In this paper, the development and implementation of a web-based interactive computer-aided learning package on open-channel flow is delineated. The principal purpose of the tool is to support classroom teaching for a better understanding of the basic principles and practical aspects of the theories on open-channel flow. Several up-to-date expert-system shell and web-production software are employed during its development. Various theories on open-channel flow, design, and interactive “What-if” analysis on various design parameters are performed using this package through an active and dynamic learning environment. Through evaluation of its learning effectiveness and teaching efficiency, in comparison with traditional course delivery, pertinent innovations, challenges and experiences on the possible impact the Internet is having in the field of engineering education are discussed. It is shown that, if used appropriately, web-based learning has the potential to enhance both learning effectiveness and teaching efficiency.

The paper presents a thesis that the word “civil” in “civil engineering” is anachronistic and does not represent the works of the so-called civil engineer. The origin and root of the words “engineer” and civil are traced. Engineer is seen to have its roots via the Greek and Latin in the Sanskrit word jan, meaning life, whereas civil is traced to the differentiation that engineers of the 18th and 19th centuries created from their military engineer counterparts. The word engineer was used as far back as the 14th century, though, much of it in nontechnical terms. The evolution of the practice of civil engineering, and the history of the formation of societies are studied to determine how tasks relate to the word civil. Of particular interest is to see what the practitioners and founders of societies aimed to embody in this field of civil engineering. The paper aims to explore the factors and influences in the practice and naming of the civil engineer. It delves into the roots and origins of the names of a number of engineering disciplines, giving explanations and commentary on the implications of those names, and finds that all those names relate to technical functions. The paper concludes that the name of civil engineering does not represent the functional tasks of the civil engineer, in contrast to names of other engineering disciplines, and is, moreover, out of place with modern times. What’s in a name? This paper seeks to find out.

In this case study, we present a teaching approach that promotes active learning in engineering classes. Students are provided with a combination of physical, mathematical, and computer simulation models that allow them to participate, act, react, and reflect, rather than just listen to lectures, as in traditional classes. We illustrate important aspects of our pedagogy with one of 12 modules that have been implemented in an undergraduate hydraulic engineering course. Student evaluations indicate that this approach is appealing to most students. Data are presented to show that this approach has contributed to improved student learning and achievement.

Existing research has shown that visual input significantly contributes to learning, therefore, it is paramount to use visual tools to help demonstrate engineering concepts. One of these tools, digital image analysis, can help effectively communicate complex concepts to students in a simple and understandable format as a supplement to traditional lecturing, while simultaneously enabling students to have hands-on experience. This note describes a series of activities to incorporate digital image analysis into engineering education. The undergraduate students worked in research projects that involved image-based analysis of geomaterials. Based on these activities and the students’ response to a questionnaire, it was recognized that digital image analysis can enhance the understanding of engineering phenomena for undergraduate students. The hands-on experience and visual demonstration improved the students’ grasp of fundamental concepts in research projects. The research experience allowed the students to build a connection between the classroom and the solution of state-of-the-art engineering scientific problems. It also taught them about cooperation and teamwork, as well as academic independence.

Changes almost always occur on construction projects. Among other things, they can hurt labor productivity. The relationship between change and labor productivity, though commonly acknowledged, is not well understood. In this paper, such causal linkages are illustrated to capture the interactions of changes, disruptions, productivity losses, and the responsible parties. They go an extra step from the current mechanism of changes, disruptions, and inefficiency to underline the critical role of causing parties in cumulative impacts. From these causal linkages it is visible that: (1) even when disruptions are initially caused by one party (e.g., the owner), the other party (e.g., the contractor) may be able to reduce or escalate the disruptions and inefficiency throughout the course of work; and (2) productivity losses rarely result from a single causing factor but multiple and concurrent ones for which both parties can be responsible. Also, the methods available for quantifying lost productivity are systemized in this paper to visualize relationships among uncertainty, effort and expertise to use, and the level of contemporaneous project documentation required of these methods. A conceptual framework is also proposed herein to help project participants match the relevant quantifying analysis with their project circumstances.

Subsurface ground conditions present a big factor of uncertainty in a construction project. It is difficult to determine subsurface ground conditions even with a prebid site investigation. Nevertheless, such conditions must be included in the bid price. Due to this uncertainty, claims arise during the construction of a project. Many claims end up in litigation. This paper presents an analysis of legal cases dealing with differing subsurface ground conditions in construction contracts. By creating a database containing salient features from legal cases related to subsurface ground conditions, this research identifies the most important factors influencing the outcome of legal cases pertaining to subsurface ground conditions. Further, the most commonly used arguments by the litigating parties and the precedent cases supporting them are identified and categorized.

Change, defined as any event that results in a modification of the original scope, execution time, or cost of work, is inevitable on most construction projects due to the uniqueness of each project and the limited resources of time and money available for planning. There are many factors that may cause a change such as design errors, design changes, additions to the scope, or unknown conditions in the field. For each change, contractors are entitled to an equitable adjustment to the base contract price and schedule for all productivity impacts associated with the change. The focus of this paper is to outline the types of changes that can occur on a construction project and also to spell out the financial recovery possibilities that exist for the contractor for each type of change. There are many historical and current court decisions that shape the outcomes of such claims and determine who holds the risks associated with various project changes. Also, an effective cumulative impact claim contains certain vital elements upon which the final outcome will be determined by the legal system. Last, there are certain actions that a contractor and owner can do to either enhance or mitigate the effectiveness of a potential cumulative impact claim.

Increased student enrollment and the current poor state of the educational infrastructure require the construction of more school buildings and the renovation of many of the existing ones. The large number and magnitude of change orders in these projects constitute an impediment to the rapid and economic delivery of these projects. A total of 6,585 change orders filed in a school district’s projects in the 5 1/2 year period from 1999 to 2004 were analyzed in five categories including owner-directed changes, code compliance issues, errors/omissions in contract documents, discovered or changed conditions, and others. The results of the study indicate that the dollar value of change orders relative to the original contract can be reduced if preventive measures are taken. These measures include choosing the right construction management firm, emphasizing the definition of project scope early in the project, and effectively managing the precontract activities by conducting value engineering and constructability reviews. The results indicate that school projects can be completed with change orders not exceeding 5% of the contract value if these measures are taken. This study is of relevance to practitioners involved in school design and construction projects.

The total cost or modified total cost method is the most common contractor used method of quantifying contract damages, probably because of its simplicity. But the judiciary has placed limits on its use. In theory, before it can be used by a contractor in a court of law, the contractor must show that (1) all the damages were the result of actions by the owner; (2) the project was sufficiently complex that there is no other way to satisfactorily quantify the damages; (3) the contractor’s bid is correct; and (4) the costs are reasonable. This note focuses only on the correctness of the contractor’s bid. The writers recently completed a benchmarking study of union interior system (framing and drywall) specialty contractors. The study relied on the use of a reference project and an accompanying shopping list of 10 commonly constructed items. In theory, all contractors were developing a bid on the same thing. The study was distributed nationally. Based on an analysis of 57 responses (and subsequently cleansed to 42 responses) the range of workhours to construct the shopping list was 1,247–2,500 with an average of 1,805. There is a twofold increase from the low bid to the high bid. There are also significant differences between regions that are in close proximity to one another, for example, northern and southern California and San Diego, Pittsburgh and Philadelphia, Chicago and St. Louis. The range in the total database is 1,253, which is a surprisingly large amount. The standard deviation in some regions of the United States was as large as the standard deviation of the total database. Based on these results, it is concluded that a contractor could make a sizable mistake in his/her bid and still be within the range of “correct” estimates. Almost any bid could be argued as correct. This hardly seems to be a reasonable standard of proof.