This is an archival version of the original KnowledgePoint website.

Interactive features have been disabled and some pages and links have been removed.

Visit the new KnowledgePoint website at


Revision history [back]

click to hide/show revision 1
initial version
bones49 gravatar image

I'm an Agricultural Engineer, not a Structural person, but I have had a lot of experience in doing remote project work. My biggest frustration is always that I may have a photo of what I need to look at, but it doesn't show the detail I need.

I would agree with the above, If the process could be created to be 80% effective, then it might be worth it, but at what point does it loose it's value - 50/50?

The problem with relying on a lay person to provide a photo is that, as obvious as it sounds, if they don't know what they are looking for, then they don't know what to take a photo off. It's easy to think that they can just take a photo of the crack, but if it's too dark, or from the wrong angle, or not close enough, you can't see the detail that you want.

I guess the ultimate concern is that you have to be 100% sure that the will not ignore a vital piece of evidence that shows an otherwise sound looking building is actually in very bad condition. You have to be 100% sure that you can effectively train and communicate with whoever is doing the inspections. In my experience that is almost impossible, even when you are on the ground training them in person - as soon as you include cross cultural communication, and second languages, such things become significantly more difficult.

This might work if you were using a junior engineer to do the inspections - they have the training to understand what to look for, but not the experience to make the call.