Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Proposal of a Collaborative Teaching Method for AEC Supported by Additive Manufacturing Use

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Advances in Information Technology in Civil and Building Engineering (ICCCBE 2022)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering ((LNCE,volume 358))

  • 308 Accesses

Abstract

The Brazilian construction industry presents low productivity and limited international competitiveness. In this scenario, two relevant aspects are identified: academic education and technology adoption. In view of this context, two movements stand out. The first is the reformulation of the Brazilian National Curriculum Guidelines (DCNs) for Civil Engineering and Architecture undergraduate courses, which seeks to improve professional qualification, with a greater focus on the expectations of the industry of the 4th Industrial Revolution. The second is the emergence of new professionals, capable of engaging in the AEC (Architecture, Engineering and Construction) ecosystem to assist in the adoption of new technologies, linked to Industry 4.0. Among various innovative technologies, this research focus on Additive Manufacturing (AM), as it presents a great disruptive potential for civil construction industry, especially in education. Among the new workers who are joining the AEC industry, Graphic Expression professionals, graduated from Federal University of Paraná (Brazil), are inducing agents for the adoption of new technologies. For the effective incorporation of these elements in the AEC ecosystem, teaching programs are required to provide the fundamentals of technology, allowing future professionals to discover their capabilities. This paper presents a proposal of a collaborative teaching method for AEC, supported by AM use. This method, grounded on constructivist pedagogy for teaching and learning, is the result of a Design Science Research (DSR) approach. It puts together students from Civil Engineering, Architecture and Graphic Expression undergraduate courses, who then work on an interdisciplinary setting, studying a common theme. Our method uses Additive Manufacturing, Project-based Learning (PBL) and Collaborative Learning as teaching tools, with an emphasis in motivation, always considering the best conditions for students. In this paper, we establish important contents to be worked on in a hybrid teaching model, which uses distance learning to teach theoretical concepts and practical laboratory experience to solve problems collaboratively, ensuring the development of skills and competences. Finally, the present paper indicates seven important steps for the development of the proposed educational activities.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 219.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 279.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. de Oliveira VF (2019) A engenharia e as novas DCNs: oportunidades para formar mais e melhores engenheiros. LTC, Rio de Janeiro

    Google Scholar 

  2. Kern M, Sagazio G, Lourenção P, Pereira S, Miranda Z, Lopes A (2019) A mobilização empresarial pela inovação (MEI) e a defesa da modernização do ensino de Engenharia. In: de Oliveira VF (ed) A engenharia e as novas DCNs: Oportunidades para formar mais e melhores engenheiros. LTC, Rio de Janeiro, pp 33–43

    Google Scholar 

  3. de Oliveira MR, Fabricio MM (2011) Projeto paramétrico e prototipagem rápida: casos em instituições internacionais. In: Kowaltowski D, Moreira D de C, Petreche JRD, Fabricio MM (eds.) O processo de projeto em arquitetura. Oficina de textos, São Paulo, pp 455–469

    Google Scholar 

  4. Eastman C, Teicholz P, Sacks R, Liston K (2011) BIM handbook: a guide to building information modeling for owners, managers, designers engineers and contractors. Wiley, New Jersey

    Google Scholar 

  5. NIST: Metrics and tools for construction productivity project. https://www.nist.gov/programs-projects/metrics-and-tools-construction-productivity-project

  6. Wu P, Zhao X, Baller JH, Wang X (2018) Developing a conceptual framework to improve the implementation of 3D printing technology in the construction industry. Archit Sci Rev 61:133–142. https://doi.org/10.1080/00038628.2018.1450727

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. BRASIL (2019) Conselho Nacional De Educação. Parecer CNE/CES no 1 de 23 de janeiro de 2019. Diretrizes Curriculares Nacionais do Curso de Graduação em Engenharia. http://portal.mec.gov.br/index.php?option=com_docman&view=download&alias=109871-pces001-19-1&category_slug=marco-2019-pdf&Itemid=30192

  8. Godoy EV, Almeida ED (2020) Evasão nos cursos de engenharia: um olhar para os trabalhos do COBENGE de 2000 a 2014. Rev. Bras. Ensino Ciência e Tecnol. 13:50–74. https://doi.org/10.3895/rbect.v13n3.8583

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Go J, Hart AJ (2016) A framework for teaching the fundamentals of additive manufacturing and enabling rapid innovation. Addit Manuf 10:76–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2016.03.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Haavi T, Tvenge N, Martinsen K (2018) CDIO design education collaboration using 3D-desktop printers. Procedia CIRP 70:325–330. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2018.03.277

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Stern A, Rosenthal Y, Dresler N, Ashkenazi D (2019) Additive manufacturing: an education strategy for engineering students. Addit Manuf 27:503–514. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2019.04.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Martins IL, Filho ZRP (2019) A produção acadêmica sobre a fabricação digital nas escolas brasileiras de arquitetura e urbanismo. PARC Pesquisa em Arquitetura e Construção 10:e019007. https://doi.org/10.20396/parc.v10i0.8652734

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Kolitsky MA (2014) Reshaping teaching and learning with 3D printing technologies. e-mentor 2014(56 (4)):84–94. https://doi.org/10.15219/em56.1130

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Vaccarezza M, Papa V (2015) 3D printing: a valuable resource in human anatomy education. Anat Sci Int 90:64–65. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12565-014-0257-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Fukuda T, Tokuhara T, Yabuki N (2016) A dynamic physical model based on a 3D digital model for architectural rapid prototyping. Autom Constr 72:9–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2016.07.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Huleihil M (2016) 3D printing technology as innovative tool for math and geometry teaching applications. J Phys Conf Ser 755:011001. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/755/1/011001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Ludwig PM, Nagel JK, Lewis EJ (2017) Student learning outcomes from a pilot medical innovations course with nursing, engineering, and biology undergraduate students. Int J STEM Educ 4:33. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-017-0095-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Bassanezi CR (2015) Ensino aprendizagem com modelagem matemática: uma nova estratégia. Contexto, São Paulo

    Google Scholar 

  19. Novak E, Wisdom S (2018) Effects of 3D printing project-based learning on preservice elementary teachers’ science attitudes, science content knowledge, and anxiety about teaching science. J Sci Educ Technol 27:412–432. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-018-9733-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Nery M de A (2016) O uso das tecnologias digitais da internet na Educação Superior: representações docentes - entre o formal e o informal, as marcas da presença do possível

    Google Scholar 

  21. Pupo RT (2008) Ensino da prototipagem rápida e fabricação digital para arquitetura e construção no Brasil: definições e estado da arte. PARC Pesquisa em Arquitetura e Construção 1:80. https://doi.org/10.20396/parc.v1i3.8634511

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. BRASIL (2019) Conselho Nacional De Educação. Resolução CNE/CES no 2, de 24 de Abril de 2019. Diretrizes Curriculares Nacionais do Curso de Graduação em Engenharia. https://www.in.gov.br/web/dou/-/resoluÇÃo-no-2-de-24-de-abril-de-2019-85344528

  23. BRASIL (2006) Conselho Nacional De Educação. Resolução No 6, de 2 de fevereiro de 2006. Diretrizes Curriculares Nacionais do curso de graduação em Arquitetura e Urbanismo. http://portal.mec.gov.br/index.php?option=com_docman&view=download&alias=5649-rces06-06&category_slug=junho-2010-pdf&Itemid=30192

  24. BRASIL (2010) Conselho Nacional De Educação. Resolução CNE/CES no 2, de 17 de junho de 2010. Diretrizes Curriculares Nacionais do curso de graduação em Arquitetura e Urbanismo. http://portal.mec.gov.br/index.php?option=com_docman&view=download&alias=5651-rces002-10&category_slug=junho-2010-pdf&Itemid=30192

  25. ABEA (2019) Desafios do ensino de arquitetura e urbanismo no século XXI. In: XXXVII Encontro Nacional sobre Ensino de Arquitetura e Urbanismo, XX Congresso da Associação Brasileira de Ensino de Arquitetura e Urbanismo. p 515. Rio de Janeiro

    Google Scholar 

  26. Santos BP, Alberto A, Lima TDFM, Charrua-Santos FMB (2018) Indústria 4.0: desafios e oportunidades. Rev. Produção e Desenvolv. 4:111–124

    Google Scholar 

  27. DEGRAF: Graduação em Expressão Gráfica homepage. http://www.exatas.ufpr.br/portal/cegraf/. Last accessed 20 Apr 2022

  28. De Souza L.V., Costa DMB (2013) O curso de bacharelado em expressão gráfica da UFPR. In: GRAPHICA 13. Florianópolis

    Google Scholar 

  29. DEGRAF (2018) Projeto pedagógico do curso de expressão gráfica, http://www.exatas.ufpr.br/portal/cegraf/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2019/09/PPC_Projeto_Pedagogico_de_Curso__Expressao_Grafica.pdf

  30. Lacerda DP, Dresch A, Antunes Junior JAV (2013) Design science research Método de Pesquisa para Avanço da Ciência e Tecnolgia. Gestão Produção 20:741–761. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0104-530X2013005000014

  31. March ST, Smith GF (1995) Design and natural science research on information technology. Decis Support Syst 15:251–266

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Carboni MH de S, Scheer S (2021) Manufatura aditiva como ferramenta didática para a formação de profissionais da AEC. In: Simpósio Brasileiro De Tecnologia Da Informação E Comunicação Na Construção, 3, pp 1–14. ANTAC, Uberlândia

    Google Scholar 

  33. Gatto A, Bassoli E, Denti L, Iuliano L, Minetola P (2015) Multi-disciplinary approach in engineering education: learning with additive manufacturing and reverse engineering. Rapid Prototyping J 21(5):598–603. https://doi.org/10.1108/RPJ-09-2014-0134

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. BRASIL (2019) Decreto no 9.983, de 22 de agosto de 2019. Dispõe sobre a Estratégia Nacional de Disseminação do Building Information Modelling e institui o Comitê Gestor da Estratégia do Building Information Modelling. http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2019-2022/2019/decreto/D9983.htm

  35. Gorgônio P, Da Nóbrega B, Da Nóbrega SHS (2020) Engenheiro civil x arquiteto: conflito no aprendizado das estruturas. Rev de Ensino Eng 39(1):183–191. https://doi.org/10.37702/REE2236-0158.v39p183-191.2020

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Weber, P.D.: Beyond Bolts : architectural details, construction, meaning, http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/70861, (1991)

  37. Elmôr Filho G, Sauer LZ, de Almeida NN, Villas-Boas V (2019) Uma nova sala de aula é possível: Aprendizagem ativa na educação em engenharia. LTC, Rio de Janeiro

    Google Scholar 

  38. Corbacho AM, Minini L, Pereyra M, González-Fernández AE, Echániz R, Repetto L, Cruz P, Fernández-Damonte V, Lorieto A, Basile M (2021) Interdisciplinary higher education with a focus on academic motivation and teamwork diversity. Int J Educ Res Open 2–2:100062. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedro.2021.100062

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Jones BD (2009) Motivating students to engage in learning: the music model of academic motivation. Int J Teach Learn High Educ 21:272–285

    Google Scholar 

  40. Woods M, Rosenberg M (2016) Educational tools: thinking outside the box. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 11(3):518–526. https://doi.org/10.2215/CJN.02570315

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Carbonell J (2016) Pedagogias do século XXI - bases para a inovação educativa. Penso, Porto Alegre

    Google Scholar 

  42. Yokaichiya DK, Galembeck E, Brag DB, Torres BB (2004) Aprendizagem Colaborativa no Ensino a Distância - Análise da Distância Transacional. In: Congresso Internacional de Educação a Distância, 11, pp 1–11. ABED, Salvador

    Google Scholar 

  43. Ford S, Minshall T (2019) Invited review article: where and how 3D printing is used in teaching and education. Addit Manuf 25:131–150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2018.10.028

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Chiu PHP, Lai KWC, Fan TKF, Cheng SH (2015) A pedagogical model for introducing 3D printing technology in a freshman level course based on a classic instructional design theory. Proc. – Front. Educ. Conf. FIE. 2014:1–6. https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE.2015.7344287

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Gagne R (1985) The conditions of learning. Rinehart & Winston, New York

    Google Scholar 

  46. Junk S, Matt R (2015) New approach to introduction of 3D digital technologies in design education. Procedia CIRP 36:35–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2015.01.045

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Lynn R et al (2016) Toward rapid manufacturability analysis tools for engineering design education. Procedia Manuf. 5:1183–1196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2016.08.093

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Federal University of Paraná, Curitiba PR, Brazil

    Márcio Henrique de Sousa Carboni & Sérgio Scheer

  2. Federal University of Technology – Parana, Curitiba PR, Brazil

    Armando Luis Yoshio Ito

Authors
  1. Márcio Henrique de Sousa Carboni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sérgio Scheer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Armando Luis Yoshio Ito
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Márcio Henrique de Sousa Carboni .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Civil Engineering, University of Cape Town, Rondebosch, South Africa

    Sebastian Skatulla

  2. Department of Civil Engineering, University of Cape Town, Rondebosch, South Africa

    Hans Beushausen

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

de Sousa Carboni, M.H., Scheer, S., Ito, A.L.Y. (2023). Proposal of a Collaborative Teaching Method for AEC Supported by Additive Manufacturing Use. In: Skatulla, S., Beushausen, H. (eds) Advances in Information Technology in Civil and Building Engineering. ICCCBE 2022. Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering, vol 358. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-32515-1_14

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-32515-1_14

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-32514-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-32515-1

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation