Traveling Europe by train is already faster than by plane right now, and Japan is testing a “Supreme” version of its popular high-speed trains, set for a 2020 debut ahead of the next Winter Olympics. You can’t ride that one just yet, but there are more than a few bullet trains available to speed up your travels. Here are the world’s fastest high-speed trains in commercial service, ranked by speed:
Table of Contents
1. Shanghai Maglev: 267 mph
The world’s fastest train isn’t the newest, the shiniest, or even the one with the most expensive tickets. Charging $8 per person, per ride, the Maglev runs the nearly 19 miles from Shanghai’s Pudong International Airport to the Longyang metro station on the outskirts of Shanghai. That’s right—the train, which takes just over 7 minutes to complete the journey using magnetic levitation (maglev) technology, doesn’t go to the city center. As such, the bulk of the passengers since its 2004 debut have been travelers on their way to and from the airport, cameras out and ready to snap a photo of the speed indicators when the train hits 431 km/hr (267 mph).
2. Fuxing Hao CR400AF/BF: 249 mph
China wins again, also serving as home to the world’s fastest non-maglev train currently in service. The name “Fuxing Hao” translates to mean “rejuvenation,” and each of the two trains have been branded with nicknames: CR400AF is “Dolphin Blue,” and the CR400BF is “Golden Phoenix.” The “CR” stands for China Railway. Both take just under five hours to zip up to 556 passengers each between Beijing South and Shanghai Hongqiao Station, easily halving the nearly 10-hour time it takes to ride the conventional, parallel rail line between these two megalopolises. The “Rejuvenation” also beats China’s next fastest train, the “Harmony” CRH380A; it has dazzled since 2010, with speeds of up to 236 mph on routes connecting Shanghai with Nanjing and Hangzhou, and Wuhan with Guangzhou.
3. Shinkansen H5 and E5: 224 mph
Japan is celebrating the 54th anniversary of high-speed train travel this year, since it was way back in 1964 that the Hikari high-speed train launched service between Tokyo and Osaka, cutting travel time between the country’s two largest cities from nearly seven hours to a mere four by rail. The H5 and E5 series Shinkansen, respectively running the Tohoku and Hokkaido services, are two of the newer bullet trains on Japan’s tracks, and so far the fastest in regular commercial service in the country.
4. The Italo and Frecciarossa: 220 mph
Italy’s dueling train operators, NTV and Trenitalia, each flaunt a high-speed train that tie as Europe’s fastest, capable of shuttling passengers from Milan to Florence or Rome in under three hours, with a new route to Perugia debuting this year. The Frecciarossa, or “red arrow,” was unveiled during Expo 2015, held in Milan, and the train is remarkable as much for its speed as for its construction; its components are nearly 100 percent renewable and sustainable.
5. Renfe AVE: 217 mph
Spain’s fastest train is the Velaro E by Siemens, and it is used for long-distance services to major Spanish cities and beyond: traveling from Barcelona to Paris can now be accomplished on high-speed rail in six hours.
The DeutscheBahn ICE reaches speeds of 205 mph.Courtesy Deutsche Ban
6. Haramain Western Railway: 217 mph
The Mecca-Medina high-speed link stretches the 281 miles between Saudi Arabia’s most holy cities and has been in partial operation since December 2017, with full completion set for early summer 2018. Traveling the length of the route takes two and a half hours, compared to five hours by car. Speed isn’t the entire justification for the construction of this railway, however; the Haramain is expected to carry three million passengers a year, including many Hajj and Umrah pilgrims, relieving traffic congestion.
7. DeutscheBahn ICE: 205 mph
The distinctively futuristic white and silver of the Inter-City Express, or ICE, combined with its sharp red cheatline, makes an impressive sight speeding through scenic German countryside, especially on its newest route connecting Berlin and Munich. Similar to Spain’s Renfe AVE train, Germany’s fastest train is another Siemens design, the Velaro, and was built to fit through the Channel Tunnel. That’s a serious asset for DeutscheBahn’s long-term plans to operate these trains from Frankfurt to London.
8. Korail KTX: 205 mph
South Korea’s high-speed rail network is far from the newest (the KTX debuted in 2004), but it does hold its rank among the fastest. The latest route, opened just in time for the 2018 Winter Olympics, connects Incheon International Airport in the west to the coastal town of Gangneung in the east, stopping in Seoul along the way. The KTX cuts the transport time to reach the ski slopes of PyeongChang from six hours by conventional train to under two hours.
9. Eurostar e320 and TGV: 200 mph
Both the TGV and Eurostar e320 trains are tied for next on the list, but the latter underwent a redesign in 2015. Named for its top speed of 320 km/hr (200 mph), the e320 series is the first tip-to-tail redesign of a Eurostar train in the company’s 22-year history. The speedier trains—20 km/hr faster than the earlier, e300 series—are capable of trimming another 15 minutes off the already zippy Eurostar trips of around two hours between Brussels, Paris, and London (and Amsterdam, later this year). Since Eurostar delivers its passengers right to the center of each city and fares are available with Rail Europe from $70 one-way, it’s a wonder anyone still flies between the cities.
10. Thalys: 186 mph
Connecting Amsterdam, Brussels, Paris, and Cologne with multiple daily services, the Thalys is one of Europe’s most important train lines for both leisure and business travelers; in fact, its ridership is almost an even split between the two categories. In December 2015 the German route was extended as far as Dortmund, though the Brussels-to-Paris run remains critical, making up more than half the business.
An homage to the Chinese past, the new bridge makes history in its own right.
TSINGHUA UNIVERSITY
Behold, the world’s largest 3D-printed bridge. The Chinese creation spans 26.3 meters (a little over 86 feet) and has a width of 2.6 meters (almost 12 feet). Its design is a tribute to Chinese architectural history, referencing the historic Zhaozhou Bridge built in A.D. 605, the country’s oldest standing bridge.
While the ancient Zhaozhou span required a decade to build, Professor Xu Weiguo’s team at Tsinghua University needed only 450 hours of printing to finish all of their new bridge’s concrete components. That translates to a little under 19 days. In a press statement, Professor Xu’s team also says that the bridge’s cost came in at just two thirds the tally of ordinary bridge, with savings coming from cutting down on materials and engineering.
The bridge’s print structure in an earlier stage.
Construction in a later phase, printing a bridge board.
The bridge consists of 44 individual 3D-printed concrete units, each of them approximately 3 by 3 by 5 feet. The sides, influenced by the Zhaozhou, were made with 68 individual concrete slabs moved into place by robot arms.
A low angle shot of the bridge. Its design is based on China’s storied bridge history.
Embedded with a real-time monitoring system, the bridge will be able to detect vibrating wire stress and strain with high precision. The Tsinghua press release (read through Google Translate) notes that “the demand for labor in construction projects will be increasingly in short supply” in the future. If China cannot find people to build bridges, “intelligent construction will be an important channel to solve this problem.”
The press release concedes that “there are still many bottlenecks that need to be solved in the construction of 3D concrete printing,” including that while many companies are invested in building the technology, it has not often been used in “actual engineering.”
Professor Xu’s two robotic arms aim to combine these two fields, integrating digital architectural design, print path generation, and concrete material. The first robot has stirring and squeeze push functions, and the second robot is concerned with print path generation and maintaining an operating system.
Before the bridge was built, a 1:4 model was created to test its strength. When that went off without a hitch, the team felt confident enough to proceed in its next goal.
There have been other 3D-printed architectural projects over the last few years, as the technology has become more widespread. A team at MIT built a sample house in a stunning 14 hours. Not that they’re known for comfort, but the Marines recently 3D-printed a barracksin 40 hours. If there are ever houses on Mars, NASA suspects they, too, will be built by robots using 3D printing.
The overall goal of track maintenance is to deliver the track, to support the timetable. This is achieved by Rail and Transit owner-operators through four objectives. First, to deliver safety to all passengers and staff, safety for passengers who depend on the rail system. Second, to deliver a reliable rail system, to ensure that the required services are available and that all assets are fit for purpose. Third, to deliver economic prosperity for a rail organization, through optimal and sustainable maintenance activities; and lastly, to deliver a comfortable ride for the consumer, reducing noise and improving ride quality. To deliver these goals, a rail organization must understand the criticality of all their assets, and the condition, along with the quality of the track they own and operate on.
Linear Measurements
Track Geometry measurements are a key component to understanding if the track is fit for purpose and is in a state of good repair. Periodic track condition measurements are required to evaluate the track quality and maintain an effective railway track system. Today most railroads already collect track geometry measurements from recording vehicles; however, often rail operators are not utilizing the data to its full advantage and sometimes data sets are held in siloed systems; making it almost impossible to visualize different condition data at the same time. Track Geometry contains a wealth of information that can support a range of maintenance and renewal decision support.
Core Track Geometry Measurements and Calculations
Gauge; the distance between the running edge of the left and right rail. There are several gauges used globally, the standard gauge is 1,435 mm (4 ft 8 1⁄2 in) and is typically used in North America and most of Europe. As the linear asset degrades, the distance between the rails will increase. This deterioration can cause a train to derail.
Curvature; one way to survey a track alignment is to measure the offsets from a chord to the running edge of the rail at the centres of successive overlapping chords, laid out along the outer rail of the surveyed track, this offset is called a versine.
Superelevation; is a difference in height between the left and right rails. It is generally applied in curves, with the low rail being on the inside edge of the curve. It is applied to offset the lateral forces that are felt when a vehicle traverses a curve.
Vertical Track Variation; a challenge for some individuals to understand is that the underlying geometry is not important; for example, a hill or a valley was already designed into the system. However, if there is a bump or a dip in the track on a hill, that is the information that is needed for extraction. The hill is viewed as a zero, we want to pay attention to the oscillations or variations in the track geometry data. As a general rule, if it takes less than two seconds to go through the variation at line speed, then we consider the variation; and if it takes more than two seconds, then we don’t consider the variation.
Lateral Track Variation; horizontal track geometry is generally filtered in the same way as vertical track geometry. We are looking for features that can be traversed in less than two seconds at line speed. The two seconds is derived from ISO 2632 – Human Comfort.
Track Twist; the difference in cross-level between two points or the rate of change of superelevation and measured over the impact on the bogie; this should be calculated based on the smallest wheelbase used by the owner-operator. A worst-case scenario is that the front wheel would drop onto a twist causing the rear wheel to climb, resulting in a train derailment.
Core Channels from a Track Geometry System
Location; beyond recording what the track geometry is, the system needs to record where it is as well. This is often one of the main issues with geometry data, as the same feature can be recorded at slightly different locations on different recording runs. Distance measured along the track can be derived from a tachometer fitted to one of the axles. This is a reasonably effective mechanism, but errors can be introduced as the wheel wears and if the recording vehicle runs around curves at different speeds. This can be corrected by GPS where available, or by detecting known features along the network and marking them against the recording. Lastly, the location should be reported against the linear referencing system (LRS) for the track, not against the distance traveled by the recording vehicle.
Speed; the FRA defines the maximum allowable posted timetable operating speed using the Vmax formula. We can take our curve data and plot the max speeds on our track charts. Additionally, we can calculate the equilibrium speed, which is the minimum speed that should be traveled through a curve. If locomotive traverses through the curve above Vmax speed, this causes extra wear on the outside rail; and if the locomotive traverses through the curve below the equilibrium speed, then this causes extra wear on the inside rail. This can be tracked and shown in our track charts with real locomotive speed data, to ensure operators are traversing through curves at the appropriate speed.
By Robert Henderson – Rail and Transit Consultant at Bentley Systems
Considering what a hot topic BIM has become, there have been very few new software firms willing to invest in creating new BIM authoring tools. This month we report on a new product, written on a ‘familiar’ package and backed by a huge company. Could BricsCAD BIM be the one to take on the might of Revit?
The BricsCAD BIM interface
It’s been 18 months since we last saw BricsCAD, from Ghent-based developer, Bricsys. The company started out developing an AutoCAD clone called BricsCAD and did a great job at creating a low-cost alternative to AutoCAD. Since then it has gone beyond AutoCAD and developed all sorts of original functionality to its base platform application. Although the company is dedicated to maintaining compatibility with DWG and AutoCAD, it wants to be perceived as a CAD developer in its own right and from what we saw at the firm’s recent London event, there is good reason.
Bricsys is not new to AEC or BIM. It developed TriForma which Bentley Systems sold as its core BIM application in the 1990s and then its own tool called Architecturals in the 2000s. The firm recently developed a SketchUp work-alike BricsCAD Shape. The company also develops tools for the manufacturing market with powerful parametric solid modelling (based on ACIS) and sheet metal applications.
AEC Magazine saw the company’s formative new BIM tools 18 months ago. The demonstration showed rectilinear ACIS solids being used to model a building and then the user applying IFC definitions post modelling. This turns products like Revit on their heads, as instead of using a palette of predefined and customisable objects to model with, like Lego, BricsCAD BIM was model first, then define. The benefit of this approach was that the conceptual phase didn’t require the architects to worry about object definitions, just define the forms.
This was all happening on top of BricsCAD, which is a DWG drawing and modelling tool which offers LISP, ARX and all the familiar AutoCAD functions you would expect. Bricsys thinks that those who have not yet made the move to Revit, may have more 2D processes and be happier doing their BIM modelling in a familiar environment, with the added advantage of it being cheaper. As things stood 18 months ago, however, the BIM functionality seemed all rather basic and there was evidently a long way to go.
Table of Contents
A new owner
At last month’s Bricsys conference in London, the first big news was that the company had been acquired by Hexagon for an undisclosed sum. For those unfamiliar with Hexagon, it is a global giant of a firm, that operates in construction, engineering, mining, automotive and plant and has annual revenues in excess of £1.2 billion. It owns Leica, Intergraph, MSC Software, Z/I Imaging and many others.
While Bricsys had annual revenues of £13 million, now it is under the Hexagon umbrella it will have all the resources it could ever need, plus access to markets as a mature, trusted CAD platform. Hexagon also has a reputation of leaving the brands it buys alone to carry on developing semi-autonomously.
Hexagon previously ported its AutoCAD-based plant application, CADWorx Plant Design Suite, to Bricsys as an alternative for its customers to paying for Autodesk’s AutoCAD on subscription. Bricsys pricing is based on a perpetual licence and works on Windows, macOS and Linux. The entry-level BricsCAD is $825 forever; AutoCAD is $1,575 per year, LT is $390 per year. Bricsys also offers subscription at $312 per year, if that’s what you would prefer. Bricsys works out a lot cheaper than Autodesk Subscription for AutoCAD. Hexagon was perhaps the biggest thirdparty developer to realise that it could use the familiar APIs that AutoCAD has, to port its existing applications to BricsCAD and offer to save its customers money on their AutoCAD subscriptions.
BIM and development
What a difference 18 months makes. From seeing the initial BIM development work to what was presented on the stage in London was really quite a marked difference. While the concept is the same, the capability and ease of use really blew us away. At its core, you have a DWG compatible, and very capable, drawing platform. Bricsys has harnessed the ACIS solid modelling kernel to enable designers to create incredibly complex shapes, using booleans, workplanes, chamfers, surfaces, complex wireframe manipulation – the usual gamut of modelling tools.
Designers can create anything they can envision in geometry. So, now comes the real magic. Bricsys has utilised machine learning to start the process of turning these models into BIM. Using the ‘BIMify’ button, the software will analyse the model and turn the geometry it finds into rooms, floors, slabs, columns, walls, doors, windows – regular IFC components.
BricsCAD BIM includes poweful curtain wall tools
The user can then edit or add objects that the automation didn’t classify or omitted. This is seriously impressive and, unlike the first demo we had, it works well on some pretty crazy geometry. Zaha Hadid would have had some fun with this tool. This is a fantastic solution to the problem of linking conceptual modelling to the creation of BIM models, together with the added benefit of the backend processes such as drawing production being all in one package.
The curtain wall capability is also powerful; model your spline geometry, select face, create a grid and then dynamically manipulate to make traditional or freeform curtain walls. The software will generate all the frame elements, which of course can also be edited.
But as we all know, architecture is really only one component in the mix. Bricsys demonstrated some intelligent modelling of HVAC components within a BIM context. Automatic sizing and connections, together with some elementary auto complete capabilities gave a good indication of the way development was heading. Bricsys isn’t looking to deliver for the front end of the building process, but throughout all professions, including structural and site development (it even handles point clouds).
BricsCAD BIM is not just for architects — it covers all professions, including structural, MEP and site
Because BricsCAD BIM is built on a DWG platform, it’s at this point that you really see the benefit in workflow vs something like Revit. We have lost count of the number of firms we have visited who take their Revit drawings into AutoCAD to finish off the documentation. This breaks with the BIM process as, if there are any changes, then the additional hours of drawing in AutoCAD need to be repeated. BricsCAD BIM is already inside its DWG documentation world and this destructive phase of using other tools than Revit can be avoided.
Speed was also very impressive. During the day’s talks all product demonstrations were done live from laptops. The underlying BricsCAD platform is a modern CAD product, it is fast, uses multiple cores and benefits from fast GPU graphics card accelerators. While one would assume that modelling architectural elements in full on solids over lightweight geometry would lead to hefty and unwieldy models, that certainly does not seem to be the case.
Parametrics are also built-in systemwide and can be used in a very intuitive fashion when designing. The ability to quickly model floors and partitions was fabulous and at all times the mouse and drawing lines give real-time feedback on relative geometry. Floors can be replicated in just a few clicks. In 2011, Bricsys acquired the intellectual property rights from Russian developer Ledas, which developed very high-end 2D/3D constraints tools and set up a technology division in Russia under Dmitry Ushakov. This move also enabled considerable advances for BricsCAD Platinum for Mechanical Design, which is aimed at the DS SolidWorks and Autodesk Inventors of this world.
Bricsys demonstrated something it calls A.I propagate, which uses artificial intelligence to replicate component details throughout a model. Simply select a component, plus the elements you want it to propagate over, and the computer does the rest. It also supports the import of RVT components, live building grids and ceilings. This can drastically speed up modelling. The user interface also really gives a clear indication of where the propagation of objects will take place.
BricsCAD BIM includes a feature called A.I propagate, which uses artificial intelligence to replicate component details throughout a model
When at the documentation stage, BricsCAD has some fabulous capabilities for multi-view layout and for automating call-out details. Again, all in a DWG workflow and so common AutoCAD commands are used for drawing.
BricsCAD BIM is $2,275 a seat, for a perpetual licence with one year’s maintenance. Alternatively, it can be subscribed to for $910 a year. For comparison, Revit is currently $2,250 a year or $6,075 for a 3-year subscription.
2D CAD
BricsCAD started off life as an AutoCAD clone. The company then went on to develop functionality that you won’t find in AutoCAD. As Autodesk went off to develop or acquire other tools (Revit, Inventor, Fusion etc), the mentality that AutoCAD was the hammer that hit all nails disappeared. Bricsys is of the mentality that its DWG CAD platform can be extended to solve BIM, MCAD solid modelling and other verticals. In one respect at least, the persistence of drawings in our new 3D modelled world, would back this view up.
BricsCAD v19, the new version, will offer a range of powerful tools but we don’t have room to highlight them here. However, one feature that we did see is indicative of the kind of tools under development. We had seen BIMify; now there’s ‘Blockify’, huge models, 2D or 3D, measuring in the Gigabyte range, automatically turned into blocks, drastically reducing the file size. Again, machine learning at play; the software automatically detects equally shaped solids in a model and replaces them by block references and searches the drawing for an identical set of a 2D entities and replaces them by block references. Just look at AutoCAD 2019’s new feature set and wonder where the new features are, vs enhancements to existing ones.
24/7 collaboration
Not just content with developing products for every vertical market, Bricsys offers a cloud-based collaboration product called 24/7, which is free to customers on maintenance. It’s a global document management system for 2D drawings and 3D models, which supports multiple roles and access for defined users and has a graphical widget application development ability to automate repetitive tasks. The system has version control, activity logs and search capabilities. For BIM users it has a fast 3D data viewer, model annotation and DWG/ xref management.
24/7 is a cloud-based collaboration tool, which is free to those on maintenance
Management Q & A
Bricsys CEO, Erik de Keyser and Hexagon’s Rick Allen, PPM executive vice president answered questions on the surprise acquisition (this came as a shock to most Bricsys employers too). de Keyser explained that the driver for the acquisition was that being a great developer was not enough for success; marketing and sales required investment and as things stood, would have diverted R&D funds to enable that. Bricsys had been seeking investment and Hexagon had been interested since it ported its plant products to BricsCAD.
Allen explained that Hexagon was keen to offer customers a choice and with Autodesk’s pricing changes, subscription- only and potentially web-only products in the future, Bricsys would be there to offer an alternative. In the process of porting CADWorx to BricsCAD, Bricsys was incredibly responsive and over eight million lines of code were ported in nine months and the product is stable.
Allen, while predominantly dealing with the plant side of Hexagon’s business, sees the Bricsys acquisition as a play in all areas BIM, manufacturing, drafting, as well as plant. Allen identified that Revit, while popular in architecture, isn’t in other professions and they have picked up on a lot of end user dissatisfaction. While Hexagon will certainly focus on AutoCAD seats in its process plant customers, not just CADworx, Hexagon is looking at a much broader play.
De Keyser estimated that Revit had only hit 16% of BIM penetration of all the possible users and in certain geographies it was not the No.1 choice, with Vectorworks, Graphisoft and Allplan all occupying decent market share. de Keyser stated that with Hexagon behind them, Bricsys would aim for 20-25% of the market with the sales pitch being ‘you don’t need to leave DWG or translate to/from DWG. The workflow stays in one format as you move from application to application – at a fraction of the price. We will win one customer at a time.’
Looking forward, de Keyser stated that with IFC 4.0, it will become harder for firms, such as Autodesk, to trap customers in proprietary file formats, as substantially more of the data will be transferable.
While it’s the plant division of Hexagon that led the charge to acquire Bricsys, Allen made it clear that all divisions of Hexagon would have access to the technology and the buy-in was not simply cost justified on the benefit to the plant division. The company is taking aim at Autodesk and all players in BIM, mechanical, plant and drafting. With Autodesk dominating so many areas in the built space and with Autodesk Subscription increasing the cost of ownership, Hexagon is out to offer a lower cost alternative with enhanced functionality.
Conclusion
Many years ago, we watched Dominic Gallello, then Autodesk VP of Mechanical, launch Autodesk Inventor. This was a big deal for Autodesk as it was the first new code stream the company had delivered since AutoCAD decades before. At the time, Autodesk was trying to get into the 3D modelling market and had established players such as SolidWorks, Dassault Systèmes, Siemens, PTC etc. all with mature CAD products.
Gallello’s pitch was don’t judge us by the current feature set, judge us on the product’s ‘velocity’. Gallello was telling us the development team had new ideas to crack old problems and would be delivering on new functionality in a way the mature competition was not.
With BricsCAD BIM, we see that development velocity. In just 18 months the software has gone from being formative building modelling to offering something really different and innovative for BIM workflows. At the same time, it bashes you over the head as it’s all happening in an AutoCAD work-a-like, which is committed to supporting all the 2D processes millions of AutoCAD customers currently use.
We are in strange times. Autodesk’s move to Subscription without question increases costs to users in ownership over three years, compared to the traditional historic buy and upgrade cycles of around three years. Subscription does offer suites but that comes at a cost and not many utilise many of the products they get.
Autodesk’s channel is showing signs of rebellion, after years of deflating margins, with one or two now offering AutoCAD clones as alternatives to AutoCAD LT. This is a clear and present danger, as we estimate 40% of all Autodesk licences are AutoCAD LT. Revit’s development velocity has slowed and many are wondering when it will be re-written as the core is 20 years old. The conceptual side of BIM has never really been solved by anybody who can take that data on to be used throughout the design and documentation workflow.
Bricsys now has a giant backing it up. A giant that sees an opportunity in Autodesk’s base. Bricsys offers low-cost, AutoCAD functionality with perpetual licensing (or subscription), on multiple platforms, with unique BIM workflows, in a single environment, with machine learning cleverness, powerful MCAD part and assembly modelling, Autodesk APIs and even collaborative cloud-based management.
At the wrap up from the event, de Keyser took issue with the company being called a ‘clone developer’ by the press during that day’s tweets. He feels the development teams are now way beyond performing that work and are developing new functionality in all vertical areas. Even though the origins of the company are certainly defined by the work it has done on mimicking DWG functionality, it’s true that Bricsys is now defining a unique path. de Keyser quipped, “We are not a clone developer, we are a cyclone in the industry!”
For now, BricsCAD BIM is certainly something to watch. Revit has decades of development work put into it and I can’t see many switching like for like. However, with the velocity comes a trajectory and backed up with Hexagon, with a low price point, innovative machine learning development, this is a BIM product to watch. It’s the most promising modelling tool we have seen in BIM in the last ten years.
Next year will certainly be an interesting one in the BIM market. Hexagon has come to the table with Bricsys and a very impressive development team. We hear Dassault Systèmes has a construction BIM tool coming out. Siemens and Bentley continue to dance together and are working on many joint developments. Nemetscheck has a new Allplan and Vectorworks and Graphisoft are continuing to execute well. Things are hotting up and new and innovative solutions are still coming to the market. AEC Magazine will be here to keep you up to date.
Download a trial version of BricsCAD BIM at ■ bricsys.com/bim
New Tekla Bridge Creator extension covers the complete bridge design workflow
Trimble has launched Tekla Bridge Creator, a new extension for Tekla Structures that supports the complete bridge design workflow from design geometry to constructible modelling and detailing.
Trimble says the new software provides a solution to common problems: importing a road alignment directly from road design software; creating one or more key sections that define the bridge deck or even abutments; and then modelling and detailing the reinforcing bars.
By adding the Bridge Creator extension, Tekla Structures can create and utilise Bridge Information Models (BrIM) from early stages of design (0- Strategy, 1 – Brief, 2 – Concept) through fabrication-ready (Stage 4 – Detailed Design) to constructible models (Stage 5 – Build & Commission).
Hannu Suojanen, project engineer for Bridges, WSP Finland, who participated in testing the software, commented: “Bridge Creator is intelligent and certainly the most efficient tool for the whole bridge design workflow, which no other software provider has to offer. It automatically imports the road alignment and helps create bridge geometry easily. Even when facing complex deck geometries, the extension creates the deck with impressive accuracy.
“Tekla Structures is already a sound choice for bridge detailing. Adding the new Bridge Creator extension with the existing Concrete Bridge Reinforcement tool for complex geometries make Trimble’s Tekla solution the most advanced on the market. Trimble is creating value for the overall bridge design, construction and operations workflow, increasing the efficiency and quality in bridge design.”
The Bridge Creator extension version 1.0 can be downloaded from the Tekla Warehouse in March. The extension is available for Tekla Structures customers with a software maintenance agreement.
Stone columns are constructed using down-hole vibratory probe methods similar to those used in vibro-compaction. The main difference is that instead of using coarsegrained soil to simply fill the void created by the vibro-compaction operation, stone or other clean, coarse grained materials are placed, and compacted, to form a narrow structural element (i.e. a column) which functions as one or more of the following:
1. enhance the average shear strength and bearing capacity of a weak soil mass,
2. transfer a surface load to deeper competent materials, or
3. provide easy drainage of temporarily high pore water pressures.
Stone columns are ideally suited for improving soft silts and clays and loose silty sands. Stone columns under suitable conditions will:
• increase a soil’s bearing capacity and shear resistance
• reduce settlements,
• increase the time-rate of consolidation,
• reduce liquefaction potential, and
• stabilize existing slopes affected by low shear strength soils .
Stone columns, in general, are most economically attractive for sites requiring column lengths less than 35 ft. deep and preferably about 20 ft. deep below the surface.
Unsuitable soil conditions for stone columns include soils having thick layers of very soft or sensitive clays and organic materials. If the thickness of the unsuitable soil layer is more than the diameter of the stone column, then stone columns may not be appropriate because the very soft soils will not provide adequate lateral support of the stone column. In addition, stone column construction can be hampered by the presence of a thick, dense overburden, or soils with boulders, cobbles or other obstructions that may require pre-drilling prior to installation of the stone column.
Stone columns are constructed using either a vibro-replacement or vibro-displacement installation with the stone aggregate placed using either top or bottom feed methods.
Vibro-Replacement :
Vibro-replacement involves a wet installation method that replaces deep, narrow pockets of the in-situ soil with stone aggregate columns. In this method a high-pressure water jet, located at the tip of the probe, is used to excavate a narrow, open (uncased) hole. Once the hole is progressed to the design depth, the hole is flushed out several times by raising and dropping the probe to remove any loose silt and sand at the bottom of the hole. The vibro-probe is retracted and a limited amount of stone is placed into the hole from the top. The probe’s vibration mode is turned on and it is inserted into the hole to compact the lift of stone. The probe is retracted again and the process repeated until the stone column is formed to the ground surface. During the entire operation, water is continually pumped into the hole to prevent collapse and to keep the aggregate clean. This method is best suited for sites with soft to firm soils with undrained shear strengths of 200 to 1,000 psf and a shallow groundwater table, and where drill wash and spoil
containment and disposal can be practically handled.
Vibro-Displacement :
When a cleaner or lesser environmental impact operation is preferred, stone columns should be constructed using the vibro-displacement method. The operation is a dry installation method where the stone aggregate can be placed into the hole from the top or from aggregate ports at the bottom of the probe. Although the probe’s dead weight and vibration, in lieu of water jetting, is used to excavate the hole, air jetting and/or pre-augering may be used to prevent clogging of the aggregate ports or to assist in advancing or extracting the probe. This method is best suited for
sites where collapse of the hole during the column’s installation is unlikely.
Vibro-compaction is a ground improvement method that uses a specialized vibrating probe for in-situ subsurface compaction of loose sandy or gravelly soils at depths beyond which surface compaction efforts are effective.
The vibrating probe densifies loose granular, cohesionless soils by using mechanical vibrations and, in some applications, water saturation to minimize the effective stresses between the soil grains which then allows the oil grains to rearrange under the action of gravity into a denser state.
Vibro compaction to densify loose, silty sands for an interim spent fuel cask storage pad in Braceville, Illinois.
Generally, vibro-compaction can be used to achieve the following enhanced soil performance or
properties:
• Increased soil bearing capacity
• Reduced foundation settlements
• Increased resistance to liquefaction
• Compaction to stabilize pile foundations driven through loose granular materials
• Densification for abutments, piers and approach embankment foundations
• Increased shear strength
• Reduced permeability
• Filling of voids in treated areas
Two rigs completing vibro compaction for liquefaction mitigation and settlement at a casino.
The vibrator is hung from a crane cable or, in some instances; it is mounted to leads in a similar fashion as foundation drilling equipment. The vibrator penetrates under its self weight (or crowd of the machine if mounted in leads) and, at times, with assistance from the action of water jets. The goal is that the vibration and water imparted to the soils ransforms the loose soils to a more dense state.
The Vibro Compaction Process
Advantages, Disadvantages and Limitations
1. Advantages
As an alternative to deep foundations, vibro-compaction is usually more economical and often results in significant time savings. Loads can be spread from the footing elevation, thus minimizing problems from lower, weak layers. Densifying the soils with vibro-compaction can considerably reduce the risk of seismically induced liquefaction. Vibro-compaction can also be cost-effective alternative to removal and replacement of poor load-bearing soils. The use of vibro-compaction allows the maximum improvement of granular soils to depths of up to 165 feet. The vibro-ompaction system is effective both above and below the natural water level.
2. Disadvantages and Limitations
Vibro-compaction is effective only in granular, cohesionless soils. The realignment of the sand grains and, therefore, proper densification generally cannot be achieved when the granular soil contains more than 12 to 15 percent silt or more than 2 percent clay. The maximum depth of treatment is typically limited to 165 feet, but there are very few construction projects that will require densification to a greater depth.
Like all ground improvement techniques, a thorough soils investigation program is required. Yet, a more detailed soils analysis may be required for vibro-compaction than for a deep foundation design because the vibro-compaction process utilizes the permeability and properties of the in-situ soil to the full depth of treatment to achieve the end result. A comprehensive understanding of the total soil profile is therefore necessary which typically requires continuous sampling or in-situ testing.
Equipment access over the site must also be considered. Since the operation requires use of a large crane, a relatively flat work bench with a width of at least 25 ft must be possible near all areas to be treated.
Wet vibro-compaction requires the use of water to jet the vibrator into the ground. The effluent from the jetting process requires at least temporary containment to allow any fine soil particles to settle out and be disposed. Further, this method of ground improvement may not be acceptable if the existing subsurface environment, either soil or water is contaminated. If contamination is present, use of water jetting may cause its dispersion and therefore other ground improvement methods should be considered.
Exciting architecture projects to look forward to in 2019
2018 was an outstanding year for architecture, but 2019 is shaping up to be just as exciting too, and there are already several noteworthy projects on the horizon. From a supertall skyscraper to a massive airport terminal shaped like a starfish, here’s our pick of projects to look forward to this year.
Though issues arise and buildings sometimes get delayed at the last hurdle, we’ve focused on projects that are, as of writing, expected to be completed in 2019. Read on below to see our pick and you can also hit the gallery to see more of each project.
CopenHill – BIG
First unveiled all the way back in 2011, the Bjarke Ingels Group (BIG)-led CopenHill (aka Amager Bakke) is a power station in Copenhagen with a “smoke ring generator” that will expel a steam ring each time 250 kg (551 lb) of carbon dioxide is produced. It’s also topped by a ski slope for visitors and locals to enjoy.
This one’s a lot of fun and it’s hard to imagine a firm other than BIG coming up with the idea. The power station itself is already operational but the ski slope roof is currently being tested and is expected to be open in April.
Under – Snøhetta
The design for Europe’s first underwater restaurant was unveiled by Snøhetta back in 2017. The last time we checked in, the project was being built atop a barge and the engineers were preparing to submerge it and secure it onto the sea bed at Norway’s southernmost point.
Snøhetta likens Under to an oversized periscope and it will sport a large panoramic window offering diners a view of the seabed as they eat. The building will measure 600 sq m (6,458 sq ft) and sport 1 m (3.2 ft)-thick concrete walls to protect it from the crashing waves. Under is expected to be open for bookings in “Spring 2019” (northern hemisphere).
One Thousand Museum – Zaha Hadid Architects
The late Zaha Hadid’s One Thousand Museum sports an eye-catching glass-fiber reinforced white concrete exoskeleton that twists as it rises to a maximum height of 215 m (706 ft)-tall.
The residential project is aimed at the well-heeled and billed as a “Six Star” residence. It includes just 83 homes in all, with apartments measuring between 4,600 and 9,900 sq ft (427 – 919 sq m). Each will boast multiple balconies and the building overlooks Miami’s famous Biscayne Bay. One Thousand Museum is due to be completed sometime this year.
Vessel – Heatherwick Studio
Looking like a strange cross between a big pineapple and an M.C. Escher artwork, Vessel is the centerpiece of a massive development in Hudson Yards, New York City, the largest private real estate development in the history of the United States.
Costing US$150 million for what is essentially just a fancy viewing point, the structure will rise to a height of 150 ft (45 m) and comprise 54 interconnecting flights of stairs, 2,500 individual steps, and 80 landings – as well as an elevator for disabled access. It’s certainly something a little different and should be finished in the next few months.
Lakhta Center – Gorproject/RMJM
Rising 462 m (1,516 ft) over St. Petersburg, Russia, the bullet-shaped Lakhta Center is rated the 13th tallest building in the world and is Europe’s tallest tower.
Its construction has taken over six years and involved 20,000 people from 18 countries. The foundations required concrete to be poured continuously for 49 hours and its glazing measures 72,500 sq m (780,383 sq ft). It takes the form of a spire with five wings that twist a total of 90 degrees from top to bottom and has been pre-certified LEED Gold (a green building standard) for its energy-efficient design. The Lakhta Center is due to be officially completed soon.
Beijing Daxing International Airport terminal – Zaha Hadid Architects
Another project by ZHA, the Beijing Daxing International Airport terminal (aka Beijing New Airport) was promoted as the world’s largest airport terminal building when revealed and as far as we know this still stands. It’s expected to open for business in September, 2019.
The huge building was created in collaboration with ADP Ingeniérie and takes the form of a massive starfish, with a total floorspace of 700,000 sq m (over 7 million sq ft). It will eventually have a capacity of 100 million passengers annually and will apparently also boast sustainable technology, but we’ve still received very little information on it as of writing. No doubt we’ll learn more once it’s finished in late 2019.
Gardenhouse – MAD Architects
MAD Architects’ Gardenhouse was originally slated for completion in late 2018 but now expected sometime this year. It consists of a large podium envisioned as an artificial mountain, with 18 houses atop. The podium will be covered in native, drought-tolerant greenery and contain commercial spaces for rent on ground level.
There are some potential issues like noise and pollution, but it’ll be fascinating to see if the firm can meet its goal of bringing the feel of a mountain village to Beverly Hills, California.
What type of pavement is used for airports runway?
The materials used for airports is generally the same as what is used for roadways, however, the depths, or thicknesses are different, and the tolerances are much tighter at an airport. The material for runways usually needs to meet a much tighter spec.
A typical section for an airport can use asphalt or concrete. Below is a generic look at the structural section for either asphalt or concrete from an FAA Advisory Circular on Aiport Pavement Design and Evaluation.
You will notice that the materials in the middle are thicker and then taper to thinner. This is because the loads on the runway are primarily from the 2 landing wheels, which will be in the middle of the runway. The effective tire width is pictured below.
The surface must be smooth and well bonded, and resistant to the shear stresses of the airplane wheel loads. The non-skid surface must not cause undue wear on the airplane tires . The surface must be free of loose particles that could damage the airplane or people. In order to meet this requirement, there must be good control of the mix. This usually requires a central mixing plant be used for the hot mix asphalt.
The base course is integral to flexible pavement design such as asphalt. The loading in flexible pavements transfers downward and outward. For this reason, the base, subbase, if used, and subgrade contribute to the strength of the pavement section. For concrete pavement, the concrete provides the strength to the structural section.
The base course must be of sufficient quality that it won’t fail, or allow failure in the subgrade. It must be able to withstand the forces from the airplane wheel loading without consolidating which would cause the surface course to deform. The base course uses very select material with very hard and durable aggregate. The requirements for the base course are very strict.
Concrete slab moisture can cause problems with the adhesion of floor-covering material, such as tile, sheet
flooring, or carpet and bond-related failures of non-breathable floor coatings. Many adhesives used for installation of floor coverings are more water-sensitive than in the past, due to restrictions on the use of volatile organic compounds (VOCs).
To warranty their products, manufacturers require that the moisture emission from the hardened concrete slab be less than some threshold value prior to installing floor coverings or coatings. Fast-track construction schedules exacerbate the problem when floor-surfacing material is installed before the concrete slab has dried to an acceptable level.
WHAT are the Sources of Concrete Slab Moisture ?
a. Ground water sources and when the floor slab is in contact with saturated ground, or if drainage is poor. Moisture moves to the slab surface by capillary action or wicking. Factors affecting this include depth of the water table and fineness of soil below the slab. Fine grained soil promotes moisture movements from considerable depths compared to coarser subgrade material.
b. Water vapor from damp soil will diffuse and condense on a concrete slab surface that is cooler and at a lower relative humidity due to a vapor pressure gradient.
c . Wetting of the fill course/blotter layer, if any, between the vapor retarder and the slab prior to placing the slab will trap moisture with the only possible escape route being through the slab. A blotter layer is not recommended for interior slabs on grade (CIP 29).
d. Residual moisture in the slab from the original concrete mixing water will move towards the surface. It may take anywhere from six weeks to one year or longer for a concrete slab to dry to an acceptable level under normal conditions.
Factors that affect the drying rate include the original water content of the concrete, type of curing, and the
relative humidity and temperature of the ambient air during the drying period. This is the only source of moisture in elevated slabs. Any wetting of the slab after final curing will elevate moisture levels within the slab and lengthen the drying period.
HOW do You Avoid Problems?
Avoiding problems associated with high moisture content in concrete can be accomplished by the following means:
• Protect against ingress of water under hydrostatic pressure by ensuring that proper drainage away from the slab is part of the design.
• Use a 6 to 8 inch [150 to 200 mm] layer of coarse gravel or crushed stone as a capillary break in locations with fine-grained soil subgrades.
• Use a vapor retarder membrane under the slab to prevent water from entering the slab. Ensure that the vapor retarder is installed correctly and not damaged during construction. Current recommendation of ACI Committee 302 is to place the concrete directly on a vapor retarder for interior slabs on grade (CIP 29).
• Use a concrete mixture with a moderately low water-cementitious material (w/cm) ratio (about 0.50). This reduces the amount of residual moisture in the slab, will require a shorter drying period, and result in a lower permeability to vapor transmission. Water reducing admixtures can be used to obtain adequate workability and maintain a low water content. The water tightness of concrete can be improved by using fly ash or slag in the concrete mixture.
• Curing is an important step in achieving excellent hardened concrete properties. However, moist curing will increase drying time. As a compromise, curing the concrete under plastic sheeting for 3 days is recommended and moist curing times greater than 7 days must be avoided. Avoid using curing compounds on floors where coverings or coatings will be installed.
• Allow sufficient time for the moisture in the slab to dry naturally while the floor is under a roof and protected from the elements. Avoid maintenance and cleaning operations that will wet the concrete floor. Use heat and dehumidifiers to accelerate drying. Since moisture transmission is affected by temperature and humidity, maintain the actual service conditions for a long enough period prior to installing the floor covering.
• Test the slab moisture condition prior to installing the floor covering. When concrete slab moisture cannot be controlled, consider using decorative concrete, less moisture-sensitive floor coverings, breathable floor coatings, or install moisture vapor suppression systems (topical coatings).
HOW is Concrete Slab Moisture Measured?
Various qualitative and quantitative methods of measuring concrete slab moisture are described in ASTM E 1907.
Test the moisture condition of the slab in the same temperature and humidity conditions as it will be in service.
In general, test at three random sample locations for areas up to 1000 sq. ft. [100 m2] and perform one additional test for each additional 1,000 sq ft. Ensure that the surface is dry and clean. Record the relative humidity and temperature at the time of testing. Some of the common tests are:
Polyethylene Sheet Test (ASTM D 4263)
– is a simple qualitative test, where an 18 by 18 inch [450 by 450 mm] square plastic sheet is taped tightly to the concrete and left in place for a at least 16 hours. The presence of moisture under the plastic sheet is a positive indication that excess moisture is likely present in the slab. However, a negative indication is not an assurance that the
slab is acceptably dry below the surface.
Mat Test
– where the adhesive intended for use is applied to a 24 by 24 inch [600 by 600 mm] area and a sheet vinyl flooring product is placed face down on the adhesive and sealed at the edges. A visual inspection of the condition of the adhesive is made after a 72-hour period. This test is no longer favored since it can produce false negative results.
Test Strip
– in which a test strip of the proposed primer or adhesive is evaluated for 24 hours to predict its behavior on the floor. This procedure is not very reliable.
Moisture meters
– Measure electrical resistance or impedance to indicate slab moisture. Electronic meters can be useful survey tools that provide comparative readings across a floor but should not be used to accept or reject a floor because they do not provide an absolute measure of moisture conditions within the slab.
Gravimetric
– This is a direct and accurate method of determining moisture content by weight in the concrete slab. Pieces of concrete are removed by chiseling or stitch-drilling and dried in an oven to constant weight. The moisture content is then calculated as a percentage of the dry sample weight. This is rarely recommended by floor covering manufacturers.
Nuclear Density and Radio Frequency
– This nondestructive test instrument is relatively expensive and can take a long time to properly correlate correction factors for each individual project. The instrument has a radioactive source and therefore requires licensed operators.
Anhydrous Calcium Chloride Test (ASTM F 1869)
– is specified by most floor covering manufacturers for pre installation testing. A measured amount of anhydrous calcium chloride is placed in a cup sealed under a plastic dome on the slab surface and the amount of moisture
absorbed by the salt in 60 to 72 hours is measured to calculate the moisture vapor emission rate (MVER).
Maximum limits of vapor transmission generally specified are 3 to 5 pounds of moisture per 1000 square feet per 24 hours. This test is relatively inexpensive, and yields a quantitative result. However, it has some major shortcomings: it determines only a portion of the free moisture at a shallow depth of concrete near the surface of the slab. The test is sensitive to the temperature and humidity in the building. It provides only a “snapshot in time” of current moisture conditions and does not predict if the sub-slab conditions will cause a moisture problem later in the life of the floor.
Relative Humidity Probe (ASTM F 2170)
This procedure involves measuring the relative humidity of concrete at a specific depth from the slab surface inside a
drilled or cast hole in a concrete slab. The relative humidity is measured after allowing 72 hours to achieve moisture equilibrium within the hole. Typically a relative humidity of 75% to 80% is targeted for installation of floor coverings. Relative humidity probes can determine the moisture profile from top to bottom in a slab, conditions below the slab,
and can monitor the drying of a slab over time, leading to predictions of future moisture conditions. These instruments have been used for many years in Europe and are becoming more popular in the
