The Experts below are selected from a list of 4137 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Jeff Haberl - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Enhanced Software for Displaying Orthographic, Stereographic, Gnomic and Cylindrical Projections of the Sunpath Diagram and Shading Mask Protractor
2000Co-Authors: Jeff Haberl, Lamy DegelmanAbstract:The well-known versions of the sun-path diagrams and shading mask Protractors that appear in the AIA's Architectural Graphics Standards (Ramsey and Sleeper 1994) are based on the equidistant projections and use a shading mask Protractor developed by Olgyay and Olgyay at Princeton University in the 1950s. In the previous papers by McWatters and Haberl(1994a; 1994b;1995) and Oh and Haberl(1996;1997) the development of a computerized display of the equidistant projection of the sunpath diagram and shading mask Protractor was presented. This paper describes enhancements to the display of the sunpath diagram and shading mask Protractor that include orthographic, stereographic, gnomic and cylindrical projections. Descriptions of the new algorithms and examples of the different displays are also provided.
-
new educational software for teaching the sunpath diagram and shading mask Protractor
1997Co-Authors: Jeff HaberlAbstract:The well-known versions of the sunpath diagrams that appear in the AIA's Architectural Graphics Standards are based on the equidistant sky dome projections and use a shading mask Protractor developed by Olgyay and Olgyay at Princeton University in the 1950s. A designer using the AIA's Graphics Standards book, or other printed versions of the sunpath diagram, must select the nearest latitude, make photocopies of the appropriate sunpath diagram and shading mask Protractor, and then overlay the shading mask Protractor upon the diagram in the proper orientation. The outline of the shading device is then transcribed upon the shading mask, aligned at the proper orientation for the facade in which the window is being analyzed, and placed on top of the sunpath diagram to determine if a point centered at the base of the window is exposed to direct sunlight. Teaching this process to architects and engineers is tedious and error-prone since the students must calculate several angles and then mentally translate their cartesian coordinates onto a sperical coordinate system to determine whether or not their shading device is going to have the intended effect. As a result of this, the sunpath diagram and shading mask Protractor are not widely used because many designers either do not understand how to use the tools or do not budget the time to analyze a shading device properly with these tools. This paper describes the new MS-Windows-based educational software package (Oh and Haberl 1996) that has been developed to fast-track the learning of the sunpath diagram and shading mask Protractor which is based on previously published equations for plotting the sunpath diagram and shading mask Protractor (McWatters and Haberl 1994a, 1994b, 1995). A review of the manual process is also provided to compare the computerized tool to the traditional design method.
-
NEW MS-WINDOWS-BASED EDUCATIONAL SOFTWARE FOR TEACHING THE SUNPATH DIAGRAM AND SHADING MASK Protractor
1996Co-Authors: Jeff HaberlAbstract:The well-known versions of the sunpath diagrams and shading mask Protractors that appear in the AIA's Architectural Graphics Standards are based on the equidistant projections and use a shading mask Protractor developed by Olgyay and Olgyay at Princeton University in the 1950s. A designer using the AIA's Graphics Standards book, or other printed versions of the sunpath diagram must select the nearest latitude, make photocopies of the appropriate sunpath diagram and shading mask Protractor, and then overlay the shading mask Protractor upon the diagram in the proper orientation. The outline of the shading device is then transcribed upon the shading mask, aligned at the proper orientation for the facade in which the window is being analyzed, and placed on top of the sunpath diagram to determine if a point centered at the base of the window is exposed to direct sunlight. Obviously, teaching this process to architects and engineers is tedious and errorprone since the students must calculate several angles to ascertain whether or not a given shading device is going to work as planned and then painstakingly transcribe their calculations onto the printed sunpath diagram and shading mask Protractor. This paper describes a new MS-Windows-based educational software package that has been developed to fast-track the learning and use of the sunpath diagram and shading mask Protractor which is based on previously published equations for plotting the sunpath diagram and shading mask Protractor. Examples will be provided that demonstrate some basic configurations of shading devices that are often misrepresented in the standard literature.
-
A Procedure for Plotting the Sun-Path Diagram, and Shading Mask Protector
Journal of Solar Energy Engineering-transactions of The Asme, 1995Co-Authors: K. Mcwatters, Jeff HaberlAbstract:The well-known versions of sun-path diagrams and shading mask Protractors that appear in the AIA`s Architectural Graphic Standards (Ramsey and Sleeper, 1970) are based on the equi-distant projections and use the shading mask Protractor developed by Olgyay and Olgyay (1957). A designer using the AIA`s Graphics Standards book, or other versions of the sun-path diagram (LOF, 1974; Mazria, 1979) must select the nearest latitude, make photocopies of the appropriate sun-path diagram and shading mask Protractor, and then overlay the shading mask Protractor upon the diagram in the proper orientation. The outline of the shading device is then transcribed upon the shading mask, aligned at the proper orientation for the facade in which the window is being analyzed, and placed on top of the sun-path diagram to determine if a point at the base and center of a window is exposed to direct sunlight. This technical note describes the basic equations that can be used to develop a computerized construction of the shading mask Protractor and sun-path diagram, and demonstrates their use with an example shading device at a northern latitude. A brief historical review of the sunpath diagrams and additional information regarding the computerization of the diagrams is provided inmore » McWatters and Haberl (1994a,b).« less
Maowei Yang - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
radiographic angles in hallux valgus comparison between Protractor and iphone measurements
Journal of Orthopaedic Research, 2015Co-Authors: Hongzheng Meng, Weilin Zhang, Maowei YangAbstract:Radiographic angles are used to assess the severity of hallux valgus deformity, make preoperative plans, evaluate outcomes after surgery, and compare results between different methods. Traditionally, hallux valgus angle (HVA) has been measured by using a Protractor and a marker pen with hardcopy radiographs. The main objective of this study is to compare HVA measurements performed using a smartphone and a traditional Protractor. The secondary objective was to compare the time taken between those two methods. Six observers measured major HVA on 20 radiographs of hallux valgus deformity with both a standard Protractor and an Apple iPhone. Four of the observers repeated the measurements at least a week after the original measurements. The mean absolute difference between pairs of Protractor and smartphone measurements was 3.2°. The 95% confidence intervals for intra-observer variability were ±3.1° for the smartphone measurement and ±3.2° for the Protractor method. The 95% confidence intervals for inter-observer variability were ±9.1° for the smartphone measurement and ±9.6° for the Protractor measurement. We conclude that the smartphone is equivalent to the Protractor for the accuracy of HVA measurement. But, the time taken in smartphone measurement was also reduced.
-
Radiographic angles in hallux valgus: Comparison between Protractor and iPhone measurements
Journal of Orthopaedic Research, 2015Co-Authors: Hongzheng Meng, Weilin Zhang, Maowei YangAbstract:Radiographic angles are used to assess the severity of hallux valgus deformity, make preoperative plans, evaluate outcomes after surgery, and compare results between different methods. Traditionally, hallux valgus angle (HVA) has been measured by using a Protractor and a marker pen with hardcopy radiographs. The main objective of this study is to compare HVA measurements performed using a smartphone and a traditional Protractor. The secondary objective was to compare the time taken between those two methods. Six observers measured major HVA on 20 radiographs of hallux valgus deformity with both a standard Protractor and an Apple iPhone. Four of the observers repeated the measurements at least a week after the original measurements. The mean absolute difference between pairs of Protractor and smartphone measurements was 3.2°. The 95% confidence intervals for intra-observer variability were ±3.1° for the smartphone measurement and ±3.2° for the Protractor method. The 95% confidence intervals for inter-observer variability were ±9.1° for the smartphone measurement and ±9.6° for the Protractor measurement. We conclude that the smartphone is equivalent to the Protractor for the accuracy of HVA measurement. But, the time taken in smartphone measurement was also reduced. © 2015 Orthopaedic Research Society. Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Orthop Res 33:1250–1254, 2015.
Geoffrey N. Askin - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
use of the iphone for cobb angle measurement in scoliosis
European Spine Journal, 2012Co-Authors: Matthew J. Shaw, Clayton J. Adam, Maree T. Izatt, Paul Licina, Geoffrey N. AskinAbstract:Purpose The Cobb technique is the universally accepted method for measuring the severity of spinal deformities. Traditionally, Cobb angles have been measured using Protractor and pencil on hardcopy radiographic films. The new generation of mobile ‘smartphones’ make accurate angle measurement possible using an integrated accelerometer, providing a potentially useful clinical tool for assessing Cobb angles. The purpose of this study was to compare Cobb angle measurements performed using a smartphone and traditional Protractor in a series of 20 adolescent idiopathic scoliosis patients.
-
Use of the iPhone for Cobb angle measurement in scoliosis
2011Co-Authors: Matthew J. Shaw, Clayton J. Adam, Maree T. Izatt, Paul Licina, Geoffrey N. AskinAbstract:Purpose: The Cobb technique is the universally accepted method for measuring the severity of spinal deformities. Traditionally, Cobb angles have been measured using Protractor and pencil on hardcopy radiographic films. The new generation of mobile phones make accurate angle measurement possible using an integrated accelerometer, providing a potentially useful clinical tool for assessing Cobb angles. The purpose of this study was to compare Cobb angle measurements performed using an Apple iPhone and traditional Protractor in a series of twenty Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis patients. Methods: Seven observers measured major Cobb angles on twenty pre-operative postero-anterior radiographs of Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis patients with both a standard Protractor and using an Apple iPhone. Five of the observers repeated the measurements at least a week after the original measurements. Results: The mean absolute difference between pairs of iPhone/Protractor measurements was 2.1°, with a small (1°) bias toward lower Cobb angles with the iPhone. 95% confidence intervals for intra-observer variability were ±3.3° for the Protractor and ±3.9° for the iPhone. 95% confidence intervals for inter-observer variability were ±8.3° for the iPhone and ±7.1° for the Protractor. Both of these confidence intervals were within the range of previously published Cobb measurement studies. Conclusions: We conclude that the iPhone is an equivalent Cobb measurement tool to the manual Protractor, and measurement times are about 15% less. The widespread availability of inclinometer-equipped mobile phones and the ability to store measurements in later versions of the angle measurement software may make these new technologies attractive for clinical measurement applications.
-
Is the iPhone an accurate and useful tool for the monitoring of spinal deformity
2011Co-Authors: Maree T. Izatt, Clayton J. Adam, Robert D. Labrom, Geoffrey N. AskinAbstract:The progression of spinal deformity is traditionally monitored by spinal surgeons using the Cobb method on hardcopy radiographs with a Protractor and pencil. The rotation of the spine and ribcage (rib hump) in scoliosis is measured with a simple hand-held inclinometer (Scoliometer). The iPhone and other smart phones have the capability to accurately sense inclination, and can therefore be used to measure Cobb angles and rib hump angulation. The purpose of this study was to quantify the performance of the iPhone compared to a standard Protractor for measuring Cobb angles and the Scoliometer for measuring rib humps. The study concluded that the iPhone is a clinically equivalent measuring tool to the traditional Protractor and Scoliometer
Hongzheng Meng - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
radiographic angles in hallux valgus comparison between Protractor and iphone measurements
Journal of Orthopaedic Research, 2015Co-Authors: Hongzheng Meng, Weilin Zhang, Maowei YangAbstract:Radiographic angles are used to assess the severity of hallux valgus deformity, make preoperative plans, evaluate outcomes after surgery, and compare results between different methods. Traditionally, hallux valgus angle (HVA) has been measured by using a Protractor and a marker pen with hardcopy radiographs. The main objective of this study is to compare HVA measurements performed using a smartphone and a traditional Protractor. The secondary objective was to compare the time taken between those two methods. Six observers measured major HVA on 20 radiographs of hallux valgus deformity with both a standard Protractor and an Apple iPhone. Four of the observers repeated the measurements at least a week after the original measurements. The mean absolute difference between pairs of Protractor and smartphone measurements was 3.2°. The 95% confidence intervals for intra-observer variability were ±3.1° for the smartphone measurement and ±3.2° for the Protractor method. The 95% confidence intervals for inter-observer variability were ±9.1° for the smartphone measurement and ±9.6° for the Protractor measurement. We conclude that the smartphone is equivalent to the Protractor for the accuracy of HVA measurement. But, the time taken in smartphone measurement was also reduced.
-
Radiographic angles in hallux valgus: Comparison between Protractor and iPhone measurements
Journal of Orthopaedic Research, 2015Co-Authors: Hongzheng Meng, Weilin Zhang, Maowei YangAbstract:Radiographic angles are used to assess the severity of hallux valgus deformity, make preoperative plans, evaluate outcomes after surgery, and compare results between different methods. Traditionally, hallux valgus angle (HVA) has been measured by using a Protractor and a marker pen with hardcopy radiographs. The main objective of this study is to compare HVA measurements performed using a smartphone and a traditional Protractor. The secondary objective was to compare the time taken between those two methods. Six observers measured major HVA on 20 radiographs of hallux valgus deformity with both a standard Protractor and an Apple iPhone. Four of the observers repeated the measurements at least a week after the original measurements. The mean absolute difference between pairs of Protractor and smartphone measurements was 3.2°. The 95% confidence intervals for intra-observer variability were ±3.1° for the smartphone measurement and ±3.2° for the Protractor method. The 95% confidence intervals for inter-observer variability were ±9.1° for the smartphone measurement and ±9.6° for the Protractor measurement. We conclude that the smartphone is equivalent to the Protractor for the accuracy of HVA measurement. But, the time taken in smartphone measurement was also reduced. © 2015 Orthopaedic Research Society. Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Orthop Res 33:1250–1254, 2015.
Clayton J. Adam - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
use of the iphone for cobb angle measurement in scoliosis
European Spine Journal, 2012Co-Authors: Matthew J. Shaw, Clayton J. Adam, Maree T. Izatt, Paul Licina, Geoffrey N. AskinAbstract:Purpose The Cobb technique is the universally accepted method for measuring the severity of spinal deformities. Traditionally, Cobb angles have been measured using Protractor and pencil on hardcopy radiographic films. The new generation of mobile ‘smartphones’ make accurate angle measurement possible using an integrated accelerometer, providing a potentially useful clinical tool for assessing Cobb angles. The purpose of this study was to compare Cobb angle measurements performed using a smartphone and traditional Protractor in a series of 20 adolescent idiopathic scoliosis patients.
-
Use of the iPhone for Cobb angle measurement in scoliosis
2011Co-Authors: Matthew J. Shaw, Clayton J. Adam, Maree T. Izatt, Paul Licina, Geoffrey N. AskinAbstract:Purpose: The Cobb technique is the universally accepted method for measuring the severity of spinal deformities. Traditionally, Cobb angles have been measured using Protractor and pencil on hardcopy radiographic films. The new generation of mobile phones make accurate angle measurement possible using an integrated accelerometer, providing a potentially useful clinical tool for assessing Cobb angles. The purpose of this study was to compare Cobb angle measurements performed using an Apple iPhone and traditional Protractor in a series of twenty Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis patients. Methods: Seven observers measured major Cobb angles on twenty pre-operative postero-anterior radiographs of Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis patients with both a standard Protractor and using an Apple iPhone. Five of the observers repeated the measurements at least a week after the original measurements. Results: The mean absolute difference between pairs of iPhone/Protractor measurements was 2.1°, with a small (1°) bias toward lower Cobb angles with the iPhone. 95% confidence intervals for intra-observer variability were ±3.3° for the Protractor and ±3.9° for the iPhone. 95% confidence intervals for inter-observer variability were ±8.3° for the iPhone and ±7.1° for the Protractor. Both of these confidence intervals were within the range of previously published Cobb measurement studies. Conclusions: We conclude that the iPhone is an equivalent Cobb measurement tool to the manual Protractor, and measurement times are about 15% less. The widespread availability of inclinometer-equipped mobile phones and the ability to store measurements in later versions of the angle measurement software may make these new technologies attractive for clinical measurement applications.
-
Is the iPhone an accurate and useful tool for the monitoring of spinal deformity
2011Co-Authors: Maree T. Izatt, Clayton J. Adam, Robert D. Labrom, Geoffrey N. AskinAbstract:The progression of spinal deformity is traditionally monitored by spinal surgeons using the Cobb method on hardcopy radiographs with a Protractor and pencil. The rotation of the spine and ribcage (rib hump) in scoliosis is measured with a simple hand-held inclinometer (Scoliometer). The iPhone and other smart phones have the capability to accurately sense inclination, and can therefore be used to measure Cobb angles and rib hump angulation. The purpose of this study was to quantify the performance of the iPhone compared to a standard Protractor for measuring Cobb angles and the Scoliometer for measuring rib humps. The study concluded that the iPhone is a clinically equivalent measuring tool to the traditional Protractor and Scoliometer
