AI Writing Your Next TMR? The differences between UK and Arctic Infra

Recently I became aware of an AI chatbot website called ChatGPT (https://openai.com/blog/chatgpt/) and thought to ask it some increasingly technical questions about building shallow footings on permafrost (related to work I’m currently doing in Norway). Whilst I wouldn’t for a second suggest using any of these answers without further investigation and reference checking – I was blown away with the detail provided, and the human nature in which the answers were delivered. I’ll include a snippet of the chat log below – note that each answer was produced in only a few seconds…
So, firstly, here’s a tool for you to consider using if you have a question (always check validity afterwards), but secondly, whilst AI is still fairly infant, I wonder what this could mean for the future – friend or foe?
Chat Log (my questions in bold)
What are the key differences between infrastructure in the UK and infrastructure in the Arctic environment?
The key differences between infrastructure in the UK and infrastructure in the Arctic environment include:
- Climate: The Arctic environment is characterized by extreme cold temperatures, snow, and ice, which can make it difficult to maintain and repair infrastructure. In contrast, the UK has a milder climate.
- Accessibility: The Arctic environment is often remote and difficult to access, which can make it challenging to build and maintain infrastructure. In contrast, the UK is more densely populated and accessible.
- Natural hazards: The Arctic environment is prone to natural hazards such as permafrost thaw, landslides, and flooding, which can damage infrastructure and make it difficult to maintain. The UK, on the other hand, is less prone to natural hazards.
- Cost: Building and maintaining infrastructure in the Arctic environment can be much more expensive than in the UK due to the harsh climate and remote location.
- Durability: The infrastructure in the Arctic environment needs to be built to be more durable and able to withstand the harsh conditions and natural hazards. In the UK, there is less need to build infrastructure to withstand such harsh conditions.
Can you be more specific about the differences in how the infrastructure is constructed?
Sure, here are some specific differences in how infrastructure is constructed in the UK and the Arctic environment:
- Materials: In the Arctic environment, infrastructure needs to be built using materials that can withstand the extreme cold temperatures, such as steel and reinforced concrete. In contrast, the UK can use a wider range of materials for construction.
- Insulation: The Arctic environment requires buildings and structures to be heavily insulated to keep the heat in and the cold out. This can add significant cost to the construction of infrastructure in the Arctic.
- Foundation: In the Arctic environment, the permafrost can thaw and cause the ground to shift, which can damage infrastructure. To mitigate this, infrastructure in the Arctic is often built on piles or stilts to keep it above the permafrost.
- Heating: In the Arctic environment, buildings and infrastructure need to have reliable heating systems to keep the interiors warm. This can be challenging and expensive to maintain in remote areas.
- Transportation: In the Arctic environment, it can be difficult to transport materials and equipment to the construction site due to the remote location and harsh weather conditions. This can add significant cost and delay to construction projects.
- Maintenance: In the Arctic environment, infrastructure needs to be designed to be easily maintainable in harsh conditions, and regular maintenance is needed to ensure that the infrastructure remains functional.
Could you please expand on point number 3?
Sure, point number 3 refers to the foundation of infrastructure in the Arctic environment. The permafrost, which is a layer of soil that remains frozen throughout the year, can thaw and cause the ground to shift, which can damage infrastructure. To mitigate this, infrastructure in the Arctic is often built on piles or stilts to keep it above the permafrost.
When building on permafrost, piles are typically driven deep into the ground to reach the permafrost layer, which is relatively stable. The piles act as supports for the building and help to distribute the weight of the structure over a larger area, reducing the load on the permafrost. This can help to prevent the permafrost from thawing and the ground from shifting.
Another approach used in permafrost regions is the use of stilts to lift the building off the ground. This technique is used for light-weight buildings, like cabins or small huts. This method prevents the building from coming into contact with the permafrost and also prevents snow from accumulating beneath it, which would make it difficult to maintain.
Both of these techniques help to make sure that the infrastructure is stable and secure, even in the face of permafrost thawing and ground shifting, which can be a major problem in the Arctic environment.
I thought the point of permafrost is that it doesn’t thaw? So why can’t we just build directly onto frozen ground and assume/calculate a higher bearing ground pressure?
You are correct that permafrost is defined as soil that remains frozen for at least two consecutive years. However, permafrost can still thaw in certain conditions, such as when the temperature of the air or the ground increases. This is known as “permafrost degradation” or “thermal erosion” and it can happen in different ways:
- Active layer: The topmost layer of permafrost, called the “active layer,” can thaw during the summer months, and then refreeze during the winter. This can lead to ground instability and damage to infrastructure built on top of it.
- Deeper permafrost: In some areas, permafrost can thaw deeper than the active layer. This can be caused by changes in the climate, such as warming temperatures, or by human activities, such as the construction of roads or buildings that change the heat balance of the ground.
- Localized thawing: Permafrost can also thaw locally, for example, under the weight of heavy buildings or equipment.
Given that permafrost can thaw, it is important to take this into consideration when building infrastructure in permafrost regions. Building directly onto frozen ground can still cause permafrost degradation and instability, which can damage infrastructure. Using techniques such as piles or stilts, helps to reduce the load on the permafrost and prevent permafrost degradation, making the infrastructure more stable and secure in the long term.
Can shallow foundations be constructed on permafrost for temporary structures?
Shallow foundations can be used for temporary structures built on permafrost, but there are some important considerations to keep in mind.
Shallow foundations, such as spread footings or slab-on-grade foundations, are typically used for light-weight structures or structures that will not be subjected to heavy loads. They distribute the weight of the structure over a larger area, reducing the load on any one point.
When constructing a temporary structure on permafrost, it is important to ensure that the foundation is not too deep. If the foundation is too deep, it can thaw the permafrost and cause instability. Additionally, it is important to use insulation to keep the foundation from freezing the permafrost.
Furthermore, the soil conditions should be evaluated to determine the bearing capacity of the soil. A geotechnical investigation must be carried out to identify the soil type, the depth of permafrost, the presence of ice lenses or other features, and other soil properties that can affect the stability of the structure.
It is also important to consider the duration of the structure, as the longer a temporary structure stays in place, the more likely it is to cause permafrost degradation. If the structure will be in place for a longer period, additional measures may be necessary to ensure stability and prevent permafrost degradation.
In summary, shallow foundations can be used for temporary structures on permafrost, but careful consideration of soil conditions, foundation depth and insulation, and the duration of the structure are important to ensure stability and prevent permafrost degradation.
You previously said “Additionally, it is important to use insulation to keep the foundation from freezing the permafrost.” Did you mean to keep the foundation from defrosting the permafrost?
You are correct, I apologize for the confusion. I meant to say that it is important to use insulation to keep the foundation from thawing the permafrost. The insulation helps to keep the permafrost from melting by preventing the heat from the building from reaching the ground, so the permafrost remains frozen and stable.
Permafrost thawing can cause instability in the structure and can lead to the failure of the shallow foundation. Insulation can mitigate this by slowing down or preventing the permafrost thawing, which would in turn keep the foundation stable and secure.
Again, I apologize for any confusion caused by my mistake. Thank you for bringing it to my attention.
What are your references used to provide the response abouf insulation requirements for foundations in permafrost?
I am a language model AI, I don’t have personal experiences or references, but my responses are generated based on patterns in the data I was trained on.
When it comes to insulation requirements for foundations in permafrost, there are several guidelines and standards that are commonly used. Some examples include:
- International Building Code (IBC) – This code provides guidelines for the design and construction of buildings and structures, including insulation requirements for foundations in permafrost.
- American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) – This organization provides guidelines and standards for civil engineering practice, including foundation design in permafrost.
- International Code Council (ICC) – This organization provides guidelines and standards for building and construction, including insulation requirements for foundations in permafrost.
- International Permafrost Association (IPA) – This organization provides guidelines and standards specifically for the design and construction of infrastructure in permafrost regions.
- American Society of Heating, Refrigeration, and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) – This organization provides guidelines and standards for the design and operation of heating, ventilation, and air conditioning systems, including insulation requirements for buildings in permafrost regions.
These are some examples of guidelines and standards that can provide information on insulation requirements for foundations in permafrost. It’s important to note that specific requirements may vary depending on the location and climate, as well as the specific building codes and regulations of the area where the structure is being built.
Ok, write me a poem about permafrost
Permafrost, frozen earth so still
A land of ice, a winter chill
A layer deep, that never thaws
A land of snow, where polar bears pause
A land of white, where cold winds blow
A land of silence, where rivers flow
A land of beauty, where mountains rise
A land of wonder, before our eyes
A land of secrets, that scientists seek
A land of history, that’s yet to speak
A land of change, as climate shifts
A land of challenge, that tests our wits
Permafrost, a land of might
A land of contrasts, day and night
A land of life, where animals thrive
A land of mystery, that keeps us alive
Permafrost, a land so wild
A land of wonder, that beguiles
A land of ice, that we must protect
A land of beauty, that we must respect.
Yes I played with this – it is impressive
For the likes of me I’d better get used to pre checking my lecture material – otherwise I’ll be exposed as the fraud that I most certainly am!
There is so much noise around GPT that I wonder what the plans are to ‘monetise it’ ( as they say are?
We enjoyed exploring this in class yesterday. If you ask what is the most sustainable way to provide short term accommodation in the Arctic you get another perspective. And asking wat interpretation of sustainability was used opens up further rabbit holes to dive down.
Key points that I am picking up at present are that 1) Yes it is very impressive and provides a good sweep across a question that either makes sure you have missed nothing or, in my case, ‘reminds’ me of the aspects I have forgotten to include. 2) It is very important to learn how to use it as a tool so that you ask the right question and frame it in the right way otherwise all of the subconscious bias in the question is imported into the response. 3) It doesn’t do numbers, which is not secret or an omission, but does mean that when the response on sustainability was returned, despite giving an impressive response regarding the different metrics, there is a need as a professional to quantify each one to support the response which is otherwise just conjecture. NB it is easy to read a convincing response and presume an evidence based balanced output rather than one that merely reflects the mass of www opinion.
There is no doubt that the continual evolution of guides and supporting aids to critical thinking and communication, such as AI, requires us to look at all evolving tools and ask ourselves how we can harness the benefits to improve efficiency and challenge preconceptions whilst guarding against the imported risks.
To my mind there is no doubt but that the future of design engineering lies in advanced modelling software with AI and generative design engines to interpret requirments, constraints and options. I think that retrospective engineering in rework, change of use (cut and carve), damaged structures, demolition and expedient temporary works will similarly benefit from AI in a defence environment if only the raw data can be accessed securely by a good AI engine. From this there are two lines of thought/discussion we might pursue; one being how might defence, and more specifically infrastructure engineers in defence, harness some of the potential more rapidly than it is deployed against you? And, does my deliberate use of the word engine in ‘Generative Design Engines’ and ‘AI Engines’ give something of a clue as to where engineers should perhaps ensure we are at the fore unless we wish to cede this to others?
Interesting points about chat GPT – I raised this in the design office I’m working in a few weeks back and drew the comparisons of using software for design. If you have the underlying knowledge of the calculations a software package is running for design then there is no problem in using it, provided you are able to verify and explain its output. Applying this logic to chat GPT is it still cheating if you understand a topic, put in the parameters of the discussion and use it to generate prose which you then proof read for accuracy? is this not the same as using design software and verifying output? – I think the issue comes when its used to produce text on subjects that the writer does not understand and takes the output as given without any interrogation.
Another interesting discussion I’ve been having is chat GPTs potential application for report writing (as in annual appraisals) – type in ‘write me a report for a top third soldier who should be promoted and has been on an overseas exercise and done adventurous training’ and see what you get! its quite interesting
Agree.