Slides
> Slide 1
> Slide 2
> Slide 3
> Slide 4
> Slide 5
> Slide 6
> Slide 7
> Slide 8
> Slide 9
> Slide 10
> Slide 11
> Slide 12
> Slide 13
> Slide 14
> Slide 15
> Slide 16
> Slide 17
> Slide 18
> Slide 19
> Slide 20
> Slide 21
> Slide 22
> Slide 23
> Slide 24
> Slide 1
> Slide 2
> Slide 3
> Slide 4
> Slide 5
> Slide 6
> Slide 7
> Slide 8
> Slide 9
> Slide 10
> Slide 11
> Slide 12
> Slide 13
> Slide 14
> Slide 15
> Slide 16
> Slide 17
> Slide 18
> Slide 19
> Slide 20
> Slide 21
> Slide 22
> Slide 23
> Slide 24
Documentation of Existing Facade Condtions in the Field
A Comparison of Two Methods
The collection of data in the field using PocketCAD and the ESA program allowed us to produce dense, but legible drawings. Portrayal of visual data and identifying fault patterns is possible by selectively switching layers off and on. The problem is the large number of sheets that must be reproduced in order to clearly and unambiguously portray the numerous conditions specific to a building. For instance, our project at Trinity Towers resulted in a total of 80 sheets to cover all the conditions identified on two buildings.
A Comparison of Two Methods
The collection of data in the field using PocketCAD and the ESA program allowed us to produce dense, but legible drawings. Portrayal of visual data and identifying fault patterns is possible by selectively switching layers off and on. The problem is the large number of sheets that must be reproduced in order to clearly and unambiguously portray the numerous conditions specific to a building. For instance, our project at Trinity Towers resulted in a total of 80 sheets to cover all the conditions identified on two buildings.