The role of micro computers on the construction site

The control needed in the management of a project was analysed with particular reference to the unique needs of the construction industry within the context of site management. This was explored further by analysing the various problems facing managers within the overall system and determining to what extent the organisation would benefit from an integrated mangement information system. Integration and management of information within the organisational units and the cycles of events that make up the main sub-system was suggested as the means of achieving this objective. A conceptual model of the flow of information was constructed within the whole process of project management by examining the type of information and documents which are generated for the production cycle of a project. This model was analysed with respect to the site managers' needs and the minimum requirements for an overall integrated system. The most tedious and time-consuming task facing the site manager is the determination of weekly production costs, calculation and preparation of interim certificates and valuation of variations occurring during the production stage and finally the settlement and preparation of supplier and sub-contractors' accounts. These areas where microcomputers could be of most help were identified and a number of packages were designed and implemented for various contractors. The gradual integration of stand-alone packages within the whole of the construction industry is a logical sequence to achieve integration of management system. The methods of doing this were analysed together with the resulting advantages and disadvantages.

Specialist contact lens fitting

What is meant by the term ‘specialist contact lens fitting’? Or put another way, what would be considered non-specialist contact lens fitting? Is there such a thing as routine contact lens fitting? Soft or silicone hydrogel fitting for daily wear would probably be considered as routine contact lens fitting, but would extended or flexible wear remain in the same category or would they be considered a specialist fit? Different eras will classify different products as being ‘specialist’. Certainly twenty years ago soft toric contact lenses were considered as being speciality lenses but today would be thought of as routine lenses. Conversely, gas permeable lenses were thought of as mainstream twenty years ago but now are considered as speciality lenses. Although this would not be the same globally, as in some countries (such as Netherlands, France and Japan) gas permeable lens fitting remains popular and is not on the decline as in other countries (Canada, Australia and Sweden) [1]. Bandage soft lenses applied after surface laser refractive procedures would be considered as therapeutic lenses but in reality they are just plano thin hydrogel lenses worn constantly for 3–4 days to allow the underlying epithelium to convalesce and are then removed [2]. Some patients find that wearing hydrogel lenses during periods when they suffer from seasonal allergies actually improves their ocular comfort as the contact lens acts as a barrier to the allergen [3] and [4]. Scleral lenses have long been considered speciality lenses, apart from a time when they were the only lenses available but at that time all contact lens work would have been considered speciality practice! Nowadays we see the advent of mini-scleral designs and we see large diameter gas permeable lenses too. It is possible that these lenses increase the popularity of gas permeable lenses again and they become more main stream. So it would seem that the lines between routine and speciality contact lens fitting are not clear. Whether a lens is classed a specialist fit or not would depend on the lens type, why it was fitted, where in the world the fitting was being done and even the era in which it was fitted. This begs the question as to what would be considered entry level knowledge in contact lens fitting. This may not be an issue for most BCLA members or CLAE readers but certainly would be for bodies such as the College of Optometrists (UK) or the Association of British Dispensing Opticians when they are planning the final registration examinations for budding practitioners or when planning the level of higher level qualifications such as College Certificates or Diplomas. Similarly for training institutions when they are planning their course content. This becomes even trickier when trying to devise a qualification that spans across many countries, like the European Diploma in Optometry and Optics. How do we know if the training and examination level is correct? One way would be to analyse things when they go wrong and if patterns of malpractice are seen then maybe that could be used as an indicator to more training being needed. There were 162 Fitness to Practice Hearing at the General Optical Council between 2001 and 2010. Forty-seven of these were clinically related case, 39 fraud related, and 76 others. Of the clinical ones only 3 were contact lens related. So it would appear that as whole, in the profession, contact lens clinical skills are not being questioned too often (although it seems a few of us can’t keep our hands out the cookie jar!).

Uncertainty evaluation of an axi-symmetric measurement machine

This paper describes a method of uncertainty evaluation for axi-symmetric measurement machines which is compliant with GUM and PUMA methodologies. Specialized measuring machines for the inspection of axisymmetric components enable the measurement of properties such as roundness (radial runout), axial runout and coning. These machines typically consist of a rotary table and a number of contact measurement probes located on slideways. Sources of uncertainty include the probe calibration process, probe repeatability, probe alignment, geometric errors in the rotary table, the dimensional stability of the structure holding the probes and form errors in the reference hemisphere which is used to calibrate the system. The generic method is described and an evaluation of an industrial machine is described as a worked example. Type A uncertainties were obtained from a repeatability study of the probe calibration process, a repeatability study of the actual measurement process, a system stability test and an elastic deformation test. Type B uncertainties were obtained from calibration certificates and estimates. Expanded uncertainties, at 95% confidence, were then calculated for the measurement of; radial runout (1.2 µm with a plunger probe or 1.7 µm with a lever probe); axial runout (1.2 µm with a plunger probe or 1.5 µm with a lever probe); and coning/swash (0.44 arc seconds with a plunger probe or 0.60 arc seconds with a lever probe).