Perform engineering tasks in planning, designing, and supervising the construction and maintenance of building structures and facilities, such as roads, railroads, airports, bridges, ports, canals, dams, irrigation projects, pipelines, power plants, and water and sewer systems. You should see the software used by most private consultancies, some seem straight out of the 90s. If you look at something like autonomous cars, Google, Tesla and others have invested billions of dollars in the last 20 years. Systems have just reached runtime level 4.Tier 5 full autonomy is somewhere in the not-too-near future.
In the grand scheme, driving is a relatively simple task. There are well-structured rules that leave relatively little room for interpretation. Civil engineering is different because the rules are often not so clear. In addition, the work involves judgment, creativity and person-to-person coordination.
Even things like automating masonry construction, something you think would be easy, isn't at all. However, driving, at least in the system in which we intend to implement it, is a very complex task to automate because the system has to learn to account for a myriad of potential situations that do not conform to those well-structured rules. Because instead of replacing our transport system with autonomous vehicles, we want to integrate them with us even on the roads. And there is simply no way to account 100% for human behavior, we are erratic and make stupid decisions constantly.
Therefore, the code needed to try to tell us becomes very complex and can have errors, hence the driving problems of AI in the real world. Maybe some aspects for the job, but AI can't make the necessary engineering decisions, especially in the ever-changing field that is civil engineering. At least, in our lives and for the foreseeable future. Real design is only part of the process.
There is also coating and project management. My experience (not in civil, but in another engineering stream) is that the design is intended solely to show the intent of the design and then make sure that it is installed to perform as intended. Once onsite, a million changes take place and the engineer is not there to make sure that it is 100% compliant with the design, but rather that it complies with the intention. There will be negotiations around change orders where contractors will not submit one cost if they are allowed to charge for another, etc.
It's very difficult to program in AI. I wouldn't worry about that in my life or even in the lives of my children. As someone has already pointed out, many of us use 30-year-old technology on a daily basis, and even when advanced AI technology is advancing, it is more of a complementary tool than a human replacement. It's not uncommon for people to think they can be replaced by a robot in the workplace.
After all, it has happened many times before. For example, the rise of mechanical assembly line saw machines replaced people in the early 20th century. With recent advances in artificial intelligence (A, I. Even skilled workers, such as architects, programmers and engineers, can be at risk.
The software developer can do everything a human programmer can do. Just think about the software you use in your work. Many software packages can handle many of the complex calculations for you. Yes, this reduces the amount of work you do.
However, this automation can also pose a threat to your work. What if in the future we see that these same software packages handle data entry and processing?. It's a sobering idea, but does it have any merit? It's an interesting question, so let's explore the details in more depth. The use of artificial intelligence, along with other technologies, has always improved production.
More work is done, which means companies make more money. Architects and engineers are constantly looking for ways to speed up their work. The desire for automation has influenced many recent software innovations. In addition, project methodologies, such as building information modeling, place automation at the forefront.
It's a simplification, but it's not invalid. Companies make these types of decisions all the time. By pushing for automation, architects and engineers can slowly get out of their own jobs. Several studies have also suggested that artificial intelligence can lead to job losses.
A recent example comes from Oxford University. The study found that more than 700 types of jobs are at risk of technological disruption. In total, this means that around 47% of jobs are at risk due to artificial intelligence. It is a large number of people who may find themselves obsolete due to the advancement of technology.
If a position requires a high degree of any of those three things, you are less likely to be at risk due to artificial intelligence. Architects and engineers are a good example. These professionals require a lot of creative intelligence. Artificial intelligence and robots may not be able to emulate that creative intelligence.
As a result, architects and engineers are unlikely to have to worry about losing their jobs. The study concluded with a warning note. He said that just because automation improves the work of an architect and engineer right now, it doesn't mean that automation won't replace that function in the future. So is artificial intelligence worth it? To answer that question, let's look at A, I.
If artificial intelligence poses a threat to jobs, why continue to develop it? That's a good question. The obvious answer is that there must be some asset attached to artificial intelligence. Whether the good outweighs the bad depends on the observer. Let's take a look at each side of the plot.
So that covers the good and the bad of artificial intelligence. So we return to our central question. Will architects and engineers be replaced by robots? It's a horror scenario, but it's also highly unlikely. These are just some of the reasons why.
Fears that growing dependence on A, I. The decline in demand for services from architects and engineers seems to be unfounded. In any case, it seems more likely that A, me. What do you think would be the reaction to a robot that tries to manage people? A lot of people probably won't kindly accept artificial intelligence telling them what to do.
Many underestimate the importance of people's skills in the architectural and engineering profession. Architects and engineers must be able to organize workloads and manage people. Scheduling is a task that many already automate. It will crumble when it comes to the human relationships that are so vital in a team environment.
You don't understand when someone is demotivated or why. It will not take into account the human problems that affect all problems. This makes qualified team members even more valuable. Take on an increasingly important role in the workplace, the need for people management will be more important.
Architects and engineers with those skills may even realize that they earn more money to employ them. It's easy to refer to the brain as a human computer. It's also easy to refer to a computer as a mechanical brain. However, neither of the two descriptions is particularly accurate.
Brains and computers are two very different things. They can take the data you enter and create action plans based on that information. They can even learn from those actions to make adjustments later. However, computers do not experience the results of those actions.
This returns to the human question we mentioned earlier. Just because something makes sense to an artificial intelligence device doesn't mean it makes sense in the real world. Yes, it can absorb information and draw conclusions, just like a computer. But it's also influenced by your senses.
What you can see and touch are things that influence the decisions you make. This is something a computer can't do. An algorithm could calculate an answer, but a person can make judgments based on more than just basic data. You're playing baseball and the ball is hit in your direction.
If you were an A, I device, you would go into processing mode. Their systems would perform dozens of calculations that would determine the trajectory of the ball. Height, speed and wind would play a role in these calculations. The results would determine where you are going to catch the ball.
However, you don't really work like that. In fact, how you react to the ball is much simpler and more instinctive. You see the ball and the surrounding landmarks. With these visual stimuli, you can continuously react to the ball, rather than trying to predict its movements based on calculations.
In fact, the lack of calculations allows you to react if something unexpected happens. You can prepare the data of an architect or engineer. It can help the manufacturing engineer optimize the design of a production plant. It can help the mechanical engineer to generate parts.
All of these things make an engineer's job easier, but that doesn't mean artificial intelligence will replace the engineer. In this context, you can think of A, I. Why don't you use it to your advantage so you can focus on other tasks? Computers have no innovations. Even the computer itself is a human innovation.
This is an important point to remember when talking about the role of artificial intelligence in the modern workplace. However, he doesn't come up with the idea in the first place. It can lead to the loss of some jobs in more repetitive areas of the architecture and engineering industry. However, the design and maintenance of these A, I.
What we lose in one area, we gain in another. It's hard to really predict the effect that A, I. Will have architectural and engineering work. On the one hand, you can argue that it will lead to job losses.
Increased automation means less work for humans. Many companies will see this and eliminate the least essential people from their equipment if a machine can do its job instead. However, artificial intelligence itself cannot exist without the ingenuity of the people who created it. Needs maintenance and updates, otherwise it becomes obsolete in its own time.
In essence, the shift to A, I. It's similar to the changes we've seen in the past. People are constantly striving to make their work easier, which has led to virtually every innovation under the sun. Since ancient times, great thinkers have created tools and machines that can do things that people can't do.
In the end, the shift to A, I. However, it doesn't have to mean that it causes job losses. As with any new technology, it's likely that A, I. It will create as many jobs as it moves.
ArchiStar Academy offers several courses across the spectrum of digital design software. You will develop your skills, which will allow you to create more accurate and functional models. An ArchiStar membership gives you instant and unlimited access to all of our online courses for architects, engineers and construction companies. ArchiStar subscription is FREE, start now.
In engineering, architecture and design, a new type of AI-based software emerged, capable of creating a multitude of solutions to a problem in a short period of time based on predefined criteria. In a subdivision plan, the automated grade design can help engineers more easily establish a balanced preliminary surface based on the allowable slopes of areas within the road, from the road to the backsides of buildings, and across construction areas. With the advent of autonomous vehicles, the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) International developed a widely accepted classification system consisting of five levels of driving range. Today, Theo's team is leading the evolution of design automation, including the launch of Autodesk Grading Optimization for Civil 3D, a tool that helps engineers take a more efficient, faster and more accurate approach to ground grading.
If civil engineering is ever automated, it will take a lot of financial investment and a lot of time. Grading optimization is important not only because of the efficiency it provides, but also because it demonstrates the value of automated design in a specific component of a civil infrastructure project. The goal is to help engineers work faster and make them more efficient, according to Paul Haimes, vice president of digital services and Internet of Things company PTC, which develops generative design solutions. But what will happen next? “Generative design is based on CAD inheritance, but it eliminates the iterative process from the engineer's desk and places it in the cloud environment,” says Haimes.
Engineers will always be needed to protect the public, but increased efficiency and automated processes will mean fewer jobs. Results-based design automation enables designers and engineers to set specific goals from the start, such as saving time, optimizing costs, reducing material use, or improving sustainability, and increases the likelihood of meeting them once completed. . .