Design of a norm-bounded LQG controller for power distribution networks with distributed generation

This paper presents a novel excitation control design to improve the voltage profile of power distribution networks with distributed generation and induction motor loads. The system is linearised by perturbation technique. Controller is designed using the linear-quadratic-Gaussian (LQG) controller synthesis method. The LQG controller is addressed with norm-bounded uncertainty. The approach considered in this paper is to find the smallest upper bound on the H∞ norm of the uncertain system and to design an optimal controller based on this bound. The design method requires the solution of a linear matrix inequality. The performance of the controller is tested on a benchmark power distribution system. Simulation results show that the proposed controller provides impressive oscillation damping compared to the conventional excitation controller.

Beware fast tracking high rise building

Currently, employers tend to fast rack works where construction can begin while design is still incomplete following three main phases of procurement. This session details a case study of a fast track overseas super high rise building, where an Australian firm acted as a technical expert to provide a detailed report on the failure of the shoring system, while construction of five basements had just started next to a marina. The lessons learnt from the case study are summarized with recommendations to have better practice of the fast track method in complex high rise buildings.

Enhancing and assessing group and team learning in architecture and related design contexts

EXECUTIVE SUMMARYTeamwork skills are essential in the design industry where practitioners negotiate often-conflicting design options in multi-disciplinary teams. Indeed, many of the bodies that accredit design courses explicitly list teamwork skills as essential attributes of design graduates e.g., the Australian Institute of Architects (AIA), Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA), the National Council of Architectural Registration Boards (NCARB) of the United States and the Institution of Engineers, Australia (IEAust). In addition to the need to meet the demands of the accrediting bodies, there are many reasons for the ubiquitous use of teamwork assignments in design schools. For instance, teamwork learning is seen as being representative of work in practice where design is nearly always a collaborative activity. Learning and teaching in teamwork contexts in design education are not without particular challenges. In particular, two broad issues have been identified: first, many students leave academia without having been taught the knowledge and skills of how to design in teams; second, teaching, assessment and assignment design need to be better informed by a clear understanding of what leads to effective teamwork and the learning of teamwork skills. In recognition of the lack of a structured approach to integrating teamwork learning into the curricula of design programs, this project set out to answer three primary research questions: • How do we teach teamwork skills in the context of design? • How do we assess teamwork skills?• How do design students best learn teamwork skills?In addition, four more specific questions were investigated:1. Is there a common range of learning objectives for group-and-team-work in architecture and related design disciplines that will enable the teaching of consistent and measurable outcomes?2. Do group and team formation methods, learning styles and team-role preferences impact students’ academic and course satisfaction outcomes?3. What combinations of group-and-team formation methods, teaching and assessment models significantly improve learning outcomes?4. For design students across different disciplines with different learning styles and cultural origins, are there significant differences in performance, student satisfaction (as measured through questionnaires and unit evaluations), group-and-team working abilities and student participation?To elucidate these questions, a design-based research methodology was followed comprising an iterative series of enquiries: (a) A literature review was completed to investigate: what constitutes effective teamwork, what contributes to effectiveness in teams, what leads to positive design outcomes for teams, and what leads to effective learning in teams. The review encompassed a range of contexts: from work-teams in corporate settings, to professional design teams, to education outside of and within the design disciplines. The review informed a theoretical framework for understanding what factors impact the effectiveness of student design teams. (b) The validity of this multi-factorial Framework of Effectiveness in Student Design Teams was tested via surveys of educators’ teaching practices and attitudes, and of students’ learning experiences. 638 students and 68 teachers completed surveys: two pilot surveys for participants at the four partner institutions, which then informed two national surveys completed by participants from the majority of design schools across Australia. (c) The data collected provided evidence for 22 teamwork factors impacting team effectiveness in student design teams. Pedagogic responses and strategies to these 22 teamwork factors were devised, tested and refined via case studies, focus groups and workshops. (d) In addition, 35 educators from a wide range of design schools and disciplines across Australia attended two National Teaching Symposiums. The first symposium investigated the wider conceptualisation of teamwork within the design disciplines, and the second focused on curriculum level approaches to structuring the teaching of teamwork skills identified in the Framework.The Framework of Effectiveness in Student Design Teams identifies 22 factors impacting effective teamwork, along with teaching responses and strategies that design educators might use to better support student learning. The teamwork factors and teaching strategies are categorised according to three groups of input (Task Characteristics, Individual Level Factors and Team Level Factors), two groups of processes (Teaching Practice & Support Structures and Team Processes), and three categories of output (Task Performance, Teamwork Skills, and Attitudinal Outcomes). Eight of the 22 teamwork factors directly relate to the skills that need to be developed in students, one factor relates to design outputs, and the other thirteen factors inform pedagogies that can be designed for better learning outcomes. In Table 10 of Section 4, we outline which of the 22 teamwork factors pertain to each of five stakeholder groups (curriculum leaders, teachers, students, employers and the professional bodies); thus establishing who will make best use the information and recommendations we make. In the body of this report we summarise the 22 teamwork factors and teaching strategies informed by the Framework of Effectiveness in Student Design Teams, and give succinct recommendations arising from them. This material is covered in depth by the project outputs. For instance, the teaching and assessment strategies will be expanded upon in a projected book on Teaching Teamwork in Design. The strategies are also elucidated by examples of good practice presented in our case studies, and by Manuals on Teamwork for Teachers and Students. Moreover, the project website (-teamwork-in-design.com index.html=""> visited by representatives of stakeholder groups in Australia and Canada), is seeding a burgeoning community of practice that promises dissemination, critical evaluation and the subsequent refinement of our materials, tools, strategies and recommendations. The following three primary outputs have been produced by the project in answer to the primary research questions:1. A theoretical Framework of Effectiveness in Student Design Teams;2. Manuals on Teamwork for Teachers and Students (available from the website);3. Case studies of good/innovative practices in teaching and assessing teamwork in design;In addition, five secondary outputs/outcomes have been produced that provide more nuanced responses:4. Detailed recommendations for the professional accrediting bodies and curriculum leaders;5. Online survey data (from over 700 participants), plus Team Effectiveness Scale to determine the factors influencing effective learning and successful outputs for student design teams;6. A community of practice in policy, programs, practice and dialogue;7. A detailed book proposal (with sample chapter), submitted to prospective publishers, on Teaching Teamwork in Design; 8. An annotated bibliography (accessed via the project website) on learning, teaching and assessing teamwork.The project has already had an international impact. As well as papers presented in Canada and New Zealand, the surveys were participated in by six Canadian schools of architecture, whose teaching leaders also provided early feedback on the project aims and objectives during visits made to them by the project leader. In addition, design schools in Vancouver, Canada, and San Diego in the USA have already utilised the Teacher’s Manual, and in February 2014 the project findings were discussed at Tel Aviv University in a forum focusing on the challenges for sustainability in architectural education.-teamwork-in-design.com>

Learning and concurrent engineering in the development of a high technology product/service system

This paper explores project management techniques that can support the development of novel product-service systems. Some observations from the development of an airborne earth properties measurement system are provided. The intellectual property and the data this system could potentially deliver was more important than the potential commercial value of the product itself. What was sought was a complete business service solution. A concurrent engineering approach was implemented linking both product development and survey data/analysis services. The blend of product and service was integrated using a function modeling technique. It was observed that the implementation of some functions required radical innovation whilst others could be implemented through incremental improvements to current practice. It is suggested in the paper that adapting production learning curve concepts that reflect the relative degrees of uncertainty involved in individual subsystems can enhance project management forecasting practice © 2013 The Authors and IOS Press.

A novel approach for monitoring pipeline corrosion under disbonded coatings

Underground pipeline corrosion monitoring is a complex technical challenge. Currently there is no corrosion monitoring probe that is able to provide in situ information on corrosion under disbonded coatings. This paper presents a proof of concept of a novel corrosion monitoring probe intended to simulate corrosion under disbonded pipeline coatings and monitor its rate under Cathodic Protection (CP). The probe's capabilities to measure corrosion rates and simulate disbonded coating conditions are illustrated by a typical experiment that involved testing of the probe in 0.1M NaCl at -850mVCSE. Estimated metal thickness losses based on results measured by the probe were compared against corrosion patterns and profilometry measurements of control specimens exposed to the same conditions.

Evaluating assessment practices in design based learning environment

This investigation is focused on evaluating assessment practices in design based learning environment. The School of Engineering at Deakin University practices project/design based learning as one of its learning and teaching approach. When identifying graduate attributes particularly for undergraduate engineering programs in Australia, the program accrediting body Engineers Australia (EA) initiates a set of graduate attribute elements which was mentioned in “Stage1 competencies and elements of competency”. Stage1 competencies state that one of the important engineering application ability for graduates is ‘application of systematic engineering synthesis and design processes’. By practicing the design focused learning environment and evaluating students perceptions, This investigation examines students’ experiences of assessment practices in their curriculum through an online survey given to the same cohort of students in third year and fourth year undergraduate engineering.