Full download test bank at ebook textbookfull.

com

Digitalization in Construction 1st

CLICK LINK TO DOWLOAD

https://textbookfull.com/product/digitalizati
on-in-construction-1st-edition-angenette-
spalink/

textbookfull
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

Advances in Information Systems Development Designing

Digitalization Bo Andersson

https://textbookfull.com/product/advances-in-information-systems-
development-designing-digitalization-bo-andersson/

5G Core Networks Powering Digitalization 1st Edition

Stefan Rommer

https://textbookfull.com/product/5g-core-networks-powering-
digitalization-1st-edition-stefan-rommer/

Human Resource Management and Digitalization 1st

Edition Franca Cantoni

https://textbookfull.com/product/human-resource-management-and-
digitalization-1st-edition-franca-cantoni/

Business Digitalization : Corporate Identity and

Reputation 1st Edition Pantea Foroudi

https://textbookfull.com/product/business-digitalization-
corporate-identity-and-reputation-1st-edition-pantea-foroudi/
101 Case Studies in Construction Management 1st Edition
Len Holm

https://textbookfull.com/product/101-case-studies-in-
construction-management-1st-edition-len-holm/

Soils and Geotechnology in Construction 1st Edition

Alan J. Lutenegger

https://textbookfull.com/product/soils-and-geotechnology-in-
construction-1st-edition-alan-j-lutenegger/

BASICS Construction Concrete Construction Katrin Hanses

https://textbookfull.com/product/basics-construction-concrete-
construction-katrin-hanses/

Leadership and Digital Change The Digitalization

Paradox Einar Iveroth

https://textbookfull.com/product/leadership-and-digital-change-
the-digitalization-paradox-einar-iveroth/

The Pseudo Cleft Construction in English 1st Edition F.

R. Higgins

https://textbookfull.com/product/the-pseudo-cleft-construction-
in-english-1st-edition-f-r-higgins/
 Spon Research

DIGITALIZATION IN
CONSTRUCTION
RECENT TRENDS AND ADVANCES
Edited by
Chansik Park, Farzad Pour Rahimian, Nashwan Dawood,
Akeem Pedro, Dongmin Lee, Rahat Hussain,
and Mehrtash Soltani
Digitalization in Construction

This book highlights the latest trends and advances in applications of digital technologies
in construction engineering and management. A collection of chapters is presented,
explicating how advanced technological solutions can innovatively address challenges
and improve outcomes in the construction industry. Promising technologies that are
highlighted include digital twins, virtual reality, augmented reality, artificial intelligence,
robotics, blockchain, and distributed ledger technologies. The first section presents recent
applications of extended reality technologies for construction education and advanced
project control. The subsequent chapters explore Artificial Intelligence (AI), blockchain,
and BIM-enabled digitalization in construction through a series of case studies, reviews,
and technical studies. Innovative technologies and digitalized solutions are proposed for
improved design, planning, training, monitoring, inspection, and operations management
in Architectural, Engineering and Construction (AEC) contexts. In addition to the
technological perspectives and insights presented, pressing issues such as decarbonization,
safety, and sustainability in the built environment are also discussed.
This book provides foundational knowledge and in-depth technical studies on
emerging technologies for students, academics, and industry practitioners. The research
demonstrates how the effective use of new technologies can enhance work methods,
transform organizational structures, and bring profound advantages to construction
project participants.
Spon Research

Publishes a stream of advanced books for built environment researchers and profes­
sionals from one of the world’s leading publishers. The ISSN for the Spon Research
programme is ISSN 1940-7653 and the ISSN for the Spon Research E-book programme
is ISSN 1940-8005
The Connectivity of Innovation in the Construction Industry
Edited by Malena Ingemansson Havenvid, Åse Linné, Lena E. Bygballe and Chris Harty
Contract Law in the Construction Industry Context
Carl J. Circo
Corruption in Infrastructure Procurement
Emmanuel Kingsford Owusu and Albert P. C. Chan
Improving the Performance of Construction Industries for Developing Countries
Programmes, Initiatives, Achievements and Challenges
Edited by Pantaleo D Rwelamila and Rashid Abdul Aziz
Work Stress Induced Chronic Diseases in Construction
Discoveries Using Data Analytics
Imriyas Kamardeen
Life-Cycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Commercial Buildings
An Analysis for Green-Building Implementation Using A Green Star Rating System
Cuong N. N. Tran, Vivian W. Y. Tam and Khoa N. Le
Data-driven BIM for Energy Efficient Building Design
Saeed Banihashemi, Hamed Golizadeh and Farzad Pour Rahimian
Successful Development of Green Building Projects
Tayyab Ahmad
BIM and Construction Health and Safety
Uncovering, Adoption and Implementation
Hamed Golizadeh, Saeed Banihashemi, Carol Hon and Robin Drogemuller
Digitalisation in Construction
Recent Trends and Advances
Edited by Chansik Park, Farzad Pour Rahimian, Nashwan Dawood, Akeem Pedro,
Dongmin Lee, Rahat Hussain, Mehrtash Soltani
Digitalization in Construction
Recent Trends and Advances

Edited by Chansik Park,

Farzad Pour Rahimian, Nashwan Dawood,
Akeem Pedro, Dongmin Lee, Rahat Hussain,
and Mehrtash Soltani
First published 2024
by Routledge
4 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN
and by Routledge
605 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10158
Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business
© 2024 selection and editorial matter, Chansik Park, Farzad Pour Rahimian,
Nashwan Dawood, Akeem Pedro, Dongmin Lee, Rahat Hussain and Mehrtash Soltani;
individual chapters, the contributors
The right of Chansik Park, Farzad Pour Rahimian, Nashwan Dawood, Akeem Pedro,
Dongmin Lee, Rahat Hussain and Mehrtash Soltani to be identified as the authors of the
editorial material, and of the authors for their individual chapters, has been asserted in
accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in
any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter
invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or
retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers.
Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered
trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to
infringe.
British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library
Library of Congress Cataloguing-in-Publication Data
Names: Park, Chansik, editor. | Rahimian, Farzad Pour, editor. | Dawood, Nashwan,
editor. | Pedro, Akeem, editor. | Lee, Dongmin (Professor of architecture and building
science) editor. | Hussain, Rahat, editor. | Soltani, Mehrtash, editor.
Title: Digitalization in construction : recent trends and advances / edited by Chansik
Park, Farzad Pour Rahimian, Nashwan Dawood, Akeem Pedro, Dongmin Lee, Rahat
Hussain, Mehrtash Soltani.
Description: Abingdon, Oxon ; New York, NY : Routledge, 2024. |
Series: Spon research | Includes bibliographical references and index.
Identifiers: LCCN 2023026759 (print) | LCCN 2023026760 (ebook) | ISBN 9781032517896
(hardback) | ISBN 9781032528892 (paperback) | ISBN 9781003408949 (ebook)
Subjects: LCSH: Building information modeling. | Construction industry--
Management--Data processing.
Classification: LCC TH438.13 .D54 2024 (print) | LCC TH438.13 (ebook) | DDC
624.0285--dc23/eng/20231019
LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2023026759
LC ebook record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2023026760
ISBN: 978-1-032-51789-6 (hbk)
ISBN: 978-1-032-52889-2 (pbk)
ISBN: 978-1-003-40894-9 (ebk)
DOI: 10.1201/9781003408949
Typeset in Times New Roman
by MPS Limited, Dehradun
Contents

Preface viii
Editors’ Biographies ix
Contributors xi

1 Multi-user Virtual Reality-Based Design Review of Students’

Construction Designs 1
MEINHARDT THORLUND HAAHR

2 Towards Personalized Mixed Reality-Based Learning

Experience in Construction Education 20
OMOBOLANLE OGUNSEIJU, NIHAR JAMES GONSALVES,
ABIOLA ABOSEDE AKANMU, AND DIANA BAIRAKTAROVA

3 Marker-Based Augmented Reality Framework for Checking

the Installation Status of Onsite Components 39
HUNG PHAM, LINH NGUYEN, MAN-WOO PARK, AND CHAN-SIK PARK

4 Schedule-Driven BIM Model Breakdown Framework

for Construction Monitoring with Augmented Reality 60
THAI-HOA LE, YUN TING SHIH, AND JACOB J. LIN

5 Building Information Model Visualisation in

Augmented Reality 75
VISHAK DUDHEE AND VLADIMIR VUKOVIC

6 Conceptual Framework for Safety Training for Migrant

Construction Workers Using Virtual Reality Techniques 93
RAHAT HUSSAIN, AKEEM PEDRO, SYED FARHAN ALAM ZAIDI,
MUHAMMAD SIBTAIN ABBAS, MEHRTASH SOLTANI, AND CHANSIK PARK
vi Contents

7 Automated Data Retrieval Solution from BIM Using

AI Voice Assistant 104
FARIS ELGHAISH, JATIN KUMAR CHAUHAN, SANDRA MATARNEH,
FARZAD POUR RAHIMIAN, AND M REZA HOSSEINI

8 BIM-VR Integration for Infrastructure Asset Management:

A Systematic Review 126
RHIJUL SOOD AND BOEING LAISHRAM

9 Verification and Validation of a Framework for Collaborative

BIM Implementation, Measurement and Management (CIMM) 147
ANDREW PIDGEON

10 BIM Adoption Issues in Infrastructure Construction Projects:

Analysis and Solutions 173
ANDREW PIDGEON AND NASHWAN DAWOOD

11 A Review of Barriers and Enablers of the BIM Adoption

in Quality Management System 201
NANDINI SHARMA AND BOEING LAISHRAM

12 Transforming Construction Site Safety with iSAFE:

An Automated Safety Management Platform 213
CHANSIK PARK, MEHRTASH SOLTANI, AKEEM PEDRO, JAEHUN YANG,
DOYEOP LEE, AND RAHAT HUSSAIN

13 BIM with Blockchain for Decentralised Circular Construction

Supply Chain 235
FARIS ELGHAISH, M. REZA HOSSEINI, TUBA KOCATURK,
MEHRDAD ARASHPOUR, AND MASOOMEH BARARZADEH LEDARI

14 Developing a Digitized Maintenance Supply Chain System

for Sensitive Assets Using ‘Blockchain of Things’ 260
FARIS ELGHAISH, FARZAD POUR RAHIMIAN, AND NASHWAN DAWOOD

15 Digital Twinning in the Malaysian Construction Industry 271

SHAN JIANCHENG, CHAI CHANG SAAR, AND EEYDZAH AMINUDIN

16 Electromyography-Based Action Recognition of Construction

Workers Using and Not Using Wearable Robots 294
NIHAR JAMES GONSALVES, OMOBOLANLE OGUNSEIJU, AND
ABIOLA ABOSEDE AKANMU
 Contents vii

17 Design and Development of Virtual Reality Environment

for Human-Robot Interaction on Construction Site 311
ADETAYO ONOSOSEN, INNOCENT MUSONDA, CHRISTOPHER DZUWA,
AND RAMABODU MOLUSIWA

18 Application of Blockchain Technology in the Engineering

and Construction Sector: A State-of-the-Art Review 322
ARTURO DE JESÚS MIRANDA, EMMANUEL DANIEL, AND
HAMLET REYNOSO VANDERHORST

Index 345
Preface

The rapid proliferation of digital technologies is heralding unprecedented trans-

formation across diverse industries and sectors. This book highlights the latest trends
and advances in applications of digital technologies in construction engineering and
management. A collection of articles is presented, explicating how advanced techno-
logical solutions can innovatively address challenges and improve outcomes in the
construction industry. Promising technologies that are highlighted include digital twins,
virtual reality, augmented reality, artificial intelligence, computer vision, robotics,
blockchain, and distributed ledger technologies.
The drive towards digital transformation is essential for the construction industry,
which tends to lag behind other industries in terms of labor productivity, safety, and cost
efficiency. Unforeseen disruptions such as the COVID-19 pandemic have shown the need
for construction collaboration, training, monitoring, and contracting innovation. The
immense potential of paradigm-shifting technologies such as artificial intelligence,
computer vision, digital twins, and robotics has been recognized. Their integration into
construction workflows is expected to bring tremendous value to the building industry.
However, many challenges and questions regarding the digitalization of construction
remain unaddressed. Many emerging technological tools and solutions in construction
are still at a low level of maturity, and there is a lack of documented work on how they
can be implemented in practice. Issues such as tool interoperability and concerns
regarding the high cost of entry, worker upskilling, and safety remain underexamined.
This book fills this gap by providing a body of research outputs which showcase state-of-
the-art advances and applications of innovative technologies in construction.
The book comprises 18 chapters. The first chapter provides an overview of the state of
the construction industry through a collection of review papers and qualitative studies.
The subsequent chapters explore applications of innovative technologies through case
studies, review articles, conceptual articles, and technical papers. Innovative technologies
and digitalized solutions are proposed for improved design, planning, training,
monitoring, inspection, and operations management in Architectural, Engineering, and
Construction (AEC) contexts. In addition to the technological perspectives and insights
presented, the last few chapters explore pressing issues such as health and safety in the
built environment.
Chansik Park, Farzad Pour Rahimian, Nashwan Dawood,
Akeem Pedro, Dongmin Lee, Rahat Hussain, Mehrtash Soltani
Editors’ Biographies

Chansik Park is a Professor at the School of Architecture and Building Science and a
former Dean of the Graduate School of Construction Engineering of Chung-Ang
University in South Korea. Professor Park has published over 100 papers in peer-
reviewed journals and conferences internationally and has served editorial board member
and reviewer of many international journals including Automation in Construction and
International Journal of Project Management. He has been the recipient of numerous
academic and professional awards, including the prestigious Elsevier Atlas Award in
recognition of ‘outstanding achievement and significant positive contribution to society’.

Farzad Rahimian is a Professor of Digital Engineering and Manufacturing at Teesside

University, UK. He is the Editor-in-Chief of the Journal of Smart and Sustainable Built
Environment and Associate Editor of Automation in Construction. He is the author
and editor of a number of books including Industry 4.0 Solutions for Building Design
and Construction (Routledge, 2019) and Industry 4.0 Solutions for Building Design and
Construction (Routledge, 2021)

Nashwan Dawood is a Professor of Digital Construction in the Centre for Sustainable

Engineering at Teesside University. His expertise is in sustainable infrastructure and in
modelling ways to ensure carbon reduction in construction, housing and engineering
projects. He has long-standing experience in undertaking research projects with major
industrial partners in the areas of 5D modelling, serious game engine technology,
Building Information Modelling, and the application of digital technologies for energy-
efficient buildings.

Akeem Pedro is a Research Associate at Chung-Ang University in Seoul, South Korea.

His research focuses on Technology Enhanced Learning, Interactive Learning
Environments, Knowledge Engineering and Informatics for construction safety and
health. He has published and co-authored over 20 papers in international journals and
conferences, garnering over 900 citations.

Dongmin Lee is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Architecture and Building

Science at Chung-Ang University. His research interests lie in the integration of cons-
truction equipment, method, planning, scheduling, and control to support a better human-
robot collaborative working environment. Dr Lee has published around 40 papers in
various journals and conferences internationally. He has also served as a reviewer of many
international as well as national journals.
x Editors’ Biographies

Rahat Hussain is currently working towards PhD degree at Chung-Ang University in

Seoul, South Korea. His current research works focus on construction informatics,
technology-enhanced education, metaverse, visualization technologies for construction
safety, education, and management.

Mehrtash Soltani earned his PhD from the University of Malaya in Malaysia. With over a
decade of research expertise in building materials, waste management, and construction
safety management, he currently serves as a research associate at ConTi Lab, located
at Chung-Ang University in Seoul, South Korea.
Contributors

Abbas Muhammad Sibtain, Chung-Ang University, South Korea

Akanmu Abiola Abosede, Myers Lawson School of Construction, Virginia Tech,
Blacksburg, VA, USA
Aminudin Eeydzah, School of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Universiti
Teknologi Malaysia, Skudai Johor, Malaysia
Arashpour Mehrdad, Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University, Australia
Bairaktarova Diana, Department of Engineering Education, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg,
VA, USA
Chauhan Jatin Kumar, School of Natural and Built Environment, Queen’s University
Belfast, United Kingdom
Daniel Emmanuel, University of Wolverhampton, Wolverhampton, United Kingdom
Dawood Nashwan, School of Computing, Engineering and Digital Technologies, Teesside
University, Middlesbrough, UK
Dudhee Vishak, School of Computing, Engineering and Digital Technologies, Teesside
University, Middlesbrough, UK
Dzuwa Christopher, Faculty of Engineering and the Built Environment, University of
Johannesburg, South Africa
Elghaish Faris, School of Natural and Built Environment, Queen’s University Belfast,
United Kingdom
Gonsalves Nihar James, Myers-Lawson School of Construction, Virginia Tech,
Blacksburg, VA, USA
Haahr Meinhardt Thorlund, University College of Northern Denmark (UCN), Aalborg,
Denmark
Hosseini M Reza, School of Architecture and Building, Deakin University, Australia
Hussain Rahat, Chung-Ang University, South Korea
Jiancheng Shan, Faculty of Engineering, Computing and Science, Swinburne University
of Technology Sarawak Campus, Kuching, Sarawak, Malaysia
xii Contributors

Kocaturk Tuba, School of Architecture and Built Environment, Deakin University,

Australia
Laishram Boeing, Department of Civil Engineering, IIT Guwahati, Assam, India
Le Thai-Hoa, Department of Civil Engineering, National Taiwan University, Taiwan
Ledari Masoomeh Bararzadeh, Energy Department, Sharif University of Technology,
Tehran, Iran
Lee Doyeop, Chung-Ang University, South Korea
Lin Jacob J., Department of Civil Engineering, National Taiwan University, Taiwan
Matarneh Sandra, Faculty of Engineering, Al-Ahliyya Amman University, Amman,
Jordan
Miranda Arturo De Jesús, University of Wolverhampton, Wolverhampton, United
Kingdom
Molusiwa Ramabodu, Faculty of Engineering and the Built Environment, University of
Johannesburg, South Africa
Musonda Innocent, Faculty of Engineering and the Built Environment, University of
Johannesburg, South Africa
Nguyen Linh, Myongji University, South Korea
Ogunseiju Omobolanle, School of Building of Construction, College of Design, Georgia
Tech, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Onososen Adetayo, Faculty of Engineering and the Built Environment, University of
Johannesburg, South Africa
Park Chan-Sik, Chung-Ang University, South Korea
Park Man-Woo, Myongji University, South Korea
Pedro Akeem, Chung-Ang University, South Korea
Pham Hung, Eindhoven University of Technology, Netherlands
Pidgeon Andrew Gerard, School of Computing, Engineering and Digital Technologies,
Teesside University, Middlesbrough, UK
Rahimian Farzad Pour, School of Computing, Engineering and Digital Technologies,
Teesside University, Middlesbrough, UK
Saar Chai Chang, Faculty of Engineering, Computing and Science, Swinburne University
of Technology Sarawak Campus, Kuching, Sarawak, Malaysia
Sharma Nandini, Department of Civil Engineering, IIT Guwahati, Assam, India
Shih Yun Ting, Department of Civil Engineering, National Taiwan University, Taiwan
Soltani Mehrtash, Chung-Ang University, South Korea
Sood Rhijul, Department of Civil Engineering, IIT Guwahati, Assam, India
 Contributors xiii

Vanderhorst Hamlet Reynoso, University of Wolverhampton, Wolverhampton, United

Kingdom
Vukovic Vladimir, School of Computing, Engineering and Digital Technologies, Teesside
University, Middlesbrough, UK
Yang Jaehun, Chung-Ang University, South Korea
Zaidi Syed Farhan Alam, Chung-Ang University, South Korea
1 Multi-user Virtual Reality-Based Design
Review of Students’ Construction Designs
Meinhardt Thorlund Haahr
University College of Northern Denmark (UCN), Aalborg

1.1 Introduction
A construction process is considered successful if the construction is completed on time,
at the agreed price and quality and with a high degree of customer satisfaction.
Unfortunately, there are many examples of this not being achieved (Shirkavand et al.,
2016). McKinsey reported that 98% of megaprojects are associated with overruns or
delays, with an average cost increase being 80% of original budget and least but not last
with an average delay of 20 months (McKinsey Global Institute, 2015). Among others,
they report the cause being, lack of interdisciplinary collaboration and accumulation of
unresolved issues. According to the report conducted by The Danish Construction
Federation, in collaboration with Chalmers University in Gothenburg and the company
BIMobject, the Danish private construction sector can save up to 10.5 billion DKK
(approximately 1.41 billion Euro) by proper use of digital tools and improving com-
munication in the design phase of a construction project (Malmgreen, 2020). Among
other things, they conclude that economic profit can be gained in the transition between
design and construction phases. Here, several ambiguities often arise between consultants
and contractors, leading to misunderstandings and disagreements between the partners.

1.1.1 Communication
Communication, especially information delivery, depends on the context in which the
information is presented, the background of the sender and receiver as well as their
natural environment (Berlo, 1960). For information to be delivered, it must be concep-
tualized and coded in the form of language, text and/or a medium. The prerequisite for
encoding and decoding to be successful is familiarity with the codes that apply in the
culture, in which the communication takes place (Hall, 1980). Design and construction of
buildings and especially its building services are interdisciplinary and complex processes,
as each building is unique, the partners are many, with different educational backgrounds
and change from project to project. Finally, several of the stakeholders, such as users and
the client, are not necessarily building professionals.

1.1.2 Design Review

During the design process, design reviews are conducted in order to detect omissions and
defects, also referred to as issues. Design and execution of building is a complex process,
as each building is unique, and the partners are many and different from project to
project. The current design and review processes in the design phase are predominantly

DOI: 10.1201/9781003408949-1
2 Meinhardt Thorlund Haahr

Figure 1.1 Abstraction pyramid – inspired by Kjems (2000).

communicated via media such as Building Information Model (BIM), design review in
the construction phase is predominantly communicated via media such as 2D drawings
and descriptions and to a lesser extent 3D models. (Haahr et al., 2019; Johansson and
Roupé, 2019). According to space cognition theory (Golledge, 1991), which is grounded
in visuospatial skills, processing and working memory, information delivery in current
media is abstract (Figure 1.1). They place high demands on the individual actor’s ability
to encode and decode information, and as consequence a higher cognitive workload for
the actor (Johansson and Roupé, 2019; Kwiatek et al., 2019).

1.1.3 Virtual Reality

Virtual reality (VR) offers a solution to this problem. By using VR, it is possible to
achieve a more natural and intuitive design review in a size ratio of 1:1, similar to that
used in erected buildings. The goal is that the technology will result in actors arriving at
the same conclusions as they would in a real-world investigation. According to Windham
and Liu, VR significantly improves the (1) understanding of space, (2) detecting and
understanding of potential issues and (3) understanding of functionality (Windham and
Liu, 2018). Furthermore, VR gives a common base of reference in a 1:1 scale, which gives
actors from the Architectural Engineering and Construction (AEC) Industry improved
ability to (1) understand the building as whole, (2) decode the intended design compared
to 2D drawings and 3D models in BIM and lastly (3) detect clashes and design errors
before commenced work (Johansson and Roupé, 2019). A literature study conducted by
the author concludes, that existing studies argue that VR can improve design review
process in the designing phase of a building (Haahr, 2021). Furthermore, VR is mature
for use in the industry and that existing research lacks investigation with many actors in a
multidisciplinary environment, which can give more transferable results.
One disadvantage with existing VR is that most commercialized applications only
involve a single user experience. As opposed to multi-user, the common base of reference
is gained individually. From the author’s own observation, collaboration with single-user
experience (1) leads to actors spending shorter time in an immersive VR experience or
 Multi-user Virtual Reality Based Design Review 3

(2) rapidly taking off VR equipment, when reviewing a design. Furthermore, VR is

associated with expensive and troublesome setups, which causes resistance to the adop-
tion of the technology. Fortunately, Prospect offers an easy-to-use and multi-user
solution intended for interdisciplinary immersive collaboration, and is supported by
low-priced VR equipment, Oculus Quest 2 (PROSPECT BY IRISVR, 2022).
The aim of this study is to investigate the value of multi-user VR-supported design
review of buildings in a multidisciplinary collaboration.

1.2 Method
The physical frame around this study was at an annual event at UCN, called The Digital
Days (DDD) (de Digitale Dage, 2022). The purpose of DDD is to bring together students
from different education within the AEC industry to design a building, where the main
goal is to learn digital tools centred around BIM. For the event, students from different
disciplines within AEC industry, work in groups, aiming to use digital applications to
design building projects.

1.2.1 Case
The case was a multi-story building with a real client. Each group received the official
material of the Schematic Design, including a Revit model, see Figure 1.2. Within three
days each group move from Schematic Design to Detailed Design, including considera-
tions and a rough design of Architecture, MEP and Structural bearing system. Each
group had a supervisor from the local AEC industry, which supported the group with his
own experience and knowledge from the AEC industry. The groups compete in making
the best project, by exploring methods, digital applications and collaboration. Before and
during the event, various presentations are held by companies, which are to inspire the
students in their work.

Figure 1.2 An extract of the Revit model and shows a 3D view, ground floor, first floor and second
floor.
4 Meinhardt Thorlund Haahr

Figure 1.3 An overview of data collected during this study.

1.2.2 Data Collection

This year had particular focus on VR, which included two intensive days of VR prior to
the DDD competition. This included different lectures in the use of VR, both theoretical
and practical from two Danish companies. The theoretical lectures focused on the
technology and existing studies on VR in the AEC industry, whereas the practical lectures
focused on the practical use-case and value of VR based on their experience within the
AEC industry. To get some hands-on experience, the students were introduced to dif-
ferent applications for issue detecting and handling, among here Navisworks for clash
detection and Prospect for immersive and collaborative design review.
For this study, data were collected during and after the three days of competition, as
shown in Figure 1.3. During the DDD competition, a VR room was set up for voluntary
design review. The VR room consisted of four sets of Oculus Quest 2 (OQ) for use in
Prospect, furthermore, students could also participate with they’re desktop (DT). Data
was collected through three sources.

1 Observation during the design review sessions: During the observation, quantitative data
was noted, such as number of OQ and DT users as well as time used. Furthermore,
qualitative data was also noted, such as how the design review process proceeded as well
as interactions, statements, announcements and body language between VR users.
2 Issue report from design reviews: Groups that used the issue-handling tool built in
Prospect, handed in their issue report, which consisted of qualitative data, such as
number, discipline, type and priority of issues.
3 Survey: A survey was conducted after the competition and use of VR room. It consists
of both qualitative and quantitative data related to their individual opinion regarding
VR and experience during the VR introduction and/or VR room.

1.3 Results
During the competition period, a total of eight design review sessions were conducted, see
Table 1.1. The sessions were conducted in the VR room by different groups during the
DDD. In total 25 users participated in a total time of 201 minutes, 18 OQ and 7 DT
users. On average, rounded to whole persons, in total three users, two OQ and one DT, in
a 25-minute session.
 Multi-user Virtual Reality Based Design Review 5

Table 1.1 Overview of multi-user VR-supported design review session

Session Oculus Desktop Total Time Process Issues

Quest
No. No. of Users Minutes Documentation Approach No. Per Minute

1 4 2 6 39 BCF Digital Structured 19 0.49

2 2 0 2 15 No Analog Semi
3 2 1 3 20 Screenshot Digital Semi
4 1 1 2 25 BCF Digital Structured 6 0.24
5 2 0 2 15 No Analog Non
6 1 1 2 40 BCF Digital Structured 15 0.38
7 3 1 4 22 BCF Digital Structured 8 0.36
8 3 1 4 25 Hand notes Analog Non
Total 18 7 25 201 48
Average 2 1 3 25 12 0.37

Session 1 was the greatest and one of the longest sessions, with a total of six users, four
OQ users and two DTs, and 39 min long. The longest session was 40 minutes, which was
conducted in session 6. On the other hand, in four sessions only two users were partic-
ipating, in which two sessions had two OQ users and the other two sessions had one OQ
and one DC user. In the case of two OQ users, the sessions lasted 15 minutes, which was
the two shortest sessions conducted.

1.3.1 Design Review Process

As mentioned in Section 1.2, the VR-supported design reviews were optional for the
students participating in DDD, where the main objective of DDD is to learn digital
solutions based on hands-on experience and own reflections. Therefore, no instruction
was given on how to perform design reviews in VR. As shown in Table 1.1, in six out of
eight sessions, at least one DT user was participating. Interestingly enough, in all six
sessions, the role of the DT user was to document the issues detected by the OQ user(s). In
all eight sessions, the role of the OQ user was to review the models and detect issues.
The documentation for registered issues was handled in four different ways, Building
Collaboration Format (BCF), screenshots, hand notes or no documentation. In four out
of eight sessions, the detection of issues was documented in the issue-handling tool in
Prospect, in which supports BCF. This allows the users to create a so-called issue, which
among other things saves the location of the issue in the 3D model, screenshot including
any animation (left and right, Figure 1.4) and/or measurements (left, Figure 1.5) created
in VR, description, status and to assign responsibility to a project participant. In session 3
the documentation consisted of DT users taking screenshots in Prospect and reporting
and describing the issues in a Word document. In session 8, the documentation consisted
of DT user taking analogy hand notes on a piece of paper. Common for both sessions 2
and 5 was that no documentation was conducted. Interestingly, these were also the only
two sessions where no DT user participated. Even though, this does not mean that the
design review session was useless. In both sessions, the users gain an improved under-
standing of the project and issues were also detected. For instance, in session 5, when
looking at a bearing beam, one OQ user states “This one is too high up”. Furthermore,
during another conversation, one OQ user states “The suspended ceiling is floating and
6 Meinhardt Thorlund Haahr

Figure 1.4 Examples of issue registration in Prospect. (Left) Hard class between ventilation duct
and ceiling in session 5. (Right) Omission of stair rail from session 6. The animation
shows where stair railing is to be placed.

Figure 1.5 Examples of issue registration from session 1in Prospect. (Left) An issue from poor
accessibility in the kitchen, including a measurement supporting the claim. (Right)
An issue of wrong choice of material in the bathroom floor.

also it must be lowered”, and the other one answers “The models off-set is completely
wrong”. Lastly, when finishing the design review one OQ user states “We made a mess”,
where he implies that there are a lot of problems they have not noticed when designing
and reviewing the project in Revit.
Three different approaches were observed, structured, semi-structured and non-
structured. In four out of eight sessions, a structured approach was conducted. In the
structured approaches, the participants had made a detailed plan of the design review
session in advance, which included they had prioritized and scheduled walking path as
well as a prepared list of point of interest to be reviewed in a joint force. For instance,
in session 1 they start with the first room on the ground floor and begin with the first
thing on the list, which in this particular case was collisions. In two out of eight ses-
sions, the approaches were non-structured. In the non-structured approaches, there was
no plan for the design review session. The participants started walking in random
directions and walked around looking announcing what caught the eye. In the semi-
structured approaches, there was not necessarily a plan in advance, but during the
design review session, the participants, especially the DT, felt a need to start structuring
the process. This was mainly because it was difficult for the DT to keep track of the
issues being reported.
 Multi-user Virtual Reality Based Design Review 7

1.3.2 Issue Report

As shown in Table 1.1, in four out of eight sessions, the issue report was documented
using issue-handling tool in Prospect. In Figures 1.4–1.6, six examples of issues from the
issue report are shown. In this section, these issues are analysed and classified. In total 48
issues were registered in the four sessions. In session 1 a total amount of 19 issues was
registered and in relation to effectiveness 0.49 issues were registered per minute, which
was the highest score in relation to total amount and effectiveness. In session 4 total
amount of six issues were registered and in relation to effectiveness, 0.24 issues were
registered per minute, which was the lowest score in relation to total amount of effec-
tiveness. On average a total of 12 issues were registered whereas 0.37 issues were regis-
tered per minute.
Going through all the issue reports, the issues were categorized in relation to type,
discipline and priority. For each category issues were classified, as shown in Table 1.2.

1.3.2.1 Type of Issue

Four different types of issues were identified and classified as follows.
Omission was used when something is missing from the model. A total of 12 issues
were classified as omissions. Among these issues the description was “Missing suspended
ceiling” or “Missing stair rail”, an example is shown in Figure 1.4 (right).
Accessibility was used for one single issue, which was described as “Kitchen
Accessibility”, this example is shown in Figure 1.5 (left). This issue was also noted in the
observation in session 1, as one user moved into the kitchen and stated that there was not

Figure 1.6 Examples of issue registration in Prospect. (Left) Collisions with elevator shaft and
ventilation in session 1. (Right) Collision with elevator shafts and ventilation in section
session 4.

Table 1.2 Shows issue report from Prospect, categorized by type, discipline and priority

Type No. Per cent Discipline No. Per cent Priority No. Per cent

Omission 12 25% Architecture 35 73% Trivial 12 25%

Accessibility 1 2% MEP 11 23% Low 4 8%
Hard Clash 5 10% Structural 2 4% Medium 12 25%
Defect 30 63% High 13 27%
Critical 7 15%
Total 48 100% 48 100% 48 100%
8 Meinhardt Thorlund Haahr

enough space for proper passage in the kitchen. This was followed up by a measurement
in VR, that confirms his claim. This issue was then registered in the issue report as
“Kitchen Accessibility”.
Hard clash was used when two or more objects collide in the model, an example is
shown in the left picture of Figure 1.4. A total of five issues were classified as hard clash.
In all five cases, the issue consisted of MEP colliding with other BIM objects, such as
“Collision between ventilation and bearing beam” and “Plumbing colliding with above
floorplan”.
Defect was used when an object has been modelled poorly or misplaced and not
necessarily is clashing. A total of 40 issues were classified as defect, which consisted of
63%. Examples were “Floating Wall”, “Movement of elevator shaft” and “wrong
material”, an example is shown in Figure 1.5 (right) and Figure 1.6 (right and left).

1.3.2.2 Discipline
The issues were classified into three different disciplines, Architectural, Mechanical
Electrical and Plumbing (MEP) and Structural. With a total of 35 issues, Architectural
issues were by far the highest amount registered. Followed by MEP and Structural, which
consisted of respectively 11 and 2 issues. In some cases, it was not clear who was
responsible for correcting the issue. In this case, this was discussed during the design
review sessions.

1.3.2.3 Priority of Issue

The issues were also classified by their priority. (1) Trivial was used for issues that were
easy to fix and needed no interdisciplinary coordination, such as “Ventilation supply
fitting placement” and “missing glazing on the window”. A total of 12 issues were
registered as trivial. (2) Low was used for issues that were easy to fix, but couldn’t
be decided by a single person such as “Placement of suspended ceiling”. A total of
four issues were registered as low. (3) Medium was used for issues that were somewhat
more difficult to fix and affected at least two disciplines. A total of 12 issues were
registered as medium and examples were “Ceiling level height” and “Misplacement of
stair landing”. (4) High was used for issues that were difficult to fix and affected
multiple disciplines. A total of 13 was registered as high and was the highest amount.
Examples were “Ventilation duct rout collides with elevator shaft” and “Floating
Bearing column”. (5) Critical was used for issues that affected multiple disciplines
and in solving the issue, may have caused new issues. Examples were “Movement of
elevator shafts”, see Figure 1.6 (left and right), and “collision between ventilation and
bearing beam”.

1.3.2.4 Model-Confirmation and Solution-Discussing

In the design review sessions, the participants typically reviewed the whole model. In
all eight sessions, there were incidents where participants started addressing solutions
of the registered issues during the design review session, in order to get an agreement
on how to move on. Furthermore, there were many examples of participants con-
firming their model, such as the following statements from an OQ user “The bearing
beam is good enough” or the conversation between an OC and DT user; OQ said “Is
the suspended ceiling not too faar down?” and the DT user replied, “Let me check
 Multi-user Virtual Reality Based Design Review 9

that … no, it is good”. It is noteworthy to mention, that confirming the model was
very valuable, however, these confirmations are not shown in the issue report. Lastly,
it was also observed that accessibility was a subject that was often discussed in many
sessions, however, as shown in Table 1.2, only one issue was registered in issue-
handling tool.

1.3.3 Communication and Interaction

During all eight sessions, observations were made of the participants’ interactions,
statements, announcements and body language. It is important to mention, that when a
user in Prospect moved around, the other users could see his orientation and movement.
Furthermore, for OQ users, the movement of hands was also visible for other users,
making it possible to communicate through body language to a degree. In terms of oral
communication, the OQ and DT have built-in speakers and microphone, making it
possible to communicate orally, however, this was not necessary in this study, since
all users in the design review sessions were in the same room, making it possible to
communicate normally.
During the design review sessions, it was noted that in general the communication
and interaction between the participants, especially communication between OQ users,
was reduced to simple and concrete expressions, such as the oral conversation between
three OQ users in session 1:

OQ1 speech: “Try entering here”

OQ1–3 actions: Move with their controllers
OQ2 action: Turns his head facing upwards
OQ2 speech: “Hold on, that is completely wrong”
OQ2 action: rising his hands upwards
OQ1 and 3 action: turn their head facing upward.
OQ3 speech: “There is also something missing”
OQ1 speech: “OK!, this is really bad”

For an outsider, who was not participating in the VR design review session 1, it is
almost impossible to understand what they were communicating. In the first sentence,
OQ1 requested the other users to enter a place “here”. For the OQ users, here was not
difficult to understand, since it was a simple action of following another user using the
controllers. After entering the place referred to, OQ2 detected something when looking
upwards. He then pointed by using his controller and expressed that “something” was
completely wrong. Both OQ1 and OQ3 reacted, by looking in the direction OQ2 pointed.
Both users seemed to easily understand what OQ1 was refereeing to. This led to OQ3 also
expressing that something was also missing, which OQ1 and OQ2 seemed to “silently”
agree with. Lastly, OQ1 stated that this was bad. The above-mentioned example took
place in session 1. The place referred to by OQ1 was the Common Room on Ground
Floor, see Figure 1.2. The “that” referred to by OQ2 was a ventilation colliding with a
bearing beam, see Figure 1.7 (left). The “something” referred to by OQ3 was a missing
suspended ceiling. The “This” referred to a bigger problem including multiple issues that
needed attending to by multiple and interdisciplinary actions.
Another example of simple and concrete expressions is during session 7, where three
OQ and one DT users were participating. In advance of this particular conversation, the
10 Meinhardt Thorlund Haahr

Figure 1.7 Examples of issue registration in Prospect. (Left) An issue during session 1 of a hard
clash between a bearing beam and ventilation. (Right) An issue during session 7 of the
floor deck is missing underneath the door.

OQ user in question wandered alone around to a distant place of the model, while the rest
of the users were busy registering other issues. During this time the OQ user in question
discovered the issue shown in Figure 1.7 (right), in which the floor deck was missing at a
specific location. However, at the moment of time, DT user was busy. After a while, the
conversation started.

DT speech: “Were was it the floor deck was missing?”

OQ1 speech: “How should I explain …”
OQ1 action: stops and thinks a few seconds
OQ1 speech: “I’ll move to the place in question”
OQ1 action: starts move towards the place in question
DT, OQ2 and OQ3 action: starts to follow OQ1.

For an outsider, who was not participating in the VR design review session 7, it is
almost impossible to know where the place in question is located. All the concrete
information we get is that the floor deck is missing somewhere in the model, which is a
fairly broad demarcation. Even though OQ1 knows of the place in question himself, it
is too difficult for him to explain orally. According to Figure 1.1, an explanation
through oral communication requires the coding and decoding between the sender
(OQ1) and receivers (DT, OQ2 and OQ3) on a more abstract level. However, after
some consideration, the OQ1 user decides to move to the place in question. With no
opposition, the rest of the group move to the location. Even though, the oral com-
munication happens in the VR environment, the act of explaining it orally still requires
high abstraction. On the other hand, by moving to the place in question in VR, the act
of delivering information from sender (OQ1) to receivers (DT, OQ2 and OQ3) is
reduced to a simple movement, by pressing the joystick, hence the communication is on
the lowest level of abstraction.
The two above-mentioned examples were but one of many. Other statement examples
are as such; “I’m standing right behind you”, “There’s nothing here”, “That one is too
high up”, “We made a mess” and “It doesn’t connect here”. Furthermore, in general lots
of body language was observed, such as pointing or waving around to address a single
issue or an area with issues and giving direction when guiding another user around in
the model.
 Multi-user Virtual Reality Based Design Review 11

1.3.4 Survey
After the two-day’s introduction to VR and optional VR-supported design review ses-
sions during the DDD, a survey was conducted. The purpose was to get the students’
individual viewpoint about the multi-user VR-supported design review. A total of 37
respondents completed the questionnaire, whereas 25 of them participated in the design
review sessions. Even more so two respondents were present at the VR sessions, but did
not participate in the sessions as an OC or DT user. Lastly, ten of the respondents only
participated in the two days of introduction to VR. Twenty-two of the respondents have
experience in the AEC industry were among them 17 have primary experience within the
construction phase. The other 15 of them have no experience prior to their current study,
as shown in Figure 1.8. In relation to respondents that participated in the VR sessions,
the demography of work experience is somewhat similar to the total. Therefore, even
though the respondent in this study are students, many of them still have a significant
amount of practical experience to support their viewpoint.

1.3.4.1 Strengths and Drawbacks

The result in this section is based on all 37 respondents. In the survey, the respondents
were asked to describe strengths and weaknesses in relation to VR in the AEC industry.
The results are coded and summarized in Table 1.3. In general, the strengths are that VR
improves the understanding of the project, especially compared to 2D and desktop ver-
sion of 3D models. For instance, respondent number (RN) 34;

RN 34 states: “It is possible to discover possible errors in buildings, as well as get an

understanding of how the building will appear in the real world. There is a big difference
from a screen in 3D and then standing in the building in a virtual world”.

Figure 1.8 Amount of work experience by the respondents.

12 Meinhardt Thorlund Haahr

Table 1.3 Shows the strengths and drawbacks of VR appointed by the respondents

Strengths No. Drawbacks No.

General Improves understanding 12 General Difficult with new 12

technology
Improved visualisation 8 Value vs cost and use of 9
time
Improved working 5 Time-consuming and 8
process difficult to set up
Superior to 3D 4 Clumsy to use 2
Improved 3 Motion sickness 1
interdisciplinary
cooperation
Superior to 2D 3
Presentation Client 12 AEC Expensive to implement 14
Building contractor 4 Lack of skills in the 12
industry
Investors 3 Resistance of new 7
technology adoption
Sale 3 Conservatism in AEC- 3
industry
Requires broad agreement 2
among the AEC-
industry
Difficult to implement for 2
small and medium-sized
enterprises
Design phase Quality assurance 24 Technology Inferior Clash detection 4
compared to clash
detection algorithms
Design Review 22 Requires a model with high 4
level of LOD
Collision control 4 Difficult to keep track with 1
many users
Model-confirmation 4
Solution-discussing 3
Construction Quality assurance 22
phase
Design Review 16
Building instructions 4

Furthermore, VR improves interdisciplinary cooperation and the working processes

in general. More specific building contractors, clients, investors and sales departments
would particularly benefit from VR. In terms of quality management, the majority of the
respondents point out that VR improves design review and quality assurance in especially
the designing phase and construction phase. Furthermore, strengths such as model
confirmation and solution discussion in the designing phase are also mentioned as well as
building instructions in the construction phase.
On the other hand, drawbacks are also mentioned. The most drawbacks described are
difficulty with new technology, expensive to implement and lack of skills in the industry.
These drawbacks are of a more general in nature and are supported by drawbacks such
as time consuming and difficult to setup, resistance of new technology adoption, con-
servativism in the AEC industry. For instance;
 Multi-user Virtual Reality Based Design Review 13

RN 20 “… in order to achieve a proper implementation of VR, it requires a large

knowledge base to, which we currently don’t have”.

Following on from that, nine respondents also point out that it is not known whether
or not the value of the use of VR is good enough when compared to costs and time
consumption.

RN 29 states: “I think it is difficult for companies to know whether it is a good

investment, and I also think that the investment and retraining of employees there is the
biggest challange”.

In relation to the technology, four respondents point out that a model needs a certain
Level of Detail (LOD), for the AEC industry to gain from using VR. Furthermore, four
respondents mentioned that VR was inferior to clash detection compared with clash
detection algorithms such as in Navisworks.

RS 28 states. “It can be difficult to persuade people to use it when, for example, when you
can do clash detection in Navisworks, without the use of VR glasses”.

1.3.4.2 VR versus Traditional Design Review

The result in this section is based on all 37 respondents. When comparing design review carried
out in 2D drawings and 3D view with VR, the bar chart in Figure 1.9. speaks quite unam-
biguously. To a high degree, the respondents either strongly agree or agree, that compared with
both traditional 2D drawings and 3D views, VR gave them (1) a better understanding of the
project as a whole, (2) more spatial understanding of the project, (3) a better understanding
of the interdisciplinary work and (4) a better opportunity to communicate issues.
Although it is worth mentioning that there were significantly more respondents
that are neutral or disagreed when it comes to a better understanding of the inter-
disciplinary work. For instance, compared with 3D view, a total of four respondents
(14.8%) disagreed and five respondents (18.5%) are neutral. It is also worth mentioning
that in relation to communicating in 3D view versus communicating in VR, for each
answer one respondent answered “I don’t know”, “Disagree” and “Neutral”.

1.3.4.3 Value of VR in Design Review Sessions

The result in this section is based on the 27 respondents, who used were presented during
the design review sessions. This section investigates the respondents’ own experience on
the design review sessions described in Sections 3.1 to 3.3, see also Table 1.1.
The results shown in Figure 1.10 speak quite unambiguously, respondents that par-
ticipated in design review sessions aider strongly agree or agree, that (1) reviewing the
project in general gave them value, (2) a lot of issues were detected when reviewing the
model in VR, (3) without VR, they would not detect some issues and (4) reviewing
the project with multiple VR users gave them value. In the survey, there were many
examples supporting these results such as. In relation to value of VR

RN 12: “We found errors that we couldn’t find in 3D Revit, and as an architect it gave me
a better overview”.
14 Meinhardt Thorlund Haahr

Figure 1.9 The degree to which the respondents agree or disagree to the statement listed above the
charts.

RN 15: “Being able to stand inside the building yourself gives a better understanding of
the entire project, and it is much easier to see and to perform a quality assurance on the
building”.
RN 23: “It was great to be able to walk around inside our building. It gave a better
understanding of room size, corridor widths, stairs, ceiling height, etc. in 1:1”.
RN 25: “It added value to the project because we could see and discuss things that were
not visible in our 2D/3D drawings”.

Respondents also mentioned many examples of issues they would not discover without a
VR design review session such as

RN 2: “There were many technical installations that collided. There were building parts
that collided or were not connected”.
RN 12: “we had some ventilation pipes that we had made holes in the walls to
implement. - We then moved these ventilation pipes, and it turned out when we performed
quality assurance in VR that there was still a hole in the wall”.
RN 14: “ … the elevator shaft collided with a ventilation pipe. It would have been
difficult to see in 3D”.
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the
Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the
collection of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the
individual works in the collection are in the public domain in the
United States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright
law in the United States and you are located in the United
States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from copying,
distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative works
based on the work as long as all references to Project
Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope that you will
support the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting free
access to electronic works by freely sharing Project
Gutenberg™ works in compliance with the terms of this
agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg™ name
associated with the work. You can easily comply with the terms
of this agreement by keeping this work in the same format with
its attached full Project Gutenberg™ License when you share it
without charge with others.

1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also
govern what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most
countries are in a constant state of change. If you are outside
the United States, check the laws of your country in addition to
the terms of this agreement before downloading, copying,
displaying, performing, distributing or creating derivative works
based on this work or any other Project Gutenberg™ work. The
Foundation makes no representations concerning the copyright
status of any work in any country other than the United States.

1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project

Gutenberg:

1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other

immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must
appear prominently whenever any copy of a Project
Gutenberg™ work (any work on which the phrase “Project
Gutenberg” appears, or with which the phrase “Project
Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed,
viewed, copied or distributed:

This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United

States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with
almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it
away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg
License included with this eBook or online at
www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United
States, you will have to check the laws of the country where
you are located before using this eBook.

1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is

derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not
contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the
copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to
anyone in the United States without paying any fees or charges.
If you are redistributing or providing access to a work with the
phrase “Project Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the
work, you must comply either with the requirements of
paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use
of the work and the Project Gutenberg™ trademark as set forth
in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is

posted with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and
distribution must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through
1.E.7 and any additional terms imposed by the copyright holder.
Additional terms will be linked to the Project Gutenberg™
License for all works posted with the permission of the copyright
holder found at the beginning of this work.

1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project

Gutenberg™ License terms from this work, or any files
containing a part of this work or any other work associated with
Project Gutenberg™.
 1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute
this electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1
with active links or immediate access to the full terms of the
Project Gutenberg™ License.

1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form,
including any word processing or hypertext form. However, if
you provide access to or distribute copies of a Project
Gutenberg™ work in a format other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or
other format used in the official version posted on the official
Project Gutenberg™ website (www.gutenberg.org), you must, at
no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a copy, a
means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon
request, of the work in its original “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other
form. Any alternate format must include the full Project
Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.

1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,

performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™
works unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or

providing access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™
electronic works provided that:

• You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the
method you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The
fee is owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark,
but he has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to
the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty
payments must be paid within 60 days following each date on
which you prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your
periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked
as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation at the address specified in Section 4, “Information
 about donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation.”

• You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who

notifies you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that
s/he does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™
License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all
copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and
discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of Project
Gutenberg™ works.

• You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of

any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in
the electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90
days of receipt of the work.

• You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.

1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project

Gutenberg™ electronic work or group of works on different
terms than are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain
permission in writing from the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation, the manager of the Project Gutenberg™
trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3
below.

1.F.

1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend

considerable effort to identify, do copyright research on,
transcribe and proofread works not protected by U.S. copyright
law in creating the Project Gutenberg™ collection. Despite
these efforts, Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, and the
medium on which they may be stored, may contain “Defects,”
such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or corrupt
data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual
property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other
medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or
cannot be read by your equipment.

1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES -

Except for the “Right of Replacement or Refund” described in
paragraph 1.F.3, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation, the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark,
and any other party distributing a Project Gutenberg™ electronic
work under this agreement, disclaim all liability to you for
damages, costs and expenses, including legal fees. YOU
AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE,
STRICT LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH
OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH
1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER
THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR
ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE
OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF
THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.

1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If

you discover a defect in this electronic work within 90 days of
receiving it, you can receive a refund of the money (if any) you
paid for it by sending a written explanation to the person you
received the work from. If you received the work on a physical
medium, you must return the medium with your written
explanation. The person or entity that provided you with the
defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu
of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or
entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second
opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund.
If the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund
in writing without further opportunities to fix the problem.

1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set

forth in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’,
WITH NO OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS
OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO
WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR
ANY PURPOSE.

1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied

warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of
damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this
agreement violates the law of the state applicable to this
agreement, the agreement shall be interpreted to make the
maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by the applicable
state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any provision of
this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.

1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the

Foundation, the trademark owner, any agent or employee of the
Foundation, anyone providing copies of Project Gutenberg™
electronic works in accordance with this agreement, and any
volunteers associated with the production, promotion and
distribution of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, harmless
from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, that
arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do
or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project
Gutenberg™ work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or
deletions to any Project Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any Defect
you cause.

Section 2. Information about the Mission of

Project Gutenberg™
Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of
electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new
computers. It exists because of the efforts of hundreds of
volunteers and donations from people in all walks of life.

Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the

assistance they need are critical to reaching Project
Gutenberg™’s goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™
collection will remain freely available for generations to come. In
2001, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was
created to provide a secure and permanent future for Project
Gutenberg™ and future generations. To learn more about the
Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and how your
efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 and the
Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org.

Section 3. Information about the Project

Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-
profit 501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the
laws of the state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by
the Internal Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal
tax identification number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the
Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation are tax
deductible to the full extent permitted by U.S. federal laws and
your state’s laws.

The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500

West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact
links and up to date contact information can be found at the
Foundation’s website and official page at
www.gutenberg.org/contact

Section 4. Information about Donations to

the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation
Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without
widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission
of increasing the number of public domain and licensed works
that can be freely distributed in machine-readable form
accessible by the widest array of equipment including outdated
equipment. Many small donations ($1 to $5,000) are particularly
important to maintaining tax exempt status with the IRS.

The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws

regulating charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of
the United States. Compliance requirements are not uniform
and it takes a considerable effort, much paperwork and many
fees to meet and keep up with these requirements. We do not
solicit donations in locations where we have not received written
confirmation of compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or
determine the status of compliance for any particular state visit
www.gutenberg.org/donate.

While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states

where we have not met the solicitation requirements, we know
of no prohibition against accepting unsolicited donations from
donors in such states who approach us with offers to donate.

International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot

make any statements concerning tax treatment of donations
received from outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp
our small staff.

Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current

donation methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a
number of other ways including checks, online payments and
credit card donations. To donate, please visit:
www.gutenberg.org/donate.

Section 5. General Information About Project

Gutenberg™ electronic works
Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project
Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could
be freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and
distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose
network of volunteer support.

Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several

printed editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by
copyright in the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus,
we do not necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any
particular paper edition.

Most people start at our website which has the main PG search
facility: www.gutenberg.org.

This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™,

including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new
eBooks, and how to subscribe to our email newsletter to hear
about new eBooks.