whilst the pressure may not develop high enough to burst brickwork, it is likely high enough to force water into permeable materials causing damp patches on the interior.</div><div><br /></div><div>If going to have two adjacent boundary walls then they should be properly capped and sealed together on all sides: which I doubt is permitted. Secondly need to give consideration to circulation around the building. That is circulation for fresh air, and circulation for firefighters to have adequate access to the property. </div><div><br /></div><div>A whole street of independent houses built boundary to boundary is poor design. Far better to build proper terraced or row houses, with appropriate ginnels to access the rear. Detached houses should be detached and clear of one another.</div><div><br /></div><h2 style="text-align: left;">Separation of Buildings</h2><div>For fire safety buildings on same allotment need to be separated, and the separation should not be less than 1.8m as required by the NCC/BCA. For caravan parks it is 3m as required by ministers specification. Smaller distances are permitted but that then requires fire rated construction, for which masonry is an acceptable solution. though there are other solutions available, some of which involve multiple layers of plasterboard</div><div><br /></div><h2 style="text-align: left;"> Building Floor Areas</h2><div>Ancillary building floor areas not to exceed 60 sq.m for sites less than 800 sq.m, and not to exceed 80 sq.m for sites greater than 800 sq.m. It depends on zone and can be as low as 40 sq.m.</div><div><br /></div><div>Note that is an upper limit, not a lower limit. So transportable modules 2.4*4.8 (11.52 sq.m) , or 2.4*12 (28.8 sq.m) are acceptable. If such area meets your needs and the requirements of a class 1 building, then it can be the main dwelling.</div><div><br /></div><div><span style="color: red;">The problem isn't that we are prohibited from constructing small buildings, its that they are not being built, and there is a lack of vacant land to build them on.</span></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><h2 style="text-align: left;">Site Coverage</h2><div>It is not permissible to cover all the natural ground surface with impermeable materials. There are thus limits on roof coverage and requirements for private open space and soft landscaping. Stormwater detention tanks may still be required to temporarily hold water on site during a storm even if meet these requirements.</div><div><br /></div><div>For sites being considered, with ancillary buildings soft landscaping has to remain at 25% of site area for areas greater than 450 sq.m, for sites less than 150 sq.m the limit is 10%.</div><div><br /></div><div>So for a site 32 x 21.333m site area is 682.7 sq.m, so soft landscaping has to be 307.22 sq.m, or 14.4m wide across the width of the block, or 4.8m wide each side down the length of the block. For a small 100 sq,m site, landscaping would need to be 10 sq.m, so for a 10m x 10m block, a 1m strip garden along any side.</div><div><br /></div><div>Site coverage by buildings not to exceed 60% of the site, so for 682.7 sq.m site, maximum coverage by buildings is 409.62 sq.m. Given main dwellings are currently up around the 250 sq.m mark, this leaves 159.62 sq.m for additional buildings (which includes verandas). The upper limit for an ancillary building appears to be 80 sq.m, but for this site it would be 60 sq.m. So leaves 99.62 sq.m for sheds, carports and verandas. Though the houses on these sites likely less than 250 sq.m unless they've been extended, their areas possibly down around 150 sq,m. {If have larger floor areas, they maybe 2 storey, rather than the more common 1 storey.}</div><h2 style="text-align: left;">Private Open Space</h2><div>Private open space typically has to be provided behind the building line, that is it is typically the back garden, the front garden doesn't count. The area required depends on the area of the site. If site less than 301 sq.m then require 24 sq.m, if over 301 sq.m then require 60 sq.m. With a requirement that at least 16 sq.m is directly accessible from a living room, and has minimum dimension of 3m.</div><div><br /></div><div>Smaller areas are permitted for multistorey buildings typically in the form of balconies. Cabin and caravan sites are permitted 16 sq.m, no minimum dimension given, but can be used as a second car parking area.</div><div><br /></div><div>This open space has to remain on an allotment after the ancillary accommodation building is provided. But it may be desirable to provide the ancillary building with its own private open space. Which is why I suggest a 9 x 9m or 10 x 10m site internal partition for the ADU, or possibly larger options of 15 x 10m, or 20 x 10m depending on width of main allotment. Also expecting that the building would only need be between 25 sq.m and 54 sq.m.</div><h2 style="text-align: left;">Parking Space</h2><div>Typically site required to provide some off-street parking. Dwelling with 2 or more bedrooms, 2 parking spaces to be provided, one of which is to be covered. For dwelling with 1 bedroom, 1 parking space required. For group dwellings with 3 or more dwellings, space also to be provided for visitors, at rate of 0.33 spaces per dwelling or 1 extra space for every 3 dwellings.</div><div><br /></div><div>So with ancillary accommodation on allotment, have less than 3 dwellings, and only need 2 parking spaces for main dwelling if has 2 or more bedrooms. So no additional parking spaces required for the ancillary accommodation.</div><div><br /></div><div>Parking spaces 5.4m long, and 3m wide if enclosed by fencing, or 2.4m wide if uncovered and centre line is 1.5m from obstructions. (pg. 1627)</div><div><br /></div><h2 style="text-align: left;">Storage</h2><div>For 3 bedroom dwelling not less than 12 cu.m. For 1 bedroom dwelling not less than 8 cu.m. So assuming 600mm wide storage space, and 2.4m high, then would need to be 5.6m long. So a 4.8m long module may not meet the planning requirements for a 1 bedroom dwelling. For a 3 bedroom dwelling it would need to be 8.3m long. </div><div><br /></div><div>Note this is not necessarily a reference to the dwelling, but the allotment. So additional storage space can be provided by outbuildings, if cannot fit in the main dwelling. So a garden locker, 0.6*1.8*1.2=1.296 cu.m of storage, and place these around the external perimeter of the building.</div><div><br /></div><h2 style="text-align: left;">Waste Bin Storage</h2><div>Storage space required for bins, area 2 sq.m and minimum width 900mm, and not part of private open space or car parking areas.</div><div><br /></div><h2 style="text-align: left;">Subfloor Space</h2><div>Space below transportable buildings is enclosed to give appearance of permanent structure. Seems more an issue for light weight construction mounted on pads and piers, with tie-down anchors, than simply transportable buildings. Also assume it doesn't apply to elevated buildings on stilts, especially in flood areas where want open space below, or buildings on sloping ground. That is the pads need to be hidden where inconsistent with neighbouring slab on ground construction, or suspended floors on dwarf walls.</div><div><br /></div><div>Also note the NCC/BCA requires minimum openings for ventilation to the subfloor space. Also floor framing has ground clearance requirements. If no termite inspection requirements then 150mm ground clearance to underside of lowest framing, if termite inspection required then 400mm clearance. Note this is a poor crawl space. If want to access the space below to crawl around on knees, then 800mm clearance is preferable, and if want to squat and work, then 1250mm clearance. (Refer new metric handbook )</div><div><br /></div><h2 style="text-align: left;">Storm water</h2><div>Development may require rainwater tanks for both detention and retention. Generally these are additive, not shared storage space. For sites less than 200 sq.m 1000 L retained and 1000 L detained. so total 2000 L. Flat rectangular water tanks would suit these requirements.</div><div><br /></div><h2 style="text-align: left;">Paving and Foot Paths</h2><div>Generally the first metre of ground around a building should have a fall away from the building, and preferably should be paved. If the building is only 600mm or 900mm from the boundary, then the required fall is not met as the last 100mm to 400mm is on the neighbouring property and falling in the opposite direction. Also the triangular trough formed by the two neighbouring properties, has a smaller section area than provided by 1m of paving, and therefore a smaller volume of water which can be held in its length, and it will be closer to the two buildings than desirable.</div><div><br /></div><div>So preferable that building walls are greater than 1000mm from the boundaries. The required fall depends on rainfall intensity and is either 25mm or 50mm.</div><div><br /></div><h2 style="text-align: left;">Floor Level.</h2><div>Required Finished floor level (FFL) is typically given relative to the Australian Height Datum (AHD), it may otherwise be given as some height above street kerb level. Typical values in the past have been 100mm to 300mm above kerb level.</div><div><br /></div><div>For a slab on ground the finished slab level should be 50 to 150mm above the ground. It depends on rainfall intensity and whether the ground is paved.</div><h2 style="text-align: left;">Conclusion</h2><div>The above outlines requirements of the SA Planning Code and some issues of the building code which overlap with planning as regards providing ancillary accommodation or for that matter the main dwelling.</div><div><br /></div><div>As far as I can tell there are no minimum size dwelling or room requirements in either the planning code or the NCC/BCA. The only minimum is a ceiling of 2.4m and there has been increasing number of situations in which lower is permitted.</div><div><br /></div><div>In Australia we don't have the confusion of manufactured buildings to HUD specifications that they have in the USA. In Australia all buildings are to the NCC/BCA: transportable, modular, manufactured. Constructed on-site or off-site it doesn't matter.</div><div> </div><div>Building Code of Australia, BCA-1 is similar to the international building code (IBC) and BCA-2 is similar to the international residential code (IRC). According to the HUD website they have adopted the national models codes, which as far as I know are the IBC/IRC. And the IBC/IRC are adopted by states and cities, So the houses should be the same, except HUD indicates they have imposed additional durability requirements. Beyond that the HUD specifications require a chassis and wheels. Which is weird given HUD=housing and urban development. Point is shouldn't really be any confusion, though could do with changing the name, so the word "manufactured" can be used properly. So really have houses to HUD specification or to the IRC, either of which can be fabricated or manufactured in a factory. If choosing to supply globally, then American manufacturers would require design to another specification like the NCC/BCA. Whilst Australian manufacturers choosing to supply to the USA would have to choose HUD versus IRC. I don't know why they would choose HUD over the IRC.</div><div><br /></div><h3 style="text-align: left;">Tiny Homes</h3><div>The tiny home movement. Not sure I understand its emergence in Australia. Tiny homes appear to be poorly designed vehicles, poorly designed caravans and poorly designed houses. The dimensions of a shipping container (2.4x2.4 section area and 6 to 12m long) has dimensions which are most transportable, but still likely to encounter problems. The Australian design rules (ADR) limits 2.5m wide, 4.3m from ground to top, and length possibly 12m. Length limits are somewhat confusing, and depend on type of vehicle, and likely have difficulty finding trailers and vehicles which meet the maximum. Making a vehicle to these dimensions is not sensible, it may still encounter problems with low bridges, and narrow tunnels. The dimensions are for compatibility of new vehicles and new infrastructure. They are not for suitability with existing infrastructure.</div><div><br /></div><div>For most part people are aiming for light vehicle less than 4.5 tonne which can drive or tow with ordinary drivers licence. In SA towing limit imposed by licence is typically defined relative to capabilities of vehicle, the towed vehicle typically has to be less than the towing vehicle, and that typically puts the trailer at 3.5 tonne. Either way there are few light vehicles which can tow such weight in Australia. So likely will have to get it towed or transported on a truck. Or keep it small, streamlined and light, like a proper caravan.</div><div><br /></div><div>For the most part in Australia a tiny-home is either a small transportable building to the NCC/BCA or if its on wheels (THOW) then its considered a caravan. There is little value in it being considered a caravan. You are typically not permitted to live permanently in a caravan, nor a class 10 shed. You can live in a small transportable building which meets the NCC/BCA and planning code requirements for class 1 building. There may be some Australian states which have dimensional constraints on housing, South Australia is not one of them. The constraint is the size of the allotment of land, and the number of dwellings permitted on that allotment in a planning zone.</div><div><br /></div><div>Also several years back, as I recollect there was a law introduced to SA which prohibited buying empty blocks of land and holding onto it and selling it for a higher price. The requirement was to either put a house on the land in 1 to 2 years or sell the land to someone who would. This was primarily concerned with the scattering of empty blocks around suburban streets, which hadn't been developed, and so there was land available for needed housing without need for rezoning anything.</div><div><br /></div><div>So cannot live on a suburban or rural block permanently in a caravan or shed. Nor can set up a village on farmland. Though a farmer could set up a village for seasonal workers or farm tourism. These would likely have to provide facilities similar to a caravan park, though the planning code does have a workers settlement zone for seasonal workers in rural areas. There is no need to put the buildings on wheels, and buildings can be transportable without need of their own wheel set.</div><h3 style="text-align: left;">Developing Land to Rent for use with Transportable Buildings</h3><div>Humans have legs and are meant to be mobile. To be mobile need somewhere to move to, which suggests a need for more residential caravan parks. If the objective is to be mobile. That however doesn't seem to be the objective, its just a desire for a smaller building. Possibly a desire not to own land, and only rent land whilst own building. So may be opposed to the tie-down anchors to prevent wind blowing building over: though anchorage connection doesn't have to be permanent. May also be opposed to some of the energy efficiency performance requirements which keep increasing and increasing the cost of housing: thus oppose the NCC/BCA hence building on wheels to avoid compliance.</div><div><br /></div><div>So first thing is that housing sites can be developed to move buildings in and out. Secondly landscaping to front gardens is not consistent. So landscaping can be used to hide a house, if not consistent with other houses. The house frontage can be made to match other houses, whilst the house behind is different.</div><div><br /></div><div>Instead of having slab on ground with all services embedded in the concrete, can just have a simple slab and a utility service box. The slab can just provide for the maximum rectangle permitted on the site, or define a smaller area.</div><div><br /></div><div><span style="color: red;">The site is rented, and tenants provide their own house. So tenants responsible for maintenance of own house and can do as they wish with the house. So landlords using other peoples money only have to pay for the land, their costs are lower, therefore rents are lower. Whilst tenants are paying for a house they can own. House owners can start with tiny-house and trade up to larger house</span>.</div><div><br /></div><div>When I was at school in 70's, current affairs shows, indicated that people in Adelaide were moving interstate to work, that they were renting interstate whilst they had mortgages on houses in Adelaide. They couldn't sell the houses, because no one interested in moving to the city, due to lack of employment.</div><div><br /></div><div>Land allotments don't have natural water supply, and are not large enough for growing food. Land is basically useless, it just provides space. All really need is a licence to occupy and use the land, no real need to own. <span style="color: red;">If people have transportable house then it can go where they need to be, and they don't have to settle for what ever rubbish is already built on the land</span>. A lot of development wastes the available land, and deprives people of access to land. Development does not require constructing a building, it requires making the land more useful.</div><div><br /></div><div>Developers can assess that the buildings on an allotment of land are worthless and put a bulldozer through them. Then possibly merge allotments or subdivide allotments, followed by constructing new houses and making a profit. The typical person cannot afford to buy a property and remove the house.</div><div><br /></div><div>But change the situation. <span style="color: red;">The house on the land is not suitable. The land has the required space, its in the appropriate location and the neighbourhood is acceptable. The house is moveable and reusable. The house is removed and sold to others, and the desired house is moved in.</span></div><div><br /></div><div>Thus developers don't need to build houses, they just need to make the land more useful. They demolish the existing houses, improve the site. Then future occupants choose the house they want, and the developer puts the appropriate transportable house on the site.</div><div><br /></div><div>This is better than property speculators building oversized houses asking for extortionate rents and having problems finding tenants, and otherwise using up land which could be put to better use. Now some of these over sized properties can be changed into boarding houses, and get more people in.</div><div><br /></div><div>To prevent future waste however, leave the sites empty, but with appropriate development to accommodate transportable buildings. The future tenant then chooses suitable house. The property investor may buy the house, and rent both to the tenant, or just rent the site. The tenant may have the option to rent to buy the house. The property investor likely doesn't have much use for the house, as unlikely suitable for future tenants.</div><div><br /></div><div>Transportable houses can be moved off-site and renovated, then moved back. During the renovation the occupants can live in a substitute house delivered to site, with contents placed in temporary storage. A property investor could have more houses than allotments. They can have houses being renovated, whilst others are occupied.</div></div><div><br /></div><div>With movable houses, and rented land, we can expand and contract the housing supply as needed. Plus we can more readily upgrade housing, or change the nature of housing. So can have 3 bedroom house one day, and a sole occupancy unit the next. Plus property investors can change a site from having a family dwelling one day to having multiple sole occupancy units another day. They are not stuck with an empty building which doesn't meet the needs of the market. A fixed building which costs too much to renovate, and too much to demolish and replace. Transportable buildings can be moved in and out, and relocated to where they are needed.</div><div><br /><hr />Related Posts<br /></div><div><hr />Revisions: <br /> [13/03/2024] : Original<br /></div>Conrad Harrisonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11351972303793021889noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7659329.post-55422766070172733002024-01-03T03:29:00.000+10:302024-01-03T03:29:04.190+10:30Housing Crisis ?<div><div>Here in South Australia, back at the beginning of the 1990's average household occupancy was less than 3 persons per household and vehicle ownership at 2 vehicles per household, and around 500,000 dwellings. So could assume on average 1 person per household not yet coupled and with zero population growth further construction of houses would drop average household occupancy to 2 persons per houshold. In detail however, there were a large number of 3 bedroom houses occupied by one person. Whilst "state of housing" report indicated around 5% of houses had inadequate number of bedrooms when assessed against a Canadian quality of life index. This basically indicates when siblings of certain ages and genders ought to have separate bedrooms: not essential but desirable.</div><div><br /></div><div>One vehicle assembly facility in the state could build 100,000 vehicles per year when operating at full capacity. Therefore it had potential to provide private space to 250,000 couples in 2.5 years, and provide all with a vehicle in 5 years. The building industry statistics indicated it oscillated between 5000 dwellings per year and 15,000 dwellings, and was down at less than 10,000. So assuming could be boosted to 10,000, then it would take 25 years, to provide housing for the 250,000 potential couples. Thus expectation that average household occupancy would be 2 persons, by 2015: assuming zero population growth.</div><div><br /></div><div>However, basically no change has occurred, as average household occupancy is still less than 3 persons per household but not yet 2. This is due to population growth, mostly derived from immigration. This migration mostly fuelled by incompetent managers, who do not appear to realise the job is to maximise the benefit from the available but otherwise limited resources. Thus they are always claiming shortages, add to this employment policies built around keeping the building industry active. Except now claiming we have a shortage of skilled trades people in the building industry.</div><div><br /></div><div>So it becomes questionable has to whether we want migrants to build the houses, or create a pressure for more houses to keep the building industry active.</div><div><br /></div><div>I would argue we do not need more people in the building industry. We may need new people to replace those that retire, but we don't need more. Also we do not need to be releasing more land and do not need to be building more family houses. We already have water rationing, the severity of the restrictions vary on an as needs basis. There has to come a point when we say "enough is enough, no more expansion of our cities, this is as big as it gets". The current push is to increase population density of the inner city areas, however, it is still around population growth.</div><div><br /></div><div>If we still have average household occupancy of 3 persons per household then we still have on average one person in each house not coupled, and if their coupling is creating demand for more housing, then we push towards 2 people per household. To do this we need to construct new houses equal to half the existing housing stock. To expand the radial reach of the city by releasing more land, typically agricultural land, for housing is ridiculous. Expand population and reduce food production land, how is that sensible?</div><div><br /></div><h2 style="text-align: left;">Allotment Size and Building Size</h2><div>Most of the existing housing stock comprises of 3 bedroom family houses, that is housing suitable for 4 people. Large numbers of these houses are already occupied by one person. The smallest housing site permitted in the old development plans was 81 sq.m in a caravan park, that is a block 9m x 9m. One requirement for fire safety in caravan parks is 3m between caravans/dwellings on neighbouring sites. So would need a site boundary offset of 1.5m, leaving room for a building 6m x 6m. An old reference indicates minimum area for a sole occupancy dwelling to be 25 sq.m, this can be provided by a 5m x 5m dwelling. This in turn can be divided into 2 strip modules 2.5m x 5m. Comparing against shipping container of 2.4m x 6m, the strip modules are transportable: preferably with width reduced from 2.5m to 2.4, even though 2.5m is compatible with vehicle design rules (Australian Design Rules (ADR)).</div><div><br /></div><div>Given older housing blocks are larger than in new developments, it is possible to subdivide these blocks, for example a block 32m x 21m, can be divided into two blocks. Allowing for a 9m wide access road, each block would be 16m x 12m, having an area of 192 sq.m, excluding the access road. Each dwelling could be suitable for a couple, thus retaining a limit of 4 persons on the block of land. Though even if such block of land has a 4 bedroom house on it, it is still feasible to locate a 9m x 9m site on the block for a sole occupancy unit, which is otherwise suitable for a couple. Assuming existing house occupied by 5 people, and allow another 2 in the added dwelling, then total site occupancy increased to 7.</div><div><br /></div><h2 style="text-align: left;">Population Density</h2><div>Though blocks of land typically have 3 bedroom houses which may get extended to have more bedrooms. A 3 bedroom house typically for two parents and two children, but may extend to four children sharing bedrooms. If the resource demand of two children taken to be equal to one adult, then have an equivalent household of 3 adults, for typical family of 4, but for family of 6, then equivalent to 4 adults. However, if have more than two children in such house then places extra demand on schools and other childhood services. However, the demand for some of these services can be reduced by added residence used by part-time caretaker.</div><div><br /></div><div>Also if housing in the vicinity of schools restricted use, and rent only, then need can be concentrated around available services, and housing density can be further increased in these areas by use of 2 to 4 storey apartment blocks. Such apartments being used by older students and teachers. The teachers using such apartments being at either end of the age spectrum, young single teachers, and older couples with no children at home. People raising families, including teachers being in larger detached houses with gardens. Though with school facilities accessible 24 hours per day, the need for gardens can be reduced.</div><div><br /></div><div>In short we don't need more family dwellings, we need to better manage the housing stock we already have. It seems most of the industrialised world has average occupancy rate less than 3, with some extremely close to 2.</div><div><br /></div><div>Here in Australia, most of our houses are detached single storey dwellings, and until recently on relatively large blocks of land. Houses are getting bigger and land sizes smaller. Many of these large houses are not practical, and do not meet the long term needs of the occupants, they are also of increasing distance from available services.</div><div><br /></div><div>If averaging 3 people per household, then constructing a sole occupancy dwelling in the back garden, maintains the allotment occupancy at 3 people, no increase in population density, or increase in demand on services in the area. Rather the third person in each household moves into own dwelling, either at current address or elsewhere. In effect we double the number of dwellings, and average household occupancy drops to 1.5 people per dwelling.</div><div><br /></div><div>Also hopefully the people constructing these sole occupancy units own the land, and therefore rents can be less, than provided by property speculators who expect others to pay off their mortgage and provide them with a profit.</div><div><br /></div><h2 style="text-align: left;">Production of Modules</h2><div>As indicated above a single vehicle assembly plant can produce 100,000 vehicles per year, some produce even more. By comparison buildings are trite, most especially in the form of strip modules, or flat panels.</div><div><br /></div><div>The largest shipping container manufacturer builds 2 million shipping containers per year in 11 factories. That is around 181,818 units per year per factory. A strip module for a dwelling is more complicated than a shipping container, but not has complicated as a vehicle.</div><div><br /></div><div>As indicated above a sole occupancy dwelling can be provided by 2 strip modules: 2.5m x 5m, or 2.4m x 6m. One strip module being for wet areas containing bathroom, kitchen and laundry. The other providing lounge, dining and sleeping space. If two people couple up, there is no need to replicate the wet area module. Thus two people as a couple only need 3 modules, compared to 4 modules as individuals. A single strip module would be adequate for 2 bedrooms for children. So 4 strip modules can provide a family home. The width of modules can be increased on site with joiner modules and or plain panels.</div><div><br /></div><div><div>Also looking at video's of shipping container manufacturing, some of the operations are cumbersome, especially transfer between work stations. Also looking at videos of house manufacturing facilities again some cumbersome operating procedures. A basic strip module is just empty space, with some electrical fixtures (lights/gpo's). The more complicated module is the wet area module with plumbing and electrical fixtures.</div><div><br /></div><div>So base assumption would be one facility with two production lines can produce 200,000 basic modules per year, and 100,000 wet area modules per year. Which suggests can supply 100,000 dwellings per year, each comprising of 3 strip modules: that is a dwelling suitable for a couple. Alternatively one production line which produces 200,000 basic modules, half of which are converted into wet area modules. So 100,000 dwellings per year comprising of two strip modules.</div></div><div><br /></div><div>Now if one vehicle leaves an assembly line at the rate of one every 2 minutes, then in a 480 minute day, produce 240 vehicles, and for 250 productive days in a year, can produce 60,000 units per year. Operating at full capacity is 3 shifts per day, so 180,000 units per year. </div><div><br /></div><div>Such production does not require a large army of skilled trades people. It does not require electricians or plumbers. If it does then the electrical systems and plumbing systems are poorly designed, and an hinderance to productivity. The electricians and plumbers are needed on site to connect to the mains, and even this can be eliminated with better design of the system connections.</div><div><br /></div><div>Similarly the assembly of panels and or frames and fabric is not carpentry. Skills maybe required but not the skill sets of people currently in the building industry: their skill set is required for on-site renovation.</div><div><br /></div><div>Now for a unit of production to leave an assembly line at the rate of 1 unit every 2 minutes, then no operation can take longer than 2 minutes. A roll-forming machine for cold-formed steel can produce at the rate of 5m/minute. That means the bearers along the length of a strip module can be produced in 1 minute.</div><div><br /></div><div><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MsZdLEOky4Y&t=12s">Dynamic Steel frame video</a> indicates they can assemble the framing for a tiny house on a trailer in 30 minutes. Whilst a video tour of Bailey caravans <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HtZFmyaQ48Y">Part 1</a> and<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4-UPo22oxPk"> Part 2</a>, indicates assembly of caravan takes around 16 hours. No indication of rate at which leave the assembly line, which is a different issue.</div><div><br /></div><div>Starting with the 200,000 units per year, then need 66,667 units for each of 3 shifts, and 266 per day, and 0.55 units/minute, or 1.8 minutes per unit. So no operation can take more than 1.8 minutes, that is no operation on the assembly line.</div><div><br /></div><div>So if have two roll forming machines, producing the needed 2 bearers, in one minute, and takes 30 minutes to assemble framing, have a problem. Roll forming all the framing components, takes around 1 hour at rough estimate, so this has to be done aside from the main assembly line. So the 30 minutes assembly time as shown in the video, is manually assembly and not optimised, this <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PniWJ9Ps5JM">video </a>show the process more clearly. The workers are running all over the place, no mechanical handling for the wall panels, whilst mechanical handling for roof panels comes from elsewhere in factory, and working at height provided by temporary means. In a factory optimised for such production, timing is likely to be faster, additionally, wouldn't just install wall framing, would have fully clad wall frame panels, and roof panels. So can do more in the 30 minutes than simply assemble a bare skeleton. Whilst the 16 hours for a caravan includes full interior fitout, cabinets, beds, kitchen, bathroom, electrical and plumbing.</div><div><br /></div><div>One thing noticed with videos of manufactured housing is that the use of "vacuum lifts" is a clumsy and cumbersome process, with time wasted on alignment. Better mechanical handling systems would reduce production time at each workstation.</div><div><br /></div><div>It noted that many of South Australia's builders of transportable homes, simply construct them outside in a yard in same manner as construct on site. Whilst this avoids the trade people running all over the state, it is still a low quality production process. The building industry does not fully design anything. Full design involves design of product and process. With the design of process involving the design of tooling, jigs and fixtures, minimising handling, minimising process delays and waiting time between processes.</div><div><br /></div><div>As indicated above the electrical and plumbing systems are poorly designed. For example there should be no stripping of wires and wrapping around terminals: industrial product design would replace these with moulded plugs and sockets and lockable couplings. When it comes to houses, on site electricians and plumbers are largely responsible for design, and that design is dependent on the components available to them. Full system design changes the components, and if components are changed then production processes can be changed.</div><div><br /></div><div>The building industry is largely based on "standard industry practice", which equates to no one knowing what any one does, but what ever it is it'll be good enough. To increase productivity this is not acceptable. Just look at video's of builders and the time they waste on site, working things out, which should have been worked out before they got to site, preferably by the designers and then checked.</div><div><br /></div><div>And the its "one-off", customised to the site. Even if the product is designed for the site, it is most likely a concept adapted to fit the site, rather than starting with the site. Either way though, the production process is the same. Whilst builders may manage the process, they don't design the process, the process is left to individual trades. So electricians and plumbers may have to turn up at the site twice, the so called first fix and second fix processes. For example first electrician puts wiring in the wall framing and ceiling space, then when clad, they return and attach fixtures to the wall and ceiling faces. This is imposed by the product design, modify the product, and can modify the process. For example wall cladding panels can be cut out by CNC machines, and then inserted over installed electrical and plumbing fixtures. So only one fix for electrical, though plumbing may still require two fixes.</div><div><br /></div><div>So consider a box, one floor panel to which 4 wall panels attached and a single roof panel. There are 4 base joints at bottom of walls, 4 joints at top of walls, and 4 corner joints. A total of 12 joints. Assume 12 workstations and 1 minute for the longest joint, then boxes leave line at rate of one every minute. However, that requires 12 partially completed boxes in the production line, and it takes 12 minutes to produce one box.</div><div><br /></div><div>Consider 3 work stations, one installs two side walls, with temporary bracing. It takes one minute for each wall. If done sequentially it takes two minutes at the work station, if done in parallel then it only takes one minute. Next station, two end walls installed, each wall has one base connection and two corner connections. These are shorter joints so should take less than 1 minute to complete, but assume 1 minute is the limit. So if each wall installed sequentially it takes 6 minutes, if in parallel then 3 minutes. The last work station install the roof, for which have 4 joints, so time is 4 minutes.</div><div><br /></div><div>So 3 stations with sequential times have [2,6,4] or parallel times [1,3,4]. So if done sequentially the boxes exit the line at the rate of one every 6 minutes, not 4 minutes. The last workstation after completing its 4 minute task has to wait 2 minutes for preceding workstation to complete its task 6 minute task. If have parallel tasks at each workstation then time can drop to 4 minutes.</div><div><br /></div><div>But also note that total production time for sequential is 12 minutes, but with parallel times it is 8 minutes. The 3 work stations is preferable has have less inventory tied up in the line, but not achieving the rate of one unit per minute. However it is possible to install the roof with all joints in parallel. The two side wall joints in one operation and the two end wall joints in one operation, and these two operations simultaneously. So total time at end station is reduced from 4 minutes to 1 minute, the second work station now has the longest time at 3 minutes.</div><div><br /></div><div>The two corner joints can be completed in parallel. So 1 minute for corner joints and 1 minute for base joint, drops to 2 minutes. If can do the base joint in parallel with wall corners, then dropped to 1 minute. The station times become [1,1,1] and total time for box is 3 minutes. With boxes exiting the production line at the rate of one every minute.</div><div><br /></div><div>Assuming bolted joints and maximum length is 6000mm and spacing minimum of 200mm, then have 30 spaces or 31 bolts. The objective is thus installing such bolts in less than 1 minute, so would need to install each bolt in less than 1.91 seconds. Assuming not possible, then increase bolt size and install at 600mm to say 1200mm centres, thus reducing number of bolts and allowing more time per bolt. Thus 5 spaces, requires 6 bolts, so 10 seconds per bolt. Introduce multiple spindle drivers, and can install all bolts along a line in one operation.</div><div><br /></div><div>Also note with modular construction, that 2 modules 6m long placed end to end, create a 12m wide building, made from 2.4m wide segments. Though 12m long modules can be transported, though may have manoeuvrability problems in some suburban streets, and then at driveways. However if feasible then end to end have 24m wide building. In Australia our timber framing code (AS1684) and simplified wind classification system limits building widths to 16m. So would want to replicate this using other materials and systems. So would need 8m long modules. Assume maximum site width 21m and length 32m. So in width can get maximum length of 2400*8 = 19200, or in length allowing 6m offsets from boundaries, then also limited to 8 modules. So total of 16 modules in one building. Assuming it takes 30 minutes to install a module on site, then will take 480 minutes to install whole building: 16*19.2 = 307.2 sq.m. Which is larger than typical single storey house. Earlier versions of timber framing code had 12m limit on width, however few buildings have such widths let alone the now permitted 16m. Maximum length is 5 times the width, so at 16m can make 80m long, and unlikely to find a block of land suitable for such length. Also development plans typically have large offsets from the front boundary and from the rear boundary, offsets from side boundaries typically around 900mm to 1000mm. </div><div><br /></div><div>So consider a 3m square grid, and 12 x 12m dwelling. Then have 16 potential rooms. But only need around 8 rooms: kitchen, laundry, bathroom, lounge, dining, 3 bedrooms. So such a dwelling potentially has 8 rooms surplus to requirements. Though some rooms may want larger than 3m x 3m, whilst others are smaller.</div><div><br /></div><div>Consider 3.6m wide broad loom carpet. So two side by strips and 1.2m hallway between, gives 3.6*2+1.2 = 8.4m width, and put 4 rooms on each side, at say 3.6m long, so 14.4m long, which would require 6 modules, in length, whilst width provide by single module, so total of 6 modules at installation of 30 minutes each, is 180 minutes or 3 hours.</div><div><br /></div><div>Or consider a popular 4 bedroom floor plan, L-shaped dwelling, 15m legs and each leg 7.5m wide. So one leg take to be 15m, the other 7.5m, so 6.25 modules one leg and 3.125 modules the other leg. So we could round the number of modules down, or up, alternatively change the width to something less than 2.4m. For example adopt 8 modules and 4 modules for each leg, and width of 1875mm. So total of 12 modules at 30 minutes installation each, so 360 minutes or 6 hours.</div><div><br /></div><div>So assuming modules arrive on schedule then expect the typical house can be assembled in one working day. Also expecting need less than 16 modules, and expecting fabrication of module is less than 30 minutes. So expect all modules fabricated in one day, and delivered and assembled on site the next day. Or for some distant site, the modules all arrive in sequence on the same day.</div><div><br /></div><div>If expect to roll of the production line at the rate of one every minute, then expecting can produce 480 modules per day, per shift, and if using 16 modules per dwelling then providing 30 dwellings per day.</div><div><br /></div><div>One example of the potential is <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GlTNqBXErlk">BOXABL</a>, so 300,000 sq.ft of factory space (so a 547 ft square, or around 167m square), building a home every 4 hours, aiming for home every 30 to 40 minutes, producing around 6000 and 7000 homes per year and currently with order book for 120,000 homes. Aiming for new factory, with production capacity of home every 10 to 15 minutes. Part of problem here is what is their timing referring to, total production time, or time flowing from the line.</div><div><br /></div><div>They are no where near 200,000 units per year from one factory. But like the caravan company above, they are producing a fully fitted out box: wet areas, kitchens, bathrooms, and cabinets. Also they are not producing two strip modules, but one expandable unit. So separate the empty box from the fit out, and also consider wet area modules from basic empty box. Then it does seem like there is potential for modular production to hit 200,000 empty units per year.</div><div><br /></div><br /><hr />Related Posts<br /></div><div><hr />Revisions: <br /> [3/01/2024] : Original<br /></div>Conrad Harrisonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11351972303793021889noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7659329.post-31475561050882268802023-04-13T00:50:00.005+09:302023-04-13T00:50:33.061+09:30IDENTITY VERIFICATION WITHOUT COPYING<div><h2 style="text-align: left;">Introduction</h2><div>The verification of identity seems to be a highly flawed process, which every organisation appears to believe involves copying, including the Australian Tax Office. Yet no copying is needed, nor sighting, further more if the selected documents are used for identification purposes it hinders their proper use. The processes are also contradictory, as they require the same data to be both public and private at the same time. Everyone needs to stop building repositories of identity data, which are ripe for harvesting by thieves. The need is to verify identity, not acquire a copy of identity data. Not the least of which is, more traditionally, copying of such documents was considered illegal.</div><h2 style="text-align: left;">Security Key</h2><div>To me the Australian Tax Office MyGovID application is fundamentally flawed. I don't have an issue with its use as a security key, other than a mobile phone, the purpose of which is spoken communications, is an overly expensive security key. Which item is treated with more care, house keys or mobile phone? A low priced USB security key on keyring with house keys likely more secure than a phone. The phone is only more secure assuming its security features used to prevent anyone else accessing. These features have tendency to interfere with use as a phone the primary purpose of the device. A smart phones security features may make it good in theory, but not in practice, it is not a quality robust design solution. Given such may as well make other options available: it is poor design if there is no alternative or backup technology.</div><h2 style="text-align: left;">Verification of Identity</h2><div>However, the major flaw with MyGovID, is the process of verifying identity to use with the security key. The process involves copying, creating pristine digital images of identity documents. Pointing a camera on a phone at an identity document may be convenient, but it is also foolish and irresponsible. Around two or more years before MyGovID was introduced, I refused to give Paypal such copy of my identity documents, and I am surprised that the government is following such path of collecting copies. Especially surprised as I'm reasonably certain it was corrupt government employees during 80/90's who first exploited colour photocopiers to forge identity documents. To now give them pristine digital copies is insane.</div><h2 style="text-align: left;">Token Evidence of Identity Check</h2><div>Maybe in the first instance as a consequence of World War 2 , and the cold war and the iron curtain, it was apparent employees could be corrupted and false identity documents created. So taking black and white photocopies of documents introduced, along with stamping these as copies, with the date and the signature of the agent taking the copy. Such copy providing token evidence of having viewed something resembling an identity document. If originals need sighting then these copies clearly not suitable substitutes. But as copying technology has improved, such copying no longer acceptable and should have been abandoned during the 1990's. For such copying to be continued using digital technologies is unacceptable.</div><div><br /></div><div>The Optus breach would be less significant, if identity data had not been collected. It seems "as a tax office requirement", businesses are building repositories of identity data littered all over the place. Would expect the government to take the lead and demonstrate that do not need to copy identity documents or sight them, to verify identity.</div><h2 style="text-align: left;">Privacy Policies</h2><div>Such copying is unacceptable and unnecessary. Whilst it is nice that the tax office and other businesses have privacy policies. Such policies are unfortunately no consolation to people who have their identity stolen. Most especially when the verification system is poorly designed and contributing to the theft of identity, due to predictable design flaws.</div><h2 style="text-align: left;">Identity Tasks</h2><div>I'm aware of at least two different identity tasks. The first is verifying dealing with a real person, and real address, and opening an account and issuing an on going unique customer number (ID1) for the name and address. And attempting to connect an actual person (ID0) to that identity. The second issue is ensuring all future transactions (ID*) are with this same person (ID0), Most organisations issue plastic membership cards, with the unique membership number on it. These membership cards are not proof of identity, they simply allow transactions against the membership number: that is transaction ID* connected to ID1, not to ID0. One problem is ID1 can be stolen, but everything still points to ID0, as they are the one at the address or a previous address if the thief (IDx) has changed the address. If a problem occurs then seeking to find an actual person at an address. Not checking validity of addresses, and not checking occupation of the address, in the first place is a major defect.</div><h2 style="text-align: left;">Public Facing and Private Data</h2><div>We can consider there is public facing data and non-public facing (private) . By public facing I mean the information is shared with a multitude of people: friends, relatives, businesses and government departments. Information on membership and identity cards have to be public facing to operate: the data cannot be private. Name and address are public facing but their association with other things is private.</div><h2 style="text-align: left;">Government Registers</h2><div>All special documents/cards issued by the government are associated with a register and for a specific purpose. Use for any other purpose has the potential to hinder the proper use of the document. Presence on the register is based on a name, which may not be unique, but is made unique by an assigned number, and other data placed in the register. For on going transactions a physical address is typically required, where if we chose to look, expect to find the person inside the house at the address.</div><h2 style="text-align: left;">Interrogating Legitimacy of Documents</h2><div>The government typically chooses to keep other information collected by each department, private and confidential to that department, unless there is good reason to share. Therefore all interrogation of the legitimacy of a document should only occur between the department which issued it and the person claiming the benefit conferred by the document. Exchange of data with any other party puts information where it does not belong. Collecting the data simply because do not have the imagination to consider how verification can be done otherwise, is not acceptable.</div><div><br /></div><div>If a person does not have an original document, then they need to apply to the keeper of the register for a transcript. This transcript and copies should never be passed onto anyone else. It is clear that the keepers of the registers have to be able to interrogate an individual to the extent necessary to be convinced the person can uniquely identify themselves on the register: That is connect ID1 to ID0. However, possession of an original or transcript provides little evidence of anything useful: it is not proof of ID1 connected to ID0.</div><div><br /></div><div>Therefore the registers and the keepers of the registers are important to defining identity (ID1), but have a problem connecting to the person (ID0). Keeping ID1 connected to ID0 is thus part of the problem to be dealt with.</div><h2 style="text-align: left;">Associating ID0 Activity with ID1</h2><div>Our primary concern is that ID1 is unique within the community and all transactions by that identity are those desired by ID0. Therefore an important task is to get ID0 to associate all their activity with ID1, and will typically involve reference to transactions ID*.</div><h2 style="text-align: left;">Presence of Name on Available Registers</h2><div>Since a name is on all the registers, it is clear that all the registers can be checked for presence and uniqueness of a name on the available registers, without disclosing any other information. If address is available then it can be checked, if and only if the name is not unique. As knowledge of presence on some registers may be a matter of privacy in itself., an individual needs to grant permission to check all the registers, When granting permission to check the register the person can also identify whether they expect to be on the register or not. For example not on Australian registers of births or deaths: because alive and born overseas.</div><div><br /></div><div>Having checked multiple registers we know the name is in common use, but not that all uses are by the same person, or by the person (ID0) currently being checked. We therefore need the person (ID0) to get confirmation from the keeper of each register that they are able to defend their unique presence on the register. Also if necessary demonstrate they are not the person on a register.</div><div><br /></div><div>For any organisation to get more information from the person to check against the registers would be unacceptable. The keeper of the register has to exchange the information. The keeper of the register has access to the information, the information is private to that register. It should be kept private to that register. There is no value to the data for identity and security purposes if it is littered all over the place.</div><h2 style="text-align: left;">Identity Confirmation Tokens</h2><div>The individual therefore needs to apply to the keeper of each register and get a confirmation token of some description that they are able to defend their unique presence on the register. The collection of tokens are then linked to a single identity token. This token ultimately being a public facing identity card, potentially eliminating need for 100 point identity check as the identity represented by the card is routinely updated by an increasing number of checks against the use of the identity. </div><div><br /></div><div>An identity card being created as it is a time consuming and inconvenient activity for all parties involved therefore only want to pursue the activity once.</div><h2 style="text-align: left;">Identity Check</h2><div>So notionally defined an identity and assigned to a single identity card, and whilst built on checks against multiple registers, the card can be stolen or faked. It can contain a photo and a data strip, and a personal identification number(PIN) can also be associated with the card. The data strip contains information about all the checks made, the more checks made the more robust the identity. For person to person transactions, an 100 point ID card is likely good enough. Multiple organisations can be involved issuing ID cards complying to common standards, on condition no organisation ever takes a copy of identity documents. The only general purpose public facing identity data is that made available on the 100 point ID card. All other data is kept private, only shared with those organisations which issue the documents.</div><h2 style="text-align: left;">No Computers</h2><div>A system could be designed which does not require computers or smart phones. The system needs either paper confirmation certificates or could use plastic/metal confirmation tokens/coins. However, the registers can be searched faster by computer, and restricted access to the data better enforced. Digital tokens also have potential to be more secure.</div><h2 style="text-align: left;">Remote Transactions</h2><div>Remote transactions pose a problem as cannot see a plastic ID card, though it could have a built-in USB key, employ or employ NFC technology as in smart cards and stickers and tags. However, unlike face to face transactions cannot check face against the ID card: not that this is helpful if the card is fake. So problem is that ID1 is not permanently attached to ID0 and no one really wants the world of Cyborg 2087 and implanted trackers.</div><div><br /></div><div>It seems drivers licences, and other identity documents are being used for over the phone verification. This is not sensible, it is a contradiction. Either the information is private or it is public, it cannot be both at the same time. If every business is making copies, then it is public. The original purpose of most of the documents also makes them public facing.</div><div><br /></div><div>For traffic control purposes, it is likely that people will communicate required exchange of information by way of their drivers licences. Therefore one way to get information is through a minor car accident: the thief already using a fake identity. Such information is therefore not suitable for remote identification purposes.</div><h2 style="text-align: left;">Biometrics</h2><div>Biometrics instead of implanting a tracker, make use of data already nautrally embodied in a person. However in the world of 3D printers it is questionable as to how robust these systems are. Furthermore there is still the issue of the data being collected and littered all over the place. So copying a persons features is no more acceptable than copying their personal identity documents. There is a difference between fallible human memory connected to multiple sensors, and a permanent machine record based on a myopic perception from limited sensors.</div><div><br /></div><div>Using biometrics stored on single device belonging to the owner, and used as a key for multiple devices and systems is more acceptable. In this manner identity/biometric data is not scattered amongst multiple organisations nor on multiple devices. The one device is unlocked and activates a key to unlock other systems.</div><h2 style="text-align: left;">Transaction History</h2><div>As indicated above if an organisation has a history with a client, there are therefore multiple ID* transactions which can be used to verify a person remotely. Most recent transactions not necessarily the best transactions to use as the use of such maybe the cause of a recent identity theft. Unfortunately historical transactions may not be readily available to individuals, consequently may take a few days to dig old information out and verify. The purpose being to determine a history of interaction between ID1 and an organisation, as recognised by ID0 and the organisation.</div><h2 style="text-align: left;">Computer and Smart Phone Technology</h2><div>Increasingly smart phones and computers are acquiring increased security features which restrict access to the device or an account on the device. The tax office assumes one phone one user, which is some what unreasonable and doesn't reflect the real world. Many families just have one mobile phone and a landline, there is no need for everyone in the household to have their own mobile phone. Businesses have landlines, most businesses are small business, and they didn't have one phone to one person. If anyone in the business has a mobile, it is most likely their own, and not supplied by the business. So have two issues individual not wanting their phone contaminated with business software. Business owners not having control over individuals personal devices.</div><h2 style="text-align: left;">Tax Office Problem</h2><div>The tax office's problem appears to be that any individual can log onto a computer and onto tax office systems. This is because in many businesses, employees likely do not have their own computers, nor do they have their own computer accounts/profile on a computer. So once a person had access to a computer a person had access to the Auskey granting access to the tax offices data. Unless using an Auskey on a usb stick, in which case only the person with the USB stick should have been able to access. Of course anyone could be granted access to use the key. But had the advantage that the usb stick could be taken back and the Auskey cancelled. Thus usb sticks a visual reminder of how many Auskeys a business was using. Though I'd hazard a guess the contents of the USB stick could easily be copied, but as long as the Auskey cancelled once an employee changes roles, should not have been a problem.</div><div><br /></div><div>However, the expectation with MyGovID is that only one person using the security features of a smart phone is able to unlock the phone and gain access to the security key provided by MyGovID. However it does seem like the security features of a computer, laptops especially, and system accounts, could equally well be used to limit access to the tax office systems. One computer with multiple users, and each account having its own digital key. In large organisations people not always using the same computer, they can log onto any computer, and their profile follows them, therefore the digital key would have to follow, it cannot be machine dependent.</div><h2 style="text-align: left;">Irritating 2 Factor Authentication Using a Smart Phone</h2><div>So enter the irritating 2 factor authentication either using a mobile phone and codes sent by SMS, or other methods such as using symantec VIP on a desktop or google's backup codes. At least google recognises may not have phone with you or switched on and provides an alternative. The tax office suggests that the SMS messages are not secure, and that new smart phones have improved security for the communications.</div><div><br /></div><div>So once MyGovID is setup we supposedly have a secure digital key for remote transactions. Using a smart phone we don't need a special reader for a keycard, and unlike a simple usb key supposedly only one person can use the key. All seems reasonable for on going transactions and especially remote transactions.</div><h2 style="text-align: left;">MyGovID Primary Defect</h2><div>The big problem however is that to set up MyGovID everyone foolish enough to do so, or otherwise coerced by the tax office, has given their identity away, and the tax office servers are now ripe for harvesting. No point harvesting them when little data there.</div><div><br /></div><div>Copying and collecting of identity data is not verifying identity, it is not making transactions more secure, it is creating more sources of identity data and making peoples identity data easier to find and steal. So MyGovID would be good if it didn't place our futures at risk.</div><div><br /></div><h2 style="text-align: left;">MyGov Primary Defect</h2><div>On the other hand MyGov connects multiple government accounts to a single account, but otherwise fails to confirm and create a single secure identity. Furthermore various government departments may still ask for copies of documents to conduct a 100 point identity check. Thus creating even more repositories of identity data.</div><h2 style="text-align: left;">Use of MyGov to Interrogate Government Registers</h2><div>Yet MyGov should be carrying out adequate interrogation to connect a government account to a single user account, and as it does so generating a firm identity for a given user. In other words MyGov needs more government accounts available for connection so that can generate a firm identity. That is so that a user of MyGov can check themselves against the various government registers, be appropriately interrogated by the keepers of the registers and receive an appropriate confirmation token against such register. The more government accounts a person can link or otherwise confirm against, the stronger their identity.</div><div><br /></div><div>So in the first instance, simply create an account, such account is not associated with anyone. Just a user name, and/or email address and a password. Once the user provides their full name, approval can be granted to search all registers for their full name. At which point they can be notified as to their presence on the register and as to whether they are unique or not. If not unique then they can do further checks against those registers to uniquely identify themselves. Once uniquely identified on 3 or more registers then the user can proceed to the process of unlocking access to the various accounts and linking them to their one MyGov account. {3 or more := birth/migration + electoral roll + medicare + taxfile } Those registering for services for the first time may have problems, but they likely have an education, and the education department should know they have attended school. So it maybe necessary to connect both federal and state government departments to the one account, and possibly certain private enterprises. Thus MyGov creates a confirmed identity with out ever copying or sighting issued documents. This identity then needs to be secured and usable: that is making the identity usable as a security key the way MyGovID is meant to be.</div><h2 style="text-align: left;">Flawed Verification Process</h2><div>The tax office approach requires they, banks and various other organisations acquire copies of identity documents such as birth certificates, drivers licences, passports, citizenship certificates, Medicare cards. If they acquire copies the document is no longer unique, and the data is no longer private. And as they are now largely acquiring and checking digital copies, it is possible that no original is ever required. So the process is flawed. It may be believed that not possible to inject fake data into the communication stream, but it does seem feasible to by pass a phones camera and inject into the camera's memory. I believe a criminal organisation would only need to modify one phone, and swap sim cards to create multiple identities. If they cannot get digital images then they cannot do that. If digital images of identity documents are not used then they cannot do that. If the documents selected as identity documents are not used then they cannot do that.</div><div><br /></div><div>The system described above is not using identity documents it interrogates the individual once to create an multi-use identity card/token. That identity card can be questioned requiring further confirmation of the connection of ID1 to ID0. But under no circumstances does the party requiring the confirmation get to see the other identity documents.</div><h2 style="text-align: left;">General Use Identity Card (100ID)</h2><div>To clarify further the 100 point ID card (100ID) can be checked by anyone for any purpose. The police can check the drivers licence and 100ID card if they wish, or just the drivers licence. Customs can check passport and 100ID or just the passport. But no one else can check a drivers licence or a passport, as these are not general use identity documents, they are created and issued for specific control purposes, and such purpose should not be hindered by alternative uses.</div><div><br /></div><div>So confirm identity but do not contribute to theft of identity by building repositories of identity data and passing such off as verification.</div><h2 style="text-align: left;">Arresting People</h2><div>Who is the tax office going to arrest for failing to confirm identity or acquire an identity token. Either a person is not identified or they are. If they are not identified then cannot arrest as do not know who the person is that is to be arrested. If can arrest then have identified and confirmed the persons identity, if confirmed the persons identity then no just cause to arrest. Whilst can arrest someone, take a photo, assign a reference number and leave all other details blank. However it is not acceptable to arrest someone simply because they do not have any form of identification. Nor is it acceptable to arrest someone because happen to be an arrogant all powerful organisation which is only capable of confirmation of identity by creating a copy of identity.</div><div><br /></div></div><div><br /><hr />Related Posts<br /></div><div><hr />Revisions: <br /> [(13/04/2023)] : Original<br /></div>Conrad Harrisonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11351972303793021889noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7659329.post-53859705459696990382023-04-13T00:41:00.003+09:302023-04-13T00:41:28.334+09:30COPYING IDENTITY DOCUMENTS IS NOT A VERIFICATION PROCESS<div><div>I have an issue with the general copying and collecting of identity data passed off as an identity verification process, by all businesses (eg. Paypal, banks, Certsy), and especially government departments such as the Australian Tax Office (ATO), and Centrelink. The reference to its a tax office requirement could also be considered and coercion or abusive use of power. The ATO is potentially responsible for all data breaches such as the Optus breach.</div><div><br /></div><h2 style="text-align: left;">Centrelink Identity Check</h2><div>After an heart attack in 2018 I was advised to seek a health concession card, centrelink required my identity documents be submitted, this could be done via MyGov. I reluctantly and unwillingly submitted via MyGov, I submitted "everything but the kitchen sink", the response was not enough information. It currently indicates there is no history of my ever submitting documents. I don't trust them. As far as my memory goes, sometime back in the 1980/1990's the DSS/CES introduced A3 colour photocopiers with collation memory, that collation memory was used by corrupt employees, after hours, to produce passable replica's. This copying activity should have stopped back in the 1990's, instead it seems to have increased.</div><h2 style="text-align: left;">Traditional Copying</h2><div>My understanding is that attempting to copy official documents issued by the government whilst not itself illegal the potential use of the documents in a fraudulent manner is illegal. The original A4 black and white (B&W) copies taken by DSS/CES, stamped in red ink with the word "COPY" , dated and signed by the representative of the DSS/CES who witnessed the original, was acceptable, as originals need be sighted and the B&W copy was not passable as an original. The copy, basically being taken because employees not trusted and the copy is token evidence of having seen something resembling an identity document.</div><h2 style="text-align: left;">Copying Technology</h2><div>However, once copying technology had reached the stage of being able to produce passable replica's the copying of identity documents should have ceased, that is some time around the 1990's. Instead today pristine digital copies, which can be used to produce passable replica's, are being littered all over the place. {AI technology detecting fakes is irrelevant}</div><h2 style="text-align: left;">Paypal</h2><div>Around 2 years prior to the ATO introducing MyGovID, Paypal requested digital copies of my identity documents, indicating it was a tax office requirement. I refused to provide, and provided them with explanation why and informing about the traditional B&W copies. I also explained they had already verified my account through my linked bank account, which already required a 100 point ID check in person, to get. They indicated they would verify my identity by other means. I still have two Paypal accounts, though the business account I'm not certain is fully operational, but I have little use for it, so not overly concerned at the moment. {I did have a few dollars seemingly trapped in the account, but I have recently transferred.}</div><h2 style="text-align: left;">ATO Secure Access</h2><div>The ATO introduced MyGovID and discarded Auskey. As the application is not compatible with my phone, and to me a mobile phone is a useless piece of electronic junk running poorly written bloated software, its only purpose is spoken conversation, I have no intention of updating it simply to use as a security key. Consequently I lost access to the ATO business portal and processes became inefficient as now I need to operate via an accountant. Apparently accountants, financial advisers and tax agents are not very responsible as they appear to have mindlessly complied and verified their identities with MyGovID. Needing to use a smart phone as an over priced security key, is irritating but something I could ignore and detour around.</div><div><br /></div><div>Though lost faith in accountants ability to act in the best interests of their clients. On an accountants forum all the accountants seemed to be concerned about was updating the phone, the cost of the phone, and the security features of the phone, no thought of how the phone is used. It seems anything on a mobile phone is seen as "cool!" and convenient, rather than stupid and irresponsible.</div><h2 style="text-align: left;">Smart Phones and Software</h2><div>The need to use a mobile phone in conjunction with a computer is getting to be annoying. Quite frankly I have little use for a phone, and consider it an unnecessary expense and have little intention of replacing when my current phone stops working. It spends the majority of the time switched off. I like computers, but I hate phones of all descriptions. When I got a smart phone, I thought it had potential as a portable computing device, it has however never demonstrated any value as a computer. Not the least of which there is generally only one way to get software onto the device. The constraints imposed by Google and Apple are unacceptable. A smart phone should be a personal computing device, and not require software from a public repository, nor require software be placed in such public repository.</div><div><br /></div><div>The constraints on the public repositories operated by Google and Apple is the one major reason why the ATO MyGovID application is not acceptable, since if it is not compatible with your phone and cannot be installed then google play will not permit comment. But MyGovID is an imposed piece of software by a government department and its very concept and nature is flawed and needs to be discussed, criticised and interrogated, and has little to do with whether the software does or does not work. To a certain extent the ATO covertly introduced this infringement of rights: theft of data from other departments which they would otherwise not be granted access to. Copying documents is not verification.</div><div><br /></div><div>There are other means of multifactor authentication with out need of a smart phone: such as googles backup code numbers and symantec vip access, and usb security keys.</div><h2 style="text-align: left;">ATO Directors ID</h2><div>Then the ATO introduced the Directors ID, this requires MyGovID to "verify" identity. Now I cannot avoid the issue. There was a voice phone option, so I was willing but reluctant to go along. I tried the phone option, and got an extension of time as phones busy. There's a telling clue. I eventually get through, and over the phone they failed to verify my identity, But they did collect data from my citizenship certificate: suspicious. Which all seems likely an highly defective process, since it suggests only need data from the document, which could come from anywhere. As failed to confirm over the phone I was sent letters requesting I send certified copies.</div><h2 style="text-align: left;">Copying Identity Documents & Exchange of Data</h2><div>I am not placing my identity documents anywhere near a photocopier, scanner, or camera. The only scanner acceptable to me is that operated by the department which issued the documents, and only with respect to the purpose for which the document was issued. The only exchange of data acceptable to me is with the department which issued the document.</div><h2 style="text-align: left;">Legitimate Access to Data</h2><div>The various government departments do not share data,. If the ATO had a legitimate reason for such data then they would have it already. They do not have legitimate reason for the data, and they are not getting it from me.</div><h2 style="text-align: left;">Verification Process</h2><div>This verification of identity process is total nonsense. They are copying identities they are not confirming or verifying anything. They are simply building repositories of identity data ripe for harvesting and thus contributing to the theft of identity. {eg. Optus breach}</div><div><br /></div><div>The 100 point ID check does not require copying or sighting any of the specified documents. Furthermore possessing the documents is not proof of anything useful. Whilst sighting of the documents by persons not involved with the intended purpose of such documents is also not proof of anything useful.</div><h2 style="text-align: left;">AI Technology</h2><div>Customs and immigration using AI technology to detect fake passports at border crossings is a reasonable use of AI technology. This is because fake passports along with corrupt employees diminishes the value of the passport and interferes with its proper purpose. The department/s which issued and otherwise employ the document are doing the checks to fulfill the proper purpose of the document. Consequently their activity does not interfere with the proper use of the document.</div><div><br /></div><div>Furthermore given the number of people processed daily, it is unlikely they would waste resources storing the scans long term, and have little need to do so, as they already hold the information which is on the passports they issued. They really only need to keep a check on arrivals and departures, in each direction, and keep for a short time afterwards, and only data about suspicious persons retained for longer periods.</div><div><br /></div><div>Other organisations scanning the document is not acceptable.We have no control over their use of the digital image generated, and they do not otherwise hold the data on the document, and have no "right" to such data. The digital image generated has potential for use in producing fake documents and therefore interferes with, and hinders, the proper use of the document.</div><div><br /></div><div>The proper use of a drivers licence is traffic control, the police scanning it for such purpose is acceptable, anyone else scanning it is unacceptable as hinders the proper use of the document. It is also to be noted that data cannot be public facing and private at the same time. During an accident the required exchange of information is likely to occur via the use of a drivers licence, the information is therefore public facing. As the data on a drivers licence is public facing it is no value for confirmation of identity over the telephone. Copying the licence with a smart phones camera is not a transient observation and is not acceptable.</div><h2 style="text-align: left;">Identity Cards</h2><div> If other organisations have issues with identity then they should issue their own identity cards, and security keys, to suit their purposes, not hinder the proper use of those cards issued by others.</div><h2 style="text-align: left;">Tax Office</h2><div>If the ATO is not happy with tax file numbers (TFN) attached to just about everything, and wants a photographic identity card then it should issue one. Or simply issue a card similar to the Medicare card, with TFN on it.. Instead of useless piece of scrap paper with TFN on it.</div><h2 style="text-align: left;">Identity Checking</h2><div>So the ATO is not in the business of identity checking. In which case why was it permitted to introduce MyGovID? Other businesses for which the 100 point identity check has been imposed are also not in the business of identity checking.</div><h2 style="text-align: left;">National Identity Cards</h2><div>As I recollect back in the 1970's the population opposed the introduction of national identity numbers and photographic identity cards. The government got around this by having the TFN assocaited with various customer accounts with coercion of increased tax if do not do so. The state governments introduced photographic drivers licences, with explicit disclaimer on them that for traffic control purposes.</div><h2 style="text-align: left;">Smart Phones</h2><div>It was clearly apparent with the introduction of mobile phones, that an alternative national and international ID number had been introduced (the phones number), followed by GPS tracking and audio/video surveillance of a person becoming possible. But this is not simply an invasion of privacy, it places the security and uniqueness of a persons identity at risk. All this abstraction of identity is not the person. {Biometrics is just another abstraction, and 3D printers are liable to make that unreliable.}</div><h2 style="text-align: left;">Secure Identity</h2><div>So we need secure identity and we need an organisation to trust to create and secure such identity. But at the same time we do not want national identity cards. The issue is that certain information should be private and confidential to certain organisations and should not be shared by anyone. Only name and address are public facing: with an hopeful expectation we can find a person with the given name at the associated address inside the main dwelling.</div><div><br /></div><div>So the 100 point ID check, and MyGovID are all hazards to the security of individuals unique identity, rather than safeguarding identity, the processes currently employed are defective and contributing to the theft of identity and these defective processes need to be stopped. That includes terminating the use of MyGovID for identity checking, its use as a security key is another matter. Similarly it is unacceptable for justices of the peace to provide certified copies. Copying is not acceptable.</div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div></div><div><hr />Related Posts<br /></div><div><hr />Revisions: <br /> [(13/04/2023)] : Original<br /></div>Conrad Harrisonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11351972303793021889noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7659329.post-39865263200674482942023-02-04T17:41:00.008+10:302023-02-05T17:45:10.228+10:30Proof of Identity Nonsense and Directors ID<div><div>To start with full identity is embodied in your flesh and blood, and cloning you would not be considered acceptable. Therefore if your identity is abstracted to a pile of scrap paper, it should be considered unacceptable to copy such documents, and unacceptable for information to be retrieved from those documents and stored.</div><div><br /></div><div>The only acceptable copy and store of such information is the original register of record when the documents were created.</div><div><br /></div><div>Documents may need to be sighted, but they should never leave your sight or be touched or handled by others. You want to be certain that the document you walk away with is the exact same document you arrived with. You should not want any kind of document swapping, copying or scanning to take place.</div><h3 style="text-align: left;">Mobile Phone Apps</h3><div>You should not view mobile phone apps as convenient and cool. Just point phone camera at drivers licence and get identity verified is not cool, it is irresponsible and foolish. The drivers licence is not an identity card its only purpose is traffic control, if not dealing with a traffic control issue then no one has a right to see your drivers licence or record your licence number.</div><h3 style="text-align: left;">National Identity Number and ID Card</h3><div>During the 1970's the Australian population voted against national identity numbers, and the introduction of a national photographic identity card. I'm not sure whether it was an actual referendum or preliminary survey which indicated no point to a referendum: but the dominate view reported on the news was against the idea.</div><div><br /></div><div>So tax file numbers became attached to just about everything financial, and identity cards covertly introduced by way of the states introducing photographic drivers licences. And whilst the drivers licence explicitly states for no other purpose other than traffic control it is increasingly being used as a general identity card. Those without a drivers licence then find themselves at a disadvantage. Though the vast majority of the identification requirements are unnecessary.</div><div><br /><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhLhZ19voOz5I3ysyIVwojzaK9Vm3zUZ8OFV5z8Jgvp0Dfv5QWTTfpAwXf7Fx94C9hnGhHVSI3wbE7UzP1ymReffXCPoNp10JTNA_sYGWNhb1-d1dMkChnPam0Oq5gnF1G0aYHFSk81r4Qu9y8yYgHkdzDgTU1HklcUiQKHb_DHHd2yzUMSWg/s1913/BackOfDriversLicence.jpg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="655" data-original-width="1913" height="110" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhLhZ19voOz5I3ysyIVwojzaK9Vm3zUZ8OFV5z8Jgvp0Dfv5QWTTfpAwXf7Fx94C9hnGhHVSI3wbE7UzP1ymReffXCPoNp10JTNA_sYGWNhb1-d1dMkChnPam0Oq5gnF1G0aYHFSk81r4Qu9y8yYgHkdzDgTU1HklcUiQKHb_DHHd2yzUMSWg/s320/BackOfDriversLicence.jpg" width="320" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Back of Drivers Licence</td></tr></tbody></table></div><div><br /></div><br /><h3 style="text-align: left;">PAYPAL</h3><div>A few years back Paypal requested I send them digital copies of my identity documents to verify identity, as it was a requirement imposed by the tax office. I refused, I still have my paypal accounts (personal and business). Amongst other things I pointed out that they had already verified my bank account, credit card, and I had already done the identity check in person at the bank, and therefore why does such linked facility require additional identity check. I also declared that they did not have a right to a digital copy of my identity documents and that receipt of a digital copy was not confirmation of identity.</div><div><br /></div><h3 style="text-align: left;">TAX OFFICE AND MYGOVID</h3><div>Then a few years later the tax office introduces this MyGovID garbage. This mobile phone app, is apparently defective, and people are complaining that their documents are not getting verified, and the response is typicallly that they need to submit pristine copies of the identity documents. The MyGovID app is not compatible with all phones, so to use people would need to get a new mobile phone.</div><div><br /></div><div>At the time I checked out an accountants forum, expecting that this app to be criticised as a seriously defective concept. Instead these idiot accountants were arguing about looking after clients best interests and updating mobile phone to get latest and greatest security fixes. If these imbeciles were truly concerned about their clients privacy and security, they wouldn't be jumping on the bandwagon of the latest piece of mobile phone junk. Instead they would put brain in gear and avoid using mobile phone junk. Software which is updated, daily, weekly, monthly and yearly is poorly written junk, it is not minimum viable product (MVP), and the security updates are a joke. The software is typically written using bloated libraries, and that bloat of unnecessary features makes it both a privacy and security hazard.</div><div><br /></div><h3 style="text-align: left;">MYGOVID : DEFECTIVE IN CONCEPT</h3><div>But putting the defective software aside, the MyGOVID concept itself is defective. First it is only available on google play, where only people who are able to download and use can comment. So no opportunity to criticise the concept: this is completely unacceptable for software imposed by the government. This is not optional software, there is no alternative.</div><div><br /></div><div>No one, absolutely no one, should be providing a digital copy or even paper copy of their identify documents to any organisation, not even under the coercive cloud of tax office powers. Using your mobile phone may be convenient, but it is not proof of identity.</div><div><br /></div><div><span style="color: red;">All the digital copies uploaded elsewhere can be stolen and used to create false identities, as only digital copies are being used for verification. I should imagine a criminal organisation would only need to hack one mobile phone, to create a device which bypasses the camera, and injects a digital image into camera memory. The sim cards are used to identify the caller, and these can be replaced as needed to create as many identities are desired from the one phone.</span></div><div><br /></div><h3 style="text-align: left;">PAST PROOF OF IDENTITY</h3><div>In the past, identity documents were photocopied using A4 black and white (B&W) photocopiers, the DSS/CES for example took such copies and then stamped in red ink with the word "COPY" and the current date, these were then signed by the agent processing the information. It seemed innocent and acceptable, but why did they need the copy? Well <span style="color: red;">the past indicates that such employees can be corrupted, and so the B&W copy was token evidence that something resembling an identity document had been seen.</span></div><div><br /></div><h3 style="text-align: left;">PHOTOCOPIERS AND MEMORY</h3><div>However, sometime during the 1980/1990's colour A3 photocopiers with collation memory were introduced. Few people understood the advanced collation features of the copiers and also little actual need for such features. Corruptible employees used the collation memory to store copies of identity documents then after hours printed off replica documents. The situation became worst when, the photocopiers became combined, copiers, printers and scanners attached to computer networks and desktop publishing software. Now they went beyond cloning to more fully forging documents. Then came wireless networking.</div><div><br /></div><div><span style="color: red;">So by the 1990's it was no longer sensible to trust identity documents anywhere near a photocopier. Problem is that the number of organisations required to conduct identity checks increased, and the number of people wanting to copy identity documents increased, and everyone seems to have nonchalantly and compliantly fallen into line, allowing such copying. Yet we should have opposed from the beginning.</span></div><div><br /></div><h3 style="text-align: left;">VERIFYING VERSUS COPYING IDENTITY</h3><div>Not one of these organisations has any reason or need to hold a copy or record information from your identity documents. There should be no copies of the documents or copies of the information floating around anywhere.</div><div><br /></div><div>Verification of identity is a process, and is transient. It basically requires checking transient data against a read only database. A database which cannot be copied. So search data can be passed to the database, be checked and discarded. The only data stored being the response from the register which has been checked. The register keeping track of all enquiries made and the source of such enquiry. So the only data being permitted to be recorded is with the original register of such information.</div><div><br /></div><div><span style="color: red;">The only information any organisation should need to store is your name and address and the unique client number they assign to you. Most organisations don't even need this information, they just need to check one piece of data to make a decision.</span> For example check age to allow into a venue, who you are is irrelevant. <span style="color: red;">For other situations, the organisation simply assigns an identity number to you, and again who you are is irrelevant. So no name, rank and serial number requirements : all that is relevant is the serial number. Think about that, we are being imposed on to provide more information than a soldier would be required to supply during war.</span></div><div><br /></div><div>Now take the <b>directors ID</b>, what value is it? I didn't need one last year, and I doubt it will be any use next year or any time in the future. I'm also fairly certain that the tax office will be held accountable in a few years time for making it easier to masquerade as a director, as they have turned complex identity into a simple number which can be easily stolen. But not to worry because the tax office puts the burden of protecting this worthless and dangerous number on the people they assign the number too. Ok! So have a responsibility to protect identity, no problem. So Dear Tax Office you are not getting copies of my identity documents: verify identity yes, receive a copy of my identity, no #$@!% way.</div><div><br /></div><h3 style="text-align: left;">EXAMPLE SITUATIONS</h3><div>So you go to the bank to open a new bank account or to the post office to organise a passport. So what happens? You need the <b>100 point identity check</b>. Two major identity documents are Australian birth certificate or Australian citizenship certificate. Obviously if taking out Australian citizenship don't have such certificate nor Australian birth certificate, however expect department responsible for this to be capable of processing foreign birth certificates.</div><div><br /></div><div>Now the bank should not need a copy of your identity document, nor need to record information from it. Your account is opened based on a name and current address. <span style="color: red;">There are thus two bits of data to verify: the name and the current address</span>. The address can be verified by visiting the address and talking to the person inside the house, not someone in the garden. The name is part verified by sighting identity documents: such as birth certificate and citizenship certificates. However additionally a collection of documents with their name and address also gives some evidence to their use of such name and address: a problem if they have recently moved however. Changing address seems to be a problem. But again address can be verified by visiting the address.</div><div><br /></div><div><span style="color: red;">Now passports are a problem because the Australian Post Office doesn't do anything other than take a photo, collect copies and pass onto the appropriate government department. So it maybe seems reasonable to provide copies, however <b>it is not</b>. Again the primary issue is to verify use of name and address</span>. </div><div><br /></div><div><span style="color: red;">The Tax office doesn't trust email, or paper post, but seems to believe telephones are secure, and that the piece of electronic junk that is a mobile phone is exceptionally secure.</span></div><div><br /></div><div>I recollect during the 1970's the government indicated it would decentralise and make services more local, instead it centralised everything at the end of a telephone in another state, and for all we know these days it could be outsourced to another country entirely. <span style="color: red;">The car, telephones and internet are putting services more and more distant, and thus generating a need for remote identification</span>.</div><div><br /></div><h3 style="text-align: left;">BUYING MOBILE PHONES</h3><div>To buy a mobile phone in Australia you need to provide a name and address, for the most part this is for on going billing purposes. Not everyone has a personal mobile phone, nor do they have a desire for one, it is therefore unacceptable to create systems dependent on such electronic junk. Further more I don't recollect a requirement for a 100 point ID check to buy a phone, so a mobile phone number is not a verified identity. I do recollect opposition to the idea that retailers should become responsible for such identity checks, before selling phones. So I believe no such system has been implemented.</div><div><br /></div><div>Secondly if buying a phone with prepaid credit, why do you need to provide name and address? There is no on going billing, and simply a number on the network. Do we care who is using the number? For the most part the answer should be no, there is no public telephone directory for mobile phones as there is with landlines. Mobile phone numbers seem to be more private than private landlines: though doesn't stop unwanted phone calls from salespeople and scammers on either.</div><div><br /></div><div>Also whilst some people do not have mobile phones, others have more than one mobile phone. Further whilst some people seem to think they need 24 hour access to the world and always have their phone on, others switch their phones off and do not consider it acceptable for others to have 24 hour access to their life. <span style="color: red;">Needing to switch a mobile phone on for two factor authentication is annoying</span>.</div><div><br /></div><div>However using a mobile phone is probably more convenient than a separate device for identity checks. But if the mobile phone is to be used for identity check, then the identity of the user needs to be verified and that is a problem.</div><h3 style="text-align: left;"><br />THE OPTUS BREACH</h3><div>Just back tracking. As I indicated earlier, the population voted against national identity number and identity card. This same population has adopted mobile phones for just about everything. They have essentially accepted a national and international identity number. The phones have camera's and gps tracking. People plaster their faces and activities all over social networks. Someone asks for identity check and they go cool phone app and <span style="color: red;">give their identity away</span>.</div><div><br /></div><div><span style="color: red;">The most concerning issue with the Optus data breach isn't that the servers were hacked and that data was stolen, the real issue is the number of people who were so willing to give data to organisations in the first place</span>. To organisations which had no need or right to collect or store such data. The only organisation which needs to know your drivers license number is the government department which issued the licence and responsible for traffic control. The only organisations which need to know your Medicare number is the government department which issued the number and the organisations providing health services. These organisations have an on going use for the number.</div><div><br /></div><div>Other organisations do not need to record these numbers or store them, all they need do is use to confirm your name. In the main this can be achieved by sighting the document. <span style="color: red;">Taking a photo with phone camera is not sighting the document. Giving the number over the phone is not sighting the document.</span></div><div><br /></div><div><span style="color: red;">If all that is required is to give numbers over the phone, then anyone who has collected the information, is able to masquerade and use the identities they have collected. Which is why it is acceptable for them to sight the document but not copy or record information from the document.</span></div><div><br /></div><h3 style="text-align: left;">IN PERSON</h3><div>So want to do things remotely over the phone or the internet or maybe even in person. Say change bank details. So go into a bank to change details of existing bank account. To do that need details of the bank account, which could be stolen from a letter box. The real owner therefore won't have the most recent communications from the bank, but they should have plenty of previous communications. Changing the name of the account would require <b>100 point ID check</b> on new identity, changing the address would require verifying the new address. Again visiting the address is preferable, but admittedly they may not want to travel 150km to do so.</div><div><br /></div><div>Now a change of address likely results in a change of landline, whilst email addresses and mobile phone numbers are likely to remain unchanged. <span style="color: red;">Addresses, email addresses and phone numbers are for the purposes of communication, so passing these onto people wish to communicate with is not a major issue. Using these numbers and addresses for security purposes is thus not sensible.</span> However there is potential to use communication channels to check that the person seeking the change is actually present in the office or is actually elsewhere.</div><div><br /></div><div>If the request to make a change is by post, email or phone, then a response can be to check other channels of communication and request visit the office. Again travelling 150km is not desirable for either client or supplier. Therefore need to rely on the channels of communication.</div><h3 style="text-align: left;"><br />CHANNELS OF COMMUNICATION</h3><div>Now the channels of communication are a problem because they can be intercepted or redirected, on the other hand websites and email can be provided with some protection, via SSL. In the main however websites are protected by SSL, and I hazard a guess if SSL is used for email it is only on one side of the communication namely the supplier. So websites and browsers the preferred approach.</div><div><br /></div><h3 style="text-align: left;">GOVID CONCEPT</h3><div><br /></div><div>So MyGov versus MyGovID. So MyGov is not considered secure. But why not? So anyone can create an account with any organisation, using any unique name. So say we have website GOVID, we create an account user name disenchanted2023. We now have a user name and a password to connect to an account, the account has no information attached to it. We provide a phone number for 2 factor authentication. We further make use of something like Symantec VIP access to go from 2 factor to multifactor authentication. So hopefully only the person who created the account has access to the account.</div><div><br /></div><div>But as far as the computer system is concerned we are a nonentity, a nobody a nothing. But this nobody would find it difficult to exist within the nation without having interacted with some government department. So birth certificates, citizenship certificates, immigration visas and passports just to name a few documents at entry to the nation, and then there are tax file numbers.</div><div><br /></div><div>So want to link tax account to the nobody account, so all really need is the tax file number as the tax file has all the associated information. But anyone could have the tax file number. On the other hand we don't want to waste time keep typing the same information into the system. So we setup the account with relevant information: name and address. To link to the tax account, the tax file number is provided to access and check, but not saved, and the other information is also checked against the tax account. If verified then the tax account has the potential to be linked to the nobody account but such is not automatic. Additional questions can be generated from the tax accounts which the user maybe able to check using their past communications with the tax office, such as returns. After this verification still not connected, it is simply pending.</div><div><br /></div><div>The user goes through this process with various other state and federal government departments, with all the accounts left pending. All these accounts being verified against the same name and address details registered in the nobody account, that is they weren't changed between linking accounts. With 3 or more pending accounts all the accounts are checked once again in one batch to confirm all are based on the same name and address details. As each is verified, identification progresses, when all are verified then each accounts accepts verification of identity and all accounts are connected.</div><div><br /></div><div>The basic accounts being, concerned with register of births and deaths, register of migration and citizenship, tax office, electoral register and Medicare. No information from these registers is stored in the nobody account, but all the registers have a record of the nobody account accessing and searching the register. Once the accounts are verified and linked, then the nobody account is a somebody account. From this point on other accounts can be added based on the already verified identity: which may include checking all existing and new accounts as a batch.</div><div><br /></div><h3 style="text-align: left;">TAX OFFICE AND COMPUTERS</h3><div>For the tax office to scrap the computer based <b>Auskey </b>and replace solely with a piece of junk which only works on a mobile phone is not acceptable. Mobile phones are poor computing devices, whilst they can run accounting software, it is unlikely to be acceptable for book-keepers and accountants to spend all day working on a mobile phone: they will do their real work with a computer having a decent sized screen and keyboard. Whilst the phone is only being used for registration and log in purposes, it is questionable as to why the system is not also available via computer. If computers lack security then that suggests we should be doing the work on the phone, and I've already suggested that mobile phones are an unsuitable piece of junk. <i>{NB: May have noticed I hate phones and I really hate mobile phones. Mobile phones are not personal computers and are barely programmable to suit the users needs, and the operating system is generally a hindrance to accessing the phones content. The software on phones is typically bloated and poorly written: junk.}</i></div><div><br /></div><div><span style="color: red;">As for hi-tech nonsense: biometrics, such as facial recognition, finger prints, voice prints. So your face has to be scanned and compared against something right. The something is stored data. Is it sensible to allow such data to be stored everywhere and anywhere? I suggest not.</span> However, assuming that the data is stored on the mobile phone and only your face can unlock the phone, then maybe the data is secure, if you exclude future access to the data from concept of security. Personally if I can't access my own data then its not secure, and anything which poses an hindrance to such future access is not acceptable.</div><div><br /></div><div>Any case the security features are used to access the phone, and then the phone is used to access other services. The other services are only concerned with their own access codes, do not make use of biometrics of store any other unnecessary and unacceptable data on their systems.</div><div><br /></div><div>So newer phones have enhanced security features and encryption, whilst anyone can potentially access a computer at work as not all businesses create user accounts. But not all phone users enable available protections on their mobile phone. So phones are no more secure than computers.<span style="color: red;"> So use a computer to access the government services, but log on identity verified by the users mobile phone. Seems reasonable but why does the initial identity verification need to occur using a mobile phone, with a piece of junk software which only operates on the newest phones?</span> I will hazard a guess it does not have anything to do with security. It is purely do do with incompetents using bloated software libraries which only operate on the newest phones. The bloat is a security hazard. If they, the developers, could actually program then the bloat would disappear, and the software would operate on vastly more systems, would be faster and likely more secure. <i>{NB: Consider security updates are mainly patches to block things which shouldn't be there in the first place. With real security update software would get smaller and smaller until it only comprises of the code for the task at hand, no surplus code for capability not apparent to the user.}</i></div><div><br /></div><div><span style="color: red;">There is thus need to verify identity without copying or recording of such identity information. It should also be possible to do so without something as expensive as a mobile phone and also without the on going expense of operating such mobile phone</span>. The tax office believes MYGOVID acceptable because cheap mobile phones available for the purpose. So business can get new phones for the purpose. But this neglects the cost of operating the phone solely for the purpose of tax office needs. People have no need to update their mobile phones. Sure new phones have more features, supposedly improved capability and improved security, with increasingly different user interfaces (UI) which serve no benefit over the UI that you already have and likely provide a more irritating user experience (UX). Also people are not buying new phones because they want new phones, but because their current phone made inoperable by the software developers keep automatically pushing increasingly bloated updates. Create addiction, dependency, make a product like water which your life depends on, keep them hooked into buying again and again.</div><div><br /></div><div>So cheap mobile phone and service, which solely has the purpose of a security device is not cheap enough. Whilst replacement for actual phone, is too expensive. Further why is my phone suitable for 2 factor authentication with every other organisation, but not the tax office? I'd want my bank account more secure than dealings with the tax office. To me the annual tax returns are a waste of time for employees: either you paid the right tax during the year or you didn't. If didn't then adjust and bring into alignment next year. For business, either do tax annually or more frequently, with computers it is potentially possible daily. Tax office systems seem obsolete immediately they are implemented.</div></div><div><br /></div><h3 style="text-align: left;">PRIVACY AND SECURITY</h3><div>The government and society have now had some thirty years to find a way of verifying identity with out the need to copy identity.</div><div><br /></div><div>As indicated above in the past it was apparent that people assessing identities, may lie about the validity of identity information or having sighted identity documents. So taking a black and white photocopy of identity documents providing token evidence of having sighted a document resembling an identity document was adopted. So the person doing the assessment gets a defence, but such copying poses a hazard to the owner of the identity. This hazard was realised when colour photocopiers with collation memory introduced, and started being used to copy identity documents. Copying identity documents should have stopped.</div><div><br /></div><div>But simply preventing copying documents is not enough. No information should be collected from identity documents and stored. If identity is to be abstracted to a pile of scrap paper, then that scrap paper needs to be protected. If identity is to be abstracted to a chunk of data, then that chunk of data needs to be protected. We need to retain sovereignty over our identities. </div><div><br /></div><div>Now identity cards were opposed in the first instance because it gave impressions of a police state and restrictions on doing anything. The current problem is that there are already restrictions and identity is becoming increasingly easy to steal.</div><div><br /></div><div>But a major part of the problem is that the <span style="color: red;"><b>100 point identity check </b></span>involves organisations across the country collecting and storing identities, when there is no need to. These identity stores provide a source of identity information which can be stolen. No need to steal from the owners address, can steal from any organisation.</div><div><br /></div><div>The legal requirement is to verify your identity not take a copy of your identity. Verification does not require a copy of your identity. However the next problem is that the organisations need evidence that they have verified identities.</div><div><br /></div><h3 style="text-align: left;">ORGANISATIONS NEED EVIDENCE OF IDENTITY CHECKS</h3><div>It is imposed on various organisations that they conduct identity checks on customers, and further that they have proof of identity checks. They transform this need for proof into a need to copy identities. This copying of identities poses a hazard to the legitimate use of such identity.</div><div><br /></div><div>So lets do this with paper. Fill a form in with information to search a given register. No carbon copy or other copy is taken of this form. It has a tear off strips which identifies the unique number of the form, these tear off strips are sent to various people, the purported owner of the identity gets one, the organisation keeps one.</div><div><br /></div><div>One is sent to the government department with the register, the register is checked. Another tear off strip is returned with the response: reject or accept. The government department keeps the form, which only contains information the department already has. The other organisation has token evidence of having made an identity check. Every receipt can be verified with the associated government department. The transmission slip could be faked, but not interested in transmission, only that the transmitted data was verified or rejected. With paper this is likely to take a few weeks. With a computer a few seconds to minutes.</div><div><br /></div><div>Now the problem is who filled the form in? It would be preferable that only the person needing their identity verified fill the form in and posts them off to the departments with the appropriate registers. <span style="color: red;">So the organisation with need to verify identity never sees the identity information. They just receive slips with the accept or rejection of the register check.</span></div><div><br /></div><div>So essentially a person requests the keepers of the registers to send verification tokens to the organisations seeking verification of their identity. The keepers of the records keep a record of the requests. <span style="color: red;">So information is only passed to organisations which already have such information</span>. As it is paper based, all postage is by registered mail and secure courier. Special envelopes can be used for the purpose, resulting in the mail being handled by a more secure system than normal post.</div><div><br /></div><div>This can all be made faster with computer systems and encrypted data, and no other person ever needs to see any of the data.</div><h3 style="text-align: left;">PEOPLE IN UNIFORMS, WITH LICENCES OR ID CARDS</h3><div>The vast majority of us have no need to carry out identity checks on anyone, our primary concern isn't who someone is, but if they genuinely represent the organisation they purport to represent.</div><div><br /></div><div>Say a person with a builders licence for example. So you are expecting to employ a licensed builder, they give you their business card and it has a licence number on in. In the past if you had a phone and knew who to phone you could check the licence number and who it was assigned to. But how do you know the person before you is that person. For the most part probably don't care, because if anything goes wrong, the only issue of matter is the person before you. That is the person you need to find, the person you need to track, the person to be made accountable. For the most part that would just involve visiting their business premises, confirming others in the business are aware of your project, and contract. If they work from home, then may be need to confirm their home address. If they are a mobile service and have a vehicle then can get their vehicle registration number. Information as necessary to track the person, if there is a possibility they take your money and not provide the goods and services. Since contract should be based on work done and progress payments, there shouldn't be a problem. So don't care if they have a licence or not, and if concerned about the quality of their work, then split project into small steps with low cost, and put them on probation, and increase the size of the steps when satisfied they are capable. <i>{NB: As I've said else where licences are worthless and make false claims}</i></div><div><br /></div><div>Now people in uniform. Generally we trust people in uniforms: police, fire brigade, ambulance personnel, soldiers, other defence force personnel, nurses. But our trust is really with the uniform and the authority of the organisation they represent, not the person. So again don't really care who they are, but that they genuinely represent the organisation they purport to represent. </div><div><br /></div><div>Problem is most likely we will buckle at the knees and our spines turn to jelly, when confronted by a person in authority. Depending on how they exercise their power and authority. If they annoy and irritate us, then our knees will straighten and spines turn to steel. Authority becomes irrelevant and only power matters. The distinct between power and authority is important, in most organisations it is the informal power structures which determine decisions and actions, not the formal authority. For example a person may have the authority to sack someone, but they don't have the power to do so. A person or group may not have the authority to dismiss someone, but they may have the power to force them out. So not only does responsibility have to be backed by the authority to complete required actions, but also the real power to do so. It's where a lot of promotions go wrong, because the person promoted doesn't have any real power. Authority comes from the organisation, power is with the person.</div><div><br /></div><div>So a member of the police turns up. The first thing is not to be scared of questioning them, they're just ordinary people in uniform. For the most part you will not have the power to keep them out off your home, if required they will have turned up with all the resources necessary to force entry. If they are criminals they will also have the power to force entry. If they are genuine then they won't mind the delay and won't mind the questions, and no power will need to be exercised by anyone.</div><div><br /></div><div>The police have a uniform and a number on that uniform. All of which can be faked. Plains clothes may have a warrant card, badge or something, again it can be faked. However they supposedly come from a police station. So you can phone and check with that police station, which requires you know the number of the police station.</div><div><br /></div><div>Of course uniforms, numbers and warrant cards can be stolen and telephone calls can be intercepted. For most of us no one is going to go to that much trouble. Secondly your local police station may only have one person, or one person who is changed on a regular basis. In such situation need to know the police station responsible for assignments to the local station. Or better hopefully there is a transition period where the old and new do the rounds of the local area and the new is introduced. This doesn't require introduction to everyone, mostly just businesses in the area. So then have an independent check on who the local police constable is. So there are some people we expect to be known locally and to have local knowledge. Which is a problem because the typical Australian police constable on the beat is sat in a car and is known to no one.</div><div><br /></div><div>So do photographic identity cards help? Lots of organisations seem to issue identity cards to their employees, especially those doing door to door sales, or have need to visit your home. So the people who check you gas, electricity and water meters, these days are likely to have photographic identity cards. Though given that for the most part you never really see them, it doesn't really matter. But if there is a situation where they do need to go into your house to read meters, you can view the card of who is supposedly visiting. I believe that builders licensing these days also involves photographic identity cards.</div><div><br /></div><div>Now information on an identity card should be public, therefore should not allow employer to place unnecessary information on such card. You have to show such card, and the person viewing the card should be permitted to record the information. The card therefore has to be relevant to the task at hand. A photographic drivers licence is not acceptable form of identification for water meter readers, as not concerned with traffic control issues and therefore the parties to a transaction have no need to know the drivers licence number or any other information which may be on a drivers licence. The identity card should just be relevant to the task, the name and/or employee number of the employee and the organisation they represent with contact details for the organisation (including a physical address).</div><div><br /></div><div><span style="color: red;">Having matched a face to the identity card that is not proof of anything. It doesn't work for international passports, so why would it work for anything else.</span> An organisation having received a pristine digital copy of your identity document, for example drivers licence, how difficult would it be to replace your photo with theirs, and otherwise forge a drivers licence in your name? <span style="color: red;">There would be no point stealing all this identity information, if there wasn't a market for fake identities and if it was impossible to produce a reasonable forgery of identity documents.</span></div><div><br /></div><h3 style="text-align: left;">CONCLUSION</h3><div>On the one hand identity data is nothing, on the other hand a large number of useless organisations with useless people turn this useless data into something. Think about it: a loan is taken out in your name with out your consent: how? The only time the bank turns up at your address is to throw you out. I would suggest the bank is negligent if it didn't visit your address in the first place, before granting you the loan <i>{refer above}</i>. May consider the bank doesn't care as its your house they are going to get and it is probably worth more than the loan. Then again when they turn up to take your house, they have to prove you are the one who took out the loan, that you gained the benefit of the loan. Chances are they cannot so prove. Therefore it should be important for them to properly check that they can recover the money from the person they are actually conducting a transaction with: not some useless name, but the actual flesh and blood individual.</div><div><br /></div><div>Our faces are already plastered all over security camera's in supermarkets, so may be should permit our photo's to be used for identity purposes. In other words, we don't care what your name is, just that this face entered this store and conducted business. For most businesses, this is routine, and the record and facial recognition is in human memory, as flawed as that may be. For other situations, like the bank, this face has this customer number, and this customer purports this address. Go check if the face is at the address.</div><div><br /></div><div>It may not help with online transactions, but which transactions should be permitted online without person to person interaction. It should be noted that telephone transactions are also flawed and should be limited in scope.</div><div><br /></div><div>As for photo's well you don't want your photo used on an identity card, which isn't yours, but then what use is such? More important that you identity card is not modified and and the photo replaced by someone else's. Real issue for photos, is don't want your photo attached to activity which is not your activity. So plastering your photo all over the internet is not a good idea: and that includes putting you photo on LinkedIn: a foreign website, subject to foreign laws.</div><div><br /></div><div>Putting your photo on a resume is also not a good idea: the business can take a photo once you are an employee, they have no need for one before hand. Whilst it may help for them to know who you are when you turn up for an interview the majority of the time you won't get an interview, nor will you know what the employer looks like.</div><div><br /></div><div>Another issue is employers increasing requests for police checks in their job advertisements. If the employer doesn't trust you, don't trust the employer or any of their employees. If you have to provide a police check to them, then they should provide their police checks to you. This isn't about situation where there is a legal requirement for police checks. If there is a legal requirement, then assumption is that all employees and the people you are dealing with have had a police check: and therefore assumption is they can be trusted. No! I'm referring to foolish employers demanding police checks when no legal requirement for such, and no real value in such.</div><div><br /></div><div>This is not a police state. People are innocent until proven guilty. People are trusted until proven untrustworthy.</div><div><br /></div><hr /><div>Notes:</div><div><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>As far as I remember here in Australia, in grade 7, it was the British English we were taught. But if search the internet it seems South Australian business and government either doesn't know how to spell or simply adopted: licence, licencing, licenced.</li><li><a href="https://www.grammarly.com/blog/licence-license/">Licence vs. License—Spelling Rules</a></li><li><a href="https://www.grammar-monster.com/easily_confused/licence_license.htm">What Is the Difference between "Licence" and "License"?</a></li></ul></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><hr /><div>References & Further Reading</div></div><div><ol style="text-align: left;"><li><a href="https://www.homeaffairs.gov.au/about-us/our-portfolios/criminal-justice/cybercrime-identity-security/identity-crime">Identity crime and misuse in Australia</a></li><li><a href="https://www.afp.gov.au/what-we-do/crime-types/fraud/identity-crime">What is identity crime?</a></li><li><a href="https://www.criminaldefencelawyers.com.au/blog/identity-theft-australia-laws-and-penalties/">IDENTITY THEFT AUSTRALIA LAWS AND PENALTIES</a></li><li><a href="https://moneysmart.gov.au/banking/identity-theft">Identity theft</a></li><li><a href="https://www.criminaldefencelawyers.com.au/blog/is-lying-on-your-tax-returns-a-crime/">IS LYING ON YOUR TAX RETURNS A CRIME?</a></li><li><a href="https://www.aura.com/learn/identity-theft-stories-cases">The Most Unbelievable Identity Theft Stories of All Time</a></li><li><a href="https://www.abrs.gov.au/director-identification-number/apply-director-identification-number/verify-your-identity">Verify your identity</a></li><li><a href="https://asic.gov.au/for-business/running-a-company/company-officeholder-duties/director-identification-number/">Director identification number</a></li><li><a href="https://www.smartcompany.com.au/business-advice/director-id-application-bugs-mygovid-ato/">“Bring on the fine”: Business leaders see red over Director ID application bugs</a></li><li><a href="https://www.cdpp.gov.au/case-reports/brisbane-man-jailed-identity-theft-and-income-tax-fraud">Brisbane man jailed for identity theft and income tax fraud</a></li><li><a href="https://www.accountantsdaily.com.au/technology/13860-reasonable-expectation-ato-explains-mygovid-change">‘Reasonable expectation’: ATO explains myGovID change</a></li><li><a href="https://www.accountantsdaily.com.au/tax-compliance/15514-ato-slammed-over-soul-destroying-fraud-allegations">ATO slammed over ‘soul-destroying’ fraud allegations</a></li></ol></div><div><hr /></div><div>Related Posts<br /></div><div><hr />Revisions: <br /> [4/2/2023] : Original/Draft<br /></div><div>[5/2/2023] : described more situations, and added references</div>Conrad Harrisonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11351972303793021889noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7659329.post-75522947133604767662023-01-31T16:26:00.003+10:302023-01-31T17:13:55.823+10:30Water Supply and Water Carriers<div><div>As indicated in the previous article I read the following recently: <a href="https://theconversation.com/women-work-harder-than-men-our-anthropological-study-reveals-why-196826">Women work harder than men – our anthropological study reveals why</a>. This got me thinking about the issue of fetching and carrying water from a distant location.</div><div><br /></div><div>Now it seems that fitness trackers could be used for industrial engineering, work study and work measurement providing improvements over simple time measurement. It also seems they could be helpful in the undeveloped countries. </div><div><br /></div><div>Consider the common disparity where girls, their sisters and mothers often spend a significant amount of time each day collecting water from distant locations. It should be clear that counting foot steps is of little value, the daughters with shorter strides obviously travel the distance between home and the water supply with more foot steps. But do they do the task in the same time as their mothers or burn the same number of calories, and do they get closer to their MHR than their mothers and does their heart rate stay close to their MHR longer?</div><div><br /></div><div>Not that we don't necessarily need any measurements to make an initial assessment. </div><div><br /></div><div>I recollect a recommendation of a minimum of 9 litres (L) of water per person per day to satisfy various needs: thirst and hygiene. WHO guidelines currently indicate need for 15 L or 7.5 L for short term emergency response. Assuming a 4 person family then each family needs 30, or 36 L to 60 L per day.</div><div><br /></div><div>I believe they typically carrying 10 L to 20 L at a time, and make around two trips per day, and the trips can be up to 5 km for both the outward and homeward trips, so 10 km round trip. Average walking speed is typically taken at 5km/h or slightly lower 80m/min. So each round trip is at least 2 hours duration, and the total time used for collecting water 4 hours per day. So rate of water delivery is 0.08 L/min to 0.17 L/min. </div><div><br /></div><div>When I turn the tap on water is supplied, depending on tap, at rates between 3.9 L/min and 29.6 L/min, with recommended flows being between 6 L/min and 12 L/min, hot water typically being the slowest. But there is a lot of wasteful industrial infrastructure to make that possible, plus need a large water supply to fill pipelines. If water supply is small, then transportation by container is preferable than piped water supply, as water in the pipes is basically lost.</div><div><br /></div><div>Alternatively consider a small car, can travel at 50km/h and tow 700 kg. Assuming trailer tank is 200kg, then have 500kg available for water. So the 5km trip now only takes 6 minutes, the two way trip 12 minutes, and now have 500 L, to achieve 41.7 L/min. Assuming car achieves 10 km/L, then need 0.5 L of fuel for each trip, or 1 L for round trip. Assuming the fuel provides 41.8 kJ/g , and taking the density as 800 kg/cu.m, then using 400g of fuel for each trip, provides 16720 kJ of energy, and suggesting average power of 46.4 kW. However, also need yo consider all the infrastructure required to build and maintain the vehicles and produce and distribute fuel, and all the energy it also requires. </div><div><br /></div><div>So back to the capabilities of people. A typical recommendation is maximum load to carry is 25% of body weight. Consider that the youngest girl employed for this task is 5 years old, then have female body weights [14,24,45,65]kg for ages [5,10,18, older] years, except for the 65kg these are 5th percentile weights. For males have weights of [16,27, 56, 80]. Therefore females can carry [3.5, 6,11.25.16.25]kg and males [4,6.75,14,20]kg, which at 1000kg/cu.m equates to [3.5, 6,11.25.16.25]L and males [4,6.75,14,20]L of water. So to carry 10 L to 20 L of water typically carrying more than recommended. Also this is ignoring the weight of the container. If the weight of the container is small as would be if simple plastic bag, then can neglect but if a heavy 5kg to 10 kg clay pot, then it needs to be considered. {Note a plastic bag is light weight but not very robust and easily punctured}</div><div><br /></div><div>So assuming main providers are able to transport 10 L per round trip, and need between 36 L and 60 L per day. Assuming can only make 2 round trips per day, so can only fetch 20 L/day, then need 2 to 3 people carrying water each day. which typically falls to children and mother, and of the children typically the girls. Assuming most only achieving the 36 L recommendation, then 2 people making total of 4 trips required. The above suggests that the father alone would only need make 2 trips to fetch 40 L of water: but assume he would be otherwise busy pulling a plough or something.</div><div><br /></div><div>Now a wheeled or rolling container would require less force to move. Coefficients for rolling resistance can be as low as 0.001 for steel wheels on steel track, but our situation is likely rough undulating terrain and I don't have any values for such. So I will assume about 25% of force required to push/pull when on wheels. So 10 kg, only requires 2.5kg to push/pull, whilst 20 kg, requires 5kg to push/pull. As I don't have push/pull forces for children, I will assume the 25% rule as applies to carrying also applies to pushing and pulling, so the push/pull forces can apply are the same as the carrying capacities above.</div><div><br /></div><div>So moving 20L within the capabilities of the 10 year old girl without exceeding recommended limit, but still a bit heavy for the 5 year old. Though the 5 year old doesn't have to fill the container, and could move 14 kg, or less if the weight of the container is significant. It now means the 10 year old can transport 40 L in two trips, and so only one person is required to fetch water.</div><div><br /></div><div>Now <a href="https://www.aquaroll.com/">Aquarolls </a>hold 40 L and <a href="https://hipporoller.org/">Hippo rollers</a> 90 L, other more conventional wheeled containers hold 23 L. Hippo also suggests the effective weight when pushing/pulling is 10 kg, which drops our estimate of rolling resistance from 25% to approx. 11% of the load . So the 23L container requires 2.6kg to pull, and the 40L requires 4.4kg. Whilst the females have potential to move volumes of [31,54,101,146] L and the males [35,60,125,180] L.. So 5 year olds can only shift the 23 L containers, whilst those above 10 years can use 40 L Aquarolls, whilst only 18 year olds and older can use the Hippo's full of water.</div><div><br /></div><div>On this basis only one person is required to make one trip to get 36 L of water using a 40 L rolling container, if they get the 40 L then they get 4 L reserve each day. But if can use the 90L Hippo, then it provides 30L surplus each day based on the higher recommended usage of 60 L. If they don't have a storage tank then they can get benefit from using more water if they use the 90L container.</div><div><br /></div><div>If they have a storage tank, then they can store the surplus, and further reduce number of trips to make. It would take two trips to get 60L surplus, enough for a days needs. So they can rest every third day, or they can make two trips in a day (180L), and rest for two days or for the children they get 2 days at school. Or given mother can collect all water on her own, the children get to go to school.</div><div><br /></div><div><span style="color: red;">Though there is another important factor, and that is the effort required to lift 90kg of water from where ever it is collected: if the container can be wheeled in and out off a water supply and filled, then not a problem. But if it has to be lifted in and out off the water supply, then it is too heavy for one person to fill. Thus getting water in and out off the carrier container are other issues to consider.</span></div><div><br /></div><div>The original assumption was they could travel at 5km/h carrying the load on their backs, in their arms or on their heads, it is assumed they can still travel at 5km/hr pushing/pulling the load. Also assuming that there is no change in the force applied, they apply the same force but are able to move a greater load.</div><div><br /></div><div>So if F0 is the force to move an empty cart, and W0 work done to move an empty cart and the trip length is 's', then W0=F0.s for the outward trip, whilst if F1 is the force to move a full container, then W1=F1.s is the work done to move the full container. The total work done for a single round trip is W=W0+W1=F0.s+F1.s=(F0+F1).s, the total work done in a day was 2 round trips so Wt=2.W, but with the help of technology it reduces to a single round trip and Wt=W. {NB: If F0=F1, then W=2W1=2F1.s=F1(2s), and Wt=2W1=2(F1.2s)=F1(4s), that F0<>F1 is therefore significant.}</div><div><br /></div><div>Noting that for the original method, the total distance travelled in a day was (2*2s=4s), whilst with the new method it is reduced to (1*2s). Also since speed has not changed and force not changed then Power, P=F.v has not changed. Not working harder, just spending less time working and therefore total energy use reduced (W=P.t).</div><div><br /></div><div>Generally don't want to change the power. Consider recommended fuel intake is 8700 kJ, if don't gain or loose weight, then rate of energy usage is approximately 100 W, but at 25% efficiency then external work is at approximately 25 W. But from bicycling science book, can expect to sustain a power of 74.6 W for long periods, but to do so would require more fuel than the recommended daily input. We can therefore assume that work less than 25 W is easy work, whilst that above 74.6 W is hard work, and hard work requires increased fuel supply.</div><div><br /></div><div>Now the mechanics of walking and pushing carts is complicated so I don't know the actual magnitude of forces involved. But for simplicity I will just convert the assumed 10kg pull force into Newtons, 10*9.81 = 98.1N. And assuming a 5000m trip W=98.1*5000 = 490500 J = 490.5 kJ. The human engine is about 25% efficient therefore need 490.5/0.25 = 1962 kJ of fuel (food energy), or 1962/4.18 = 469.4kcal (Calories) for the return trip moving the water, 1962/8700 = 0.23 or 23% of daily intake. Less would be required for the outward trip with the empty container. The trip takes 1 hour so P=W/t=490.5*1000/3600 = 136W whilst fuel consumption is 1962*1000/3600 = 545 W, or 469.4/60 = 7.82 kcal/min. As the power exceeds both 25W and 74.6 W, can say that shifting water is hard work, but can be made easier by travelling at less than 5km/h, which is viable if have fewer trips to make each day.</div><div><br /></div><div>From other data walking at 5km/h, uses 280 W (J/s), this expect to take 1 hour, therefore energy use (fuel) is 280*60*60/1000 = 1008 kJ, or 1008/4.18 = 241.1kcal. Since this is walking without any additional load, the above calculation for walking with a load is probably correct order of magnitude.</div><div><br /></div><div>Still another approach is using metabolic equivalents MET's from the compendium of physical activity. So looking at similar activities pulling a rickshaw requires 6.3 MET's, climbing hills with 21 to 42lb load is 8.3 MET's, or walking, 2.9 to 3.5 mph, uphill, 1 to 5% grade 5.3 MET's. Walking with baby stroller 4 MET's, or farming, hauling water for animals, general hauling water is 4.3 MET's. So our needs something between 4 MET's and 8.3 MET's depending on the terrain. Now chances are these are not calibrated for children, however will use anyway as just estimating. So for the 10 year old at 24kg weight, we get 4*3.5*24/200 = 1.7 kcal/min, and 1.7*60 = 102 kcal which seems low compared to other calculations. So try 8.3*3.5*24/200 = 3.5 kcal/min and 3.5*60 = 210 kcal. It would seem MET's under estimate the fuel energy requirement, however some guidelines are provided to make corrections for various parameters. {Also I'm doubtful that all the activities come from actual measurements or detailed assessment of the specific activity listed.}</div><div><br /></div><div>Now some women at the local gym on the Airdyne bike (arms and legs) can burn 10 kcal in 10 seconds, or 1kcal/s or 4180 W, as most gym equipment use calories for estimates of food energy and the Watt meter for useful external work and few people pay attention to the Watt meter, will just have to use the 25% rule, and so the useful external work is 1045 W or 1 kW, but this is only sustained for 10 seconds. A small engine on the other hand could output such power all day, as long as it has fuel.</div><div><br /></div><div>A bicycle is typically about 4 times faster than walking, so the walking speed 5 km/h is increased to cycling speed of 20km/h, and so the 5km trip reduced from 1 hour to 15 minutes, saving more time, at least on the outward trip. The ordinary exercise bike at the gym, indicates my dodgy heart can sustain between 100W and 180W for 30 minutes, and travel anything from 15km to 20km, depending on the day, so speed varying between 30km/h and 40km/h. So if the trip is suitable for bicycle or tricycle then the time for the outward trip can be significantly reduced, the homeward trip with the water will be slower, noting that above estimate requires 136W just to move the water, with no reference to power to move person, moving at higher speed will need more power and will also have additional power requirements due to increased air/wind resistance. By comparison an electric cargo bike is typically powered at 250W with maximum cargo of 100kg or less, with rider of 100kg, so an ebike could help with the task, if had the infrastructure to charge the bikes battery.</div><div><br /></div><h3 style="text-align: left;">School Experiment</h3><div>It suggests a potential school experiment. Use fitness tracker to measure Calories (kcal) for walking a reasonable distance (100 to 200m) without any load, then walk the same distance carrying increasing amounts of water, and produce a graph of litres carried against calories burned. Increase the water by 5 to 10 litres at a time, use a container which carry in a back pack or otherwise suitable for carrying in arms in front. The results should show that as the volume of water increases the calories burned increases. Also as the weight increases the travel speed decreases, until weight is too heavy to move, or distance can carry significantly reduced.</div><div><br /></div><div>Then do the experiment with a roller container, or a container and some form of wheeled trolley. Again make several trips with different volumes of water and measure calories burned. Again increasing volume of water should burn more calories as more force is required to move heavier weights. Plot the two curves on the same chart. For any given volume less calories should be required by using the wheels compared to carrying.</div></div><div><br /></div><div><hr />References & Further Reading:</div><div><ul style="text-align: left;"><li><a href="https://www.who.int/teams/environment-climate-change-and-health/water-sanitation-and-health/environmental-health-in-emergencies/humanitarian-emergencies">Water Sanitation and Health</a></li><li><a href="https://www.unicef.org/stories/10-things-you-didnt-know-about-water">10 things you didn't know about water</a></li><li><a href="https://www.unicef.org/press-releases/unicef-collecting-water-often-colossal-waste-time-women-and-girls">UNICEF: Collecting water is often a colossal waste of time for women and girls</a></li><li><a href="https://www.unicef.org/wash/water-scarcity">Water scarcity: Addressing the growing lack of available water to meet children’s needs.</a></li><li><a href="https://www.worldvision.org/clean-water-news-stories/compare-walk-for-water-cheru-kamama">Water within reach: Compare two 5-year-olds’ walk for water</a></li><li><br /></li><li><a href="https://www.ccohs.ca/oshanswers/ergonomics/push2.html">Pushing and Pulling - Handcarts</a></li><li><br /></li><li><a href="https://sites.google.com/site/compendiumofphysicalactivities/home">Compendium of Physical Activities</a></li><li><a href="https://journals.lww.com/acsm-healthfitness/fulltext/2020/05000/metabolic_calculations_in_action__part_1.5.aspx">Metabolic Calculations in Action: Part 1</a></li><li><a href="https://journals.lww.com/acsm-healthfitness/Fulltext/2020/07000/Metabolic_Calculations_in_Action_Part_2.4.aspx">Metabolic Calculations in Action Part 2</a></li><li><a href="https://journals.lww.com/acsm-healthfitness/Fulltext/2014/05000/Determining_the_I__Intensity__for_a_FITT_VP.4.aspx">Determining the I (Intensity) for a FITT-VP Aerobic Exercise Prescription</a></li><li><a href="http://bodytransform.co/Blog/Power+output+during+exercise.html">Power output during exercise</a></li><li><br /></li><li><a href="https://kids.britannica.com/students/article/wheel/277721">wheel</a></li><li><a href="https://owlcation.com/stem/How-Do-Wheels-Work-The-Mechanics-of-Axles-and-Wheels">Simple Machines — How Do Wheels and Axles Work?</a></li><li><a href="https://energyeducation.ca/encyclopedia/Wheel_and_axle">Wheel and axle</a></li><li>{NB: Not concerned with input and output of the machine. We are comparing two different techniques.}</li></ul></div><div><br /><hr />Related Posts:<br /></div><div><hr />Revisions: <br /> [(31/01/2023) 16:26] : Original<br /></div>Conrad Harrisonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11351972303793021889noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7659329.post-55167838751448489042023-01-31T15:56:00.001+10:302023-01-31T15:56:48.349+10:30Measuring Work<div><div>Read the following the other day: <a href="https://theconversation.com/women-work-harder-than-men-our-anthropological-study-reveals-why-196826">Women work harder than men – our anthropological study reveals why</a></div><div><br /></div><div><div>An interesting article, however it would have more value if it used a more relevant measure of work effort than counting footsteps. A count of 12,000 steps versus 9,000 steps is not an indicator of more work (1.33 times), nor harder work. As with time measurement foot step counting is a poor indicator of work effort.</div><div><br /></div><div>Also electronic foot step counters do not actually count foot steps, they have sensors which sense vibration, acceleration and movement, which is equated to a foot step. It is possible to be sat down but not still, and achieve a foot step count, it is also possible to be walking and get zero foot steps, they maybe fun but they are not reliable.</div><div><br /></div><div>Similarly fitness trackers estimates of heart rate and calories burned are based on lots of statistical wrangling and assumptions, two different brands of trackers are likely to give different results. The point of counting steps is to estimate distance based on averaged length of stride, even though the tracker is calibrated to the individuals stride, a persons stride is not constant and is likely to vary during a trip. A measuring wheel will provide a better measure of distance, or a map will provide a reasonable estimate. Basically a fitness tracker is just a wrist watch, measuring chunks of time and making assumptions about that time and calculating various things on the basis of assumptions about feedback from various sensors. Probably do as well with an ordinary wrist watch and do own calculations: point of tracker is it saves some effort and provides a more instantaneous result rather than at some time afterwards. It thus provides feedback allowing adjustment of behavior.</div><div><br /></div><div>Also a few months back I read an article by an health and fitness writer, she was discussing the issues of couples exercising together and the 10,000 step recommendation. Basically if they go for a walk together, and they have different strides, then if one achieves the 10,000 steps the other will either be behind on their step count or in front. Assume that an average stride is less than 1m, then 10,000 steps is a distance less than 10km. Average walking speed is typically taken as 5km/h or the slightly less 80m/min, additionally typically expect to change mode of movement from walking to jogging/running at around 7km/h.</div><div><br /></div><div>So assume a couple both complete a 5km trip in 1 hour, then on the face of it they are both walking at 5km/h. Except their strides are not the same, so similar situation to different diameter wheels, the smaller wheel has to do more revolutions per minute than the larger wheel. Say one has a stride of 1m and the other 0.8m, a ratio of 1.25. Then one has made 5000 steps, whilst the other has made 6250 steps, or 83 steps/min compared to 104 steps/min.</div><div><br /></div><div>So whilst completing the same external work, travelling 5km, the internal work of their bodies is different. Their elevated heart rates will be different, and the fuel each burns will be different. Do we also have a situation of one walking at 5km/h and the other running at 5km/h?</div><div><br /></div><div>So what do we measure as work, and is it the useful external work of importance or is it the internal work of our bodies we need to measure or both?</div><div><br /></div><div>Now in physics (mechanics), work done (energy) is the product of force(F) and distance(s) to give (W=F.s) and is measured in Joules(Nm=J). Whilst power is work done divided by time (P=W/t=F.s/t=F.v where v=s/t) and measured in Watts (J/s=W). Also friction force is the product of the force normal to the surface and a friction coefficient (F=mu.N), the normal force is typically the weight of the object in Newtons (Weight=m.g=m 9.81). The friction coefficient is typically less than one, therefore less force is required to slide something than to lift it off the ground. Also rolling resistance is typically less than sliding resistance, so even less force is required to push/pull something on wheels.</div><div><br /></div><div>Now the calories count on most trackers and gym equipment is an estimate of fuel used, not useful external work. The human body has an efficiency of around 25%, that is only 25% of the fuel used produces useful external work. So from the fitness tracker we can get calories, distance and time. We can estimate external work done (W) as 25% of the calories, we get velocity from distance and time, and can get an estimate of the force exerted from F=W/s, and power from P=W/t. The person with the higher force and the higher power is working harder. {NB; Working longer isn't considered working harder}</div><div><br /></div><div>Now would expect the heavier person to exert the higher force, since distance is constant for both people, therefore expect work done W=F.s to be higher, and the time is the same for each therefore P=W/t will be higher. </div><div><br /></div><div>Except the person with the shorter stride is doing a lot more internal work, a lot more leg movements, possibly higher heart rate, and therefore expect to be burning more calories, but not expecting a higher force, and as over all speed is the same, not expecting higher power P=F.v.</div><div><br /></div><div>But would expect similar power outputs only if smaller force is combined with higher speed. So would require looking at the mechanics of the activity in more detail, for example walking involves both vertical and horizontal movement, lifting an heavy body off the ground requires more force than lifting a lighter body, also sliding or rolling a heavy body requires more force than a lighter body. So who does burn the most calories for the task? Also who is operating closer to their maximum heart rate (MHR), as they would also be working their body harder.</div><div><br /></div><div>Also need to take into consideration the environment. I recollect reading a book which indicated that traditional Canadian lumberjacks, with an axe, burned some 10,000 Calories (kcal) per day. But this isn't from the work alone, this is mostly just being in the cold. So two people operating in different environments will be burning different amounts of calories.</div><div><br /></div><div>It is to be noted that sport, health and fitness have theories and equations to do some numbers on maximum heart rate (MHR) and calories. For example based on the various equations for MHR mine varies between 162.5 to 174.2 beats per minute. Exercise at about 90% of MHR is anaerobic metabolism, exercise is typically set around 65% to 85% of MHR. Would therefore expect work to be less than this as typically lasts for longer than exercise. MHR is dependent on age, with younger having higher MHR.</div><div><br /></div><div>Energy needs are typically based on base metabolic rate (BMR) or resting metabolic rate (RMR), the equations for BMR are dependent on gender, weight, height and age. Total daily energy expenditure (TDEE) is then determined by using a multiplier to account for level of activity. With females typically having a lower BMR than males, so if all other parameters are equal women need less energy. Further given required energy reduces with weight and height, and women typically lighter and shorter, then even less energy required. </div><div><br /></div><div>This suggests that calorie counting possibly no better than step counting, as expect females to count more steps and burn less fuel for the same task compared to males. On the other hand if males are typically heavier then the force required to shift their weight is greater, so W=25%C, where C is the calorie count, may give a valid estimate of work done, and then a valid estimate of force from F=W/s. This poses a different issue: heavier people have to do more work for a given task. Therefore need to measure the task by some value which is constant, such as travelling 5km, or moving 90 L of water. Also consider weight ratio's and various other ratio's which assist in an equitable comparison. For example an average fit person can generate about 3 Watts/kg for an hour, so the heavier they are the more power they can generate, but the more power they need to shift their weight. If weight has a negative impact on a task then the extra power may not be a benefit.</div><div><br /></div><div>As well as calculating MHR it is also possible to estimate VO2 max, which is a measure of peak oxygen consumption during activity, oxygen being required for combustion of food/fuel. This being measured in ml/kg/min, which for a given body weight can be converted to L/min, and kcal/min and Watts, from VO2 max, exercise levels, or in our case work, can be based on oxygen uptake reserve (VO2R). If concerned with exercise type work, then there are formulae available for walking, running, cycling, arm cycling, and stepping. For other activities can use metabolic equivalents MET's from the compendium of physical activity. Ironing clothes for example is 1.8 MET's, cooking and food preparation is 2 MET's. carpentry general workshop work is 3 MET's, walking at 3 mph (4.8km/h) with light load 4.5 MET's. </div><div><br /></div><div>So from activity sampling, and time measurement can get an assessment of daily energy requirements from calculated MET's. Again this is based on fuel, not useful external work, again can estimate useful work at 25%. Note that in calculating energy in kcal or kJ from MET's that an allowance is made for weight. So the heavier person is using more fuel.</div><div><br /></div><div>The sociologists work was with cultures in Asia, and one noticeable trait is that the males and females are typically not significantly different in height, breadth and weight: that is their basic skeletal frames are similar proportions. Any difference likely due to bone density and muscle mass, that is the males likely slightly heavier due to more muscle mass with stronger muscles wrapped around thicker heaver bones. So are the equations for BMR which vary by gender, valid for such culture? Males and females do have different body chemistry, but is it significant enough to alter BMR?</div><div><br /></div><div>It does appear that there is no simple single measure of work. Work needs to be defined by multiple characteristics, such as distance, time, weight, energy and power. Also need to reference external work, and the internal work of the human body. If internal work being considered, then MHR and VO2 max, and fuel energy used are also useful measures.</div><div><br /></div><div>However, hard work should be considered high force or high power, with duration also considered with respect to fatigue from work. Also working at a high percentage of MHR for longer durations may also be considered hard work.</div><div><br /></div><div>However, time alone does not equate to hard work, 20 hours work versus 8 hours does not make the longer duration hard work. Similarly more foot steps per day does not equate to more work or hard work.</div><div><br /></div><div>It does however seem that industrial engineering could benefit from the work of sports and fitness medicine, as can the design of human powered machines.</div></div></div><div><br /><hr />Related Posts<br /></div><div><hr />Revisions: <br /> [31/01/2023: 15:55] : Original<br /></div>Conrad Harrisonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11351972303793021889noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7659329.post-18322279473116171832022-03-23T17:50:00.000+10:302022-03-23T17:50:09.119+10:30Vote For Democracy Not Short Term Dictatorship<div><div>So South Australia just had a state election: Saturday 19 March 2022.</div><div><br /></div><div>The state government comprises of members of two houses, the house of assembly, and the legislative council, It does not comprise of half the members of one house. I contend that it is incorrect to refer to the dominant political party as the government.</div><div><br /></div><div>We have elected representatives of the people, distributed between a lower and upper house. from these representatives an executive council is selected to advise on the will of the government and execute the will of the government. The representatives are meant to determine the needs of the people. consider the constraints, reconcile conflicting requirements and debate the suitability of alternative solutions, so as to determine the will of the people. But this doesn't happen.</div><div><br /></div><div>Liberal has lost and Labor has won. How can that be? Before the current election the house of assembly comprised of members of the Liberal party and the Labor party. The house of assembly still comprises of members of the Liberal and Labour parties: so no real change to the government.</div><div><br /></div><div>Labor will blame Liberal for the current purported mess. They will proceed to dismantle systems implemented by the Liberals, and then proceed to implement their own systems. In a few years the population will get disenchanted and supposedly throw Labor out and put the Liberals back. The process of dismantling and implementing will start again. It is all extremely wasteful.</div><div><br /></div><div>Labour occupied the house of assembly at the same time as the Liberals, if the systems the Liberals wanted to implement were not in the best interests of the people then why didn't Labor stop them, right there and then? If they claim because they couldn't, then why not? If Liberals just out vote them and push policy through, then the Labor MP's were a waste of space, not required, just send them home, and don't pay them, Similarly the Liberal MP's are now a waste of space, so likewise send them home and don't pay them. </div><div><br /></div><div>That however is not how the system is meant to work. There is supposed to be real debate, we are not supposed to have a short term dictatorship. Such hijacking of the government, and dictatorship is a function of the political parties it is not part of the constitution, and I contend it is not an acceptable operation of our government. The journalists talk about the two party preferred. How can we have two party preferred? We clearly vote for multiple parties not just two. The problem we have is the two parties and a lack of diversity in the government and consequently lack of due and proper representation of the people. An election which merely changes which side of the floor, Labor and the Liberals, sit is a joke. These two political parties need kicking out off both houses of the government.</div><div><br /></div><div>The problem is the other political parties are generally not taken seriously as they only have a single idea, radical philosophies, stupid names or no policies. There is also a misconception that a party needs to have policies. We do not really need a government: we just need to approve transfer of funds from the treasury to the government departments and continue service as usual. The peoples representatives only need to be called upon to deal with exceptions, constraints, shortages, and emergencies. That is the government needs to be dynamically adaptive and respond to change. Therefore not interested in the policies, political parties have before an election, only interested in how they will respond to the circumstances they encounter.</div><div><br /></div><div>I suggest no political party should have more than 20% of the seats, so that we require at least 5 political parties to be voted into the government. <span style="color: red;">The members of the executive council can be selected from the lower and upper houses and across all political parties: because they all constitute the government and the executive councils task is merely to advise on the will of the government, and execute the will of the government. It is not the task of the executive council to impose its will on the government.</span></div><div><br /></div><div>But since we don't have a rule, just have to play the game. So can create 5 neutral political parties, say peoples representatives team 1 to 5, abbreviated to PR-T1 to PR-T5. The only policies these parties have is to maintain the status quo and implement change only if it is necessary and justified. The change being determined on an as needs basis. If all 5 parties get elected then funds are merely approved for transfer from the treasury to the government departments and operations continue as usual. They then get on with dealing with the exceptions.</div><div><br /></div><div>In the first instance the traditionalists will continue to vote for the party their ancestors voted for, and they will mostly do so with out thought, unlike their ancestors who choose sensibly. Those who swing between Labor and the Liberals shouldn't, this is what causes the inefficiency. It is better to pick a third party, if no suitable party then pick one of the neutral parties.</div><div><br /></div><div>When the Australian Democrats were around, their presence in the upper house, meant that neither of the two major parties dominated the upper house, and therefore a bill could not be passed unless the democrats were on side. The displacement of the democrats by the Greens, has changed things. The Greens have relatively radical uncompromising viewpoints with respect to the environment, they do not act as moderator.</div><div><br /></div><div>The purpose of the upper house is to interrogate a bill and determine if it truly is in the best interests of the people, that passing the bill into legislation truly reflects the will of the people. Or conclude that they are incapable of assessing the will of the people and that maybe a referendum needs to be held. If a referendum is required then we can conclude that the members of the houses are not true representatives of the people, and need to be replaced. At the same time it is also necessary to safeguard against the tyranny of the majority. If there is proper debate in the two houses, and actually operating with intent to determine the needs of the people and solve problems, then the potential for tyranny should be low.</div><div><br /></div><div>We don't get proper debate, instead we get two bickering sides. Neither side is competent at debate, or speech. To start with they don't write their own public speeches: marketing and public relations specialists write the speeches, so how can we expect them to contribute in any meaningful way to a debate. <span style="color: red;">The two houses are the battlefield and the weapons of war are words</span>. If there are 3 or more parties in each of the houses, then have many divergent viewpoints, but may avoid a bipolar split. With 5 parties in the house, then 3 parties are required to cooperate to achieve a majority vote. Thus either the 3 neutral parties, or 2 neutral parties and one major party cooperate to a achieve passing of a bill.</div><div><br /></div><div>It is to be noted that the members of the neutral parties should be specifically educated and trained to question and interrogate proposals put before them, and identify the flaws in the proposals. They are diplomats and excel at diplomacy. They are the monarchs of philosophy <i>(philosopher kings)</i>. They seek to solve problems not adopt ideology. It is thus possible for 5 or more such parties to be formed and to prove themselves before an election.</div><div><br /></div><div>We have open government, debates can be observed and they are recorded and reported. New political parties, non-government organisations (NGO) and lobby groups can be created, and they can publicly question and interrogate the decisions of the government. They can educate the population on the operation of our government and the flaws in its operation. The government can be held to account, the political parties can be held to account, and the peoples representatives can be held to account. The newly formed neutral political parties (NPP) can act as political commentators, and question the competence of the members of the two houses to provide due and proper representation of the people.</div><div><br /></div><div>Whilst it is good that anyone can be representative of the people, it doesn't mean that they have the capability to effectively represent the people. Such people maybe better off, finding appropriate skilled people and putting such people forward, whilst they themselves take a back seat.</div></div><div><br /></div><div>Point is political parties, cabinets and shadow cabinets do not have anything to do with the legal definition of our government. The political parties are simply sustained by their presence and the flawed reporting of journalists. I say flawed reporting because Labor may have won the election, but they are not the government, and Liberal was not the government before them. We should hold the government accountable and that means all political parties with members in the two houses.</div><div><br /></div><div>References:</div><hr /><div><div></div><div><ol style="text-align: left;"><li><a href="http://www.sahistorians.org.au/175/chronology/april/22-april-1857-responsible-government.shtml">22 April 1857 Responsible Government</a></li><li><a href="https://guides.slsa.sa.gov.au/c.php?g=410301&p=2794853">Electoral Rolls: History of Voting Eligibility</a></li><li><a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/about_parliament/parliamentary_departments/parliamentary_library/publications_Archive/online/milestones">Australia's Constitutional Milestones</a></li><li><a href="https://www.legislation.sa.gov.au/lz?path=%2FC%2FA%2FCONSTITUTION%20ACT%201934">Constitution Act 1934 | South Australian Legislation</a></li><li><a href="https://www.legislation.sa.gov.au/lz?path=%2FC%2FA%2FELECTORAL%20ACT%201985">Electoral Act 1985 | South Australian Legislation</a></li><li><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_South_Australia">Constitution of South Australia</a></li></ol></div></div><div><br /><hr />Related Posts<br /></div><div><hr />Revisions: <br /> [23/02/2022] : Original<br /></div>Conrad Harrisonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11351972303793021889noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7659329.post-1805721444717809982021-11-20T17:44:00.005+10:302021-11-21T18:13:31.554+10:30Ambiguous Mathematical Expressions Due to Deficiencies and Consequential Inconsistencies of Infix Notation<h2 style="text-align: left;">Introduction</h2><div>Recently I was searching for information on MS Access SQL to demonstrate that do not need MS Access to create and use MS Access databases, and in particular import text data. In the process of doing so I encountered various youtube videos which were on the wrong track, but finally found the information I was looking for here:<a href="https://www.mikesdotnetting.com/Article/67/Reading-Text-files-into-Access-with-ASP.NET"> Reading Text files into Access with ASP.NET</a>. This being part of a larger exercise in which I will explain why Python/Jupyter is no substitute for Excel/VBA, but is otherwise a useful additional tool.</div><div><br /></div><div>Any case whilst skimming the youtube videos I bumped into this nonsense:</div><div><br /></div><div><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wzchhbrqIBI">60÷5(7-5) = ? Mathematician Explains The Correct Answer - YouTube</a></div><div><br /></div><div>It is relative clear by clicking "SHOW MORE" that the article is not about mathematics but about marketing and sales of the merchandise listed. The author purports that the correct answer is 24, and presents expression trees to prove his answer. He does not parse the expression given according to the rules of BODMAS or PEMDAS, as these rules are irrelevant to expanding the ambiguous compressed expression into a properly formed mathematical expression.</div><div><br /></div><div>How a calculator parses such expression is entirely dependent on how the makers of the calculator interpret such expression and write their expression parser. The two calculators the author illustrates are google search and an android calculator, both of which are likely to use an expression parser written by google: therefore not two independent sources and thus bad science.</div><div><br /></div><div>The correct answer is that the expression is a poorly formed mathematical expression and has no single answer as a consequence. Depending on where you live, the work you do, and your past education, you may consider one answer is more desirable than another: but it does not make it correct. If I have to give a numerical answer to such defective expression then my preference is that the answer is 6 not 24.</div><div><br /></div><div>More generally we could write the expression has: A÷B(C-D). However since all the programming languages and computing environments I use do not accept the obelus '÷' , and only accept '/', it is also cumbersome using '÷', I will modify the expression to A/B(C-D), where it is assumed that '÷' and '/' have equivalent meaning. That is everything after '/' is not assumed to become a denominator. Also '*' is used for multiplication rather than 'x', though in some environments it is represented by a vertically centred dot<span style="background-color: white; color: #202122; font-family: "Nimbus Roman No9 L", "Times New Roman", Times, serif; font-size: 16.52px; white-space: nowrap;"> '∙'</span> however for simplicity of typing I will use '.'.</div><div><br /></div><h2 style="text-align: left;">Merely Insert a Missing Operator</h2><div>If you believe the expression is simply compressed by deleting an operator and all that is required is to insert such operator. Then would translate A÷B(C-D) into A÷B*(C-D) , then applying your preferred acronym, this further transforms into (A÷B)*(C-D) , and so get (60/5)*(7-5)=(12)*(2)=24.</div><div><br /></div><div>This would appear to come from the believe that () means multiply. I would contend that such believe is flawed.</div><div><br /></div><h2 style="text-align: left;">Rules of Compression</h2><div>However if you have more involved rules of compression then such answer is not acceptable. Now the rules of compression (laziness) I learned, not (BODMAS or PEMDAS), inform me I can express B*(C-D) as B(C-D). In compressing the expression in such manner the prefixed operand is bound to the contents of the brackets to create an immutable compound expression block, and it is this binding which implies multiplication between the prefix operand and the contents of the brackets. Where ever the brackets go, the prefix follows, that is B() cannot be broken apart: if the prefix operand is separated from the (), then the implied multiplication does not exist. This expression can be further reduced by setting E=(C-D), to give BE, and a step further by setting F=BE, because the block is immutable. Thus the expression collapses to A÷F or A/F. Thus F=5*(7-5) = 10, and A/F=60/10=6. This is otherwise equivalent to: A / (B*(C-D)), that is B() to retain the expression block becomes (B*()).</div><div><br /></div><div>Now if 24 is the desired answer, then the rules of compression I learned would require the expression be presented as (A÷B)(C-D) in the first place, and it was not. Note the operator which has been eliminated would lie between the two sets of brackets: ()*() compressed to ()(). Therefore the answer 24 is incompatible with the system of rules I learned, as it is not correctly compressed.</div><div><br /></div><div>It should be noted these rules do not have anything to do with BODMAS or PEMDAS, nor with commutation, association or distribution. The rules are simply a means of compressing formal expressions into a more compact form by eliminating operators, and defining expression blocks. This compression has to be removed before the acronym rules can be applied.</div><div><br /></div><div>I believe this concept of the expression blocks partially assists with the issues and conventions described in the following paper: <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/2972726?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents">Discussions: Relating to the Order of Operations in Algebra on JSTOR</a>. Today it maybe addressed by adding the concept of juxtaposition, and revising the acronym to PEJMDAS, however I don't believe this fully addresses the issues of compressed expressions and other shortcuts in notation. For example () do not mean multiply, only the binding of the prefixed operand implies multiplication: and the binding occurs by removing the operator.</div><div><br /></div><h2 style="text-align: left;">On Notation</h2><div>I don't recollect being taught anything about juxtaposition, and BODMAS was little needed after moved beyond basic arithmetic. For that matter I forgot what the 'O' stood for and typically considered it was 'of' and didn't know why it was there other than it possibly did connect brackets and multiplication and division. Given it apparently refers to 'orders', then its a very long time ago I ever referred to exponents as orders: as in by grade 12 it was history. Point is generally don't need the silly acronyms, as fundamental requirement is to clearly communicate intent.</div><div><br /></div><div>None of my text books used inline expressions using '/', so didn't have the problem of a/bc meaning a/(bc). With the increased use of computers, and calculators which accept algebraic expressions, there has apparently been an increase in the use of '/' in textbooks and a decrease in typeset expressions using horizontal lines to separate numerator from denominator. I generally expect reference books to present expressions in the following manner:</div><div><br /></div><div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-kcWuBaCeF-k/YZnL-KHTxwI/AAAAAAAABe4/KLu_KhN0HTkPvjkmA8exvNiP-Ex38JSpwCNcBGAsYHQ/s184/formula6.JPG" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="80" data-original-width="184" height="80" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-kcWuBaCeF-k/YZnL-KHTxwI/AAAAAAAABe4/KLu_KhN0HTkPvjkmA8exvNiP-Ex38JSpwCNcBGAsYHQ/s0/formula6.JPG" width="184" /></a></div><br /></div><div>However, I do not expect to write expressions like that myself, as my task is to evaluate the results and make decisions. It is not my task to communicate in detail how I go about reaching decisions, rather it is my task to outline the decision process and present the decision. In other words I don't have to show the expression at all. However, if I am deriving something for the first time, and need to explain my approach then I expect to present the required expressions. For routine design calculations, presenting such expressions is a waste of time and paper, as everyone involved is meant to know the requirements. Also people on the regulatory side of things are meant to be checking my conclusions not my calculations, if and only if we have a difference of opinion, does it become necessary for me to present my calculations in greater detail.</div><div><br /></div><div>Also, my generation, we wouldn't naturally write a/bc if we meant a/(bc), as we would assume it is ambiguous to others: even though we would expect that bc is a compound or bound expression which should not be split. That is if we intended (a/b) then we would write c(a/b), not (a/b)c, this is not because I consider the latter invalid, as expect such results when manipulating expressions, it is just convention to prefix the () with a single operand, not postfix.</div><div><br /></div><div>The other issue with a/bc is whether or not 'bc' is a single variable name or two variables multiplied together. In mathematics and physics we tend to only use single character variable names, but in other areas, two or more characters are used for variable names {which off the top of my head I cannot remember any, but they tend to be from accounting and economics}.</div><div><br /></div><div>So if want to clarify that bc is two variables and not a single variable name, would use dots as multipliers, so would write something like a/b.c. Now have a problem because b.c is no longer a bound expression, and would most likely translate as (a/b).c</div><div><br /></div><div>When using programming languages, whilst most of the time we can use single character variables, it frequently becomes preferable to use multiple character names to help distinguish one variable from another. For example, σ is frequently used to represent stress and also standard deviation. So first problem is most programming languages do not support Greek characters, so would use the English name, 'sigma', now it doesn't make sense to use the name 'sigma' for everything, when we can equally well use the name 'stress' and 'stddev' to more properly distinguish the two variables.</div><div><br /></div><div>Another point is that subtraction is the inverse of addition and division is the inverse of multiplication. That multiplication is just a shortcut notation for repeated additions, and exponents are shortcut notation for repeated multiplications. So most expressions or standard formulae are based on addition and multiplication, and we substitute negative numbers and fractional numbers into such formulae.</div><div><br /></div><div>Expression1: A÷B(C-D) becomes A*(1/(B*(C+(-D))))</div><div><br /></div><div>and thus we seek shortcut notations, to compress such expressions.</div><div><br /></div><div>For those who seem to mindlessly and bombastically regurgitate the rules of PEMDAS, why for example would I need such a rule to evaluate 3+3<sup>2</sup> ? Why would I translate it into 3+3*3=(3+3)*3 ? Clearly I cannot add anything until I know the value of 3<sup>2</sup>. Similarly I cannot proceed with anything until I have evaluated the contents of brackets, and I cannot add products and quotients to anything until I evaluate them. It would seem that school book exercises are silly exercises in mindless application of silly rules, to deliberately misleading expressions. The poorest of education failing to explain the complexities of the real world.</div><div><br /></div><div style="text-align: center;">“Rules are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men.” - Douglas Bader</div><h2 style="text-align: left;">Other Notations</h2><div>Consider this usage in construction 2/M16-8.8/s bolts, or 2/90x45 F7 studs, in both instances the '/' means multiples of that which follows, except where it is just a separator of characters. Further more 90x45 is a compound expression, defining dimensions of a rectangular section. And '-' does not mean subtract, it is simply a separator of characters.</div><div><br /></div><div>Or another example: Buildex 12-14 x 20mm Hex Head Metal Tek Screws, in neither case are '-' and 'x' really arithmetic operators. It describes a Number 12 or #12 or No.12 screw, which is the gauge size of the screw and gives its diameter, whilst 14 concerns the thread, and gives the threads per inch and 20mm is the length.<i> {Wouldn't want to confuse anyone with consistency now would we?}</i></div><h2 style="text-align: left;">Deficiencies of Infix Notation</h2><div>Now the rules of mathematical expression we use are clearly inconsistent. We use infix notation for the arithmetic operators [*,/,+,-], but we do not use infix notation for other operations. For example what does sin() mean? Does it mean multiply the variables 's', 'i' and ''n' by the contents of the brackets, or is it an abbreviated function name for sine? And what about sinθ, and 2sin2θ, now have missing operators and missing function parameter brackets. Then there are rules for exponents, which also do not follow infix notation. The context and intent of the author of the expression needs to be understood. But such inconsistencies are not necessary.</div><h2 style="text-align: left;">Calculators</h2><div>When I was at school, the expectation was we would be taught how to use a slide rule, however when we arrived at that year they changed to teaching the use of calculators.</div><div><br /></div><div>The primary calculators chosen were supposedly algebraic logic calculators (AL), though there were two variants of such. I can't remember the difference between the two, though I believe it had to do with the inconsistencies of infix notation and how the calculators accepted input for those operations which do not follow infix rules: for example exponentiation, trigonometry and logarithmic functions and the likes were handled differently. There were recommended calculators, but these were not mandatory. So not all students had calculators which used the same system.</div><div><br /></div><div>I especially didn't as I used an HP RPN calculator. Use of this type of calculator was not being taught, but I was allowed to use, and I was responsible for learning so. It was common for students to argue about who had the better calculator on the basis of the number of levels of parentheses it allowed, the more the better. My calculator had zero parentheses. Besides this causing problems for people borrowing my calculator, there was also no equals sign, they would go away and come back a few minutes later asking where the '=' was. I would explain there wasn't any, and that would cause confusion</div><div><br /></div><div>It is also interesting to note that HP handbooks explained the use of the 4 register stack (XYZT) which it used, whilst handbooks for other calculators did not explain the operation of their 2 register stack (XY) which they used. It is the operation of the stack which removes the need for parentheses and '='. </div><div><br /></div><div>Calculators which allowed algebraic expressions were not available, so all calculations required transforming expressions prior to input to the calculator. So calculators did not give the incorrect answer for an algebraic expression the user of the calculator transformed the expression incorrectly, with respect to their local conventions.</div><div><br /></div><div>I don't currently have access to an operational HP calculator. However the computer based calculator Calc98 can be operated in RPN mode. To use such a calculator each number has to be entered onto the stack using the 'ENTER' key, to keep the notation simple I will just use ',' to separate the numbers, also Calc98 has a 10 element stack.</div><div><br /></div><div>Expression1: 60,5,7,5 -*/ gives 6</div><div>Expression2: 60,5 / 7,5 - * gives 24</div><div><br /></div><div>An alternative notation would be to reverse the prefix notation of the programming language LISP. Now I've never been able to install and get common LISP working on my computer, so I cannot run the expressions in a simple LISP environment, I do however have IntelliCAD LISP available, so I could check the following two expressions.</div><div><br /></div><div>Expression1: (/ 60 (* 5 (- 7 5))) gives 6</div><div>Expression2: (* (/ 60 5) (- 7 5)) gives 24</div><div><br /></div><div>and reversed</div><div><br /></div><div><div>Expression1: (60 ( 5 (7 5 -) *) /) gives 6</div><div>Expression2: ((60 5 /) (7 5 -) *) gives 24</div><div><br /></div><div>However with a traditional HP RPN calculator it is likely necessary to use an X and Y register swap function, which I will simply call xy. This is required as the numbers have to be keyed in order, and the stack is limited in size.</div><div><br /></div><div><div>Expression1: ((( (7 5 -) 5 *) 60 xy) /) gives 6</div><div>Expression2: not required ? <i>{checked with HP21 simulator on android phone}</i></div></div><div><br /></div><div>Whilst LISP is an abbreviation of List Processing, it is commonly derogatorily referred to as: lost in stupid parentheses. Depending on how the notation is used for prefix or postfix notation the expression may have zero parentheses or be drowning in them. However the notation is generally consistent: there is no alternative notation for functions or exponents.</div><div><br /></div><div>On the other hand whilst it provides consistency it is probably cumbersome to use, but maybe not once it becomes second nature. RPN does seem more natural when just doing simple calculations. Natural in terms of start with some numbers which then need to be operated on in some manner to produce the desired result.</div><div><br /></div><div>Expression3: 100[apples/barrel], 50[barrels] * gives 5000 [apples]</div><h2 style="text-align: left;">Programming Languages and Computing Environments</h2><div>So I took a look at the various computing environments and programming languages I use, though I ignored compiled languages and only used interpreted languages. I didn't really need to, I was fairly certain before hand that all the languages would not allow the original expression: A÷B(C-D) nor allow the modified expression: A/B(C-D).</div></div><blockquote style="border: none; margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; padding: 0px; text-align: left;"><div style="text-align: left;"><ol style="text-align: left;"><li>ATCalc : invalid expression</li><li>Freemat: invalid expression</li><li>Scilab: invalid expression</li><li>Python : invalid expression</li><li>MS Excel: invalid expression</li></ol></div></blockquote><p> All of these required the missing operator to be supplied before they would accept the expression, and therefore the expression is considered ambiguous and needs to be clarified by the user. Thus need to chose whether intent is: A/(B*(D-C)) or (A/B)*(D-C).</p><p>The <b>VBA </b>editor attached to MS Excel was interesting. If type ? A/B(C-D) into the immediate window, it returns 12 and 2. If create a program module, and add subroutine and type debug.print A/B(C-D), then this is modified to debug.print A/B; (C-D). In other words, autocomplete assumes it is two separate expressions. If attempt to assign the expression to a variable then get a syntax error, a properly formed expression is required.</p><p>Using windows scripting host (WSH) and <b>vbscript</b>, the expression is also identified as an error. I was unable to test <b>JScript </b>as the engine appears to be no longer available on my machine. Tests in <b>Powershell </b>flag the expression as invalid.</p><p>In other words to the authors of such software the expression is an incomplete and ambiguous statement. Simply stuffing an '*' operator into the expression before the opening brackets is unlikely to give everybody the desired result.</p><p><b>Speedcrunch </b>was the only application tested, which did not flag the missing operator as an error. However it calculated 60/5(7-5) as 60/(5*(7-5)) = 6: works for me, but not for those who expect otherwise.</p><div><div>Now <b>SMath </b>is different. It simply won't allow the original expression to be written, it has to be translated by the user, and gets presented in more traditional typeset notation. As soon as type '(' after '5' it inserts a multiplication symbol, which it displays as '.' {actually a vertically centred dot} , whilst otherwise requires '*' to be typed to use multiplication. As soon as type '/' it creates a quotient with numerator and denominator. So 5(7-5) becomes the denominator, 5.(7-5)=10, and the over all result becomes 6. The user has to translate the expression, to clarify their intent. If after typing 60/5, move the cursor and type '(', it simply wraps 60/5 in brackets, thus get (60/5), if type again will get ((60/5)). To move on it is necessary to provide the missing operator, '*' then '('. Then we can get (60/5)*(7-5)=24.</div><div><br /></div><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-9kcqpoiZuA4/YZnj9cFT__I/AAAAAAAABfA/2sNy6vs9Zq4mG_jZAFFBShKFNpz5ZNGxQCNcBGAsYHQ/s608/dissentExpression.png" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="477" data-original-width="608" height="314" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-9kcqpoiZuA4/YZnj9cFT__I/AAAAAAAABfA/2sNy6vs9Zq4mG_jZAFFBShKFNpz5ZNGxQCNcBGAsYHQ/w400-h314/dissentExpression.png" width="400" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Experiments using SMath</td></tr></tbody></table><br /><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div>The gist is that the tools I use would basically require the formula be translated, and I would start by informing the person who provided such expression that it is ambiguous and require them to clarify their intent. For that matter depending on the source of an expression, I wouldn't even rely on BODMAS being universally understood throughout our community, and would request the supplier to clarify their intent by use of brackets. Once intent has been communicated then I, we can be lazy and remove redundant brackets to calculate the desired value.</div><h2 style="text-align: left;">Other Environments</h2><div>As mentioned near the beginning google search and the calculator on android can evaluate the expression: 60÷5(7-5) and return the value 24. An answer which is only acceptable to some. It is also advised that wolfram alpha can also understand the compressed expression and returns 24. This doesn't make the answer correct, it just means the authors of the software have adopted one means of translating the compressed expression. Wolfram appropriately explains its interpretation of various algebraic expressions as it otherwise returns unusual and unexpected results.</div><div><br /></div><div>It is fundamental to human machine interface design, that the machine augments human ability and assists avoidance of errors. Clearly if software returns a result which is not expected and have to adapt human behaviour to suit the software then the software is an hinderance and impedes human ability rather than assists, and further more the software contributes to the generation of errors.</div><div><br /></div><div>It is thus likely that wolfram software is little used in some areas for reasons other than its high price, if it does not produce commonly expected results. If to use the software people have to adjust their behaviour to how the software works, then there is a danger that when people are under pressure that they will revert to that which is most natural and produce serious errors.</div><h2 style="text-align: left;">Expression Parsers</h2><div>I don't know much about parsing expressions, other than a little bit I read in a book on an introduction to programming in C, and some computer science books using Pascal. Basically behind the scenes the parsers use one or more stacks. A stack of numbers and a stack of operators. So as the string expression is read from left to right, numbers are pushed on the stack and operators on the other, if the stack has enough numbers for the operator, then numbers and operators can be popped from the stack, the calculation performed and the result returned to the stack. Since stacks can be used to parse trees, the mathematical expression can be represented by an expression tree. However it isn't necessary for the parser to transform the string expression to a tree, and then process the tree with a stack if it can process it directly with a stack. In effect the parser transforms the infix expression into an RPN expression and evaluates.</div><div><br /></div><div>Now infix notation for the arithmetic operations [*/+-] have some level of consistency, the introduction of all the inconsistencies of our actual notation makes the parsing of the expression vastly more complicated. </div><div><br /></div><div>The point is someone has to design and implement an expression parser, and some expressions are easier to parse than others, and similarly convert and evaluate a result. But first of all they have to decide on a consistent set of rules. Most programming languages do not allow compressed expressions, all operators have to be explicitly given: this thus requires the user of clarify their intent, whilst otherwise simplifying the rules the parser has to implement.</div><div><br /></div><div>The real world is messy.</div><div><br /></div>
<div><hr />Additional References<hr /></div><div><ol style="text-align: left;"><li><a href="https://plus.maths.org/content/pemdas-paradox">The PEMDAS Paradox</a> or <a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/14h-WlVcvsj2fugDaJQUWXX6Mv5d0Wla4/view">The longer paper:</a> </li><li><a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/2972726?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents">Discussions: Relating to the Order of Operations in Algebra on JSTOR</a></li><li>Wolfram Math world : <a href="https://mathworld.wolfram.com/Solidus.html">Solidus</a></li><li><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lLCDca6dYpA">PEMDAS is wrong</a></li><li><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4x-BcYCiKCk">The Problem with PEMDAS: Why Calculators Disagree</a></li><li><a href="https://www.teachwire.net/news/why-its-time-for-maths-teachers-to-bin-bodmas">Why it’s time for maths teachers to bin BODMAS</a></li><li><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EfJCbRqypcU">DIE PEMDAS DIE - The Problem with PEMDAS - Wednesday's Why Episode 8</a></li><li><a href="https://math.berkeley.edu/~gbergman/misc/numbers/ord_ops.html">Order of arithmetic operations; in particular, the 48/2(9+3) question.</a></li></ol></div><div><br /></div><hr />Related Posts<br /></div><div><hr />Revisions: <br /> [(20/11/2021) 17:41] : Original<br /></div><div>[(21/11/2021) 01:27] : Expanded</div><div>[(21/11/2021) 18:12] : Expanded/Rewrote + further references</div>Conrad Harrisonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11351972303793021889noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7659329.post-36156143301406131662020-04-01T14:23:00.000+10:302020-04-02T14:09:42.709+10:30Tracking Coronavirus<div>
Apparently the reason we applied restrictions nationwide is because we cannot track the coronavirus: the horse has bolted and we don't know where it is. In that case I'm guessing the numbers behind the W.H.O world dashboard is pure fiction.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
As I already mentioned, the purported point of origin of the contagion is China, and the only way it can enter any other country is through discrete points of entry: border crossings, airports and (sea)ports. Entry involves, passports, visa's, tickets, boarding passes, passenger lists.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
From all this entry documentation we can identify the suburbs returning residents are returning to, and do so for several months prior to the outbreak. We can identify tourists destinations. Each of these destinations become a point on a map, connected to the points of entry. Along each road network towards these destinations are public facilities. Each facility as a radial reach, for example supermarkets typically at 1 km to 2 km centres so the radial reach is 0.5 km to 1 km. Some larger facilities have radial reach of 5 km, whilst the larger shopping precincts have a reach of 25 km or more.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
But assuming its too late to track passengers, or don't have passenger data to do so, and that we don't know the radial reach of public spaces. Are we completely in the dark? No we're not.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
We still have the points of origin: the airports, (sea)ports, and border crossings, and we have the hospitals where the infected are being treated, and we have the suburbs where the infected live. So using a map, pins and highlighters we can mark up a map. Using a geographical information system (GIS) we can build larger models faster.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
We can make assumptions. Say 1 km radial reach, 5 km radial reach and 25 km radial reach. For each of these reaches we define zones, red, orange and yellow. So for any infection point we can plot circular zones around that point, though once we have several points we can generate Delaney triangles and voronoi polygons.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
So the points of entry are in the red zone, and the hospitals are placed in the red zone, and so are the suburbs with the infections. The paths between the points of entry and the infected suburbs are in the orange zone until infections identified in the zones. The paths between the infected suburbs and the hospitals are in the red zone.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
No one is permitted to exit the red zone. So medical staff and hospital visitors are not permitted to return home, unless there is a contiguous red zone between their home and the hospital. In the red zone people are confined to their home, unless travelling to the hospital. In the orange zone, have the 2 person meeting restriction, in the yellow zone the 10 person limit. Outside the zone's simple social distancing requirements and increased area requirements at gatherings. No one outside the zones is permitted to enter the zone, no one inside the zones is permitted to exit.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
As each new infection is identified, the suburb and 1 km radius of its centre is placed in the red zone. Each shop and public place in the suburb is identified and a 1 km radius red zone is placed around such facility.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
On the ground the state police, federal police and the defence forces and defence force reserves can block the surrounding roads in and out of the zones. In some locations the road can be blocked with a shipping container.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
It should not be necessary to shut down business across the nation of any kind. A pandemic isn't something to worry more about than an epidemic. Once an epidemic is identified in one country, it becomes necessary to lock nation borders to prevent the spread becoming a pandemic. Once located an infection in a country, it is then necessary to lock that area down to prevent the spread becoming a national epidemic. Since it is reaching epidemic status across all countries can only assume that each nation's response has been too late, and their response inappropriate and inadequate. That is they have failed to contain the contagion to the known points of origin. The known points of origin being the actual identification of infected persons and the suburbs they live in.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Not to put too fine a point on it, but I expect every hospital, clinic, and GP, if not every individual doctor, to map the location of every patient, and to otherwise monitor and track clusters of illness, as it is part of the task of identifying cause.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
What we currently have is national panic about something which has only sprung up in a few suburbs. Sure if I plot 50 km diameter circles on the points of infection I will engulf the entire metro area, and if do so with tourist destinations will engulf large regional areas. But it doesn't engulf the entire state. Sure 2/3rd's of population in the metro area, but that leaves 1/3rd of population in rural and mining towns who should be able to get on with business as usual, with some precautionary measures.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
If we can home in on the infected suburbs, then we can keep most of industry operational and provide the goods which the quarantined are going to need. Instead we have had wide spread panic, people hoarding, shop shelves emptied and industry shut down. With industry shutdown, the shelves cannot be restocked, because they are not being produced, so doesn't matter if shop can stay open, and people are permitted to go to the shops.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
That should not have happened. Employers know where their employees live, they know where the business is located. People in the infected suburbs get time off, and stay home, the rest continue work as usual. Some factories may have people working shoulder to shoulder, but most have workers 10 m or more apart. Offices may have people near enough shoulder to shoulder if work in a cube farm, but many are open plan with plenty of open space. School classrooms they have close proximity seating. Most places however have plenty of space for social distancing. Public transport and getting to work maybe the main problem. Reduced people on public transport and staggered work hours can assist with that.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Most business should have been and should still be operating with only minor changes to their operating procedures. The only businesses which should have some problems are those with personnel actually infected by the virus. But every business has been affected because the government and mass media has effectively declared everyone to be a carrier, when that is not the case.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
If we properly tracked the spread, we could all move on. Noting I already said in previous post, that we cannot get back to normal. Normal is what caused the problem, therefore we have to change behaviour moving forward. But we could move forward faster is we tracked the spread geographically and not just in numbers.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Don't really care about the numbers, want to know where it is. Its not at the end of the street, its not in the town, its something like 150 km away.<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
-o0o-</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
So later in the day (1/4/2020) I was informed about TV news report which mentioned differences between New York and Los Angeles, it therefore seemed that someone was looking at things a lot closer than simply country and state level. So I went looking for maps, and found the following:</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/ng-interactive/2020/apr/01/coronavirus-map-of-the-us-latest-cases-state-by-state">Coronavirus map of the US: latest cases state by state</a></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
Whilst the table below the map only lists totals for each state, the map is clearly identifying infections on a more local level. Having had success finding that map, I thought I see if could find map for Australia and more specific South Australia. Found the following:</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
</div>
<ol>
<li><a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/datablog/ng-interactive/2020/apr/01/coronavirus-cases-in-australia-map-confirmed-numbers-stats-how-many-cases-of-covid-19-nsw-maps-victoria-live-data-qld-sa-wa-tas-nt-act-latest-statistics-update"> Coronavirus in Australia: how many cases are there? Map, latest numbers and statistics</a></li>
<li><a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/datablog/2020/mar/27/australias-coronavirus-hotspots-revealed-map-shows-affluent-sydney-suburbs-hard-hit">Eastern Australia's coronavirus hotspots revealed: map shows affluent Sydney suburbs hard hit</a></li>
</ol>
<br />
<div style="text-align: left;">
One other issue is a few days back I held the view that there should be no way that the virus had reached the interior of Australia, so I checked cases for Alice Springs. Was disappointed to find that cases had been reported, and even more disappointing to discover that a large cause was tourists from interstate, in particular Queensland.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
</div>
<ol>
<li><a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-03-27/remote-nt-lockdowns-five-new-coronavirus-cases/12093206">Remote community lockdowns take effect as NT coronavirus cases increase to 12</a></li>
<li><a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-03-27/teaching-social-distancing-in-remote-communities-for-covid-19/12088700">Coronavirus misinformation in Indigenous communities tackled with 'corona cricket' game</a></li>
<li><a href="https://www.alicespringsnews.com.au/2020/03/15/coronavirus-strategies-in-the-bush-still-a-work-in-progress/">Coronavirus strategies in the bush still a work in progress</a></li>
</ol>
<div>
Clearly the state borders weren't locked fast enough. The maps of the NSW, VIC, QLD, indicate that virus is concentrated in the state capitals. As also expected concentrated in the more affluent areas. The regional infections I'll hazard a guess are due to people in mining and agriculture who have been on overseas business trips.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Where as if I had a map of South Australia (SA), I would be more inclined to reason that should there be any regional infections, then they are a consequence of people from the Adelaide metro area, travelling to the rural regions to raid the supermarkets. Why their local supermarkets aren't stocked is beyond me, other than some unwarranted immediate need for people to stock pile.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
At the moment the only regional infection in SA is in the Barossa Valley, the origin of which has been linked to foreign tourists (America and Switzerland). Since there is generally only one road into most of the remote towns, we should generally be able to lock people out off the towns, or otherwise lock people in them.</div>
</div>
<div>
<br />
<hr />
Related Posts</div>
<div>
<hr />
Revisions: <br />
[01/04/2020] : Original<br />
[02/04/2020] : Found Some Maps</div>
Conrad Harrisonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11351972303793021889noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7659329.post-11645340268617729482020-03-31T18:07:00.001+10:302020-03-31T18:07:29.068+10:30Coronavirus Time to Replan and Redesign Our Cities<div>
Everyone is talking about when we get back to normal. The answer is never. We should not be considering getting back to normal. Normal is what caused the spread of the coronavirus in the first place, we need to change our behaviour and part of that also requires changing the planning and design of our cities.<br />
<br />
As I mentioned in the previous post, ancient cities were fortress and walled cities. One thing about a walled city is that it is easier to keep people prisoner in the city than keep the enemy out. From which can surmise, and expand to the concept that it is easier to lock a population in than to lock them out, and thus for border control will always have problem of infiltration. Still in tackling the spread of a contagion like coronavirus, locking a population in, would be beneficial on condition that the population has access to appropriate goods and services with in its own walls. Our towns and cities don't. I've written previously about how bridges wreck the economies of cities, how an optional need for a bridge is transformed into a dependency on the bridge, as business redistributes either side of the bridge. I've argued how we need to directly protect diversity, not protect competition. That economy of scale has benefits, but we also need to avoid concentration of pollutants and dependency on single supplier. We need to known when to boost production to saturate basic need then to scale back and provide more diversity. Henry Ford was right that customer can have any colour they want as long as its black: that is the requirement to supply the basic need in the first instance. Once the basic need satisfied, then can start to get particular.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Any case as mentioned the governments want to increase population density as a consequence of their perspective on urban sprawl. Part of their perspective is that urban sprawl is a consequence of the car, I believe that whilst this is partially so, it is mostly nonsense. Business and architects have been building massive facilities, with reach stretching for kilometres. An office building in the city has people travelling 25 km daily, some even 100 km daily. I read one National Geographic article where a person was spending 4 hours or more each day travelling to some distant location to work. Basically houses affordable one end of country and work available at the other. It equates to poor city and national planning.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Sure part of the problem is workers themselves wanting dormitory suburbs devoid of industry, or at least devoid of the noise and pollution created by industry. But if there is no business of any kind in the suburbs, then the next generation has to travel a significant distance to search for employment: and that generally requires they have a car. How are school leavers going to afford a car? The people of the world aren't the kids in American high school movies, owning cars. Typical families cannot afford to buy cars for their kids, and jobs for kids to work after school hours or on weekends are very few. It is part of the pressure that have to do well in school and get a degree to get a good job.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
It would be preferable if we restricted the geographical reach of business facilities, and also the market share of business. As I mentioned in an earlier post, political parties should be restricted to no more than 20% of the seats, so that we can get back to due and proper representation of the people , instead of political parties hijacking our government and contending they have mandates. Afterwards I then extended this to business, restricting them to no more than 20% of the market, where market is defined on multiple levels. So whilst a supermarket may have less than 20% of the national market, when looked at locally it may hold 80% of the market, and so in a local market it may have to adjust.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
In the metro areas supermarkets and/or small shopping centres tend to be at 1 km to 2 km centres, and so are in easy walking distance. Though few people walk to them, and that is largely because here in South Australia footpaths are rare. Where there are footpaths there is a chance that the footpath suddenly comes to an end. People thus tend to spend a lot of their time in their cars, wasting fuel and time driving in circles until they can get a carpark as close as possible to a building. To make our cities walkable we first have to make our suburbs walkable. Things are already potentially in walking distance: it's just not convenient to do so.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
After my heart attack, I looked on google earth at places I lived when I was a kid, and the places I walked to, to get an idea of how far I could walk, and thus how far I still expect to be able to walk. When looking at places in England, it was apparent, that the construction of motorways, now made it next to impossible to walk the paths I once did. Civil engineers seem more interested in constructing mega-structures, bridges over bridges, than coming up with livable spaces. Here in South Australia, they seem bent on creating the same kind of mess. We may be able to halt that.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The towns and suburbs should be capable of being isolated. No point in referring to the city of Elizabeth or city of Tea Tree Gully (TTG), if all the suburbs making up these cities are otherwise identified as suburbs of Adelaide. Not the least of which is Elizabeth was supposed to be a satellite city: so by definition it should have remained isolated from Adelaide. Gawler is a rural town and it should also remain isolated from Adelaide. That is the grid of urban sprawl, of dormitory suburbs should not spread across the lad between the city centres. There should be clear boundaries between one local government (LG) area and the next.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The network of roads for cars should be more like the network of rails for trains, we should have more intermodal systems, with the ultimate part of the system being on foot and walking. I'm not suggesting get rid of vehicles being able to reach buildings for delivery. However not all buildings need access to large mechanised vehicles. Secondly the majority of items in a building have to be able to pass through a 900 mm wide door way or smaller. So tricycles and smaller mechanised vehicles can be used for transporting most things.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
So we can gate of roads for large vehicles, and only allowing access to small personal transporters. The large vehicles have to stop at the gates and be granted access. So for example in Adelaide, we could place carparks around the periphery of the parklands, and only allow human powered vehicles and small electric vehicles into the city. These carparks will also be where the buses also stop unless the buses are electric vehicles. The buses can have electronic passes so they can automatically open access gates.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
So in developing the means of limiting vehicle access we are also providing the means of locking the city or suburb up. The road network should provide clearly identifiable corridors between clearly identifiable towns: there should be no grid of roads spread out between the towns.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Increasing the population density of the capital cities is not the requirement. Clearly high population density increases the potential for the spread of a contagion like coronavirus, and it also increases the potential problems when confronted by other attacks by nature: bushfires, earthquakes, hurricanes (tropical cyclones <i>{don't drop the word tropical the entire weather system is dependent on cyclones and anticyclones}</i>).</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
A capital city is primarily expected to be a cultural, and administrative centre, not a place with a high resident population: but a place which is visited and likely infrequently. Population is preferably concentrated around those hubs which provide needed goods and services with in walking distance of homes.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Schools should be such that all housing within 1 km radius is restricted access and rent only, likewise housing around hospitals. The housing around large industrial facilities or commercial centres should also be rent only and access restricted to those working in the facilities. People are buying housing further and further a drift from their workplaces because they wish to, they are mostly doing so because they have no choice.<br />
<br />
Rent only restrictions, moves people in and out of the areas. For example by restricting access to housing in the vicinity of schools, the entire street network around the schools can be made walkable and cars have limited to no access to the area. Children can then walk to school, and otherwise have an environment which includes the school grounds for play outside school hours. The youngest children are placed closest to the school, and the oldest furthest from the school. In this way we don't have to keep building new schools. We only build new schools if we build a new village, town or city. A suburban block, should be built around a hub, either industrial, commercial, cultural, educational, or health focused. These suburban blocks should then be built around an administrative and retail hub.<br />
<br />
For example we can define a village as 1 km in diameter, a town as 5 km to 10 km in diameter, and a city as 100 km in diameter. A suburban block likely to be the size of a village (say 1 km x l km square), the central hub can be around 500 m square. In thus block can place around 5000 single storey dwellings. Each dwelling suitable for one person is suitable for two people and a small child. Thus the population can be extended to 15,000. If add second storey to the houses, then houses suitable for 2 adults and 2 children, so population can expand to 20,000. The highest population densities around the world are around 100, 000 person/sq.km. So with multi-storey buildings the population of the areas can be increased still further. Though I suggest we should put more effort into controlling population growth, not pushing the ideas of economic growth requiring larger populations.<br />
<br />
Cities are machines. To function and provide certain goods and services a certain population is needed <i>(the cogs which make the machine function)</i>. This does not mean that world population needs to grow, rather it requires the current world population to be in the right place. I've previously mentioned that if the land mass was to be divided into cells 5 km in diameter, then the world population could distribute 1000 people per cell. Those 1000 people need less than a 1 km square for housing. For simplicity assuming a 5 km square grid, it would put a 4 km ring between each village. That ring could be a nature reserve or agricultural land. Now I'm not suggesting we distribute the world population in such manner. Not the least of which is we can house a lot more people in each 5 km cell than 1000 people.<br />
<br />
What I am suggesting though is that a lot of facilities can be placed in a 500 m x 500 m hub, that activity can be made more local, and that localities can be isolated, yet connected. That the connections can be blocked, can be severed.<br />
<br />
As I mentioned in the previous post, the corinavirus should not have spread further than 1 km radius of the discrete entry points to each nation. When the epidemic was reported in China, then each nation should have responded to prevent a pandemic. When pandemic was declared then each nation needs respond to prevent a epidemic in their nation. Just because their is a pandemic does not mean there is a epidemic in your nation. For certain the horse had already bolted when the gate was closed. However as I said, we still have passenger lists to track returned locals, and the suburbs they returned to. Plus we have rough idea of tourist destinations. So using a geographical information system (GIS) we could track the local government (LG) areas which these returning individuals likely visited. We can lock down these LG areas.<br />
<br />
But assuming its got out off hand and its spread into the cities. We know its spread into the cities because the hospitals are dealing with cases. The hospitals have a radial reach. Their patients are arriving from known suburbs. Those suburbs have shopping centres and other public places. Each of these public places has a roughly known radial reach. So once again using a GIS we can map out the region most likely affected. Without any other information, we can assume various radial reaches for each facility. So we can mark a 1 km zone, a 5 km zone, and a 25 km zone. Each zone we give a hazard level, the closest to the point of origin has the highest hazard level, the most distant the lowest hazard level. As we identify people in the 1 km zone, we change from a point of origin to a path, and define the radial zones about this path. The path notionally defines a direction of travel, and the localities where resources need to be committed.<br />
<br />
At the moment we have a response which says its an epidemic: but its not all over the country, there is a good chance it will be if we handle it as if it already is spread far and wide. We did not need to shut down the national economy, to shutdown all public gatherings and all public businesses. They needed shutting down where the contagion was and is. We don't know where that is! Really! For certain there are people out there who maybe spreading the contagion without knowing it, but there also millions of people out there not spreading anything. But clearly its being spread where people are known to be infected. Is that your neighbourhood, chances are the answer is no. Does this mean you can ignore safeguards? No it doesn't! When restrictions are lifted does this mean you can go back to normal? No it doesn't! Normal got you into this situation in the first place, normal needs to change.<br />
<br />
Places are too crowded, and they are crowded because business is permitted to construct facilities to cater for large uncontrolled crowds of people from distant locations. For example there is no real need for people to shop in Adelaide, and there shouldn't be permitted to encourage people to chop in Adelaide. Forget about the never ending arguing about shopping hours every year, the reach of Rundle mall business should be restrained. People don't need to travel into the city, they should shop locally. If they shop locally it will reduce traffic congestion into the city, it will strengthen local community, and also reduce the potential spread of any future contagion beyond the city hub. Local shopping precincts need to be restored and enhanced, and should be within walking distance. Planning regulations should permit doing so.<br />
<br />
Planning regulations also need to be modified to better encourage home business. Currently most of South Australia's development plans restrict home business to an area of 30 sq.m. Which is an area of 5 m x 6m, which is approximately 2 x 6m shipping containers side by side. Which seems like plenty of space, but I suggest it may be preferable to define limitations based on area of land: which takes into consideration required parking areas for residents, employees and customers. Whilst parking areas shouldn't be based on area used by business but on predicted traffic levels. For most home business probably looking at no more than 1 customer vehicle per hour: maximum. For many probably in the range of 1 vehicle per month: with most activity occurring by post, fax, phone, email, or web site.<br />
<br />
There have already been complaints that local bricks and mortar business are loosing business to online business. The lock down for the cornavirus will result in increased use of online sales, which will likely increase demand for couriers. Noting that local business can use couriers to supply faster than Australia post. When the lock down is over, will there really be need to fill the offices and retail stores? If people can work from home, why not have them work from home all the time, and only meet up in person occasionally? That way only need to rent large office space for a meeting possibly once a month.<br />
<br />
Taking note that don't have to pay people by the hour, because really business is not buying time. Traditionally people got paid wages, if work was intermittent such as daily or weekly. People got paid salaries because, what they needed to do, and when it needed to be done was uncertain, so they got paid by the year. How many hours the workers work is largely irrelevant, what the workers accomplish is more relevant. If a worker completes their workload in half the time working from home, you don't pay them half the pay. Completing the work faster should be worth more, so the workers should get paid more for the work completed. Or otherwise spend less time working and get the same pay. Also if people working from home are more productive, then they can be fed more work. Though they are unlikely to want to maintain the same pace and effort throughout the year: so may experience a short term spike in productivity followed by a return to more sustainable production levels.<br />
<br />
Any case an increased use of the internet and online sales and online business, will see a reduced need for commercial/industrial building space, and an increase in residential renovations to create home business and work space. This will reduce traffic congestion, at the traditional peak times of the day. However there should be an upsurge in the need for couriers and small delivery vans taking goods to houses, and between houses. This should use far less fuel than all the commuters travelling back and forth to distant work places. Even though people may place orders at different times and different days, the suppliers can still optimise their delivery times and days and travel routes, so that delivering to the same street as few times ass possible. <i>(We used to have bread and milk delivered to the door stop. so its not that difficult).</i><br />
<br />
Most of our modern world is highly wasteful and inefficient. Cars and mobile phones mostly promote poor planning, incompetence and inefficiency. The supply of simple goods and services does not require human interaction, if you have to use a telephone to get information and complete a transaction then the suppliers supply systems are inefficient. If have to meet face to face, or in person, then highly inefficient. Human interaction maybe sociable, but its not efficient. How important is sociable to the supply, versus efficiency of supply? If efficiency of supplier is more important and should have higher priority, then should aim to eliminate people from the transaction process.<br />
<br />
<br />
... to be continued ...</div>
<div>
<br />
<hr />
Related Posts</div>
<div>
<hr />
Revisions: <br />
[31/03/2020] : Original</div>
Conrad Harrisonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11351972303793021889noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7659329.post-76125134340558840972020-03-26T17:00:00.000+10:302020-03-26T17:00:55.277+10:30Coronavirus: Unnecessary Panic and Shutdown<div>
Whilst coronavirus (COVID-19) can result in death, most people recover. More importantly the point of origin of the virus is purported to be China. The only way it can get to a neighbourhood near you is via a discrete point of entry to your country. That is it has to cross the border or coastline and whilst these are continuous the legal entry to a country is at discrete points, these being border crossings, airports and (sea)ports. At these controlled entry points, entry involves, passports, visa's, tickets and passenger lists. If everything is working well I don't expect anything to get beyond 1 km radius of such entry point. I expect it is possible to quarantine and shut everything down within 1 km radius of such entry point, and that systems exist and are already in place to be able to do so: part of the forward planning and management of borders.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Now occasionally something may get through the border controls, due to it either being not detectable or otherwise not being checked for in the first instance. In which case time passes and the gate is closed after the event. From the control documents for persons entering, we should know the point of destination for locals returning. We don't need to know who they are, all we need to know is the suburb they are returning to. From the suburb we get the local government authority district (LGAD) or council area, that the suburb is located. We only need shut down the local council area, not the nation, and not the state.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Further more from the point of entry, we know the path to get to the suburbs where the returning locals reside. Each public facility along that path also has a certain reach. For example supermarkets are typically at 1 km too 2 km centres: so they have a rough reach of 0.5 km to 1 km. Some larger facilities have a reach of 5 km, and the large shopping malls, plaza's and precincts have reach of 25 km or so. The state capital cities have reach across the state, but not every day of the week.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
So using a geographical information system (GIS) it should be possible to map out, a zone where the infection is likely to spread, and lock that region down. That is lock down local council areas, not the entire city, not the entire state and not the entire nation. To shutdown the entire nation, the national economy and cause national panic is irresponsible.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
With a local council area locked down, people within that council area can go about business as usual. Deliveries of goods and services can be made into the area, but not from the area, unless it supplies something not available from elsewhere. People living in the area, but working outside the area are confined to the area, and therefore cannot go to work, unless the job does not pose an issue. More over the local council areas in the infected zone which is locked down, will be neighbouring, so as long as can travel to work place with in the locked down zones, can travel between council areas.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
It is inconsiderate of people in the Adelaide metropolitan area to be traveling 100 km's or more into the remote rural towns and emptying the supermarket shelves. To start with the metro supermarkets must have incompetent management if they cannot keep the shelves full. The rural towns typically have low demand, and are typically unable to supply all the needs of the local population on a regular basis. It is somewhat akin to living on an island, with the ship coming in once a year, and stock up when the ship arrives. So city dwellers coming up and emptying our shelves is not appreciated. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Secondly, the point of origin of the infection, for the state is the metropolitan area. Some 2/3rd's of the Australian population is in the state capitals, and around 1/3rd of the population in the remote regions. The remote regions thus have the potential to keep on with business as usual and avoid infection, if infection is locked down in the metro areas. So the city dwellers shouldn't be spreading the infection into the rural towns.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
It is also to be noted that one theory is that 60% of the population needs to be infected for herd immunity to kick in. The 2/3rd's population in the cities is near enough the 60%, so locking the cities down and restricting traffic to the remote and rural regions seems like a reasonable imposition.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
It is lunacy that people 150 km or more from the nearest infected region have to comply with national restrictions, and social distancing. It is an unnecessary imposition and inconvenience, and excessive impact on the economy. The government should act to shut the panic down, not shut the economy or nation down.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
If we lock a suburb down, then the first issue will notice, is that most suburbs are worthless dormitory regions with no local services. If shut a local council area down, then will notice that there is also a lack of local services. So the question is why is there a lack of services? What kind of development and planning approval is taking place that large regions are devoid of local services.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Take the Yorke Peninsula for example, this is split into two major council areas: the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copper_Coast_Council">Copper Coast </a>(CC) council district (area: 773 sq.km, pop:14,139), and <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yorke_Peninsula_Council">Yorke Peninsula</a> (YP) council district (area: 5834 sq.km, pop:11,056). The largest commercial town in the area would be <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kadina,_South_Australia">Kadina</a> in the CC area, with a population of 4,857. So people in the YP area have to travel out of the area into the CC area for major shopping. Towns in the region are some 25 km apart with less than 1000 people, typically around 100 to 200 people. People expect to travel 25 km to 100 km to get their shopping done, as local stores don't have the local population to sustain stores with large variety of goods.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Whilst in the metro area there are supermarkets approximately every 1 km, servicing populations measured in 1000's. Major wholesale warehouses are in the metro area, most factories are in the metro areas, and the airports and seaports where imported goods arrive are part of the metro area. So why are metro supermarkets running out of goods?</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Sure there maybe a 24 hour to 48 hour delay if panic buying empties the shelves? But that should not generate an incentive for people in the metropolitan area to travel over 100 km to do grocery shopping when usually only travel 1 km to 5 km. Why panic buying in any case, and what's the great demand for toilet paper?</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Shouldn't be any panic buying. Admittedly once upon a time my parents got paid monthly, so got used to monthly shopping. Have pantry and fridge and freezer. Generally have a months supply of groceries in any case. Even so, there are still some things which have to buy weekly or fortnightly, very little if anything which need to buy daily. The fridge and freezer and cupboards have limited space. But there are only a few things which are perishable and do not last long even if kept in a refrigerator. Most of such perishable things you do not necessarily need. You wouldn't take perishable food stuffs on an expedition. You would take long life food stuffs: canned food, powdered and dried food stuffs. Food stuffs which do not require a fridge or freezer.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
No need to buy in bulk, nor a need to spend extra money if you can't afford to. Just change what you usually buy, buy fewer perishables and get some extra canned foods. Also no need to buy in bulk, just get an extra can or pack during each ordinary shopping day, and build up reserves slowly. That way industry can also slowly build up production, and both manufacturing, wholesale and retailers can keep stock in supply. Noting that some businesses are shutting down, as a consequence of unnecessary panic. Sure if know going into quarantine, may need to buy extra. Then again there are all those people who get in a panic when have long weekends, a mere extra day, so the prospect of a fortnight or month in quarantine, definitely not going to cope.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
As for the northern hemisphere, what's all this rubbish about isolation and keeping kids occupied? What do you normally do every single year during the winter months? As I recollect being a kid in England, walked to school in the wind, rain and snow: but during the school break trapped in doors. So travelling in bad weather accepted, but playing out in it, less acceptable. Point is being trapped in the house for days, weeks, or a few months is part of every year life: so shouldn't be an issue. Secondly hasn't everyone been complaining for years that kids spend too much time in doors, first complaints about reading, then watching TV, and these days playing video games or using social networking websites? So doubly, shouldn't be an issue.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
As for social distancing I would contend that people get too close to one another in public spaces in the first place, and that shaking hands is a relatively dumb trait <i>(mainly because I don't overly appreciate getting my hand crushed by halfwits who have read some junk pop psychology. Fools who will find out the hard way how wrong the psychology is.)</i>. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
-o0o-</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div>
So consider that our towns are poorly designed, as a consequence of becoming reliant on privately owned mechanised transport. There are calls to increase population density. The architects seem to have taken this as a need for more grandiose multi-storey buildings: which I contend is a mistake. As I have mentioned before urban sprawl is not created by the car, but by architects and their multi-storey buildings and other large facilities. These facilities draw a workforce from distant locations and supply to distant locations. That is these buildings have an unacceptable radial reach. It is a planning issue, to restrict the size of buildings in an area, and also to restrict their reach and catchment areas (hinterlands).</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
As far as I know part of the incentive for building codes stemmed from two major events: the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Fire_of_London">great fire of London</a> (<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">1666</span>) and the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Plague_of_London">great plague of London</a> (<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">1665 to 1666</span>), along with <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1854_Broad_Street_cholera_outbreak">cholera out break</a> of 1854. In both cases the primary problem was a lack of isolation and circulation between buildings. In the one case the problem was access to and around buildings to fight fires, in the other there was a lack of ventilation and air circulation. On the other hand the circulation and movement of people otherwise contributed to the spread of disease. Though any significant <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Building_code">building code</a> didn't eventuate until the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropolitan_Buildings_Office"> London Building Act 1844</a> : in other words slow to respond. (Not quite:<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rebuilding_of_London_Act_1666">Rebuilding of London Act 1666</a>, and <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rebuilding_of_London_Act_1670">Rebuilding of London Act 1670</a> ).</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Any case our historical fortress cities, and rural villages could for the most part be isolated and locked down, whilst modern sprawling suburbs are more difficult to lock down, and remote rural villages are a few hours drive away, not several days walk.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
I've mentioned before that whilst South Australia has many council regions, some of which are referred to has cities, the suburbs of these regions are all listed as suburbs of Adelaide. Our development act shouldn't just place limits on separation distances between buildings, it should also separate and keep separated the cities, the towns and the villages. There wasn't any point in building the satellite<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_of_Elizabeth"> City of Elizabeth</a> and then allow urban sprawl to join it to the Adelaide metropolitan area, nor for the rural town of <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gawler,_South_Australia">Gawler </a>to become increasingly connected into the metropolitan area. In all this urban sprawl market gardens have disappeared under housing. Agriculture seems to keep moving north, closer and closer to the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goyder%27s_Line">Goyder's Line</a>. It doesn't seem sensible.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
If we kept nature strips between villages, towns and cities, and minimised the number of connector roads between. Then they can be isolated more readily than sprawling suburban grids. More importantly each community has more localised facilities and is not dependent on modern technology. The car isn't entirely necessary. Trains can shift cargo, as can small trucks and vans.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
People are considered able to walk at about 5 km/hr and cycling considered to be about 4 times faster, so around 20 km/h. People already spend around 1 hour stuck in cars to travel less than 20 km. Whilst my contention is that an industrial city state should be 100 km diameter, a town 5 km to 10 km diameter, a village 1 km diameter, and estates 100 m diameter. All of which get isolated by nature strips. Assuming can travel for 5 hours each day, then can walk 25 km/day, or cycle 100 km/day. Travelling from the perimeter to the hub of a 5 km diameter town would thus be a 30 minute walk, and at the hub most of the needs can be bought. I find it strange that as a kid we used to walk 2 km to 4 km to do the weekly shopping using a shopping trolley, no car needed: whilst monthly shopping was a car trip to a distant supermarket to buy bulk items.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
If we restricted the reach of buildings, as far as it is practical to do so, then local communities would be stronger, and more resilient, and service quality would improve. Not the least of which the customer you upset lives at the end of your street, or at least in your local neighbourhood, not out of town.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
If we strengthen local business and protect diversity rather than competition, unemployment should reduce, and energy usage should also drop.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
It should also be noted that the response to a <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pandemic">pandemic </a>and <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epidemic">epidemic </a>is no different for a nation. About the only difference it makes is if the nation is dependent on imports for its survival, in which case it may have difficulty getting what it needs.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Now what we have with urban sprawl is increased potential for contact and transmission of contaminants of all kinds. With isolated communities, say villages within towns, and towns within cities, then have increased potential to isolated, and otherwise continue business as usual.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The layout of our cities is a mater of defence and security. The current response to a pandemic/epidemic has demonstrated a lack of security: bio-weapons can easily bring the worlds nations to their knees. The response is some what pathetic given that the majority of people infected with COVID-19 have recovered and will recover.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
As it is, here in SA we could put a barrier across <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_Wakefield_Road">Port Wakefield road</a>, and prevent those from the Adelaide metropolitan area travelling to the North West of the state. For that matter it is a major failing that infection has already spread to the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barossa_Valley">Barossa Valley</a> approximately 75.4 km from Adelaide, no way should it have been permitted for the virus to transmit more than 25 km from the centre of Adelaide. Whilst there are some long back ways to some places, for the most part there is one and only one way to get to most of the remote towns.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Locals returning from overseas, we should have been able to track their destinations. Tourists, shouldn't have been able to leave the proximity of airports and (sea)ports. For certain we have the problem of those people who left and dispersed before we knew we needed to track. But tourists mostly visit tourist destinations. So once again we have a few places we can lock down and isolate.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
There is no need to shut businesses down or pubic events. As I said we are some 150 km away from where the infected are. The doctors, dentists have gone into isolation. The local gym has shutdown.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
I understand why I just had an appointment with cardiologist over the telephone, instead of the appointment I originally had for face to face in Kadina. Normally the cardiologist travels from Adelaide all the way to Kadina, and I likewise have to travel around 50 km to up the Yorke Peninsula to Kadina. Adelaide is where the infections are, so we don't want people from Adelaide potentially spreading the infection to the north. But since we haven't got infections, I don't see why local dentists, gym and other facilities need close.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Not the least of which the gym is used by rehab patients, recovering from various conditions: heart attack, COPD, cancer, etc... Apparently my heart ejection fraction hasn't improved after 12 months at the gym, but neither has it deteriorated. The doctor wants to put me on more medication, and now I've got to find some other way to get exercise<i> (I'm a problem as I don't fit the text book solution: no high blood pressure, never smoked, don't drink, and as for being over weight everyone says BMI meaningless. Primarily thin as are most people in the rehab group, more a concern if we lost weight.)</i>. Going to the gym, was only reason not to be at home, and not to be working at computer. It is unnecessary to be closing specific types of business across the entire nation. Yet I am meant to go to the chemist and get the new medication (prescription being posted out), and then with in a or week go to local doctors to get blood tests.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Sure we don't know where the virus maybe, but we do know where it is, and where it can spread from. So unless it arrives in a neighbourhood near you, there is nothing to panic about, and even if it does arrive, and you get the thing, you are more likely to recover than die.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
As mentioned above rural towns are small, typically with one road through, if you blink whilst travelling then you might not notice the towns. These towns can be shut off, but there is no need to, because the infection has not reached that far, and it shouldn't because the metro area in the vicinity of the airport should be shut off.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
So there maybe people out there who do not yet know they have the virus, but once they do know, we shut off their neighbourhood. That could be a suburban block or a single street. From any individual we can identify friends and relatives they may have been in contact with, and so have additional neighbourhoods to monitor and/or shutdown. It maybe slow but it doesn't throw the population into turmoil and wreak havoc on the economy. We simply identify, trap and isolate the contamination and stop it spreading from a source. <span style="color: red;">If there ain't no source, it ain't gonna spread.</span></div>
<div>
<br />
Therefore there should be no need to shutdown where there is no existing source of infection.<br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>{I was interrupted 3 times and lost my track. The basic gist, is that the way our towns and cities are designed impacts on our capacity to isolate locally. The building blocks are too big, we should have smaller villages, within towns, and towns within cities.}</i></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<hr />
Additional Reading: (the stuff you ought to read)</div>
<div>
<br />
<ol>
<li><a href="https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/685d0ace521648f8a5beeeee1b9125cd">WHO COVID-19 dashboard</a></li>
<li><a href="https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/situation-reports/">Coronavirus disease (COVID-2019) situation reports</a></li>
<li><a href="https://www.health.gov.au/news/health-alerts/novel-coronavirus-2019-ncov-health-alert/coronavirus-covid-19-current-situation-and-case-numbers">Coronavirus (COVID-19) current situation and case numbers</a></li>
<li><a href="https://www.health.gov.au/news/health-alerts/novel-coronavirus-2019-ncov-health-alert/government-response-to-the-covid-19-outbreak">Government response to the COVID-19 outbreak | Australian Government Department of Health</a></li>
<li><a href="https://pursuit.unimelb.edu.au/articles/the-maths-and-ethics-of-minimising-covid-19-deaths">The maths and ethics of minimising COVID-19 deaths | Pursuit by The University of Melbourne</a></li>
<li><a href="http://imperial-college-covid19-npi-modelling-16-03-2020.pdf/">Imperial-College-COVID19-NPI-modelling-16-03-2020.pdf</a></li>
<li><a href="https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-what-is-herd-immunity">What is herd immunity?</a></li>
<li><a href="https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/2020/02/what-happens-to-coronavirus-covid-19-in-warmer-spring-temperatures/?cmpid=org=ngp::mc=crm-email::src=ngp::cmp=editorial::add=Travel_20200310&rid=7D596C2FEA98CCD0C224DFAA20ECCF95">Will warming spring temperatures slow the coronavirus outbreak?</a></li>
<li><a href="https://theconversation.com/view-from-the-hill-entertainment-venues-closed-in-draconian-measures-to-fight-the-virus-134360">View from The Hill: Entertainment venues closed in draconian measures to fight the virus</a></li>
</ol>
<div>
Architecture, Population Density, Housing and Climate</div>
<ol>
<li><a href="https://architectureau.com/articles/gen-y-demonstration-housing-project/">Density by stealth: A house for Gen Y</a></li>
<li><a href="https://architectureau.com/articles/housing-diversity-adapting-1-infrastructure-for-3-lives/">Housing Diversity: Adapting 1.0 Infrastructure for 3.0 Lives</a></li>
<li><a href="https://architectureau.com/articles/what-would-boyd-do/">What Would Boyd Do? A Small Homes Service for Today</a></li>
<li><a href="https://architectureau.com/articles/infrastructure-priorities-in-the-face-of-bushfire-floods-and-droughts/?utm_source=ArchitectureAU&utm_campaign=81f503e2dd-AAU_2020_02_28&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_e3604e2a4a-81f503e2dd-39644718&mc_cid=81f503e2dd&mc_eid=76689ab387">Infrastructure priorities in the face of bushfires, floods and droughts</a></li>
<li><a href="https://architectureau.com/articles/ethical-and-scientifically-sound-architectural-solutions-to-the-climate-crisis/?utm_source=ArchitectureAU&utm_campaign=6e6ac7dc19-AAU_2020_01_14&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_e3604e2a4a-6e6ac7dc19-39644718&mc_cid=6e6ac7dc19&mc_eid=76689ab387">Ethical and scientifically sound architectural solutions to the climate crisis</a></li>
<li><a href="https://architectureau.com/articles/public-spaces-bind-cities-together-what-happens-when-coronavirus-forces-us-apart/">Public spaces bind cities together. What happens when coronavirus forces us apart?</a></li>
<li><a href="https://architectureau.com/articles/outbreaks-like-coronavirus-start-in-and-spread-from-the-edges-of-cities/">Outbreaks like coronavirus start in and spread from the edges of cities</a></li>
</ol>
</div>
<div>
<hr />
Related Posts</div>
<div>
<hr />
Revisions: <br />
[26/03/2020] : Original</div>
Conrad Harrisonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11351972303793021889noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7659329.post-64355063420793292762020-03-13T17:52:00.001+10:302020-03-13T17:52:08.060+10:30Secure Identity using myGovID Flawed<div>
<div>
This seems like an extremely flawed and insecure system. First there is the arrogant view that it would be irresponsible not to update phone to new purported more secure system. But if security is an issue, then the requirement for the irresponsible behaviour of scanning identity documents and uploading them to be stored on some organisations servers, voids the benefit of the improved phone security. The system is not acceptable.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
In the traditional approach people took their identity documents to an agency and an officer viewed the real documents. The identity documents are typically on non-standard paper sizes, in colour and are embossed or have water marks. The documents were photocopied in black and white, typically producing a copy surrounded by waste paper, or a document split onto two sheets of paper. The copy was stamped with a red stamp with the word "COPY", it was signed and dated by the officer witnessing the real documents. The copy was in no way a substitute for the original, but it was token evidence that such original documents had been presented to an officer of the agency.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
With the introduction of colour photocopiers with memory store, it became increasingly viable to produce a replica document which could be used as a substitute for the original if not closely scrutinised. With scanners, wireless networking and roll form printers, preventing the creation of a substitute document became less and less viable. All the witnessing organisation requires is token evidence of having viewed the real documents: no colour photocopy/scan of the whole document is needed.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The system we have here with myGovID, is that a substitute document is used as proof of identity, and that is definitely not acceptable. Just needs someone to steal the substitute documents from say Paypal servers and upload to the ATO servers. Not a problem right, its secure. These systems are so secure that we have to upgrade our phones on a regular basis, because the secure systems are not as secure as they are purported to be. The systems are perfectly secure until the suppliers wish to sell the next piece of electronic junk.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
From memory the Australian population opposed the introduction of national identity number and photographic identity card, and the drivers license is only supposed to be used for traffic management. Same population goes out buys mobile phone (personal identity number), with GPS tracking and camera, plasters their identity all over the internet, and complains about privacy and theft of identity. So maybe the government could assume the population is naive and gullible. However, one phone one identity is not valid, as some families just have the one mobile phone. The phone is carried by who ever is away from home, so they can contact home.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
To get the phone need to provide name and address, at the very minimum so that can be billed for regular use. I don't recollect any need to provide proof of identity to buy. However suppose impose one phone one identity, then the proof of identity needs to occur at the point of sale. Sales people and retailers become responsible for verifying identities: seems an onerous imposition.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
If the MyGovID uses a scanned file uploaded to their servers, then just need to identify where the file is taken from and push the appropriate file into the transfer system. That is hacker steals identity documents from say Paypal, and pushes them to the ATO servers. However, supposing when scan an identity document with a mobile phone that no file is created on the phone and a data stream is sent direct to the ATO servers, where a file is created. So now the phones camera/scanner has to receive a document. Still don't need the original documents, only need the substitute documents which are seen at the other end of the communication channel. And if every naive organisation is requesting upload of identity documents then there is going to be plenty of servers to hack, from which to retrieve substitute documents. And identity is thus not secured.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
I don't have an issue with Australia Post offices which issue passports checking identity documents, but once again they should not be permitted to scan and retain substitute documents. Putting the word "COPY" on the scanned document is also not acceptable, as no means of knowing if that is simply a screen display or actual change to a file. Even if it is a change to a file, it can be applied in a way that is easy to remove. Even if part of a bitmap, it may obliterate the underlying text, but it is still viable to develop an algorithm which finds the word COPY and removes, then other algorithms can attempt to fill in the missing image. Whilst probably not good enough to restore the document, such would depend on where the word "COPY" is written. If placed over standard stuff then relatively easy to restore, if over signatures then less viable to restore: But if signatures are obscured then the copy possibly of limited use.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
So basically need to have witnessed the full original document, but only be permitted to partially scan the document, such as the signature strip. But then the signature strip could be easily used to create a new set of documents. So no copies or scanning permitted. Scanning is probably not necessary anyway as most of the documents have registration numbers of some description. So witness the original documents and record the relevant details. If make an error in some of the registration numbers then the documents won't reconcile with official records and relevant agency can request to check the original documents again. For certain can have the numbers without having the original documents. The issue however is having enough numbers from enough documents, that the identity is demonstrated to have been used consistently for a long time by the same person.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
So not a secure system and requires releasing documents which place identity at even greater risk of being stolen. To not have an alternative system in place seems unreasonable.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<hr />
Related Posts</div>
<div>
<hr />
Revisions: <br />
[13/03/2020] : Original</div>
Conrad Harrisonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11351972303793021889noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7659329.post-46617568319203903652019-11-10T17:04:00.000+10:302019-11-10T17:04:29.641+10:30Even Engineers don't know what engineers do!<div>
<div>
Those persons calling themselves engineers don't know what "engineers" are meant to do!</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The education defined by the Washington Accord which essentially defines a modern engineer does not have anything to do with the role engineers typically occupy.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Engineers have spent decades defining a body of knowledge (BoK) to aid in the design, of now established technologies, to be fit-for-function. Whilst these technologies maybe considered to be "engineered" they do not need "engineers" to design them. The only time engineers are required to design specific adaptations and instances of such technology is when silly out dated legislation is in place, such as the licensing system in the USA and registration system in Queensland (Australia).</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
From the beginning engineers were the ingenious contrivers of the engines of war: not the replicators. The simplest way I have described the occupations is:</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<ol>
<li>Engineers Originate</li>
<li>Technologists Adapt</li>
<li>Technicians Apply</li>
</ol>
</div>
<div>
The education provided by the 4 year B.Eng is not about established technology nor how to design such technology. The education is concerned with science and mathematics, with notional reference to established technologies. If a study programme does provide extensive coverage of design of established technologies then it is not a compliant B.Eng.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The education provided by the compliant B.Eng is meant to enable a person to tackle problems where there is no established BoK concerned with a technology. It is for tackling problems at the frontiers of science and technology. Graduates should be able to derive new design theory where no theory currently exists, to be able to question existing theory and identify flaws and limitations and provide theory which over comes those limitations.<i> {On the job tasks which are equivalent of completing a masters research degree; except don't get awarded a scrap of paper, instead awarded the solution of a real world problem.}</i></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
When it comes to established technologies then Australia's traditionally educated 2 year qualified engineering associates should be capable of assessing fitness-for-function using an established BoK. The established BoK is typically embodied in text books, industry manuals, design guides, codes of practice and national standards.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The WFEO Sydney accord defines an occupation they call engineering technologist, and an education typically provided by a minimum of a 3 year bachelor degree. This degree may still have the title B.Eng or it may have the title B.Tech, irrespective of the degree name, it may still often be 4 years in duration. To be suitable for the occupation of "engineer" however the degree needs to meet the requirements of the Washington accord, not simply have the defined 4 year duration. Similarly just because a degree is 3 years duration doesn't result in educating an engineering technologist unless it meets the criteria of the Sydney accord.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
So we have a defined occupation which requires an extra year beyond that actually required for the task at hand. Whilst the WFEO Dublin accord defines a 2 year education for technicians, the 2 year education is not compatible with the skill set of traditional engineering associates. <i>{To be clear the IEAust and the unions (APESMA...) have spent some 30 years diminishing the skills of engineering associates. My interest is to reinstate that skill set both in terms of education and in terms of experience and training gained on the job.}</i></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
As a consequence I proposed the new title and occupation of Associate Technologist, not the least of which is to remove reference to engineering in the occupational titles and job activities.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The education for Associate Technologists should provide an individual who is highly conversant with the established technology and the established BoK required to adapt and implement such technology for specific purposes.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The development path is basically as follows. The engineer introduces new technology or is requested to review new technology, they then develop the BoK needed to assess the fitness-for-function of that technology. The BoK can then be used to assess variants of the technology for specific purposes. Technologists take guardianship of the BoK and expand and develop it as they implement multiple instances of the technology and identify the limitations of the BoK and the technology. As the BoK becomes refined it moves from being in-house reports and published research papers, into being published and widely available industry manuals. At such point the persons familiar with the BoK is significant, and the BoK is established and validated knowledge, and design can now pass to Associate Technologists.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The Associate Technologists can then take the development further and develop simplified prescriptive solutions for a wide variety of common uses. Design technicians can then take these prescriptive solutions and develop still simpler prescriptive solutions for use by trade technicians and trades people.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
To clarify with simple example, an Associate Technologist can design any beam from first principles. A design technician can design a beam using published beam formulae and load capacity tables or design capacity tables. A trade technician can select a specific beam type from suitable span tables, as can a trades person. The difference between a trade technician and trades person is the amount of qualitative and quantitative science involved in their activities: with trades people having least involvement. An electrician works with relatively simple electrical systems, whilst an electrical technician works with vastly more complex electrical systems. An auto mechanic works with cars/trucks whilst a mechanical technician works with anything mechanical. This is with respect to the skills imparted by formal education and training, it does not consider the natural abilities of the individual before or after such training.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The important issue to note is that which was engineering in the beginning is not engineering today, and will not be engineering tomorrow. So someone may be an engineer at the start of their career, but if they spend 40 to 50 years just designing variants of the same thing, then they are not doing engineering. They are not doing engineering, because some 5 years after introducing the technology, society could start training Associate Technologists to design the technology. These Associate Technologists do not have to figure out what to do, they simply have to get on with doing it<i> (with regard to science and mathematics).</i></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
I short the world is wasting global resources to educate people who do not actually have the capability to ever do a thing called "engineering" and if they do, they will never have the opportunity to do a thing called "engineering". They will have the opportunity to apply and adapt established technologies to be fit for some specific purpose, and use technical science and technical mathematics to assess such fitness-for-function: but this activity is not engineering.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Engineering only occurs when cross the frontier of science and technology. Once the frontier is crossed, the boundary is shifted and the engineering is over. So the technologies are engineered, but engineers are not required to design variants of the generic technology to suit a specific need and purpose.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
To create legislation which requires an engineer for such established technologies is extremely wasteful, inefficient and unproductive. The education provided to the WFEO Engineer is not relevant to the task at hand,and they need to spend some 5 to 10 years becoming conversant with the technology and the associated technical science. Whilst the education given to the WFEO "Engineering" Technologist is meant to cover the specific category of generic technology and its associated technical science.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
All the recent failures:</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<ol>
<li>Lacrosse Tower</li>
<li>Grenfell Tower</li>
<li>Opal Tower</li>
<li>Mascot Tower</li>
<li>Tullamarine Freeway Sign Collapse</li>
</ol>
<div>
In all cases either the design-process was defective, or the fabrication and construction processes were defective. For the most part there was lack of control over converting the design-intent into the finished article. Requiring "the thing" that the IEAust calls an "engineer" will not fix this problem. Proper quality assurance programmes need implementing in design and construction. All the quality systems I have seen on the side of consultants are based on simply renaming contract document management systems to QA systems.</div>
</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Tracking communications between designer and contractor is irrelevant if the information being generated by the designers is defective and the designers do not have adequate checks on the design. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
At present there are regulatory controls on design specification and documentation with respect to the performance of the finished "building". The original assumption was that with out controls people would just build what ever they wanted: therefore assumed they were able to build the thing. Since traditionally design and builder were one and the same entity, not a problem. But with the passage of time things have become split. Designer and builder are two or more separate entities, and over-the-wall-design is practised.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
That which is designed may theoretically have the required performance if it can be built, but chances are it cannot be built as intended. Materials properties changed by manufacturing processes is one obstacle to achieving the required end-product. It is therefore important that design-for-manufacture (DFM), and design-for-assembly (DFA) and design-for-construction (DFC) take place: where construction is taken to refer to on-site and manufacture refers to off-site activities. Or where in manufacture the wok piece is taken to the tools, and construction the tools are taken to the work piece. The point is that there is an extra stage of design which has to be conducted after get the detailed design of the finished object. Sure there should be concurrent design taking place in an attempt to specify something which is buildable in the first place. But until the fabricator is selected and there resources are known, the practicality of buildability is just wishful thinking. Production processes need to be designed along with complementary tooling.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
When implementing the established technologies, there is expectation of certainty in achievement. The frontiers of science and technology are to be avoided. The only frontier is that haven't pursued this specific project before. Whilst there is uncertainty and potential variability, they are all otherwise expected deviations. For example until start exploring the ground and the soil, rock and water below the required footings cannot be finalised. But whatever is encountered there is an expectation that suitable footings can be designed. That what ever may be encountered the basic techniques and technologies which can be adopted, adapted and applied, they exist already, and any special tooling required can be designed. On condition that the people involved are adequately conversant with both the established technologies and associated technical science (BoK). </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
My contention is that we are not educating and training the right people and that professional cults are impeding the ability of humans to adapt to the task at hand. These cults should not be granted more power by implementing poorly design legislation. Legislation built around a distorted description of the task at hand.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Yes! To legislators and the public at large it may seem like advanced science and mathematics, but to those with the appropriate 2 year qualifications it is not complex, it is not advanced, it is routine. Many engineering calculations are no more complex than grade 9 algebra or grade 12 calculus: whilst only a few people may have completed grade 12, and fewer still grade 12 calculus, everyone should have completed grade 9 algebra.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Higher education needs to keep up with that which we are now able to teach in the basic 10 years of compulsory education: else those with a bachelor degree will be less capable than the next generation which completes grade 10.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
So at the very minimum, it is not 4 year qualified "engineers" we need, it is 2 year qualified Associate technologists, which need to be required to do the work. No need for registration or licenses: they have formal educational awards. Whilst they can be faked they can also be checked, as can the license.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The issue isn't whether the person as a degree or not. The issue is here is a job that needs doing, is this person able to do the job? How do you know? How have you checked their work? Who is checking their work, and how do you check their work? It is an issue of succession planning and sustaining an established body of knowledge.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Of course they get it wrong if they didn't know how to do it in the first place? But who said they know how? Probably the IEAust, indicated the person was appropriately competent through grossly inappropriate assessment processes for chartered status. Professional cults impeding proper assessment of required competencies.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
So if there is to be legislation there should be some basic legislation for learned societies. such as:</div>
<div>
<ol>
<li>They have a published body of knowledge (BoK) for each occupational category</li>
<li>They demonstrate competence as guardian or the BoK</li>
<li>They demonstrate an ability to share and disseminate the BoK</li>
<li>They have the following grades: cadet, associate, member, fellow</li>
<li>The grades are stepping stones, and all have to start at the bottom (cadets includes, students, graduates and all others who have neither the minimum education or experience to be an associate)</li>
<li>Minimum entry point is associate: Minimum of 5 years experience at the level of cadet completing appropriate graduate development programme. Minimum requirement for member is 5 years experience at Associate pursing an appropriate development programme. Minimum requirement for Fellow is 10 years at level of Member pursuing an appropriate development programme. Typical expected distribution is 20% cadets, 60% associates, 15% members, and 5% fellows. If there are higher percentages in the higher grades then the requirements for progressing are not hard enough.</li>
<li>Minimum Education one or more associate degrees (AQF-6).</li>
<li>They comply with the Australian qualification framework (AQF). Movement from one level to the next implies increase in depth of knowledge, increased personal responsibility and increased independent thought. Qualifications have to be defined starting at AQF-1. The qualifications have to be properly articulated to enhance occupational mobility.</li>
<li>The organisation to represent an hierarchy of occupations, which are typically expected to work as part of a team. <i>(eg. trades, drafters, designers, technical scientists. Whilst members having a trade are likely to exceed those having science qualifications, the expectation is that only those tradespeople interested in progressing to associate or work very closely with associates will be interested. Trades will typically have a different body of knowledge, and likely have different organisations involving artists.)</i></li>
<li>The organisation is not permitted to hold more than 20% of the people in a given occupation or broad area of practice. <i>(eg. practitioners should have at least 5 organisations to choose from to protect diversity and provide alternative perspectives. So can have an organisation which represents generalists engineering, and more specific ones representing mechanical, civil, structural, electrical. Or put another way the IEAust has to loose its national monopoly: its colleges become separate institutions. Not a major imposition given more than one nation which speaks English, and which have various more worth while learned societies: so more productive to create local branch of a more international organisation.)</i></li>
<li>Legislation will require a minimum of Associate to practice without supervision.</li>
</ol>
</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<hr />
Related Posts</div>
<div>
<hr />
Revisions: <br />
[(10/11/2019)] : Original</div>
Conrad Harrisonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11351972303793021889noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7659329.post-2938236493268430462019-09-28T15:02:00.001+09:302019-09-28T15:02:28.233+09:30Action on Environmental Change Rather Than Climate Change<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Life draws resources from the environment and exhausts waste back to the environment, in doing so the environment is changed. The environment of tomorrow can never be the same as the environment of yesterday.</blockquote>
<div>
Want action on climate change, well in principle its relatively simple. Simply shutdown, turn off and stop.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
It's admirable that kids are seeking action on climate change. So here's a short list of actions to take.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Sorry you're walking to school from now on. No car, no bus, and no bicycle. No computer, no TV, and no internet. No electrical appliances, and no battery operated electronic junk, so no mobile phones. No video games, no social networks, no cloud. No electricity, full stop. No hot water, no oven, no refrigerator, no washing machine, no clothes iron, no vacuum cleaner. Forget about solar panels and wind turbines, the materials of construction are out. Certainly no aluminium support frames, and the mining of most of the other materials out.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
No bicycle, as steel and synthetic polymers (plastics) are out. Steel is out because it requires coal, and coal is out. Coal is one material the activists are vocal about, and explicitly demand we stop using. You want, you got it, its out. Though, interestingly coal saved us from one environmental crisis back in the 1800's. The woodlands which provided wood for heating and cooking, were being stripped bare to coke steel. Then it was discovered coal could be used for steel production. It could also be used to heat our homes, and for cooking.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Polymers are out because these are typically derived from coal, natural gas or oil. So no nylon, acrylic, polyethylene, PVC. So no fake fur for teddy bears, so teddy bears and many other toys are out. No synthetic fibres for clothing, will have to use cotton, wool and other natural fibres. Though cotton uses large amounts of water, and the global potable water supply is unstable and insecure: so maybe cotton's out as well.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
uPVC is typically used for water supply pipes, sanitary drainage pipes (sewers) and storm water drainage pipes. So these are out. Some pipes are Copper, and that is also out. All metals, and anything which requires forging and , casting or firing is out. So ceramics and fired bricks are out.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
With no metals, cutting tools are largely out. So no tools to work timber or stone. Cold-working of metals is out, as requires electricity to provide the drawing power. So could make bamboo bike, if could cut the bamboo, but that's probably out to.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Public transport typically designed around walking speeds of 5km/hr or a slightly slower 80 m/min. Allowing 5 hours/day, that is 25 km/day. Anything more than a 25 km away is out, all resources have to be local. The multi-storey buildings being promoted to create walkable cities, and reduce urban sprawl they have to go. As the sprawl is not caused by the car, it is caused by over sized buildings which have to be supported by large populations. Large populations which cannot afford to live in close proximity to the offices and other facilities, because of high land values. High land values which apparently favour making tall buildings. There is a lack of local centres.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
With mechanical transport out, back to human and animal power. A hand cart however requires timber and possibly metal treads. With no cutting tools potentially no means of making a cart, so limited to backpacks and similar.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Though cattle and pigs are out. Can have wool, but no leather or pigskin. Though depending on the requirements for cleaning wool, it may also have to go. Rubber comes from too distant a location so that is also out. Which all severely limits the materials suitable for shoes, so likely walking barefoot.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Fibres will have to be spun by hand and also weaved by hand looms. As powered looms are out, though return to water wheels maybe viable. Though without metals, the working of timber is a problem: so both traditional water wheels and wind mills have limited potential.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Without power, broad acre agriculture is out. Most of the production of modern agriculture will not be able to be delivered to the people. The massive industrial cities draw resources from all over the world to support populations over 10 million, will grind to a halt. The populations will have to move, on foot, to where the food is produced. They will also have to move closer to water supplies, because pumped storage systems will not function. If water cannot flow by gravity to where it is needed and water is pumped into elevated tanks, then those water supplies will be shut down.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
All up with power shut off, and most materials removed from production, there will be little work, so there won't really be much need to continue with school. Only thing left will be to sit and chant and contemplate the nature of the universe. But won't be able to do that for long, because there won't be enough food for everyone, and it won't becoming to a neighbourhood near you any time soon. So will need an entirely different culture.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The stone age will look awesome by comparison.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Now that's the easy part: deciding what we don't want and its direct consequences and some of its run on consequences.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Now complex decisions are not based on what we like and don't like, or what we want and don't want. Decisions need to be based on the benefits we seek, the consequential and unavoidable side effects that we are willing to accept and tolerate. A greater benefit may have more destructive side effects and thus to avoid those unwanted side effects we have to settle for a lesser benefit.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Now for the kids in school, you still have opportunity to study, 12 years of grade school and possibly 3 years at university or trade school. Are you going to make a choice based on highest paid future job, or on the knowledge required to solve the problems humanity faces? What knowledge do you need? Do you understand the problems faced? Is compulsory education going to provide the knowledge and tools needed to tackle the future?<br />
<br />
It is important to understand that our ancestors did not go to school and acquire knowledge, they took an interest in the world and created knowledge. If they had not done that, then there would be no knowledge to present in the schools. The current generation of school students have libraries full of books and an internet full of knowledge. You shouldn't study to get a job, you should study to understand your place in the world, you're impact on the environment, and determine that which is necessary to survive.To learn how to adapt to the changes, that your very presence and existence generates.<br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>(Money doesn't attract talent, it attracts those who need to fuel their own greed)</i><br />
<br />
The problem. What knowledge is valid? What can be believed? How can we test the validity of what we read? Never take something has valid because some appointed authority says it is so? Science is not religion? Science is not a democracy? School yard nonsense such as I have more peers backing my work than you have: is not science. Question everything and seek understanding, not knowledge? A brain dead unimaginative block of silicon can mindlessly recite knowledge, the skills to have are understanding, reasoning, and the ability to otherwise put knowledge to work.</div>
<div>
<br />
The fundamental task of rational scientific planning, design and management is:<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
To maximise the benefit from the available but otherwise limited resources.</blockquote>
</div>
<br />
It is highly unlikely that we can undo that which has been done and revert to some earlier state of the environment, and then move forward from there without changing the environment at all. Further more, apparently at some point the sun will burn hotter as it burns out, the atmosphere will be lost along with all water. Life will be fried and baked. Then everything left will freeze. But this is apparently millions of years away. The point is, thus far, we only have one planet, we have no space colonies and no other place to live. Eventually humanity will perish from this earth, and from the universe unless we can find a way to travel the stars.<br />
<br />
Assuming currently have 6 billion years left, then we have 2 billion years to go and explore, 2 billion years to return and indicate where new planet is and 2 billion years to get the rest of humanity there. All of which indicates we don't need a planet, just a space ship and access to planets to get needed resources.<br />
<br />
There are too many people on this planet already. Not so much due to limited resources, but mostly due to the limitations of our cultures and societies. We need a new way of life. New activities. We need to move away from entirely market driven economies: the market is not sociable it doesn't care about the planet nor humanity.<br />
<br />
Action is not, absolutely not, required to stop climate change. It is done, and cannot be undone. Our task is to adapt to the changes in the environment: and understand every action we take changes the environment. Understand that diversity is important, to reduce dependence and minimise local concentration of pollutants and other damage.<br />
<br />
Rivers do not flow along the same paths indefinitely and they do not flow forever. Rivers erode their banks. Oceans erode coastlines. This is not climate change. These are just natural changes which are consequence of a dynamic environment. They maybe happening faster than we would like, and faster than maybe previously predicted. But they are happening, and were going to happen in any case. The geology and archaeology indicates much of the land masses were once under water. We cannot expect that the land masses will stay above water forever.<br />
<br />
We can build ships, floating platforms and elevated buildings. We can move inland and into the hills. We can build cities on the ocean floor. We even have the potential to build cities on the moon and orbiting, floating space colonies. This all requires energy: fuel.<br />
<br />
The task is to investigate the industrial food chain. Identify dependencies and inefficiency and better integrate relate industries and activities to cut waste. To remove the need for pointless unnecessary upgrades. Mostly they are not upgrades they are different products with different functionality, often diminished over the previous product: so certainly no justification to call an upgrade.<br />
<br />
We need to understand action and reaction, and the dynamic adaptive behaviour of the systems we rely on and otherwise have an impact on.<br />
<br />
The task ahead is far more complicated, than reducing environment to climate, and abbreviating carbon dioxide to carbon, and talking nonsense about what is and is not green or environmentally friendly. None of it is environmentally friendly. Life changes the environment, full stop. The issue is whether or not the change forms part of a restorative cycle. If not part of a restorative cycle, then how long till the system grinds to a halt? Are we willing to tolerate such, do we have a plan to change to another resource when we run out.<br />
<br />
Irrespective of climate change our civilisation was expected to grind to a halt. The architects,civil engineers and politicians failed to design cities which are sustainable. They were built based on power sources which potentially had limited life spans, and otherwise encouraged population growth in these cities with no thought to the future. Millions of people trapped in cities with no access to land to grow food, and no means of getting food into the cities.<br />
<br />
We need to know the minimum population required to meet all the necessary and wanted services of modern civilisation. Such population levels need to be sustained to maintain the benefits provided by an industrial society. If such populations are exceeded then more towns would be needed. How many towns can we build? <i>{I have previously mentioned industrial city states 100km in diameter with maximum population of 10 million, with maximum sustainable population assumed to be 10 billion, 1000 such cities are required. I otherwise looked at cells 5 km in diameter, with current world population, the estimate was 1000 people per cell. }</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
There are social, political, historical, environmental and technical aspects of the problems to be considered. The task has always been there, and will always be there: it is life.<br />
<br />
<hr />
<div>
Further Reading (in the News):</div>
<hr />
<div>
<br />
<ol>
<li><a href="https://www.vox.com/2019/9/17/20864740/greta-thunberg-youth-climate-strike-fridays-future">Greta Thunberg is leading kids and adults from 150 countries in a massive Friday climate strike</a></li>
<li><a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/27/world/australia/climate-change-youth.html">Are the Kids Alright in the Era of Climate Change?</a></li>
<li><a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2019/09/19/no-future-no-children-pledge-teens-refuse-have-kids-until-climate-change-action/2372010001/">No future, no children: Teens refusing to have kids until there's action on climate change</a></li>
<li><a href="https://grist.org/article/when-teaching-kids-about-climate-change-dont-be-a-downer/">When teaching kids about climate change, don’t be a downer</a></li>
<li><a href="https://edition.cnn.com/2019/09/23/world/united-nations-greta-thunberg-children-climate-change-human-rights-complaint/index.html">Greta Thunberg and 15 other children filed a complaint against five countries over the climate crisis</a></li>
<li><a href="https://www.afr.com/policy/energy-and-climate/we-ve-listened-to-the-science-we-are-not-brainwashed-kids-school-strikers-20190919-p52sy4">'We've listened to the science, we are not brainwashed kids': school strikers</a></li>
<li><a href="https://theconversation.com/ever-wondered-what-our-curriculum-teaches-kids-about-climate-change-the-answer-is-not-much-123272">Ever wondered what our curriculum teaches kids about climate change? The answer is ‘not much’</a></li>
<li><a href="https://www.abc.net.au/life/in-defence-of-having-children-in-the-face-of-climate-change/11519638">In defence of having children in the face of climate change</a></li>
<li><a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-02-08/indian-man-suing-his-parents-for-giving-birth-to-him/10795690">Indian 'anti-natalist' Raphael Samuel taking legal action against his own parents for having him</a></li>
<li><a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-09-28/how-did-ceo-pay-get-to-500-times-the-wages-of-ordinary-workers/11556394">How did CEO pay get to 500 times the wages of ordinary workers?</a></li>
<li><a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-09-28/unpacking-twitter-tirades-why-are-we-triggered-by-greta-thunberg/11545952">Why Greta Thunberg triggers the troglodytes among us</a></li>
<li><a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-09-28/childhood-lessons-in-sharing-murray-darling-water/11514800">Students say adults have not learnt childhood lessons in sharing Murray-Darling water</a></li>
</ol>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
<div>
<hr />
Related Posts</div>
<div>
<hr />
Revisions: <br />
[28/09/2019] : Original</div>
Conrad Harrisonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11351972303793021889noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7659329.post-37883808469443226282019-03-25T16:10:00.001+10:302019-05-05T13:18:30.223+09:30Australia No Shortage of EngineersFollowing on from politics of professions, and defining engineering, it should be clear that Australia does not have a shortage of engineers hindering the launch of potential mining and construction boom.
<br />
<br />
The construction is associated with the mining, it is the dependent infrastructure required by the mining activity. It includes bridges, roads and railways, and ports and harbours, and associated stormwater drainage and water resources management.There may also be need for storage and processing buildings along with offices. All established technologies with an established body of scientific knowledge concerned with planning, design, analysis, evaluation and management.<br />
<br />
The mining is either open cut, underground. Underground mines seem to more typically have sloping access shafts than vertical shafts. The sloping shafts make it viable for vehicles to access the mine: thus trucks can be loaded in the mine. The alternative is a need for rail carts to be loaded or vertically raised skips. When these get to the surface they have to be unloaded, possibly onto belt conveyors and transferred to storage or loaded onto road vehicles for transport elsewhere. Thus extra handling compared to loading road vehicles in the mine. Though not all mines suitable for sloping access shafts. Any case the point is relatively ancient and established set of technologies, no "engineering" required.<br />
<br />
Now it has been indicated in recent article I read, that there is increased use of the industrial internet of things (IIoT). New technology maybe, but not exactly as demanding as programming CNC machines, or programming PLC's. It is mostly plug and play technology, hooked up to the internet and controlled by software as a service. And it's not really new as sensors were added to remote belt conveyors some 20 years ago to monitor wear. Whilst factories, industrial plant and mechanical handling systems have been getting increasingly automated for decades. So once again no "engineering".<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;">Just to be clear: Engineering takes place at the frontiers of science and technology.</span><br />
<br />
<h2>
Roads, Railways and Traffic Controls</h2>
Who as a member of the public believes it takes 4 years to learn how to design a road properly? If it takes 4 years to learn how to design a road, would you expect your local streets and roads to be the hazard they are?<br />
<br />
Hopefully you agree it doesn't take 4 years, and if they do take 4 years then the roads should be better designed than they are. It does not take four years to learn the technical aspects of road design, the social, cultural, political and psychological aspects of road design may require further study but such are not covered. Since these latter subjects are not covered we have hazardous road network. In the current discussion however not concerned with demolishing the existing network and improving the network, just concerned with getting more of what we already have. Furthermore the roads concerned with are remote area roads, with heavy vehicular traffic and few users. Roads which once the resource is mined out will likely cease to be of any value.<br />
<br />
Sure there are some roads in populated areas in the vicinity of ports and harbours. These roads may need widening to allow increased traffic flows, they may also need strengthening to carry higher loads. There will also be a need for modification and improvement to traffic control systems.<br />
<br />
There will be need to assess the relative merits of road transport over rail transport. Railway locomotives can typically haul longer trains with heavier loads. Not aware of 1 km long road train. Once again road and railway technologies are established technologies with no need for "engineering".<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;">For certain there is need for project specific drawings to be produced, and there are the so called "numbers" which need doing. But we as a society know what numbers, need doing. We don't have to survey learned journals to find new scientific theory, we don't have to devise a scientific hypothesis and conduct experiments to verify. The theory is established, and how it shall be applied to the established technologies is also established. Just have to look in the appropriate industry manuals, review regulations, and national codes of practice.</span><br />
<br />
The people required are <span style="color: red;">technicians</span>, people conversant with the relevant tools and techniques for designing, analysing and evaluating proposed adaptations and implementations of the established technologies. If you don't like the generic meaning of technician, and prefer occupational classifications and refinement of words: then the people we need are <b>Technologists, Associate Technologists, and Applied Scientists, Design Technicians and Trade Technicians, absolutely NOT Engineers.</b><br />
<br />
Sure an engineer maybe able to do the job, but to be able to do so, they need a large amount of on the job training to become conversant with the established technology for which they will be held responsible. <span style="color: red;">The point and purpose of educating and training the other occupations is that they are already conversant with the technology and how the science shall be applied to the design of such technology. Their education is not inferior to that of engineers, it is different, and better matched to the task at hand.</span><br />
<br />
To reiterate my other essays. The 4 year B.Eng (AQF-8) typically consists of a common first year concerned with science and mathematics, leaving 3 years to cover some 2 to 5 major areas of practice. So that is 3/5ths to 1.5 years to cover each area of practice. So a programme in a specific area of practice can be designed to be a 2 year (AQF-6) or 3 years (AQF-7) programme. Such programmes if anything being superior to the 4 year B.Eng, because they provide greater coverage of the area of practice, more knowledge of the specific technologies. With all programmes having the same first year, an AQF-5 qualification in science and mathematics. Having the same foundation, it becomes easier to articulate to another area of practice.<br />
<br />
Back to the roads and railways, these ribbons of impermeable surface pose a stormwater management problem. On the one hand stormwater needs to be managed around the roads and railways to prevent from getting inundated with water, which will hinder vehicle movement. On the other hand the road surface drains water to places it didn't previously flow.<br />
<br />
So there are earthworks to be designed and managed during construction. There are materials to be provided to remote regions as well as people required for all the work: there are thus logistics problems to be solved. In a consulting organisation most of these tasks are carried out by different people, not by one person, but by teams of people. <span style="color: red;">That is after graduation, someone with a B.Eng gets locked into a specific area of practice and specialises, and are typically hindered from moving to another area of practice: so a large part of their degree ceases to be of value. So industry not willing to retrain them in another area of practice and technology, and lack of appropriate study and qualification programmes to extend their knowledge themselves.</span><br />
<br />
Thus there will be specialists in:<br />
<br />
<ol>
<li>Roads</li>
<li>Railways</li>
<li>Traffic Management and Controls</li>
<li>Stormwater Drainage</li>
<li>Earthworks & Geotechnology</li>
<li>Bridges</li>
<li>Construction</li>
<li>Logistics</li>
</ol>
<div>
All of which are established areas of technology, with established bodies of science. For all of which it should be possible to design a 2 year programme to educate and train a suitably qualified Associate Technologist. This isn't entirely new, Australia's Engineering Associates were already so capable, until the 1980's, when Engineers Australia elitist objectives scuttled them. If really want an "engineer" to be in charge, then we have enough available already: as the majority are not doing anything remotely worthy of the description engineering.</div>
<br />
<br />
With appropriate AQF-5 qualification in science and mathematics, the capabilities of many drafters, planners and other technical officers can be increased. With AQF-6 qualifications in specific areas of practice and technologies, then the capabilities of many practicing engineers can be improved, whilst an army of people with appropriate skills can be educated in the first instance. Those with the B.Eng will be able to fast track through the AQF-6 programmes as they will only need to study the those subjects extending the area of practice and covering the specific technology. Those with the AQF-5 will only require one year of extra study to articulate to a specific area of practice.<br />
<br />
<h2>
Consideration of Required Numbers</h2>
I have previously suggested the world land area be divided into cells 5 km in diameter, of which I get 7,585,452 such cells. The world population is approximately 7.53 billion, so would get around 993 persons per cell. <i>{Though when looking at in detail cells should be hexagonal not circular}</i><br />
<div>
<br /></div>
For Australia there are 391,752 cells, most of these cells are not populated, but at least one park ranger and/or environmental scientist could be appointed to each cell. With population of 24,234,900 people, we could assign 62 people per cell.<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
I believe membership of Engineers Australia is around 100,000 members, and top heavy, biased towards B.Eng. I also believe it only represents about 30% of those who graduated in engineering. So there seems potential to appoint one civil engineer to each cell. On the other hand there is probably less than one third of the cells requiring any significant development over the period of 40 to 50 year career. Whilst the hub of a city may require more than one technical specialist, it does require not more than one engineer.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
By comparison compare India: 167,419 cells, and population of 1,409,517,397, enabling 8,419 persons assigned to each cell. Plus it reportedly graduates 1 million engineers each year, so it definitely has the potential to assign 1 civil engineer to each cell in India and for that matter also each cell in Australia.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
These people however don't need to be engineers, and need to work as part of a team. There appears to be around 2.8 million people between the age of 15 and 24 in Australia. So around 13.7% should be studying:</div>
<div>
<ol>
<li>Surveying</li>
<li>Cartography</li>
<li>Environmental Science</li>
<li>Agricultural Science</li>
<li>Geotech</li>
<li>Civil Infrastructure</li>
</ol>
<div>
Not sure how current system works. But those in grade 12 used to study either all arts and humanities subjects with one science subject, or all science subjects with one arts and humanities subject. My arts and humanities subject was geography, my science subjects were: maths 1&2<i> (otherwise known as double maths)</i>, physics and chemistry.</div>
</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
So my proposed AQF-5 would expand on grade 12 science and mathematics in one year, then a further year to AQF-6, would have people capable of contributing to the above areas of practice. Furthermore, such AQF-6 level academic programmes are also more appropriate to foreign students who are supported by their respective governments to go get an education and return to help develop the nation. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<h3>
Getting Side Tracked with Other Issues</h3>
<div>
Mapping and charting the continent of Australia and its resources: sure we have such data already, but individual development projects require more detailed information. Development requires identifying location for new roads and railways, water catchments and flood mitigation technologies, along with farming and mining activities. The whole environment needs zoning and developing accordingly. For example why has agriculture been permitted to go beyond the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goyder%27s_Line">Goyder line</a> and become dependent on pumped irrigation? How do we sustain food production dependent on fossil fuels, both for fuel and feedstock for agrochemicals? Choices of individuals in the market does not lead to collectively sensible behaviour. Rather the results are not in the best interests of the population at large nor are they ultimately of benefit to the individual.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
We have land, coastline and coastal waters to both manage, develop and otherwise look after.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Note that I didn't include mining in the list. This is because the priorty is to identify resources and zone the environment. Then get infrastructure to access the regions for agriculture and mining. For example passenger trains travelling at 200 km/h to 300 km/h are important to getting people to the remote interior. Whilst civil aircraft may have cruise speeds from 300 km/h to 900 km/h, it is railways and roads which open up the country not isolated airports. Australia can basically be enveloped by a rectangle E/W: 4000 km by N/S: 3860 km (includes Tasmania). So the interior is around 2000 km from the coast line. Typical rural road speed 100 km/h, so the interior is around 20 hours away. By rail, at 200 km/h it is reduced to 10 hours, and air at 900 km/h down to 2.2 hours. However we are not typically travelling that far into the interior for farming and mining, a lot closer to 500 km to 1000 km from the coast. Whilst the remote central interior is 500 km to 1000 km radius of Alice Springs.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Put simply to make it more attractive for people to work in the remote mining and rural tends we have to make them less remote: by developing the infrastructure which connects them to the more populated coastal regions: and they have to be connected, so that goods can be delivered from these regions to the coastal regions. Once we have supportive infrastructure in place, secured our water supply and food production, then we can consider new mines and expanding existing.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
We already have 1,687,893 people educated to AQF-5 and AQF-6, and 2,882,838 people educated to AQF-7. The primary problem is they don't have the necessary experience and expertise in the established technologies. With 1,675,632 people in engineering and related technologies, and 634,774 in architecture and building, and 222,831 people in Agriculture, Environmental and Related Studies.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
So it seems if anything there is a shortage of people in agriculture. Farmers have been advising there is a shortage and a lack of interest, with concerns where the next generation of farmers will come from. The problem with farming is that it is now mostly a one person activity, with lots of machinery. So assuming a 40 to 50 year career, the next generation have a long time to wait, for their parents to retire. They want jobs now, and the lifestyle the big cities promise. Hence the largest area being Management and Commerce with 2,149,808 persons.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Though statistics outside of education, indicate the largest areas of employment are: education, health care and retail. Mining and agricultural collectively account for less than 5% of the population. However these industries have flow on effects, as in mining needs infrastructure so there's a flow on construction boom. Whilst mining and agricultural materials need processing, so there's a potential increase in local manufacturing.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Any how, we may have a small population, and if they were busy doing the right work, there wouldn't be any shortages of people. The apparent shortfall of people in agriculture just means that there are fewer people looking after the potential tracts of land, plus the populated coastal cells more in need of architects and civil "engineers" than agriculture and environmental science: thus no shortfall.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
If we were to increase the workforce by 1 million people we could assign at least two people to each of the planning cells. That is one environmental scientist, and either a agricultural "engineer", a mining "engineer", or a civil "engineer". <span style="color: red;">That is we could employ one years production of engineers from India. But what we going to get them to do?</span></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Got a block of land 5 km in diameter in the middle of nowhere and in less than one year of surveying to identify its of no consequence, and just needs a park ranger assigned responsibility.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Have a block of land in the middle of a cattle or sheep station. Is it a matter for environmental science or agricultural science? Once all the land is zoned, it then primarily becomes the responsibility for park rangers, and environmental scientists.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Our coastal waters are the responsibility of environmental scientists and civil/coastal "engineers". Our farm land the responsibility of environmental scientists, agricultural scientists along with agricultural "engineers". Our mining lands the responsibility of environmental scientists, and mining "engineers". We operate in the natural environment, we draw resources from the environment, we exhaust waste to the environment. We need to understand and monitor the environment. <span style="color: red;">First and foremost we need an army of environmental technicians and scientists.</span></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
These people will either hinder development of land for: farming, mining, cities and industrial plant, or they will significantly boost the ability to implement. At present there is public opposition to increased mining, wind farms and various farming operations. It isn't decreased monitoring activity we need it is increased activity which is required.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
For example we have protests which suggest we should stop mining coal. This is naive and suggests we only use coal as a fossil fuel. Coal however is an important source of carbon <i>(not an abbreviation for carbon dioxide)</i> based materials. Similarly oil and gas are also feedstock for material production including agrichemicals. So we cannot just stop the mining, we still need the raw materials. Amongst the raw materials are polymers used for insulation, required for energy efficient buildings. <span style="color: red;">We have to better understand the industrial food chain, not simply halt production.</span></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
We need better monitoring of our rivers and the use of water for irrigation, and better stormwater management and water resource management. Much of the work required could be provided by Certificate IV (AQF-4) qualifications. Some monitoring could be provided by appropriate sensors and the industrial internet of things (IIoT): but such need installing under the supervision and operating by some one at least at AQF-4 level. The IIoT reduces the number of people required to run around taking remote measurements.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
So remote cells can be monitored by remote controlled cameras atop tall towers, alternatively remote controlled flying drones can provide the means of monitoring. The land becomes occupied and under surveillance. One person could then potentially survey more than one cell in a day, or if not necessary to survey each day, they can survey several cells each year: and then cycle round again each year.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
We have the population to occupy and survey the land. More to the point there are 798,400 Aboriginal And Torres Strait Islander, so they can occupy the land with at least two people per cell.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<span style="color: red;">Whilst there are 673,100 unemployed persons, who can occupy the land with at least one person to each cell, with two to some cells. Assuming these people want to work, then we have the required army to train to Certificate IV (AQF-4) and Associate Degree (AQF-6) level. So why haven't we? Partly because wasting national resources educating people, supposedly to AQF-8 over 4 years, and then scrapping half that education once they have found employment. Better to spend 2 years educating people to AQF-6 in the areas of practice we actually need skills. In 12 months we have planners, drafters and trade technicians. In 2 years we have the designers we need.</span></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
It should also be noted that whilst some of the AQF-4 qualifications take 4 years, these programmes are outside the classroom and on the job doing work. It isn't 4 years of academic study, it is mostly on the job training, developing proficiency in the work. So we can get the trades people for getting on with the work in short time. The people required to supervise takes slightly longer, and the people required to determine the work which needs doing, will take longer still, but should not take more than 2 years.<br />
<br />
Now the cells are just for a planning exercise: to declare the land can be occupied and that at least one person is responsible for each block of land. I can however plan a square kilometre with a 500 x 500 m hub, to have more than 5000 single storey sole occupancy units. The maximum densities so far recorded around the world are 100,000 people for each square kilometre. These people are clearly not mining or farming as they are not occupying suitable land. And as they are already occupying buildings they don't need buildings.<br />
<br />
Given 5000 single storey dwellings are suitable for couples with a baby, and extending the dwelling to two storey would make suitable for 2 adults and 2 children, and so increase population to 20,000. It seems relatively easy to increase the population to 100,000 by increasing the buildings to 10 storeys (5x2). But what are the 100,000 going to do with their time? What are they doing? Focused on education, health care and retail doesn't seem very productive. But if we do have such educational capability, then we definitely shouldn't and wouldn't have a shortage of suitably qualified persons.<br />
<br />
Now whilst we can increase the population density of our cities who would want to live in such cities? More importantly from where do we get the water supply, we already have water rationing. So we have more work to do before we go increasing the population to get more workers to do the work.<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;">The fundamental task is to maximise the benefit from the available but otherwise limited resources. The people we have in charge don't appear to have such ability.</span><br />
<br />
<b><span style="color: red;">So the numbers are available. We, just couldn't manage a booze up in a brewery.</span></b><br />
<br />
Anyway the point is that a single agricultural or civil "engineer" should be able to develop a cell 5 km in diameter over a 40 year career. If we want it developed faster then we need more than one "engineer" involved with planning and design.<br />
<br />
Just to note that is 5000 single storey or 10 storey dwellings designed once, and implemented 5000 times. Our building and construction industry in South Australia, oscillates between 5000 and 15,000 dwellings each year. So it would take less than one year to build a town. Does a mining town need more than 5,000 people or 100,000 people? Roxby Downs population 4500, Broken Hill population 17,814. Or take Leigh Creek (SA) population reduced from 2500 to 245. Mining towns are short lived. Some are unlikely to last for more than one generation: children are unlikely to follow in their parents footsteps and go work for the mining company.<br />
<br />
Humans have legs, they are meant to be mobile. So not just about mobility across occupations it is also mobility across the planet. No one wants to buy a house in a place it will get abandoned, and no one else will want to buy. The houses cannot be permanently anchored to the earth's surface, the houses need to be transportable. So the road network as to permit transport of houses into the region and out off the region. So people are mostly going to want to live close to the developing cities, and the services they offer. Thus it is important to improve transportation infrastructure between the coastal cities and the interior rural and mining towns. If want to get people to live and work there, and do so for a reasonable duration, then access needs to improve. The towns need an adequate supply line bringing goods into town. Then they need personnel to provide all the appropriate services.<br />
<br />
Also say it takes a team of about 5 people 90 days to build a house, then in 1 year they can build 365/90= 4 houses. So 5000/4 = 1250 years, or over a 50 year career, 50x4=200 houses. But want the houses built in 1 year, so need 5 people/team x 1250 teams=6,250 people. Thus needs more people than in the town. On the other hand in the detail the 5 people are not working continuously for 90 days. The plumber and electrician certainly aren't, they contribute at most about 2 days each. So they can each do 365/2=182.5 houses each year. So 5000/182.5=27.3, so would need about 28 plumbers and 28 electricians. For one years worth of work and then stop. If we shift the work into a factory we cut down on travel between sites, and the work can be reduced to a few hours. In short if we build a temporary factory at the destination, then the 5000 people are more than enough people to build their own houses in one year. The trip from factory to site also reduced. So trucks supply materials to the one factory rather than multiple sites.<br />
<br />
Apparently in Australia there are approximately 105,000 homeless people. Thus 105,000/5000, so around 21 small towns, which if they are provided with resources and opportunity they can build themselves in one year. The 500m x 500m hub of the town I described is where retail stores and services are located. So the town would have own schools and hospital.<br />
<br />
The most likely system implemented though is multistorey building, or infill housing, making use of existing stores, maintaining if not increasing unemployment.<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;">There is a problem concerning getting the job done, and dragging the job out because don't have other work to go to. But there is plenty of work to do, obviously because they are declaring occupational shortages. More work just requires imagination, backed by resources and opportunities.</span><br />
<br />
Most of the problems in this country and the world can be solved if we just got to work implementing the known solutions. Apparently 150 million world wide homeless, and 1.6 billion lacking adequate housing. So governments need to provide license to occupy and use land, and the resources and opportunity, and all can build their own homes. Furthermore the problem of shelter resolved in one year: technically. Socially and politically is another issue.<br />
<br />
I mean what's the problem with implementing the millennium development goals in one year, of 7.53 billion only 1.6 billion people need shelter and there is enough for them to set about building their own homes. It's not even as if the development goals were about eliminating problems, they were half baked. Even the new sustainable development goals are half baked. Like end extreme global poverty by 2030. First redefine extreme poverty, so there isn't much of it, so it is then easy to eliminate over an excessively long period.<br />
<br />
The primary problem is logistics, getting goods and services to and from the locations. Developing supply and distribution networks. How do we mobilise the world population and get them going to where the work is?<br />
<br />
How many plumbers does Africa need? I have already indicated requirement to get houses built. But once the houses are built how many need to be retained? One rough statistic is in any given year around 5% of households will need some kind of maintenance service. So 5% of the 5000, so that is 250 each year. Most of the activity will take less than one day. Assume 50 productive weeks in one year, and 5 days per week, then have 250 productive days per year. So one plumber for every 5000 dwellings on condition that all demands do not occur on the same day. The more plumbers we have to cater for the multiple emergencies in the one day, and the less work any individual plumber does in a given year.<br />
<br />
So with less guess work and more robust data sources than I have, it should be possible to map out a good estimate of how many plumbers the world needs and where they need be located, and do likewise for other occupations. There is no shortage of people. Though they may need training, such training should not take long.<br />
<br />
<div>
<hr />
Related Posts</div>
<div>
<hr />
Revisions: <br />
[25/03/2019] : Original<br />
[05/05/2019] : Minor Edits and Added Formatting</div>
Conrad Harrisonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11351972303793021889noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7659329.post-89795899293497798902019-03-09T17:42:00.002+10:302019-03-25T10:27:04.052+10:30So where does my Irritation with Engineers Stem From?My irritation with, "what is and is not engineering", stems from the viewpoints held by organisations like Engineers Australia, and the World Federation of Engineering Organisations (WFEO), and legislation such as they have in the USA, and legislation in Australia currently limited to the states of Queensland and Victoria.
<br />
<br />
Engineers Australia (EA) is the full trading company, of the institution of engineers Australia (IEAust). I never really considered the IEAust to be much of a learned society, it is not guardian of a body of knowledge and it doesn't actively share and disseminate knowledge, to raise understanding or spread awareness. Most especially it does not provide any forum in which deficiencies in practice can be highlighted and fixed. Published information is important as a common point of reference.<br />
<br />
Anycase in the late eighties and early nineties I mistakenly believed it was moving in the right direction and Australia's technical workforce would be strengthened. First it absorbed the institution of engineering associates. I believed this was a good thing and that knowledge would be better shared and it would reduce repetition of public information programmes.<br />
<br />
However I later read an article which indicated that the reason the institute of engineering associate's was absorbed, was to deliberately dismantle an occupation. It has to do with Australia's industrial relations system, the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_Council_of_Trade_Unions">ACTU </a>and TLC's, and industrial awards. One of the primary awards prior to the modern award system, was the metal industry award. This started with unskilled labour, moved up through trades people, technicians, engineering associates, scientists and engineers. The award defines wages and working conditions. So irrespective of the business and its needs, an engineer gets paid more than a tradesperson, and more than an engineering associate.<br />
<br />
An engineer has a 4 year bachelor degree (B.Eng), whilst an engineering associate had a 2 year Associate Diploma. Associate Diploma's were typically associated with educational institutions which did not have the required charter to issue bachelor degrees and therefore issued 3 year Diploma's. The associate diploma's were thus shorter than the diploma's. When the Australian Qualification Framework (AQF) was brought in, the meaning of diploma was messed up: as a diploma is now around 1 year duration and an advanced diploma 2 to 2.5 years duration.<br />
<br />
An engineering associate could do a lot of technical work based on first principles, no need for fancy software: more importantly such software didn't exist in any case. However duration doesn't define capability, content does. There were many associate diploma's some in engineering and some in drafting. The ones in engineering define an engineering associate those in drafting should not. However, to some extent it benefited EA to deliberately confuse the two qualifications, as its only concern was the 4 year B.Eng. Thus members of EA complained that engineering associates shouldn't be amongst their ranks, that drafters shouldn't be amongst their ranks: that it was an institution of engineers and no other occupation. Its membership also confusing the function of the IEAust with that of the labour union APESMA <i>(or whatever name it had at the time and has now).</i><br />
<br />
The result was that the academic programmes of engineering associates were watered down, and design-drafters added to the ranks of engineering associates, compounding the MIEAust/FIEAust view that drafters shouldn't be amongst the EA membership. Then EA signed the WFEO Dublin accord equating the engineering associates to technicians. As indicated above the industrial awards placed engineering associates above technicians: so the Dublin accord is disrespectful and insulting.<br />
<br />
Now the MIEAust/FIEAust seem to spend a considerable amount of time complaining that train drivers and plumbers are not engineers. But thus far they have only been able to define that an engineer has a 4 year B.Eng and basically anything they do is considered engineering. Such is both a poor and unacceptable definition.<br />
<br />
Also unions have tended to hold the view that potential is more important than actual contribution. So if job can be done by an engineering associate but occuptant has the B.Eng, then should be called engineer and paid at level of an engineer: even if the occupant is a dullard who is never going to contribute anything of higher value. Education is based more on ticket to high paid employment not actual interest. Therefore if can push the engineering associates out, it then becomes possible to raise the pay for the job, by redefining as the work of an engineer.<br />
<br />
The governments clever country programme mostly based on increasing number of people with bachelor degrees, not increasing number of clever people. So give rise to professional cults built around bachelor degrees.<br />
<br />
However, the AQF is about increasing occupational mobility, both sideways and upwards. Moving from one level to the next should represent an increase in depth of knowledge, increase in independent thought, and increase in personal responsibility. Whilst different awards increase breadth of knowledge. Clearly there are many different jobs which are dependent on knowledge in science and mathematics, so where is the common base qualification in such subjects?<br />
<br />
Now I have never considered modern engineers to be anything more than technicians, low level industrial mathematicians. It is relatively clear from the built environment and the technology which surrounds us, that the knowledge and skills of engineers is inadequate. Engineers Australia and other organisations argue about such inadequacy of the education, but are unwilling to add extra content and increase the duration, or expand content and maintain duration of the programme by reducing coverage of each topic.<br />
<br />
In Australia the typical bachelor degree is 3 years duration, and an honours degree typically adds an extra year. In the past an honours degree was minimum requirement to start a masters degree. The B.Eng is 4 years duration and therefore it has been equated to an honours degree (AQF-8), but it isn't anywhere near the equivalent to an honours degree. Occupational degrees are inflated with industrial experience, and project work: content which is not academic and has no real place in a degree.<br />
<br />
Sure for years there were complaints and there still are complaints that education is inadequately linked to needs of industry, however industrial experience doesn't fix this issue.<br />
<br />
The issue is STEM. Forget about STEAM and arguing about adding the "A", we need to drop the "E". Science and Mathematics are the tools used to plan, design, analyse, evaluate and manage technology. It is the technology which people need to be conversant with. A B.Eng doesn't provide adequate knowledge about the technology.<br />
<br />
We create legislation to protect the public. The intention of the legislation is to ensure new implementations of established technologies achieve expected levels of performance. People who are not adequately conversant with the technology cannot possibly achieve such objective. Thus legislation based on the B.Eng grants the wrong people a monopoly.<br />
<br />
But this does not matter to Engineers Australia and the over all politics of the situation.<br />
<br />
Following the clever country programme, go produce more people with bachelor degrees, fast track these people to some higher status indicating they have appropriate work experience doing something which is being called engineering. This higher status is indicated by MIEAust CP.Eng NER. Having gained high numbers of these people, can argue that creating legislation won't create a shortage. <span style="color: red;">However, a shortage is exactly what they want. They believe their wages are not high enough, that their importance is undervalued by society. They want to charge higher fees, and a monopoly will grant them the potential to hold the population to ransom.</span><br />
<br />
An engineering associate who represents a substitute product is a threat, whilst an engineering associate who represents a complementary product to the engineer is not altogether required.<br />
<br />
So taking that a B.Eng is an inadequate qualification, that B.Eng MIEAust is slightly better, and that B.Eng CP.Eng is still better, but all are incompetent to some extent, does it matter? The answer is no, it works in EA's favour. <span style="color: red;">Clearly if a B.Eng CP.Eng cannot get it right, then need to further expand their education, and training, and make the selection criteria more rigorous. So had the numbers to get the legislation passed. Once the legislation is in place, and clearly the people on the regist</span><span style="color: red;">er are not competent enough, then start to increase the rigour of the assessment, people are dropped from the register, and fewer people get on the register in the first place. A shortage arises, and fees start to increase: objective achieved.</span><br />
<br />
But we already have experienced the situation of failure of several proclaimed potential mining and construction booms due to a proclaimed shortage of engineers. This has then resulted in exploitation of foreign workers and visa requirements. It takes time to become conversant with our industrial relations system, and realise that membership of EA is voluntary. Basically the visas expire, the workers are expelled, and another batch are brought in: when they should be granted permanent residency and continue with the job. Given that construction comprises of short term intermittent contracts it is difficult to monitor.<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;">But a lot of this work doesn't require the 4 year B.Eng, and it didn't in the past. This is workplace politics not efficient design of jobs and workplaces.</span><br />
<br />
<h3>
The Associate Technologist</h3>
This is where my concept of the associate technologist comes into play. Accepting that engineering is that work done by persons with 4 year B.Eng, then modern industrial society has little need for engineering and little need for these engineer things {<i>a manufactured product thrown of an educational assembly line}</i>.<br />
<br />
Nor does society have much need for the 3 year B.Tech. Most of the work can be done by persons with a 2 year Associate Degree<i> (not the advanced diploma).</i><br />
<br />
It is not the 4 years which is important, it is the subject matter which is important, and the perspective taken on the subject matter. <span style="color: red;">A learned society needs people with a common educational base, so that communications, and publications can be written assuming such foundational knowledge and understanding.</span><br />
<br />
So most 4 year B.Eng programmes now have a common first year.<span style="color: red;"> To reinforce the AQF, the occupational groups of: Associate technologists, technologists and engineer should all have the same common first year. The common first year will be an AQF-5 (diploma) in technical science and mathematics.</span> Whilst WFEO technicians will have a 2 year Advanced Diploma (AQF-6), and pursue a different perspective: their first year will not be common with the other occupational groups.<br />
<br />
As I have mentioned before the 4 year B.Eng contains breadth, it does not contain any dependent subject strands 4 years in length: it is basically an optimised bundle of AQF-6 qualifications. The breadth tends to comprise at most 5 areas of practice. So that is 3 years to cover five subjects, or 3/5ths of a year for each subject. Even if the breadth is reduced, it rarely is a single subject, so consider at least 2 subjects, so 3/2 or 1.5 years per subject. So a full programme in a given area of practice is 1 and 3/5ths of a year to 2.5 years. In either case more subject matter in the given area of practice can be included, to more thoroughly cover that which would otherwise be learnt on the job. <i>(I am not impressed by M.Eng qualifications in structural engineering, which merely cover national codes of practice. Such are rubbish and unworthy of masters description. Such nonsense should be stopped)</i><br />
<br />
Given programmes ranging from 2 to 3 years for specific areas of practice, would expect that the graduate associate technologists and technologists have greater knowledge than graduate engineers, and are far better suited for the task at hand than the graduate engineers.<br />
<br />
I would then expect that, the dud invention, which is the 4 year B.Eng will expire and cease to be. Whilst the 3 year degree becomes the entry requirement for a 2 years masters degree through study: bringing total duration to 5 years. However, I don't believe there is adequate subject matter for depth to extend to 5 years through study. Whilst research degrees tend to be little different than, getting on with the everyday job of design and analysis. <span style="color: red;">Put another way, why pay to get a masters degree when doing little different than would be paid for in the workplace. So the validity of masters degrees needs to be investigated.</span><br />
<br />
Further to this is the government should provide greatest support for AQF levels 6 and down, whilst reducing support for levels 7 and above. I suggest that first priorty should be to create an army of people qualified at AQF-6, and then take the top 20% and encourage them to pursue AQF-7 and higher.<br />
<br />
To which end I also suggest that it should not be possible to go from school to university, or at least not start on a qualification above AQF-5. Any programme longer than 1 year duration should be broken down into shorter qualifications. So further contributing to the demise of the 4 year B.Eng (AQF-8): the first year becomes a Diploma (AQF-5), the second year an Associate Degree (AQF-6), the third year a B.Tech or B.Sc (AQF-7), and the 4th year a graduate diploma (AQF-8), and the fifth year a masters (M.Tech, M.Eng, MEngSc).<br />
<br />
And no one does engineering, and if we need to legislate we legislate planning, design, analysis, evaluation and management and do so with clearly defined areas of practice. We do not and should not allow the emergence of professional cults, and should not allow such cults to pursue objectives directed at holding us to ransom. We have enough problems with health care, we don't want to create other areas where more efficient systems cannot be implemented because a professional cults interests take priority over actual needs of society.<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
-o0o-</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
If the advanced diploma's will take a different path than the associate degree, there will be no common first year, though there will be common subjects. Basically subject matter which is irrelevant to the area of practice is eliminated from the advanced diploma program. Therefore less mathematics and less general science in the first year. The programmes will contain more qualitative coverage of subject matter and more practice work. Whilst two years in duration there will also be less depth covered. In short they will have the knowledge necessary to cover the majority of projects (eg. 80%).</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
They will be granted status to complete the AQF-5 in technical science and mathematics, and also the associate degree (AQF-6). Such study programme should require no more than 1 year to complete.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<span style="color: red;">The advanced diploma will meet the requirements for WFEO (Dublin Accord) Technician. The Associate Degree will meet the requirements for Associate Technologist, more closely related to Australia's traditional engineering associates but better.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
The Associate Technologists would achieve the educational requirements of the WFEO (Washington Accord), by completing associate degrees in 5 areas of practice, which given the common first year AQF-5 in technical science and mathematics, means 1 additional year of study for each area of practice: bringing the total study time to 6 years and surpassing the WFEO 4 year requirement: as will now contain far more content in each area of practice.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
There will be few masters to specialise, as such specialisation will be covered by completing AQF-7 award (B.Sc, B.Tech) in the single area of practice, such as structures.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<span style="color: red;">Occupational inflation of qualifications shall be halted.</span> All academic programmes will be reviewed for division of breadth, and compression of depth into the minimum number of years. Breadth is permitted only to the extent, where two or more subjects branch into a higher level subject. For example mathematics and physics branch into engineering mechanics, which then flows onto mechanics of materials. But most of physics is irrelevant to engineering mechanics, therefore the dependent physics can be kept to a minimum. Furthermore both engineering mechanics and mechanics of materials could be covered in 1 year, instead of being spread over 2 years: but to do so would require eliminating breadth of subject matter from the year.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<span style="color: red;">The point is we need people with B.Sc Applied Mechanics as much as we need people with B.Sc in Mechanical Engineering</span>. The former has depth of knowledge whilst the latter has breadth. Mechanics should be taught by someone with the degree in applied mechanics not mechanical engineering. In terms of current qualifications therefore expect someone with B.Eng to get a B.Sc in a specialist subject area before permitted to teach that subject at bachelor degree level: they will also require qualifications in teaching. Though they can use B.Eng (AQF-8) to teach at AQF level 6.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
When everyone matriculates then its value diminishes, but still everyone who is able should matriculate. <span style="color: red;">A nation's priority should be to educate the people it needs to sustain its society and it should not kowtow to the wants and whims of professional cults</span>. If a job cannot be performed by someone educated at AQF-6 then that job needs looking into in detail. Chances are it may require more than one AQF-6 qualification, but more likely it requires one AQF-6 qualification and additional AQF-5 qualifications.<br />
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<h2>
Current Education</h2>
</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
If think this does not apply to your profession, think again: it shall be applied across the board no exceptions. So includes medical doctors and lawyers amongst others. Traditional degree for doctor in some countries is: <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bachelor_of_Medicine,_Bachelor_of_Surgery">Bachelor of Medicine, Bachelor of Surgery</a>. Or there is the University of Sydney double degree: Bachelor of Science and Doctor of Medicine.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
Also note how concurrent double degrees currently can be studied in less time than the time normally required for both degrees. For example double degrees in law at Adelaide University: example given is Bachelor of Arts (three years) and Bachelor of Laws (four years) can be completed in five years if studied concurrently. whilst the duration of the law degree itself varies as follows: if you are a graduate, the duration of the program is three years full-time (or equivalent) as opposed to four years for non-graduates. Similarly get double degree: Bachelor of Engineering (Honours)(Mechanical) with Bachelor of Science, and complete in 5 years compared to (4+3)= 7 years. Or Bachelor of Engineering (Honours)(Mining) with Bachelor of Science, once again in 5 years. Such programs have the potential to increase both breadth and depth.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
If can do this at the bachelor degree level (AQF-7), then can equally well do this at the level of AQF-6. For certain in terms of status people want the bachelor degrees. However in terms of creating a flexible and mobile workforce AQF-6 and lower are more useful.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
For example mechatronics can be defined in terms of AQF-6 qualifications in mechanical and electronic technologies. Since such technologies likely employed in a manufacturing environment then additional qualifications in planning and management would be useful. Given work also typically done under contract, qualifications in contract and commercial law also useful.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
If consider a 40 to 50 year career and need for continuing professional development, and consider that part time course typically takes double time of full time. Then a 2 year programme will take 4 years part time. A person can study part time and work full time, so that is 10 to 12.5 study programmes over a career. Basically enrol in an educational institution and remain for life.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
So basically everyone has potential to complete AQF-5 or AQF-6 in:</div>
<ol>
<li>Science & Mathematics</li>
<li>Design & Technology</li>
<li>Graphic Arts & Fine Arts</li>
<li>Arts & Humanities</li>
<li>Business & Management</li>
<li>Political Science & Law</li>
<li>Health & Medicine</li>
<li>Teaching & Education</li>
</ol>
<div>
They can also complete many qualifications in trade and crafts at AQF-4 and below.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
Consider everyone attending an educational institution and becoming a part of a great repository of all human knowledge. Contrast with our ancient past and everyone attending their local village church. The capacity of the population to judge will be considerably enhanced. Public spending will require more rigorous assessment, as will infrastructure and mining projects.<br />
<br />
Now whilst the focus is AQF-6 it doesn't mean that AQF-7 will disappear, rather it will mean that AQF-7 qualifications will have the depth they are meant to have, and people will have increased potential to pursue the most appropriate AQF-7 qualification. The multiple AQF-6 qualifications will give them breadth, and provide foundation for deciding higher level of study. Furthermore we can mandate that requirement for AQF-7 is at least two independent AQF-6 awards (eg. arts and science).<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;">So no token generalist subjects thrown into the degrees, rather demand greater breadth in the first place.</span> Not sure if still holds, but at one point the universities threw mandatory second language into the generalist subjects in engineering degrees. Not altogether necessary as typical student would have previously spent 2 years at school studying a second language, and really needed to build on that to attain a level of conversational fluency. However such is of secondary importance to the primary area of study. Therefore it is better to leave out and place in additional award.<br />
<br />
So the engineering institutions/organisations are considering increasing qualification requirement to masters degree (M.Eng), but cannot get agreement from membership. <span style="color: red;">Engineers are criticised for not having appropriate breadth of knowledge regarding technology, history, culture and society. Engineers also criticised for not designing systems which have adequate fitness-for-function.</span><br />
<br />
Continuing education and AQF-6 qualifications assist to resolve these issues. The AQF-6 qualification makes them more competent in the specifics of an area of practice and associated technologies. The AQF-6 qualifications also give them greater breadth of knowledge to better understand the impact of technology.<br />
<br />
We can then identify MIEAust as a qualification, rather than post nominal detritus. It becomes a qualification because neither B.Eng nor M.Eng will be good enough to get such qualification: such qualifications lack both required depth and breadth. Depth is lacking with respect to a given technological system, and breadth is lacking regarding that which is beyond technology.<br />
<br />
Thus with new era will require something along the lines of:<br />
<br />
<ol>
<li>AQF-7 Science & Mathematics</li>
<li>AQF-6 Design & Technology</li>
<li>AQF-5 Arts & Humanities (geography, history)</li>
<li>AQF-5 Business & Management (supervision, planning)</li>
<li>AQF-5 Political Science & Law</li>
<li>AQF-5 Teaching & Education (training, mentoring)</li>
</ol>
<br />
So that's a total of (3+2+1+1+1+1)=9 years full time. Assuming first 5 years are before start work, that leaves 4 years full time, or 8 years part time. So no one will become qualified until have at least 8 years of experience. Or assuming they start work after get AQF-6, then have 7 years of full time study to complete, taking 14 years part-time. Therefore set minimum experience at 14 years, they start out as GradAIEAust (irrespective of education), then become AMIEAust, and progress through TMIEAust, then ultimately MIEAust. <i>(NB: The problem we currently have is jumping to MIEAust CP.Eng far too quickly)</i><br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;">The objective should be to get people into the workplace as quickly as possible doing the work which needs doing: but not giving them undue status and prestige beyond their capabilities and contribution.</span><br />
<br />
<h2>
Female Participation</h2>
As for increasing female participation. Well a 1 year AQF-5 in technical science and mathematics provides potential and opportunity to pursue multitude of related occupations. also more people are required to draw, plan, and make than are required to crunch numbers <i>(and a brainless unimaginative block of silicon can crunch numbers, so not a particularly desirable skill.)</i>. Easier to displace drafters and line supervisors than the trades. A design office should have more drafters in it than engineers. Drafters can be employed on contract on an as needs basis. Getting some 50% of drafters to be female, could probably be done in 2 years: train them this year, employ them next year. However, these drafters are not there to stay as drafters, they are studying part time to become "engineers". They have their foot in the door and are gaining experience, and each day they put a little bit more of their continuing education to use.<br />
<br />
Also to be noted, is that as drafters retire or drop out of the workforce for other reasons, they basically get replaced by anyone near suitably qualified. For example studied mechanical get employed in structural or doing civil drawings. Studied civil get to do mechanical. <span style="color: red;">As a drafter your task is to communicate information, not to design or solve problems, therefore working under the supervision of the engineer/designer</span>. If you demonstrate the skills to jump ahead and act as design-drafter, then management will want to keep you around. If need constant supervision and drafting presentation needs constant correcting then your presence not important. In short drafters get replaced by design-drafters, and in turn by engineering associates. <span style="color: red;">For small projects however it is inefficient to employ drafter and engineer, and both can be replaced by one engineering associate</span>. Employee engineers are typically too expensive to have them producing own drawings, engineering associates are not.<br />
<br />
Point is that can build an army where there is scope to build an army. For example this article: <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/healthcare/female-gps-outnumber-male-gps-for-the-first-time-in-australia-20170721-gxg1my.html">Female GPs outnumber male GPs for the first time in Australia</a>, the specialities are just that, specialisations requiring very few people, but GP's are near enough everywhere. If there isn't one around then probably scope to introduce one: especially in remote rural and mining towns.<br />
<br />
Little point complaining there are not enough female scientists or engineers, when also few female drafters and lab technicians. The bachelor degree in nursing for example along with potential for higher degrees, has probably increased the potential for female nurses to pursue further study and become doctors. Simply because they have their foot in the door of the universities, and more than likely attending some subjects which overlap with the studies of the doctors. How many females starting nursing switch to medicine?<br />
<br />
Proper breakdown of study programmes, progressing from AQF-1 to AQF-7 is likely to attract more people to study to higher levels. When I was at school few people wanted to waste more time in education, they wanted to get to work earning money <i>(or mostly claiming unemployment benefit). </i>And that was approaching end of grade 10. The thoughts of another 2 years of schooling followed by 3 to 4 years of university wasn't desirable. But if one year of study, gets you into the workforce, contributing and earning money, whilst pursuing continuing education, well that becomes more tolerable. <span style="color: red;">The bachelor of nursing degree for example should be equally broken down into smaller programmes, so that it is mandatory that start as enrolled nurse and progress to registered nurse, and likewise start as nursing assistant and progress to enrolled nurse.</span><br />
<br />
Or there maybe other problems: <a href="http://levelmedicine.org.au/resources/completed-fellowship-papers/gender-equity-in-medical-specialties/">Gender Equity in Medical Specialties</a>, considering the army of female nurses: <a href="https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/workforce/nursing-and-midwifery-workforce-2015/contents/how-many-nurses-and-midwives-are-there">Nursing and midwifery workforce 2015</a> and registered nurses out number enrolled nurses <i>(which seems like a major problem: top heavy organisation, not enough workers)</i>. And this is further description of potential problems: <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/health-and-wellness/red-cross-to-use-nursing-assistants-on-blood-donors-20101219-191yi.html">Red Cross to use nursing assistants on blood donors</a>. <span style="color: red;">Actually the army of female nurses probably just represents large number of females with bachelor degree who now have potential to pursue further study or research not necessarily related to medicine but more focused on social studies and health care. They don't become doctors because the proclaimed shortage of doctors is political, and the political barriers need to be overcome to improve health care rather than support the profession of doctor. Hence further education more in social studies.</span><br />
<br />
And education is no exception <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/education/private-school-principals-say-culture-must-change-20190309-p512y7.html">Private school principals say culture must change</a>. Here the issue is: do we need private schools, and the culture which supports them? That is what is the fault considered with the state schools? <span style="color: red;">If a child is not interested in learning, then a private school isn't going to make much difference. If the child is interested in learning then a private school contributes zero of value: the child does the learning not the teacher.</span> In the main the child needs access to study materials not teachers. As I mentioned in earlier posts, we should scrap grade 11 and grade 12, and start directly on AQF awards. Which thus means moving to TAFE or moving TAFE programmes into schools. The status of private schools should then diminish: and government funding be reduced not increased.<i>{Parents typically seek to get their kids into private school for at least grade 11 or 12, if they cannot get them in from the beginning or otherwise cannot afford full schooling in private school. Personally I think its a waste of money.}</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
However that approach requires modifying the AQF, as I proposed in earlier post where I increased the number of levels to 15, one more than the original 14 levels, 5 more than the current 10. Where I also introduced Certificate I to V, Diploma I to V and Masters I to V.<br />
<br />
<div>
<hr />
Related Posts</div>
<div>
<hr />
Revisions: <br />
[09/03/2019] : Original<br />
[10/03/2019] : Minor Edits, and added more after the end.<br />
[25/03/2019] : Minor Edits<br />
<br /></div>
Conrad Harrisonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11351972303793021889noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7659329.post-20484276949471203312019-02-24T16:48:00.005+10:302019-05-17T17:28:28.770+09:30Not an engineer and don't want to beI have an education in science, mathematics and technology. I can plan, design, analyse, evaluate, and manage both established technologies and new technologies. But I am not an engineer, nor am I an engineering technologist, an engineering associate or engineering technician. I don't have an occupational title, I don't need one, and I don't want one. People who get sought by occupation rather than by name, are expendable and replaceable.<br />
<br />
I have always considered the new age things called "engineers" to be less than competent, that their knowledge lacked breadth, and that rather than solving problems they implemented technical solutions. Unfortunately the technical solutions were not the proper solutions to the real problem, and thus they are responsible for creating problems in our world: not solving them.<br />
<br />
Equally well, Engineers Australia and WFEO can take their concepts of engineering technologist and engineering technician and keep them to themselves. They can choose what to call themselves, but they have no right to assign occupational titles to others. These organisations are hampering the progress of technology and societies ability to solve the world's problems.<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;">We need people with ingenuity, people who can plan, design, and manage, we do not need members of professional cults, nor people whose desire is to align themselves with such cults.</span><br />
<span style="color: red;"><br /></span>
<span style="color: red;">Engineering takes place at the frontiers of science and technology. Engineering is not about adapting established technologies to be suitable for a specific purpose: such activity is simply rational scientific based design, or technical design. Where technical is typically replaced by reference to the technology being designed such as: structural design, bridge design, mechanical design.</span><br />
<span style="color: red;"><br /></span>
At the very minimum engineering requires developing new technology at the same time as developing a rational scientific methodology for its design and developing the method of assessment of the design. Since there is no prior art, prototypes have to be built and tested in a controlled environment to verify and validate, the science and the design models. There is a high risk of failure.<br />
<br />
In some situations the technology exists but there is no rational scientific method to allow adapting the technology for some specific purpose. Developing this design method in the process of adapting the technology can be considered engineering. (Using FEA/FEM software is not engineering.)<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Developing new technology based on the established technical sciences is not engineering. Carrying out routine technical tests is not engineering. For example, a beam is a generic technology, it can be employed in a multitude of larger technologies not yet invented, inventing those technologies is not engineering. We do not expect failure, we expect the technologies to perform as required. We can design and evaluate the technologies entirely on paper, in the abstract. Though we may need to collect data from some routine testing, to complete our assessment. We may build prototypes and test them, but not to validate the science, but rather to verify we didn't miss anything. Also to check if the whole is different than the sum of the parts, and calibrate the mathematical models if needed.<br />
<br />
At the simplest if a technology is described in published literature along with appropriate technical science, then its design is not engineering: the engineering is complete, the engineering is over, the engineering has been done already.<br />
<br />
<ol>
<li><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lJRW316QcVs">EWB Australia | Redefining Engineering - YouTube</a></li>
<li><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e8QY0NDWqzk">The Most Successful People Explain Why a College Degree is USELESS - YouTube</a></li>
<li><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FEeTLopLkEo">Inspiring the next generation of female engineers | Debbie Sterling | TEDxPSU - YouTube</a></li>
<li><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WTs2kKCV9pg">Are engineers human? | Patricia Galloway | TEDxManhattanBeach - YouTube</a></li>
<li><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MhanyR5Rfk0">How Much Math do Engineers Use? (College Vs Career) - YouTube</a></li>
<li><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=btGYcizV0iI">What is Engineering?: Crash Course Engineering #1 - YouTube</a></li>
<li><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-xbtnz4wdaA">Civil Engineering: Crash Course Engineering #2 - YouTube</a></li>
<li><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A1V-QQ5wFU4">Mechanical Engineering: Crash Course Engineering #3 - YouTube</a></li>
<li><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nezlj_jrG20">Ending poverty - what engineers can do: James Trevelyan at TEDxPerth - YouTube</a></li>
<li><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G_Pjumo707Q">Re-Engineering Engineering Education: Stephan Athan at TEDxUF - YouTube</a></li>
<li><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rp9PfqUQ8a4">TEDxUIUC - David E. Goldberg - 7 Missing Basics of Engineering - YouTube</a></li>
<li><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WOAgllKD-9o">Why We Need Engineers Now More Than Ever | Elanor Huntington | TEDxSydney - YouTube</a></li>
<li><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vvlozhvQPJw">We can end poverty, but this is why we haven't | Teva Sienicki | TEDxMileHighWomen - YouTube</a></li>
<li><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p4JPFr8g3yQ">How do the poor see life? Uneducated, not stupid | Rajen Makhijani | TEDxNTU</a></li>
<li><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fw1Fc_y_2Ek">The interesting story of our educational system | Adhitya Iyer | TEDxCRCE - YouTube</a></li>
</ol>
<br />
<br />
<div>
<hr />
Related Posts</div>
<div>
<hr />
Revisions: <br />
[24/02/2019] : Original<br />
[26/02/2019] : Expanded content<br />
[25/03/2019] : rephrased<br />
[10/04/2019] : Minor Edits<br />
[17/05/2019] : Added more description</div>
</div>
Conrad Harrisonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11351972303793021889noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7659329.post-44218877438593859962019-02-17T15:06:00.003+10:302019-02-26T17:26:19.708+10:30More on the AQFI suggest that in the main qualifications awarded under the Australian Qualification Framework (AQF) do not quite live up to the objectives. So what follows includes how the AQF is working, and proposals to improve some aspects.<br />
<br />
The objectives of the AQF, are to allow employers to identify people competent for the task at hand and improve occupational mobility. The educated should not be trapped in some silly occupational class or locked out by some elitist professional cult.<br />
<br />
The AQF qualifications are supposed to improve mobility, movement up through the levels is meant to result in increased depth of knowledge, increase in independent thought and increase in personal responsibility.<br />
<br />
<h3>
Content vs Duration</h3>
The qualifications are meant to be defined by content not by duration, unfortunately the university sector doesn't comply they base awards on duration. So a 4 year B.Eng rather than being defined by required content is defined mostly by the duration.<br />
<br />
That is graduates having spent 4 years to get a degree, believe they are superior than other graduates, who only spent 3 years to get a B.Sc or B.A. The other degrees however are not occupational degrees they are traditional academic degrees and typically involve far greater intellectual rigour than an occupational degree like a B.Eng. <i>{The 4 year duration, seems to be mostly because of breadth of subject matter, slowness of the students, and and time spent on industry experience. In other words it lacks academic content, rather than such graduates being paid more on graduation they should be paid less. (we have <a href="http://awardviewer.fwo.gov.au/award/show/MA000065">industrial awards</a> which set pay and conditions, and the award says they should be paid more)}</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
Anyway as a consequence of other occupations and industries not paying too much attention to content and more interest in status of higher awards, some minimum durations were imposed. Minimum durations do not entirely help, as an isolated topic can be presented rapidly in 1 hour, or it can be dragged out over several hours. Though expect that there is an optimum time in which learning can actually take place.<br />
<br />
Therefore expect with the passage of time, the content of programmes will increase as the time required to present a subject decreases. However also expect that in lower level programmes the time taken will increase and the content will decrease, as more effort is expended to develop higher level of proficiency and make them more conversant.<br />
<br />
<h3>
Education vs Training</h3>
However developing proficiency is why in previous posts I have suggested that we split education from training. We restrict education to foundational knowledge and enabling competences, and is more evaluation than learning. Whilst training academies focus on increased proficiency: lots of repetition until achieve the required level of performance.<br />
<br />
With a split between education and training, most of the trade oriented qualifications will comprise of two parts: the AQF award and an associated Certificate of Practice (CoP). Prior AQF's will be identified as containing the CoP, modern awards will indicate explicit exclusion of the CoP. So people can get the foundational knowledge and then become adequately qualified to gain experience. If they cannot gain the AQF award then they are not adequately qualified to gain experience. <span style="color: red;">The training academies become an important filter between education and industry.</span><br />
<br />
Once someone has a CoP, at some future date they may have to complete supplementary training and assessment to verify that they still meet the minimum requirements. Whilst initial training maybe anything from 2 weeks to 250 weeks, corroboration of ability may only take 1 day.<br />
<br />
<h3>
Mobility</h3>
Improved mobility is achieved by recognising common foundational knowledge and skill sets across various occupations, and creating appropriate educational awards and study programmes. Obviously this may result in programmes which contain content not relevant to a given occupation. However if an occupation or profession is defined by breadth, then it can be defined in terms of multiple AQF awards rather than one. We should not be defining bachelor degree programmes because of required breadth.<br />
<br />
If need a ticket to belong to a profession or occupation, then that can be separate to the AQF awards and CoP's. A national organisation can issue a card the size of a credit card which lists occupations for which are qualified, on the front and AQF awards and CoP's on the back., along with a separate document providing a detailed summary. Basically little different than becoming a graded member of some qualifying body: the membership grade is the qualification not the educational awards. However for the proposal the qualifying body would ultimately be an international organisation, with national branches.<br />
<br />
There should be no issue having multiple low level AQF's to define an occupation, if an occupation is required.<br />
<br />
<h3>
Knowledge Content and Academic Rigour</h3>
There seems to have been a split in the AQF at level 6 where have the advance diploma and the associate degree. Where the associate degree is seen as more academically rigorous than the advanced diploma. This also indicates the split between the university education sector and the vocational education sector.<br />
<br />
This is where things have got messed up, along with the senior secondary certificate of education (SSCE) which doesn't properly fit into the AQF. The problem is that after grade 10, students can study towards AQF awards, or pursue grade 11 and grade 12 to get the SSCE. Some AQF programmes require the SSCE for entry, whilst others don't.<br />
<br />
So for example to enter into a bachelor degree programme (AQF-7/AQF-8) would require to complete the SSCE. But can otherwise get advanced diploma or associate degree (AQF-6) and gain status for upto 2 years in the degree programme. Some people got the advanced diploma without SSCE, either because in the past it was possible to start without such qualification, or because of adult entry.<br />
<br />
Clearly there is inequity, in that the original 5 year programme to get a 3 year degree has been collapsed to 3 years (Original: 2 years for SSCE + 3 year degree).<br />
<br />
Therefore my proposal is that we scrap the SSCE, and after grade 10, start on AQF awards. No repetition in grade 11, grade 12 and first year at university. All is properly coordinated, and all education requires stepping up through the AQF, no jumping levels.<br />
<br />
If cannot jump levels, then only one way to get a AQF-7 qualification and that is to successfully pass through the 6 previous levels. To get a bachelor degree you have to get an advanced diploma, no buts doubts or maybe's about it. This means those persons at a higher level in a more supervisory role, are aware of the capabilities of those educated at a lower level.<br />
<br />
In other words we don't waste education because a whole heap of school leavers have got a B.Eng gone into an organisation and got the idea that those with an advanced diploma are only capable of drafting because that is where such persons have been stuck. Both those with AQF-6 and AQF-8 levels of education need opportunity to put their education to work and gain experience to develop competence and confidence.<br />
<br />
Furthermore if you have progressed up the ladder rather than having jumped in at the top, and started work at the lower level you will be aware of the education required to complete a given task. Thus appropriate people can be trained and put to work. No false claims of shortages.<br />
<br />
I'm not against providing visa's and allowing foreigners to do the work. I am however against the foreigners being exploited to do the work, and then being unceremoniously tossed out off the country when no longer needed. I am also against high level people being brought in to do something which is trite from their viewpoint. We should get the right people to do the work, and if we can educate and train them locally then we should do so. <span style="color: red;">But training becomes impractical if all the time we declare there is a shortage of people with bachelor programmes and 5 to 10 years experience. It suggests we have a loss of leadership, and therefore not capable of assessing if people are adequately qualified.</span><br />
<br />
If we can say that designing a structure only requires a 2 year Associate Degree and educated people at that level and provide them opportunity, we save significant resources, and reach our objectives faster.<br />
<br />
Take engineering each discipline can be broken into about 5 major areas of practice, according to NCEES in the USA.<br />
<br />
Civil Engineering:<br />
<br />
<ol>
<li>Construction</li>
<li>Geotechnical</li>
<li>Structural</li>
<li>Transportation</li>
<li>Water Resources and Environmental</li>
</ol>
<br />
<div>
Mechanical Engineering</div>
<br />
<ol>
<li>Basic Engineering Practice</li>
<li>Mechanical Systems and Materials</li>
<li>Hydraulics and Fluids</li>
<li>Energy/Power systems</li>
<li>HVAC/Refrigeration</li>
</ol>
<br />
<div>
Industrial Engineering (management)</div>
<div>
<div>
<ol>
<li>Facilities Engineering and Planning</li>
<li>Systems Analysis and Design</li>
<li>Logistics</li>
<li>Work Design</li>
<li>Ergonomics and Safety</li>
<li>Quality Engineering</li>
</ol>
<div>
Architectural Engineering</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<ol>
<li>Building Systems Integration</li>
<li>Electrical Systems</li>
<li>Mechanical Systems</li>
<li>Structural Systems</li>
<li>Project Management and Construction Administration</li>
</ol>
</div>
<div>
Note that in all these lists they are referring to technology not to the technical science. So my formal education covers mechanical, industrial and manufacturing engineering, I also took options in structures and agricultural engineering.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Structures and mechanical systems are dependent on engineering mechanics both statics and dynamics, along with the mechanics of the strength and stability of materials. Therefore civil engineering and mechanical engineering overlap, except that most civil's wouldn't cover dynamics.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Water resources is dependent on hydraulics which is specialisation of fluid mechanics, the last 4 items in the mechanical engineering list are dependent on thermofluid dynamics.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The architectural engineering branch covers the structural and mechanical technologies as they relate to buildings. There is no coverage of the design of fabrication and construction processes, or logistics of supplying materials to the construction site. That project management stuff will be more about money, schedules and contract law.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
Also note that there are 6 areas in industrial engineering, not just 5. Also elsewhere it maybe described as industrial management rather than engineering.<br />
<br />
So as before, if take the first year of a 4 year programme as covering the common science, then that typically leaves 3 years to cover 5 areas of practice. So a 2 year AQF-6 programme can easily maintain the academic rigour of a 4 year B.Eng and cover a single area of practice which only gets 1 and 3/5ths of a year. So in a 2 year programme there is 2/5ths of a year available for increased focus on the area of practice.<br />
<br />
For example an Associate Degree in Structures: could cover the basic engineering mechanics, statics and dynamics, structural mechanics (analysis), and the mechanics of the strength and stability of materials as well as cover more technology specific requirements such as building structures and bridge structures.<br />
<br />
A 2 year programme would stick to frames. Whilst a 3 year programme would extend into plates, shells, cable-nets and tension membranes, vibration and fatigue of structures.<br />
<br />
Now I missed the soils and geotechnical aspects of the technology. Very important as the structures, no matter whether buildings, bridges, machines or other non-machine structure, all stand on the ground. However geotechnical is increasingly becoming a specialisation. If it is critical and important then want a specialist, if not critical then it's not that complex. The basics of footing design can thus be covered in the 2 year qualification for structures.<br />
<br />
Now if geotechnical depends on knowledge of structures, then it adds the 3rd year after studying AQF-6 in structures, as an alternative to studying alternative structural forms. I doubt however it is so dependent, it depends on mechanics and that should be covered in the first year.<br />
<br />
The first year would become an AQF-5 in technical science and mathematics. It should cover the content of the American FE breadth exam. Whilst the AQF-6 programme covers requirements for FE depth, and PE depth exam but lacks PE breadth.<br />
<br />
We shouldn't need the likes of the American FE/PE exam if the academic institutions examinations are rigorous enough, and the requirements for getting the AQF award are robust enough.<br />
<br />
Similarly we should <span style="color: red;">not </span>need registration or licensing requirements if people are properly educated and trained.<br />
<br />
So the problem with the sign post falling over and the cracks in the Opal towers is because people adequately qualified in structures did not design the structures and people with still greater capability in structures did not properly review and approve the evidence-of-suitability. Licensing people based on current academic records and professional memberships will not resolve the issues. We need people more competent in structural design, we need better managed projects, we need better controlled projects.<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="color: red;">... to be continued ...</span></div>
<h3>
Loss of Status</h3>
All existing bachelor degrees will loose status. This is not a problem as all academic awards should loose status with the passage of time.<br />
<br />
That which can be studied in the first 10 years of education can be increased with the passage of time. As more books are written and published, more information becomes accessible. Furthermore books improve the presentation of subject matter with time. On the other hand subjects can also become increasingly complex with the passage of time. One subject also builds upon another subject, so that have subjects, involving studying the studying of the subject, or studying the people studying the subject, or the history of the subject. Some times these are important complements other times they are irrelevant and unimportant.<br />
<br />
Furthermore books can give way to video, and animations and interactive programmes, so that learning is made easier and assessment is made more robust. So that hopefully the certificate I from last year is not as good as the certificate I from this year. And hopefully it is never the other way around, with last years qualifications being superior.<br />
<br />
Also last year needed someone special to find a solution to a problem, this year and there after, people with lesser knowledge can be educated to apply the solution. So at one point we needed to know how to design beams, and how to design walls of circular tanks: now that as a society we hold such knowledge, now we, just need to train people to use such knowledge.<br />
<br />
If there is a defined body of knowledge used to define a profession then that body of knowledge can be published and should be published. As a designer I like to know what a carpenter should be capable of doing, and also what they are willing to do or have the resources to do. Armed with such knowledge I can minimise my documentation. Alternatively I can expand documentation and save them time. But if I expect the carpenter to have more knowledge than they have, and the carpenter believes they know more than they actually do, then we have a problem.<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;">Clearly has human knowledge increases we expect to have more specialists. So now we have hundreds if not thousands of people who now have a bachelor degree defining their job, and giving rise to more and more professional cults. Yet the need for these degrees in the main has little to do with the needs of the work, and more to do with poorly defined and poorly designed jobs.</span><br />
<br />
Now clearly if each area of practice is only given 1 and 3/5th of a year in a 4 year programme (AQF-8), but an AQF-6 programme, well gives it 2 years and provides more content, then the AQF-6 programme makes that individual more competent and capable in the given area of practice. Furthermore the next generation will require 5 x AQF-6 programmes to get the same breadth. Assuming that all are based on a common foundation at AQF-5, then that is a total of 1 + 5=6 years of study versus the 4 year programme.<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;">In terms of breadth the 3 and 4 year programmes should fall out of favour. But new 3 year programmes should emerge which properly cover depth and appropriate specialisations.</span><br />
<br />
<h3>
Societies Confidence</h3>
As I say no need for registration and licensing, proper education and training and recognition of such through the AQF should take care of such.<br />
<br />
<h3>
Confidence in Design</h3>
Defects in design are largely a consequence of pressure due to budget and time constraints: if don't sell time and don't believe all units of time have the same value, then not quite the same problem. On top of these constraints is owners/developers introducing last minute changes whether at the end of design or part way through construction.<br />
<br />
Now this becomes a problem, when have inadequate checks and balances in place. The issue is not about who checks work, but how work is checked.<br />
<br />
Design is a creative activity, it imagines potential solutions to a set of objectives and constraints, and the proposals are guided by qualitative appreciation of science. Where feasible some numbers are crunched to give some quantitative guidance. Designers work at drawing boards, they alternate between drawing and calculations. Drawings are used to resolve dimensional and geometric issues of fit, to get a clear picture of relationships. Whilst dimensions may well be calculated, sketches are used to define relationships, the geometry and shape of things. Scale drawings can validate or refute assumptions. For example, the arithmetic doesn't add up because missed dimension of a clearance, or a gasket or something not usually present.<br />
<br />
Calculations and drawings therefore reinforce one another, one is a second opinion on the other: a check and a balance. You should have at least two ways of doing things, if the two ways give different answers and they should give the same, then need to find an explanation and then fix the approach which is giving the wrong answer or find other approaches better suited to the task.<br />
<br />
The process of design should therefore be close to self correcting. However often have multiple conflicting requirements. So when finished and have documented the whole, then review the finished document and assess if it is fit-for-function and met all objectives: or otherwise explicitly identify the conflicting objectives and the compromises made.<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;">Design-calculations</span> are seldom suitable as <span style="color: red;">Proof-Calculations.</span> Once design is completed then need to do proof-calculations. For example wouldn't use AS4100 steel structures code to <span style="color: red;">design </span>a steel beam, it is too complex and convoluted. Rather design is carried out using simpler calculations, for example "find and get in the ballpark" using full section properties and a suitable design-factor. Then <span style="color: red;">check compliance</span> with AS4100 using the more cumbersome to calculate effective section properties. Of course we can simplify the process and produce design capacity tables (DCT's), and thus the process becomes more efficient as we can get a suitable section more directly with fewer calculations. We can speed things even further with span tables for specific applications. Faster still is to use computers. It is still however a <span style="color: red;">"trial and error"</span> exercise as the analysis calculations are dependent on knowing the properties of a suitable section, and the point of the calculations is to find a suitable section. So we guess and check, and use each previous guess to direct our next guess, until we converge upon the structural solution. Most other areas of practice are similar. There are few situations where it is practical to rearrange the mathematical expressions and directly calculate the value we are seeking.<br />
<br />
Irrespective we have this process of design-calculation which then results in a <span style="color: red;">specification-of-intent</span><br />
which we then need to check is a valid <span style="color: red;">design-solution</span> to our defined <span style="color: red;">design-problem</span>. So our final calculations provide proof of compliance with a code of practice and all other objectives and requirements. These proof-calculations form the first stage of the evidence-of-suitability for the proposal.<br />
<br />
If the design is simple and non-critical then the designer can do their own proof checks a few hours or a few days later. If the system is not simple and is critical then another person should carry out an independent review. An <span style="color: red;">independent review</span> is not an arithmetic check, it is not a school teacher checking the work. An independent review is carried out using the specification-of-intent, and only such specification, the reviewer has no need to see the designers calculations. <i>{My experience is large Australian consultancies do not carry out proper independent reviews they get graduates to basically do arithmetic checks. Who may or may not otherwise ask what is this all about? It is good if they do ask, as they can start learning how to do such calculations, and demonstrate that they have understanding of the concepts. It is however not a proper independent check, it can be used as a secondary check and learning exercise but not a substitute for formal review.}</i><br />
<br />
Once the designer organisation is happy they have validated the design. The specification-of-intent can be released for regulatory review. <span style="color: red;">Regulatory review is only concerned with compliance with regulations: if not in the regulations then of no consequence</span>. It is therefore the designer's responsibility to highlight additional requirements which may go above and beyond the minima of the codes and to have had these properly checked and validated because the regulator isn't going to check or validate them.<br />
<br />
Now once again the regulator should be capable of carrying out an independent review without reference to the designers-proof calculations. However:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="color: red;">An independent review can only be properly executed if there has been a deliberate intent to make a proposal suitable for purpose and a defendable assertion to that effect has been made. [sch]</span></blockquote>
The designer doesn't need to submit their proof calculations, but they need make declaration that they are capable of defending their claim that a proposal is fit-for-function. Traditionally that is as simple as several people working for the consultant signing off on the drawings. Typically would include the designer, chief-designer, and senior representative of the organisation. For small projects and small consultancies, it would just be the signature of the designer. <i><span style="color: red;">{Unfortunately seems people are more concerned about intellectual property rights, and copyright than getting things right. So building designers drawings have business name on them and copyright notice, but seldom a signature or initials indicating that they are the designer responsible. The drawings bounce back and forth between council and themselves until it becomes compliant. Not really acceptable as the certifier is more designer, than independent reviewer.}</span></i><br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;">If there is no indication of who is advocate or proponent for the proposal, then the regulator shouldn't be wasting their time reviewing the proposal, as their independence from the design process will be compromised. The regulator would become more a design manager guiding the design process until it converges on a compliant design. Not their role.</span><br />
<br />
So the regulator gets the appropriate documents (which do not include the proof-calculations), and can now independently review the project. The issue is that the regulator doesn't have enough time to carry out a proper independent review, and fees are inadequate for such purpose.<br />
<br />
Possibly true. But it is also true that the<span style="color: red;"> regulators do not appear to put any time into developing suitable design tools to aid their specific role.</span><br />
<br />
For example nailed plated roof trusses were a problem, because rapidly designed by software, and the output lacked detail. So lacks detail, but did the specification of intent lack detail? If can write software to rapidly design the trusses can equally well write software to check compliance: where was the compliance checking software, where is the compliance checking software? Doesn't exist because typically use general purpose structural analysis software, but such software is too slow. Therefore need more specific software optimised for the task at hand: it needed to be developed, it still needs to be developed. But that is just the assessment, by calculation.<br />
<br />
There is still the issue of the specification-of-intent: was that adequate? The answer is no. A proper specification would have clear details regarding the connections. It would make it clear that nail plates fit and have adequate anchorage in each member. The information would be in the specification to allow checking that the nail plates have adequate resistance. If connections are not drawn to scale, then a lot of information is missing. It isn't always necessary to draw the connections, as some connections are simple and the fit is obvious. For example 2M20's into a 250 PFC likely acceptable, the same bolts in a C7510 is likely a problem unless the bolts are maybe side by side<i> (but would still like to know about end distances and edge distance.)</i>.<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;">If drawings lack the information to conduct an independent review, then the drawings are not good enough.</span> The drawings may not give the information directly, but expect to find the information necessary to derive other information. Though if have to draw additional sections, may consider the drawings inadequate.<br />
<br />
The review process is iterative. The detail of the review calculations depends on the specification. If the design is robust then a quick and simple calculation may justify its suitability. If the design is optimum, and pushing everything to the minimum, then more calculation effort would be required, and therefore more time needed.<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;">Whilst the review process is iterative like the design process it requires fewer iterations than design. Design has to find a valid solution, review only needs to accept or reject a proposal. Review can stop as soon as it hits a point of rejection. However, review should be as refined as necessary before claiming rejection. That is to say there are no further refinements which could be made which by any stretch of the imagination would result in compliance.</span><br />
<br />
In the first instance the reviewer should check all qualitative and attribute requirements before making any quantitative assessment. When they reject they should then identify all non-compliance checks upto the point of first calculation: making it clear that review has stopped. If the qualitative issues will affect calculations, then no point in starting calculation checks.<br />
<br />
Thus the defects in buildings are not so much a consequence of poorly educated personnel, but personnel operating in defective systems. Furthermore ISO:9000 accredited organisations are highly likely to have defective quality systems, as typically all they have done is rename contract document management systems to QA systems.<br />
<br />
They may monitor drafting errors, but they have few systems in place to monitor design errors, or this thing they like to call engineering. Whilst these days they may have software to do a lot of the calculations, something needs to check and balance the suitability of the software for the task. For example AS4100 does not cover torsion, therefore if a 3D frame has torsion, then would not expect that any 3D design software checking to AS4100 would make valid checks. So have two choices, follow tradition and avoid torsion, so go remove the torsion by changing the connections. Or check the suitability of the members for torsion.<i> {Whilst this is outside the scope of AS4100 to provide a check, it is within the scope of the NCC/BCA that assessing suitability for such action is required, though no method of checking is provided. So code compliance doesn't mean fit-for-function, and NCC/BCA deemed-to-satisfy provisions do not satisfy. So I reiterate if something is merely code compliant it is low quality rubbish.}</i><br />
<br />
So engineering consultancies need to improve their quality systems, understand quality robust design, and better monitor and control design errors. It is not about who to blame, it is about designing the correct process for design. It is about appropriate organisational structure and decision processes. It is about appropriate training and development of personnel. Not everything can be billable.<br />
<br />
Writing career episode and work practice reports is not graduate development, and it is not training. Fast tracking graduates to CP.Eng is not in the best interests of society nor the interests of the graduate. They need to know how deficient their knowledge and abilities are, not elevated on a pedestal.<br />
<br />
Confidence in design doesn't come from who did the design, but how the design was completed and how it was reviewed and checked.<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;">I have no confidence in design approval in Queensland and Victoria as it seems built around a self certifying authoritarian cult who fill in silly forms <i>(Form 13 as I remember is used in one of the states). </i>There seems no checks and balances on when they can self certify. And with self certifying there is no feedback to inform the "engineer" just how deficient their knowledge is and how defective their understanding.</span><br />
<br />
For years I thought the SA system was defective because the people on the regulatory side have highly inconsistent competency. So builders move from working in one council area to another, as do the architects and engineers, and they complain about lack of consistency in application of the rules. "I didn't have to do that before", is a common phrase. From which get the impression they will go back to ignoring an issue on their next project in another council area.<br />
<br />
Sometimes the council requests seem unreasonable and silly, and have to churn out a stack of pages to declare an issue to be: negligible, zero, insignificant. Pages which wouldn't be required if the regulator had appropriate experience, and knew the issue was of no significance. Various regulations now require that the people issuing certificates of an independent technical expert (CITE), have CP.Eng credentials. Unfortunately the people are mostly the same people as previous, and therefore the inconsistency remains. However, some are good and some are bad, and a designer learns from the good ones, a good designer learns from both. With good ones, it is possible to discuss issues with. The bad ones are authoritarian obstacles to be removed: they blindly apply codes where they are irrelevant, and seem to have little interest in learning and understanding the specifics of a project which make the code more hazard than benefit.<br />
<br />
Still, good or bad, two people are more likely to find defects than one person. Also most of the criticism I put in my calculation reports seems to find its way into changes in the code. So by influencing one group of people I indirectly contribute to removing ambiguities and deficiencies in the codes. Not necessary to be out there with my name up in lights.<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
... continued ...</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
Confidence doesn't come from knowing that an electrician is licensed and they pay their license fees every year. Confidence comes from knowing that they were properly educated, trained and assessed as competent in the first place. Then knowing that they know their own limitations, and will put the work aside when their capabilities deteriorate with age. If not then expect that there are systems in place and feedback mechanisms which prevent them from doing serious harm.<br />
<br />
If an electrician, plumber or builder does their work without it being checked or audited then it is not acceptable. But may consider that is an hassle, given had may have had problems finding an available tradesperson in the first place. However the checks and balances do not have to be direct inspection.<br />
<br />
If an electrician does some work on a house then the as-built drawings need to be revised, which means the as-built drawings need to exist. The as-built drawings then get submitted to the regulating authority. If there are issues with the drawings the site can be inspected immediately, if no issues with the drawings the site can be inspected at a much later date. If there are issues at a later date then all the sites can be inspected: which therefore requires knowing all the sites.<br />
<br />
Better however is the presence of an independent inspector just prior to the work being closed up and hidden from view. No payment needs to be made for the work until both the electrician and inspector sign-off on the work. This is not an exercise in collecting signatures and identifying where to lay blame. It is simply a check on the quality of the work. So a system independent of names and scrap paper can be implemented if possible. For example both electrician and inspector have tagging tools, each receives appropriate tags from the regulator, and each tags the work. The electrician cannot tag the work as inspected because they don't have the right tags and tagging tool. Though something more robust than that is preferable.<br />
<br />
The requirement is that the work needs to be demonstrated as correct and that no hazards have been created. So a certain set of tests can be mandated which have to be witnessed by the building owner.<br />
<br />
So education, training, and quality assurance system. No registration, no licensing, no system to administer and no licensing fees. Just need operational systems which have built-in checks and balances. Systems which catch mistakes when the electrician or other trade is having a bad day.<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
..o0o..</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
I got side tracked. I had more to write about the certificate programs. The stepping through the programs, and need for breadth. But cannot remember what it was.<br />
<br />
Something along lines of minimum duration of 1 year programme 1500 hours. All programmes start with certificates. But first year is broken into 5 substages. For academic programme, that is minimum of 300 hours for each substage. A maximum of 5 strands to cover breadth. So 60 hours for each strand. A year divided into 50 productive weeks, so 10 weeks for each fifth. Resulting in 6 hours each week for each strand. Possible strands are:<br />
<br />
<ol>
<li>Technology</li>
<li>Technical Drawing / Descriptive Geometry</li>
<li>Mathematics</li>
<li>Physics</li>
<li>Chemistry & Materials</li>
</ol>
<div>
This leaves out such subjects as:</div>
<div>
<ol>
<li>Management</li>
<li>Biology</li>
<li>Geology</li>
<li>Psychology</li>
</ol>
</div>
<br />
If these are important subjects, then it maybe seen that the breadth is not great enough. Alternative may consider broader subjects, from my <a href="http://metamorphs-technicalpraxis.blogspot.com/search/label/Study%20Guide">earlier breakdown of subjects</a>:<br />
<br />
<ol>
<li>Design<span style="white-space: pre;"> </span></li>
<li>Technical Drawing & Engineering Graphics<span style="white-space: pre;"> </span></li>
<li>Process Technology: Manufacturing & Construction <span style="white-space: pre;"> </span></li>
<li>Product Technology: Building Construction<span style="white-space: pre;"> </span></li>
<li>Management, Business and Office Procedures<span style="white-space: pre;"> </span></li>
<li>Legal Framework<span style="white-space: pre;"> </span></li>
</ol>
<br />
<div>
This suggests expanding to 6 strands, though legal framework could be combined with the management strand. Also this doesn't directly address mathematics and science, as this is buried in the design and technology subject areas. Or define other broad areas:</div>
<div>
<ol>
<li>Technology</li>
<li>Design</li>
<li>Science</li>
<li>Mathematics</li>
</ol>
<div>
With this approach introduce the technology, then move onto design of the technology, give rise to need for science which in turn gives rise to mathematics. All four strands are increased in depth during the first year, then in second year only science and mathematics are increased.</div>
</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
If more breadth is required then first year may have to comprise of multiple certificate 1 programmes, and therefore will not complete Certificate V in the first year, and will not move onto an associate degree in the second year.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
However with proposed system we are now starting the programme at grade 11 not after grade 12. So we have an extra 2 years to the typical 3 year bachelor programme, in which appropriate depth and breadth are developed. Hence my earlier proposal for Diploma I to Diploma V, and Masters I to Masters V. Where grade 11 = Certificate V and grade 12 is Diploma I, and 3 year bachelor degree is Diploma IV, and graduate diploma = Diploma V. Which also means that grade 12 = Associate Degree and thus no longer provides any status in a bachelor programme: as all bachelor programmes have to be completely redesigned to increase depth on the associate degrees.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The importance of the redesign is that people will be ready to enter the workplace earlier and they are qualified to be employed on meaningful work. So they can work whilst they study for higher level qualifications. This is important because many are studying because there is need to get a ticket to employment, low skilled jobs are rapidly taken, therefore difficult to get a job to pay for studies. Not everyone can get a job stocking shelves in a supermarket or working behind a bar: they need qualifications to get a job. So the qualifications need to be quicker to get, but more robust assessment of capability is required.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The staged progress from AQF-1 upwards is the more productive, efficient and higher quality approach than jumping to AQF-7 straight from school. We filter people out at AQF-1, and onwards. So AQF-1 has the harshest and most demanding assessment requirements. For example at AQF-1 expect some 50% are rejected and cannot progress further, by AQF-5 expect only 5% are rejected: by such point people should be on the right path. After AQF-5, still expect that programmes are split into 1/5th blocks or 10 week blocks, and that progressive assessments are made so that a person can quit before going to far. For example they can halt progress to AQF-6 and take another path starting with any other lower AQF level that they have passed. They may decide that AQF-5 is their limit and just choose to increase breadth at that level.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
A clever workforce is <span style="color: red;">not </span>one with great depth of knowledge, but rather an adaptive workforce with broad multi-skilling. A builder who has skills in electrical and plumbing work is preferable than need for a group. At an abstract level plumbing and electrical systems are similar: both involve networks with some driving force. For that matter could design and build a fluid power computing device. Which raises the issue that plumbers don't go near fluid power systems whether hydraulic (typically oil) or pneumatic. A plumber is thus not a mechanical engineering technician.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
So if could get plumbers and electricians to become multiskilled and move to the next level, that is potentially far better workforce than pushing people through bachelor degrees. As much can be designed and built at the technician level. And more is possible at that level if knowledge was being properly pushed down to where it can empower and enable people to do what they need.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Licensing doesn't enable and empower people to get things done, it hinders them. If I design something which is electrical do I need an electrician to make it, especially if it works of a battery? I can see the need for an electrician if needs to be plugged into the mains. However, they are not electrical technicians, so they wouldn't be entirely capable of assessing the technology. So we get to the point where the license is the hazard not the safeguard: and we otherwise have no safeguard in place.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
What I am doing designing electrical? Why wouldn't I, it's the main power source for factory automation besides fluid power. I know I don't know enough to fully verify fitness-for-function, but I can still design, propose and get full fitness-for-function verified by someone else. Design of a fluid power control system doesn't immediately consider the fluid mechanics, as need to specify a control system before start sizing pipes and pumps. I could probably verify the pipes and pumps if had an appropriate industry manual. Not so much a matter of science, but a matter of design data and standard practice.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Consistent and good practice is dependent on appropriate <span style="color: red;">industry manuals</span> and design data and such references based on local practice are in short supply or just plain none existent. It tends to reflect an inappropriate culture where knowledge is being held to ransom, rather than being appropriately shared to enable and empower the people. <i>{By sharing, I don't mean knowledge has to be available at zero fee, I mean it has to be available from a variety of alternative sources.}</i></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
..[23:48]..</div>
<br />
<br />
<div>
<hr />
Related Posts</div>
<div>
<hr />
Revisions: <br />
[17/02/2019] : Original<br />
[26/02/2019] : Minor Edits<br />
<br /></div>
Conrad Harrisonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11351972303793021889noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7659329.post-21679062996853910172019-02-16T15:01:00.003+10:302019-02-16T17:24:32.143+10:30The Need or Not For EngineersBack around 2010/2011 during the Queensland floods I was relatively active on <a href="https://twitter.com/metamorphs96">twitter</a>, involved following: the flood, farmers (#agchatoz), teachers concerned about the purpose of education (#purposedu), and various humanitarian aid agencies especially engineers without borders (EWB). In particular one EWB from imperial college who went to a rural part of <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Udaipur">Udaipur</a> working with <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seva_Mandir">Seva Mandir</a>, in the process I learnt about <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stepwell">stepwells</a>. Not long afterwards there was news that India graduated around 1 million engineers each year. Which begs the question what was an engineering graduate from the UK doing with EWB in India, why not send Indian EWB's to London to help the homeless?<br />
<br />
As I understand it, the project was concerned with assessing different power supplies for water pumps. Pipes had been put down into the wells, some being stepwells, and then pumps used to draw the water up. As I understood most of the water was for domestic use, but there was some consideration being given to irrigation. Basically the consideration was whether diesel engines, windmills or solar panels was the most suitable power source.<br />
<br />
Here in Australia, at the time, there was an article about our traditional windmill pumps being replaced by solar powered pumps and how this was a bad idea.The problem being that manufacturers of the mechanical components being long gone: and spare parts have to be custom fabricated and that was expensive. The argument however is that the solar panels and the submerged pumps, would have even shorter lifespans than the windmills, and more cumbersome to maintain.<br />
<br />
Anycase I don't know what the EWB's conclusion for the pumps in India was, as she never posted the conclusion as she indicated she would. Such doesn't really matter though, as the issue here is: did she really need to go, and was an engineer really needed for the project? For example when she arrived she discovered she needed to do some surveying, she got hold of an auto level and took some levels. I learnt what an <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Topographic_Abney_level">Abney Level</a> was, as it was something she mentioned she ought to get for her travel kit.<br />
<br />
Now if surveyors without borders had sent a surveyor and produced contour plans then it is likely that no EWB needed to visit Udaipur: dull maybe, but concerned with efficiency not interesting, nor experience of EWB's. All really need is a topographic map, a more detailed local survey plan, and some photo's, along with some reports on the needs and desires of the local communities. A civil engineering technician could have done a survey and taken photos, and other measurements. A mechanical engineering technician could have taken photos and assisted to repair any existing hand operated pumps and petrol/diesel engine pumps: not just an exploratory visit but improvements. Whilst someone in logistics or industrial management could have given consideration to supply problems concerning spare parts and people to service equipment, and potentially get supplies moving. In short there was potential to collect information on the ground, and most likely using locals, and forward such information to persons who could pull all the information together and determine the most suitable action to take: thus saving the humanitarian organisations the cost of flying people around the world. Really do not want to send an engineer unless really need an engineer.<br />
<br />
Whatever the outcome of the feasibility study, whether go with hand operated, diesel/petrol, wind, solar power, the full solution requires supporting infrastructure not just dumping technology on the ground. But with 1 million "engineer" things produced, there should be supporting infrastructure. <i>{Another project of interest at the time was the plywood <a href="http://hexayurt.com/">hexayurt</a>, the EWB's constructing it looked like a keystone cops comedy group. Admittedly it was a training exercise, but really needed someone with more experience to supervise and guide how it should be done. They were lucky nobody got hurt.}</i><br />
<br />
In previous articles I have divided the world into 5 km diameter cells: such cells are convenient as limited of view at ground level is approximately 5 km and average walking speed is also 5 km/h. If the world land area was to be divided, then the current population could supply around 1000 people to each cell.<br />
<br />
Furthermore if take a square 1 km in size, and create a central hub 500m x 500m, then in the surrounding ring can fit over 5000 single storey dwellings suitable for 1 person. A dwelling suitable for one person, is also suitable for a couple, and a baby. If increase the dwellings to 2 storey, then can increase the population to 20,000 persons. With multistorey dwellings and changes to block sizes can achieve the maximum densities of 100,000 persons per square kilometre. However sticking with the single storey dwellings (5m x 5m), on blocks 9m x 9m, with roads 9m wide. The dwelling can be reduced to the size of a caravan with two vehicles either side.<br />
<br />
So looking at India, there are approximately 167,418 cells, 5 km in diameter, compared to Australia with 391,752 cells. India can place around 8419 persons per cell, whilst Australia could place 62 persons per cell. In either case the population can be concentrated at the centre of the cell in a space no more than 1km x 1km.<br />
<br />
Now looking at this widget thing called an "engineer", Australia neither has enough to assign to all the cells nor produces enough to assign someone anytime soon. But India in 1 year produces enough to assign approximately 5 of these "engineer" things to each cell. For that matter India produces enough to assign 1 to all the cells in India and Australia.<br />
<br />
For India these 5 engineers could be:<br />
<br />
<ol>
<li>Agricultural</li>
<li>Environmental</li>
<li>Civil</li>
<li>Mechanical</li>
<li>Electrical</li>
</ol>
<div>
But do they need to be engineers. What happened to the barefoot technicians of the 1980's? Doubly important given that many articles now indicate that the vast majority of the engineering graduates are not employable. Though that may have to do with studying computing related disciplines and expectations of work outsourced from overseas to India: rather than focus on more local needs. Though there are indications that many seek government jobs, but that begs the question: where is the government in the rural villages and what is it doing about water resources?</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<br />
<div>
Note the 5km diameter cells are just a planning device to split the whole into more manageable chunks. There is no expectation that they should be produced on the ground. For example large numbers of the cells in Australia would be uninhabited wilderness, or wilderness part of a sheep or cattle station. Australia is basically an undeveloped country with the population concentrated in coastal cities.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Now <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/India">India </a>I know even less about than <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australia">Australia</a>, however I assume India has mountainous wilderness, and lots of rural communities. That some of these rural communities are extremely remote and isolated, but that most are within reasonable distance of local towns and from there they can get to any city within India. That is city populations wouldn't be growing due to migration of people from rural communities if the people in the rural communities had no practical means of travelling to the cities. With walking and train taken as being the most common means of travel.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
So if have a rural community it seems reasonable that the local government authority (LGA), whatever more specific name such are given, should have an agricultural engineer or technologist on staff. If have a mining region, then a mining engineer or technologist, and geologist on staff. With an environmental engineer in both rural and mining communities to keep track of the impact of the farming or mining activity.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
All the communities need roads, and stormwater drainage, and water resources management. However locally this is mostly an implementation and management requirement, with design being a national activity. Design should be national as it includes rivers and flow of water to the oceans: this flow is either increased or restricted affecting downstream communities: it therefore has to be coordinated nationally, but otherwise require some local technical input.<br />
<br />
With over 8000 people per cell, each person can be responsible for a square segment 48.3 m in size. Assuming strips 600 mm, and walking speed of 80 m/min, it would take 48.6 minutes to travel around. So they can walk around the site several times a day and explore it.<br />
<br />
Whilst if assume the cell is a 5 km x 5 km square, with farming machine 5m wide, and operating speed 10km/h, it would take 500 hours to work the land. Assuming 8 h/day <i>(though may operate 24 hours), </i>it would take 62.5 days, assuming a season is no more than 91 days: it thus takes less than 1 season to work the land. Machines can be wider than 5m, and maybe able to function at speeds greater than 10km/hr<i> (most machines seem to have maximum speed between 25 km/hr and 40 km/h: these are for moving along roads between fields. The actual function of the machine, ploughing, harvesting require lower operating speeds.)</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
So there is potential for one person to farm the land with appropriate machine, whilst a large population of people can explore every inch of the land or otherwise work the land. Since one machine can work the land in less than a season, the total number of machines required matches the number of cells. Though not all cells would be used for agriculture the number provides a starting point for production output of manufacturing facility. The number can be refined as agricultural and environmental scientists classify the function of each cell.<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Note that the cells can be set out from anywhere, so that each state can start the cells centred on the capital or most populous city. Such cells will collide and form a mess at state boundaries and require more people to be assigned.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Now what are the engineers going to do? According to their professional cults, they built civilization, and without them we wouldn't have anything. Now I have a problem with that declaration as these mass produced "engineer" widgets weren't around when civilisation was conceived, and they certainly didn't build anything.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
So here's a nation with wide spread poverty, producing widget "engineers" by the million, and whilst it has advanced technology it isn't raising the population out of poverty. So why waste national resources producing irrelevant widgets, when could be better spending resources on more useful widgets?</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
A starting point would therefore to be to identify resources: <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_resources_of_India">natural resources of India</a>. From which 56.78% of the land is cultivable, which roughly halves the number of agricultural engineers needed. I am assuming that the cells determine the number of people required as principal person responsible for an area. So the number of cells for example determines the number of agricultural engineers required in a state department. Beyond land for farming India seems to have plenty of other resources, though it seems to be using too much oil and gas, with the need for imports. It otherwise exports agricultural and mining products.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
So why inequity, and disparity between incomes of the people? I'm not suggesting everyone should live in the same kind of houses, or be in close proximity to shopping centres, where they can buy junk they don't need. But they should have equitable access to appropriate: shelter, education, health care, potable water, food and clothing, and other basic essentials.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
... to be continued ...</div>
<div>
<br />
So if they are producing and exporting, then it would seem the problem is political not technical.So an agricultural engineer is not likely to provide any benefit to local community. Not the least of which, aggregating land together and working with a few machines, doesn't help the majority of the community it just helps a few largely to exploit the many.<br />
<br />
So around the world, have people who walk some five miles (8 km) every day to collect water (9L to 20L) is this something that needs to be eliminated? Apparently 30 minutes of exercise is required each day to keep the heart healthy <i>(Seems in last few years, I lost need to walk anywhere, and therefore spent more time at the computer, eventually resulting in heart attack. I wasn't impressed, I was under the impression I could still walk anywhere I needed when I wanted to. So do everything else right, but make sure disrupt the time spent inactive. Apparently just getting the exercise isn't good enough, need to disrupt large periods of inactivity: like every 20 minutes do something other than sit or stand (Yep! The standing desks aren't going to help.).)</i>.<br />
<br />
Assuming 5 km/h walking speed, then the trip occupies 1.6 hours, or 3.2 hours round trip everyday: possibly longer if walk back more slowly due to extra weight: so allow 4 hours. With 8 hours work between, thats 12 hours total each day. Whilst may not want to remove the trip, due to the social aspect, may otherwise want to reduce the over all time. A bicycle is typically taken as averaging 4 times faster than walking. So operating at 20 km/hr, the trip is reduced to 24 minutes, or 48 minutes round trip: so allow 1 hour each day. Total active hours reduced to 9 hours per day.<br />
<br />
Given that bicycles potentially have longer learning period than tricycles, and tricycles are more stable with cargo, the supply of tricycles could make a significant impact in these regions. More over the rider of a tricycle could transport the load of more than one person, thus reducing the number of people who need to collect water. However people then likely to need some means of paying for such service. Though the concept reduces the number of tricycles which need be supplied, for example one for every three people, rather than one to every person. The tricycles however will need maintenance. An alternative is to install pipes and have pedal powered pumps: such machines in suitable building, would require less maintenance than wheeled vehicles on rough unsealed roads.<br />
<br />
So water and transportation are major issues. As is hygiene and sanitation. Assume clothing is adequate, as is amount of food and water. More food and water maybe better, but in the main need cleaner water not more. Similarly need more hygienic food preparation not necessarily more food: and lack of hygiene in food preparation is mostly related to lack of clean water. Another problem related to food preparation is lack of fuel for cooking.<br />
<br />
Can civil engineers help. Well, they'd say they can because they gave us the contrivances of civilisation, such as water supply and sewage treatment. But not quite, because they weren't around when we got such things. The modern "engineer" is an elitist widget mass produced by an industrial highly commercial education system: and largely is a poor fit with the industrial machinery that is modern society. We could waste national/global resources producing these "engineer" things, but maybe we could produce another thing faster and better for the task at hand.<br />
<br />
We have a planet and humans just about occupy every inch of it: they would if had towns 5 km diameter with 1000 people to each. However we haven't mapped every inch and we haven't developed every inch. What would happen if we did? To do this we do not need qualified surveyors and cartographers, we just need technicians who can use the appropriate instruments to collect local data: directional compass, dumpy level, abney level, measuring wheel, tape measure, camera, pencil and paper. Basically only need one dumpy level for each cell, though could probably use less than that. Once the data is collected then more qualified persons maybe needed to produce appropriate drawings and maps.<br />
<br />
For the most part an army of civil engineering technicians could construct unsealed roads, dig stormwater drainage channels, catchment ponds, and otherwise modify the local landscape. However the systems they implement need to be documented and coordinated nationally or internationally. In Africa for example, international agreements would be needed between neighbouring nations: as may cause flooding in a neighbouring country or cut off its water supply.<br />
<br />
Consider that the bulk of the technology of civilisation was implemented qualitatively, and has it origins in ancient Egypt, Greece and Rome. So we can put a hold on graduating more people with bachelor degrees and instead produce an army of appropriately qualified technicians. Ahhh! The world will fall apart. No it won't. A bachelor degree is a meaningless piece of scrap paper if the graduates have no ability to put knowledge to work, and no curiosity to ask questions and generate new knowledge. The people reaching that height need to be better.<br />
<br />
So the shutdown isn't direct, it's just making it harder to get higher, by making the lower levels more demanding: and making sure that have to pass through the lower levels to get to the higher levels. That is, there will be no leaving school and studying for a bachelor degree: can only start studying for a certificate. If pass then can move up, if don't pass then stay at that level. There is no need to drop out unqualified, and no need to do extra studies to get qualified. As I proposed in the earlier posts, you start out risking a fifth of a year, if get through the first year and complete Certificate V, then start risking a whole year. We make sure we have properly articulated programmes, which ensure mobility between work. Primary concern of people is being able to do work, not belong to an occupational or professional cult. The primary concern of the employer is whether or not a person is suitably qualified to perform the work.<br />
<br />
And cannot properly determine the suitability of a person for a task, if cannot properly define the task, and the necessary characteristics to complete the task. Civil engineering is not a valid description of a task: thats a declaration have no idea what the task is, hope can get someone who can figure it out. We want to stop local flooding is a better description of the task at hand. We propose to dig storm water drainage ditches, but need to know the best place to dig them: is getting a more refined description of the task. Drainage ditches maybe to refined, and inappropriate, but that is what we want to do, because it is what we can do, and afford. Someone may offer an alternative option, if they think it is better: but they can only do this because we gave them something to assess to criticise. If we identify we want to stop local flooding during the monsoon season, then we are getting still more refined: we also get some idea of the time during which we can implement a solution.<br />
<br />
As the saying goes 2/3rd's of the answer lies in putting the question clearly. The same goes for work descriptions and job descriptions. Defining a job by occupation rather than the work that needs doing, maybe fast, but it is unlikely to find the person best suited to the task.<br />
<br />
So there are basic qualitative approaches to getting things done, without expending excessive amount of time on crunching numbers and drawing pictures. If we want drainage we can wait till it rains and follow the water. We could get a dumpy level and measure levels. Or we could just release a ball and watch where it rolls. Where it stops is the natural low point. We can make it lower. We can shift soil around and relocate the high points and the low points. We can dig ditches and dig sumps. And all the time we can just watch where the ball rolls. Of course the rain can come and erode everything away, and then none of it works. So we need to be able to test our materials and our construction. What ever these refinements are, there is an expectation that it doesn't take too long to train someone in the required knowledge. So expect that relatively easy to train someone to either hold water back or drain from a 50m x 50m block: and that can do so with little more than a spade and the available soil.<br />
<br />
The engineer things are useful, if they can actually do engineering and there is engineering to be done.<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"To define it rudely but not inaptly, engineering is the art of doing that well with one dollar which any bungler can do with two after a fashion." [Arthur M Wellington :The Economic Theory of Railway Location]</blockquote>
There is no value to the "engineer" if they do for $5, and create a dependence, and ongoing operating expenses which cannot be sustained. For example you have coal and they come along and design/construct an oil fired power station. They spawn agriculture in a region where water doesn't naturally reach, and create dependence on power supply for pumped water, all the time whilst population increases due to increased food supply, whilst fuel supply to pump the water diminishes.<br />
<br />
So to put it rudely but not inaptly, it is the modern "engineers" who are becoming the bunglers. Too lost in abstract esoteric mathematical models, to look out the window and see what is actually happening.<br />
<br />
<hr />
Notes:<br />
<br />
<ol>
<li>Now if I had any skill in writing and expressing the ideas flowing around my head, I might be able to produce something that was half readable.</li>
</ol>
<br />
<br />
<div>
<hr />
Related Posts</div>
<div>
<hr />
Revisions: <br />
[16/02/2019] : Original<br />
<br /></div>
</div>
Conrad Harrisonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11351972303793021889noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7659329.post-28169671891648265802019-02-16T11:32:00.001+10:302019-02-26T22:51:06.998+10:30Index to Politics of Profession{draft}<br />
<br />
An index to my posts about politics of profession's, and the emergence of professional cults masquerading as learned societies. Primarily with respect to "engineers", and mostly those in Australia, and otherwise hampered by the dictates of Engineers Australia, which is increasingly operating like a modern day rum corp.
<br />
<br />
Note that these are largely essays, opinions, and generally freewriting. As freewriting, they are written off the top of my head, without references, and without proof reading to check typing errors, or checks on spelling errors. In some instances on reading, I have noticed small important words missing, such as the word "not". The rest of the context typically indicates my viewpoint. Each post typically has a revision block at the bottom, indicating when revised. Where the post has been edited and corrected the word "not" is typically in red, on the other hand where I have wanted to emphasise in the first place it is also coloured in red.<br />
<br />
The essays can be considered as drafts, and the foundation for something more concise and more focused (see <a href="https://metamorphs.blogspot.com/p/about-blog.html">about</a>). They are also katharsis, and general brain leak.<br />
<br />
<h2>
Index:</h2>
<div>
Mostly attempted to place everything in reverse chronological order. The top of the stack has the newer posts.</div>
<h3>
2019</h3>
<div>
<ol>
<li><a href="https://metamorphs.blogspot.com/2019/02/not-and-engineer-and-dont-want-to-be.html">Not an engineer and don't want to be</a></li>
<li><a href="https://metamorphs.blogspot.com/2019/02/more-on-aqf.html">More on the AQF</a></li>
<li><a href="https://metamorphs.blogspot.com/2019/02/the-need-or-not-for-engineers.html">The Need or Not For Engineers</a></li>
<li><a href="https://metamorphs.blogspot.com/2019/02/engineering-is-not-becoming-commodity.html">Engineering is not becoming a Commodity, You Just Don't Know What Engineering Is</a></li>
<li><a href="https://metamorphs.blogspot.com/2019/02/professional-cults-deserve-no-respect.html">Professional Cults Deserve No Respect</a></li>
<li><a href="https://metamorphs.blogspot.com/2019/02/associate-technologist.html">Associate Technologist</a></li>
<li><a href="https://metamorphs.blogspot.com/2019/02/the-stuff-that-is-not-engineering.html">The Stuff That is not Engineering</a></li>
<li><a href="https://metamorphs.blogspot.com/2019/02/no-professional-cult-should-be.html">No Professional Cult Should be Permitted to Dictate A Person's Occupation</a></li>
<li><a href="https://metamorphs.blogspot.com/2019/02/not-opposed-to-engineers-just-those-who.html">Not Opposed to Engineers, just those who Claim Sole Use of the Word and Distort Language</a></li>
<li><a href="https://metamorphs.blogspot.com/2019/02/proposing-change-to-australian.html">Proposing Change to the Australian Qualification Framework</a></li>
<li><a href="https://metamorphs.blogspot.com/2019/01/regulation-should-monitor-and-control.html">Regulation Should Monitor and Control Process not License Occupations</a></li>
</ol>
</div>
<h3>
2018</h3>
<div>
<ol>
<li><a href="https://metamorphs.blogspot.com/2018/03/current-views-on-what-is-engineering.html">Current Views on What is Engineering?</a></li>
<li><br /></li>
</ol>
</div>
<h3>
2017</h3>
<div>
Seems I managed to stay away from being irritated.</div>
<h3>
2016</h3>
<div>
<ol>
<li><a href="https://metamorphs.blogspot.com/2016/07/solutioneering.html">Solutioneering</a></li>
<li><a href="https://metamorphs.blogspot.com/2016/01/the-technical-workforce_6.html">THE TECHNICAL WORKFORCE</a></li>
</ol>
</div>
<h3>
2015</h3>
<div>
Nothing found so far.</div>
<h3>
2014</h3>
<div>
<ol>
<li><a href="https://metamorphs.blogspot.com/2014/06/more-on-engineering-and-engineers-in.html">More on Engineering, and Engineers in History</a></li>
</ol>
</div>
<h3>
2013</h3>
<div>
<ol>
<li><a href="https://metamorphs.blogspot.com/2013/12/specifications-governing-structural.html">Specifications Governing Structural Engineering Software Used by Non-Engineers</a></li>
<li><a href="https://metamorphs.blogspot.com/2013/10/engineers-australia-on-wrong-track.html">Engineers Australia : on wrong track.</a></li>
<li><a href="http://metamorphs.blogspot.com/2013/10/more-irritation-with-engineers.html">More Irritation with Engineers Australia and APESMA</a></li>
<li><a href="https://metamorphs.blogspot.com/2013/04/proposal-for-national-structural-code.html">Proposal For National Structural Code</a></li>
<li><a href="https://metamorphs.blogspot.com/2013/04/technical-lawyers-not-engineers.html">Technical Lawyers: Not Engineers</a></li>
<li><a href="https://metamorphs.blogspot.com/2013/01/more-on-licensing.html">More on Licensing</a></li>
<li><a href="http://metamorphs.blogspot.com/2013/01/dislike-of-professions.html">Dislike of Professions</a></li>
<li><a href="https://metamorphs.blogspot.com/2013/01/the-relationship-between-engineering.html">The Relationship between the Engineering Disciplines!</a></li>
<li><a href="https://metamorphs.blogspot.com/2013/01/do-you-really-need-engineer.html">Do you Really need an Engineer?</a></li>
</ol>
</div>
<h3>
2012</h3>
<ol>
<li><a href="https://metamorphs.blogspot.com/2012/11/samuel-smiles.html">Samuel Smiles</a></li>
<li><a href="https://metamorphs.blogspot.com/2012/10/the-building-code-of-australia-evidence.html">The Building Code of Australia: Evidence-of-Suitability</a></li>
<li><a href="https://metamorphs.blogspot.com/2012/10/sa-development-regulations-independent.html">SA Development Regulations: independent technical expert</a></li>
<li><a href="https://metamorphs.blogspot.com/2012/10/engineered-products-and-evidence-of.html">Engineered Products and Evidence-of-Suitability</a></li>
<li><a href="https://metamorphs.blogspot.com/2012/09/realising-innovative-economy-practical.html">Realising an innovative economy: a practical roadmap to ease the engineering skills shortage in Australia</a></li>
<li><a href="https://metamorphs.blogspot.com/2012/09/extract-chapter-v-helps-and.html">Extract: CHAPTER V--HELPS AND OPPORTUNITIES--SCIENTIFIC PURSUITS (Samuel Smiles)</a></li>
<li><a href="https://metamorphs.blogspot.com/2012/09/on-regulation.html">On Regulation ...</a></li>
<li><a href="https://metamorphs.blogspot.com/2012/09/registration-of-engineers-paper.html">Registration of Engineers: Paper shuffling Bureaucratic Nonsense.</a></li>
<li><a href="https://metamorphs.blogspot.com/2012/09/education-and-qualification-frameworks.html">Education and Qualification Frameworks</a></li>
<li><a href="https://metamorphs.blogspot.com/2012/09/killing-engineering-team.html">Killing the Engineering Team</a></li>
<li><a href="https://metamorphs.blogspot.com/2012/09/more-engineers-australia-on-linkedin.html">More Engineers Australia on LinkedIN group ...</a></li>
<li><a href="https://metamorphs.blogspot.com/2012/09/more-on-education-and-engineering.html">More on Education and Engineering.</a></li>
<li><a href="https://metamorphs.blogspot.com/2012/09/problem-of-reducing-dependence-on.html">Problem of reducing Dependence on Consultants, and other meanderings...</a></li>
<li><a href="https://metamorphs.blogspot.com/2012/08/moving-forward-with-associate.html">Moving forward with Associate Technologists #pt1</a></li>
<li><a href="https://metamorphs.blogspot.com/2012/08/views-on-engineers-australia.html">Views on Engineers Australia</a></li>
<li><a href="https://metamorphs.blogspot.com/2012/08/lives-of-engineers.html">Lives of the Engineers</a></li>
<li><a href="http://metamorphs.blogspot.com/2012/03/2012-mar-17-movie-engineers-education.html">Movie: Engineers, Education and Employment: To Sir, with Love. #purposedu</a></li>
<li><a href="https://metamorphs.blogspot.com/2012/03/structures-or-why-things-dont-fall-down.html">Structures or why things don't fall down: Theory versus Pragmatism.</a></li>
<li><a href="https://metamorphs.blogspot.com/2012/03/education-blogs-purposed.html">Education Blogs: #purposed</a></li>
<li><a href="https://metamorphs.blogspot.com/2012/02/on-science-pt1.html">On Science : pt#1</a></li>
<li><a href="https://metamorphs.blogspot.com/2012/01/education-or-experince.html">Education or Experience?</a></li>
</ol>
<h3>
2011</h3>
<div>
<ol>
<li><a href="https://metamorphs.blogspot.com/2011/10/structural-engineering.html">Structural Engineering</a></li>
<li><a href="http://metamorphs.blogspot.com/2011/10/on-education-industrial-awards-and.html">On Education, Industrial Awards, and Mobility of Professionals</a></li>
<li><a href="https://metamorphs.blogspot.com/2011/09/another-thought-on-popper.html">Another Thought on Popper: Structural/Mechanical Design</a></li>
<li><a href="https://metamorphs.blogspot.com/2011/09/karl-popper-design-regulations-and.html">Karl Popper, Design, Regulations and the Fallacy of Evidence-of-Suitability</a></li>
<li><a href="https://metamorphs.blogspot.com/2011/09/10-principles-for-eliminating-words.html">10 Principles for eliminating the words "engineer", "engineered" and "engineering" from vocabulary.</a></li>
<li><a href="https://metamorphs.blogspot.com/2011/09/been-reading-discussions-taking-place.html">Eliminating "Engineer" and "Engineering" from my Vocabulary</a></li>
<li><a href="https://metamorphs.blogspot.com/2011/09/in-australia-we-have-both-state-and.html">Industrial Awards</a></li>
<li><a href="https://metamorphs.blogspot.com/2011/08/what-is-engineering-design.html">What is Engineering Design?</a></li>
<li><a href="https://metamorphs.blogspot.com/2011/08/educational-testing-cannot-inspect.html">Educational Testing: Cannot Inspect Quality in have to Design it in</a></li>
<li><a href="https://metamorphs.blogspot.com/2011/08/machine-analogy-of-industrial-society.html">Machine Analogy of Industrial Society</a></li>
<li><a href="https://metamorphs.blogspot.com/2011/08/applied-science-technical-science-and.html">The Applied Science, Technical Science and Engineering Science Cycle</a></li>
<li><a href="https://metamorphs.blogspot.com/2011/01/why-do-i-argue-with-beng-miausts-i.html">Why do I argue with B.Eng MIAust's? I should know better.</a></li>
</ol>
<h3>
2010</h3>
<div>
<ol>
<li><a href="https://metamorphs.blogspot.com/2010/09/fw-rate-of-compensation-for-structural.html">FW: Rate of compensation for Structural Tech... And my usual long winded diversion.</a></li>
</ol>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<hr />
Related Posts</div>
<div>
<hr />
Revisions: <br />
[16/02/2019] : Original</div>
<div class="navcontainer">
<div class="navrow">
<a class="navitem navcolumn3 navbtn1" href="https://metamorphs.blogspot.com/2019/02/index-to-politics-of-profession.html">Start</a>
<a class="navitem navcolumn3 navbtn1" href="https://metamorphs.blogspot.com/2019/02/index-to-politics-of-profession.html">Index</a>
<a class="navitem navcolumn3 navbtn1" href="https://metamorphs.blogspot.com/2010/09/fw-rate-of-compensation-for-structural.html">First</a>
</div>
</div>
Conrad Harrisonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11351972303793021889noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7659329.post-9695817242330283152019-02-15T17:31:00.001+10:302019-03-25T10:51:24.517+10:30Engineering is not becoming a Commodity, You Just Don't Know What Engineering IsIn recent years there have been comments and articles suggesting that engineering is becoming a commodity, that is its price can be pushed down and bought and sold like say spuds. Some supermarkets certainly believe they can buy services that way and impose same %20 discount as they do when buying spuds and the likes in bulk: but they don't buy services in bulk, or provide business of any significance.<br />
<br />
Nevertheless, those who believe engineering is becoming a commodity are mistaken. The problem is they don't know what engineering is. They think they are engineers. They think they provide engineering services. They think their degree makes them an engineer. They want to use the title engineer, and many want to claim sole use of the title. Unfortunately the service they are providing is not engineering.<br />
<br />
In the past people were needed to push numbers through mathematical formula, this may have been significant skill, and it may have been possible to base a career simply crunching numbers. But this is no longer the case. A brainless, unimaginative block of silicon can crunch the numbers faster and with greater consistency.<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b>Engineering takes place at the frontiers of science and technology.</b></div>
<br />
Engineering is not merely a rational scientific approach to design of systems. As I have mentioned many times before, a rational scientific approach to the design of established technologies and variants off such technology can be taught in a very short time: less than 12 months if needed.<br />
<br />
A building is an established technology. We can check that it was designed correctly, we can check that it was constructed properly. The <a href="https://www.sbs.com.au/news/opal-tower-body-corporate-warns-against-return-amid-calls-for-building-industry-audit">Opal Towers</a> building either wasn't designed and properly assessed as fit-for-function, or it wasn't built to the specifications, or a combination of both.<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;">Will licensing civil engineers prevent the problem on future projects. No it won't! Civil engineers only study structures as part of their education, they do not spend 4 years studying structures. More over the application of structural mechanics to buildings and/or bridges depends on industry experience, and the competence and experience of those supervising graduates. So a supervisor with trite experience, merely begets a graduate with trite experience, it does not produce the required level of competence.</span><br />
<br />
I know writing career episode reports and work practice reports is time consuming and difficult to get right. From an industrial engineering viewpoint, job description is time consuming and difficult. Merely explaining how to make a cup of coffee can be difficult, getting the instruction correct for a robot to follow is even more difficult. <span style="color: red;">So for certain, a person may have gone through a hard and difficult time to become chartered, but that doesn't mean it was in anyway a reliable assessment of required competence for the task for which a person is to profess expertise.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;">Expertise in the appropriate technology is the requirement. Civil, mechanical and electrical "engineers" do not have adequate knowledge of buildings. As for architects, they seem more like graphic artists than competent building designers: hence apparently more buildings designed by "building designers" than "qualified" architects. In short, these people, are just <b>not </b>competent, for the task for which they profess expertise.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;">We cannot rely on industry to pass on the required knowledge, we cannot rely on industry to maintain and safeguard a body of knowledge for future generations.</span> Most especially if the knowledge goes out off practical use for a significant period of time. A system can be designed once and built many times, so it is possible for years to pass, before require anyone who can design. But when the need for design arises as a community we have an established expectation for performance: and low tolerance for anything below the desired performance.<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;">This is where modern "engineers" have lost track of their role. These modern "engineers" do not engineer, they are code cruncher's, they assess compliance with national codes: such activity is not engineering.</span><br />
<br />
Sorry <a href="https://www.romatheengineer.com/showpage.php?pagename=home">Roma The Engineer</a>, but I very much doubt there was any engineering involved with the design of the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Shard">Shard</a>, sure there was a requirement for structural design: but the structural design would have been based on established body of technical science.<br />
<br />
I don't do multistorey buildings, but basically have a stick cantilevered out of the ground. The higher from the ground the higher the wind load, the taller the stick the greater the tendency to buckle under dead and live loading. If taper the building as it goes up, than it reduces the weight as it goes up, it also reduces the surface area exposed to the wind. Tapered building: <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackpool_Tower">Blackpool tower</a>, the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eiffel_Tower">Eiffel tower</a>. Roma is right that history is interesting: why reinvent the wheel if going to produce something inferior. Need a reference point for what to surpass.<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;">This isn't to diminish the value of the input to the project. It is just to highlight, that if we are going to be picky about who is and is not an engineer (like Engineers Australia, and RPEQ's like to be), then we need to be able to define engineering without reference to the word engineer.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;"><b>As I mentioned in an earlier post. If technologist can do the work, then not engineering. If an associate technologist can do the work then not engineering.</b></span><br />
<br />
The architectural engineer is potentially more qualified to design a building than either an architect or a civil engineer. Assuming the architectural engineer studies, structures, electrical and mechanical systems.<br />
<br />
<i><span style="color: red;">{Sorry! It is extremely rare that someone graduates in Structural Engineering: structural engineering is a specialisation after graduating in either civil engineering or mechanical engineering. A machine is a structure which moves. A non-machine structure is a mechanism which is locked.}</span></i><br />
<br />
An <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Architectural_engineering">architectural engineer</a>, is thus something of a variant to a <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naval_architecture">naval architect</a>, which begs the question why are garden variety architects not more competent at design of structural, mechanical and electrical systems. Why do we need a team of architects, civil, structural, mechanical and electrical engineers to design a building? And more importantly, where is the engineering? The building comprises of an assembly of established technologies.<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;">Electrical engineering, mechanical engineering, in each instance we are defining technology. If the technology exists then the engineering is over. We can educate and train people to design these technologies in the first instance not rely on professional cults and industry to pass on the required knowledge. Knowledge itself requires better organising and managing.</span><br />
<br />
Looking at another situation, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elon_Musk">Elon Musk</a>, seems like an engineer, when considering <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla,_Inc.">Tesla Inc</a>. But electric vehicles are an established technology, as are diesel electric vehicles. Diesel electric vehicles comprise of trains, ships and heavy industrial, construction and mining equipment. Electric vehicles comprise of milk floats, industrial tugger and lifting vehicles, and scooters.<br />
<br />
Tesla electric vehicles are not at the frontiers of science they are pushing at the frontiers of practical technology. The technical science is there to design and build an electric vehicle. The problem is the weight of the vehicle and especially the weight of the power source. So need improved battery technology. We have had batteries for a long time, so expect that there is an established body of technical science to allow design of a battery, using established technology, for a specific purpose.<br />
<br />
So the technology is a variant of established technologies based on established science. The engineering starts when seek an alternative power source: generate electricity by means other than the traditional chemistry of batteries. Not seek by blind mindless experiments, but by controlled experiments. This is the scientific knowledge we have, therefore: what new technology can be developed to generate a power source? Once got an answer to that question, and found a practical method of generating power and a scientific basis to design a system to be fit-for-purpose, then the engineering is over. Then we can train technologists to design and further develop the technology.<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;">It is not the engineering which is the commodity, it is the technology which is the commodity.</span> Furthermore when it comes to buildings, engineers have been inserted into the process of design, where they were not previously required.<br />
<br />
The result is that engineers having been an unwanted insertion into the building design process, they are a bottleneck to be removed. They hinder rapid supply of buildings: there is a shortage of housing, schools, and hospitals. There is certainly not a shortage of this <a href="https://architectureau.com/articles/hassells-design-for-penultimate-tower-at-perths-elizabeth-quay-approved/">rubbish</a> <i>{What's the expected radial reach of such building, as it is this kind of building which generates urban sprawl not the car.}.</i><br />
<br />
Take sheds, carports and verandahs as an example. When I started in structural design around 1996, most manufacturers had standard calculations. If a clients proposed building was enveloped by a standard design, then the standard design was taken as suitable for that building. The typical supplier consistently indicated that 90% of the time they could get approval without something they called "engineering". Now in 2019 many suppliers have <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledge-based_configuration">product configurator software</a> which can do the structural calculations at the point of sale, operated by salespeople. The next stage would be to shift this online, and have the configurator operated by the buyer.<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;">That something they called "engineering", wasn't "engineering" in 1996, and it certainly isn't "engineering" now. But regulators haven't kept pace they send people off to get "engineering" or an "engineers" report.</span><br />
<br />
But there is no engineering involved and I'm certain most people don't want to be involved with an engineering project, certainly don't want to pay for one, rather they want reliable established technologies.<br />
<br />
So have a choice:<br />
<br />
<ol>
<li>Either continue calling this stuff engineering and accept that a person can be educated to design such technology in a 2 year academic programme.</li>
<li>Or Stop calling this stuff engineering, give it a new name, such as technical design, and accept that a person can be educated in a 2 year academic programme.</li>
</ol>
<div>
<span style="color: red;">The fundamental requirement no matter what other options may consider, is accepting that a 2 year academic programme can provide the necessary knowledge and capability to design established technologies. The architectural engineering programme maybe 3 to 4 years duration, but that is because it contains breadth of technology, not depth in understanding a specific technology.</span></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Though for certain can most likely create a 3 year programme in structural mechanics or applied mechanics. Likewise a 2 year programme should cover the static design of building structures, whilst a 3 year programme could expand to structural dynamics. No need to waste time with 4 year B.Eng in civil followed by a M.Eng in structures <i>(with focus on structural dynamics)</i>.</div>
<br />
<br />
In short we can educate and train people in technology and the associated technical science, but that doesn't make them engineers and neither does the work they do.<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;">We are wasting national resources training people in 4 year B.Eng programmes, if they never get the opportunity to "engineer" and they are not otherwise competent in the technologies for which they are assigned responsibility.</span><br />
<br />
So really do need to define engineering.<br />
<br />
<div>
<hr />
Related Posts</div>
<div>
<hr />
Revisions: <br />
[15/02/2019] : Original<br />
[25/03/2019] : Minor Edits and Formatting</div>
Conrad Harrisonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11351972303793021889noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7659329.post-38846866746675644762019-02-14T16:22:00.001+10:302019-05-17T14:11:29.954+09:30Anger ManagementPeople don't need anger management classes. Their anger is well managed, and everyone else should be well aware that a person is angry.<br />
<br />
Being aware that you are in the path of someone who is angry, it is you that needs to either step aside or be prepared to deal with the anger.<br />
<br />
Of course the problem is, the person facing someone who is angry, is typically completely oblivious to the fact, that they are the total twonk that caused the anger in the first place.<br />
<br />
<div>
<hr />
Related Posts</div>
<div>
<hr />
Revisions: <br />
[14/02/2019] : Original<br />
[17/05/2019] : Minor Edits</div>
Conrad Harrisonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11351972303793021889noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7659329.post-48399095348649899332019-02-14T10:23:00.003+10:302019-02-14T15:46:56.781+10:30Professional Cults Deserve No Respect<br />
<div>
I got annoyed on Linkedin, on the other hand my declaration was appropriate, valid and correct.<br />
<br />
Appropriate because I started out by implying I was annoyed.<br />
<br />
Secondly the acronyms MIEAust and CP.Eng are meaningless twaddle to the population at large, and they would decide meaning based on experience and interaction with those using. Builders simply use a large number of expletives to describe engineers. I avoided those expletives as they don't fit well with the acronyms, though would fit nicely with FIEAust.<br />
<br />
As I recollect Engineers Australia spent around 5 years<i> (it could have been less, just seemed like forever)</i> dreaming up CP.Eng to improve status, as MIEAust had lost status as a reliable indicator of competence. But as I say this post nominal detritus is meaningless twaddle and the public will adapt to express their feelings. So any derogatory word starting with "M" is a good starting point. Mindless Imbecile puts two letters to use, and so on we can go.<br />
<br />
Engineers Australia seems to like publishing the value of projects. Consultancy 1 has a $2 billion contract, consultancy 2 has a $1 billion contract: therefore could conclude that consultant 2 is more efficient. No sorry consultant 1 is the better consultant because they are getting more for less.<br />
<br />
As for professional, you can dig up all the ancient mythology about ethics of monks that you desire, but as far as modern usage goes a professional does something for money <i>(irrespective of ethics or competence)</i>. The flim flam man can make profit without making good on their promise to supply. You do not have to be technically competent to make a profit, you do not have to provide quality to make a profit. Profiteers seek short term gain.<br />
<br />
As for capitalists, well they can be good or bad. Apparently there are no real capitalists left. Those calling themselves capitalists aren't, they don't have any capital, they are using other people's money and largely ripping everybody off.<br />
<br />
If the primary motivation for seeking legislation, is to be granted a monopoly of trade, is so that can hold the population to ransom, because believe deserve higher income, that somehow the whole of society owes you, even though you have contributed zilch, then basically you are a profiteer.<br />
<br />
Thus M=moron and CP=Capitalist Profiteer are appropriate descriptors of a professional cult which is focused on the wrong objective. A professional cult which does not deserve any respect.<br />
<br />
<i><span style="color: red;">{NB: It should be noted that a large portion of the membership of Engineers Australia has held for a long time that, it should introduce legislation to grant the membership a monopoly over work. This is not to protect the public welfare. No! It is contrary to that, it is so that they can increase fees, hold the population to ransom, because they believe their fees are too low, and that the community owes them something. Except these people are not the people who gave us modern civilisation. These are not the people who discovered scientific approach to designing technology. These are not the people with the imagination and ingenuity to invent new technologies, nor are the people with the technical competence to properly design established technologies for specific purposes. These are just arrogant graduates with a degree, and trite experience gained under the supervision of persons with equally trite experience. To gain significant experience then Australia needed to, and needs to sustain significant work on significant projects. If someone cannot put the required effort into say the design of a connection on a small residential structure, should they be permitted to design multistorey buildings or bridges? Should they be permitted to supervise people who are designing multistorey buildings, now that such projects are increasing in number? Hopefully your answer is no! No! NO!}</span></i><br />
<br />
Related Posts</div>
<div>
<hr />
Revisions: <br />
[14/02/2019] : Original</div>
Conrad Harrisonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11351972303793021889noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7659329.post-51787583539929429152019-02-13T17:47:00.001+10:302019-02-13T17:47:39.538+10:30Associate TechnologistSo I try to get away from using the word engineering, but not so easy. For example I participate in forums on Linkedin, explicitly refer to structural design, and I get endorsements for structural engineering. So I switched endorsements off.
<br />
<br />
Even though I resigned from Engineers Australia, and can therefore toss its code of ethics in the bin, I still try to comply with and aim higher. But they keep on doing things that annoy me.<br />
<br />
As I indicated in previous posts they absorbed the institute of engineering associates, and then basically terminated the concept of engineering associates. For some reason they seem to have some stupid notion they are equivalent to drafters.<br />
<br />
The building industry employs CAD jockeys who are not even qualified drafters, they have little notion of true lengths of lines and true shapes of planes, little ability to draw and develop sections and intersections. They cannot solve dimensional and geometric problems. They don't build on paper they just put lines on paper. Besides lacking knowledge of the technology they are documenting, they also lack knowledge of presentation and communication.<br />
<br />
A drafter, in past should have had an Associate Diploma in Drafting, whilst an engineering associate should have had an Associate Diploma in Engineering. They are two different kinds of people, it is not just the duration of education which determines capability, but the also the content and focus of the education.<br />
<br />
So for example in terms of structural/mechanical design if you did not study engineering mechanics (statics & dynamics), and did not study the mechanics of materials, then you are not an engineering associate. Having an Associate Diploma or Advanced Diploma is not the deciding factor as to whether you are an engineering associate.<br />
<br />
So there have been several factors at play, scuttling our technical workforce. Engineers Australia ignoring the education of engineering associates, inconsistently referring to them as engineering officers and engineering associates, signing the WFEO Dublin accord and equating them to technicians.<br />
<br />
Subject to our traditional industrial awards, and WFEO Technician is potentially superior to our technicians, who typically educated at AQF-4, not AQF-6. However they are inferior to our more traditional engineering associates because whilst educated at AQF-6 they have a different focus.<br />
<br />
I therefore suggest we resurrect our and improve upon our traditional engineering associates, by dropping the reference to engineering, and renaming them to Associate Technologists <i>(no one currently graded as engineering associate qualifies. They will have to demonstrate competence for the role of Associate Technologist)</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
There is no need to qualify the word technologist. Whilst in the past I would have considered a technologist someone who studies technology, with respect to its history and impact on society, the prime requirement is that they study technology and are highly conversant about such, including the technical science and technical mathematics which relate to its proper design.<br />
<br />
The Technologist thus has AQF-7 education, and the Associate Technologist has AQF-6 education, and one articulates to the other via an extra year of study. Where the extra year of study may well include history and influence on society.<br />
<br />
Taking note that if the architects education is relevant to the proper design of buildings, then it is inadequate when it comes to structural, mechanical and electrical systems. Yet when we compare the education of the so called "engineers" their formal education is inadequate with respect to buildings, history and influence of technology on society.<br />
<br />
So we have these professional cults, and they wish to dictate over us, contending we the public are stupid and don't know what is good for us, so they the educated have to make decisions for us. I must have missed the memo, when democratic society consented to this autocracy by other means. These professional cults do not have any where near adequate education to be making decisions for us, we as a population should know so just from the hassles we have with the built environment, hassles with the technological environment.<br />
<br />
So let's get back to some basics and draw a line in the sand. The rise from one AQF level to the next requires and increase in depth of knowledge, increase of independent thought, and increased personal responsibility. So an AQF-7 award requires subject matter which increases in depth over a 3 year schedule. Now assuming it is unreasonable to study a single subject for a minimum of 3*1500=4500 hours, then accept that can have a maximum of 5 independent strands. That is no strand is permitted to be less than 900 hours, programmed over 3 years. Or 4*300=1200 hours programmed over 4 years.<br />
<br />
Further the rise from one level to the next based on minimum of 80% pass mark at the lower level. No need to adopt FE/PE exams like the USA, people aren't going to get through the academic programmes in the first place. No need for licensing because we educate people for the task at hand, and we don't demand knowledge and skills beyond those required for the task. The leadership role demanding vastly more knowledge and skill than currently accepted: in formal authoritarian hierarchies that is.<br />
<br />
We may end up with fewer people with bachelor degrees, but those who have them will be the intellectual elite. Whilst we will otherwise have a mighty army of people with Associate Degrees, most likely multiple such degrees. These people will do the job better than those of the past because they will be specifically educated for the task at hand: and better trained for the task through training academies.<br />
<br />
A building is a technology, and it comprises of various technological subsystems: structural, mechanical and electrical. An architectural engineer studies all 3 subsystems, civil engineers just structural, mechanical engineers the mechanical systems HVAC and plumbing, and the electrical engineers the electrical systems. But the other engineers do not study these systems relative to buildings, or for that matter relative to any specific technological application: its mostly applied science with notional concept of the application. It is notional because there is an almost infinite variety of things the science can be applied to, technologies which don't yet exist.<br />
<br />
An architectural engineer could possibly design the entire building, but they most likely will specialise in a single subsystem. No matter which subsystem they specialise in, there will be more to learn on the job. Similarly civil engineers will specialise, and so one will design the stormwater drainage system, another will design the structure. Their breadth of education largely becomes redundant: interesting, maybe useful, but not absolutely necessary.<br />
<br />
So the education of the Associate Technologist recognises this breadth in other programmes, and reduces the breadth and creates a focus on one area of practice. If they need to or desire to they can increase their breadth by completing additional AQF-6 qualifications. But if the technology requires it they can increase their depth by moving up to AQF-7 and becoming technologists.<br />
<br />
As for becoming this thing called an "engineer", I suggest that it be split into two programmes, B.Tech and B.EngSc, and stick with the traditional 3 year degree for each: thus 6 years duration. Unless give status for overlapping technical science and technical mathematics.<br />
.<br />
<div>
<hr />
Related Posts</div>
<div>
<hr />
Revisions: <br />
[13/02/2019] : Original</div>
Conrad Harrisonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11351972303793021889noreply@blogger.com