An Interview with Berok Khoshnevis,
Director of the Manufacturing Engineering Graduate Program at USC, and inventor of Contour Crafting, a computer-automated construction technology with the potential to change the building industry
What is Contour Crafting and what are its potential applications?
The Contour Crafting process is based on modern computer-aided fabrication concepts and aims at automated construction of whole houses. Using this process, a single house or a colony of houses with a different design for each structure, could be automatically constructed in a single run. The technology is ideal for low income housing and emergency shelters, which are two of the major issues in the USA and the rest of the world. The proposed technology should make possible the construction of structurally sound homes at a cost comparable to that of primitive homes that routinely result in thousands of casualties in earthquake and other natural disasters. Furthermore, the new technology should enable rapid construction of dignified shelters for victims of such disasters.
How does Contour Crafting bring together different academic and professional disciplines?
By its very nature, construction is a multidisciplinary activity, and Contour Crafting has the promise of revolutionizing the construction industry. Various engineering disciplines and non-engineering fields, such as social sciences (to deal with labor and unemployment as well as positive impact on social structures by raising standard and quality of living), real estate, construction, architecture, finance, etc. will be involved in this revolutionary transition.
When should we expect to see the first commercial machines available?
IF everything goes as planned, we should see the first commercial CC machines and structures made by them within three years. The major factor is funding to sustain and accelerate our research and development.
What kind of methodology did you follow during the process of inventing Contour Crafting?
The methodology of “perspiration”! As Edison once said, “Invention is one percent inspiration and 99 percent perspiration.” I was inspired by a phenomenon that I observed while filling a crack caused on my living room wall by the 1994 Northridge earthquake, and I have been sweating ever since. I think “intention” is the most important part of creativity. Even the least educated or the most non-creative people can become inventive if they have a strong motivation. Criminals typically are not very smart, but they can come up with pretty ingenious ways to escape the prison – their strong intention to free themselves makes them creative. We should each search within ourselves to learn if we truly have a strong intention in life.
What techniques would you recommend to those that want to create their own inventions?
I teach an entire course on the subject, and it will not be possible for me to elaborate on the question in any reasonable depth here. Suffice it to say that no form of living is more fulfilling than creative living. What makes us different from animals is not our thinking ability, because animals think as well. Imagine all the strategies and tactics that a bird uses to feed and protect its offspring. What we as humans have that is unique is our “creativity.” It is sad to see that most people go through their entire life without having tapped into the potential of their most precious commodity.
To become creative and inventive , one must first believe in the above point and then dedicate a good portion of his/her life to thinking creative thoughts while being detached from potential outcomes (such as getting rich). True inventors invent because they enjoy the process of creativity, not the potential reward of it. No one can become an over-night inventor, but everyone can instantly embrace the sort of value system that will be conducive to creative living.
TOP
Winner of the First Annual USC Business Plan Competition and $25,000 Prize Announced!
The winner of the First Annual USC Universitywide Business Plan Competition was announced last night at the Marcia Israel Awards Banquet in Town and Gown. The winner is Irene Rhodes, a returning undergraduate student who, with her husband, submitted a plan for a new technology venture called Consumer Fire Products. Her plan was selected by a distinguished panel of judges that included Lloyd Greif, boutique investment banker; John Dilts, president, Kieretzu Forum; Richard Morganstern, Tech Coast Angels; Jonathan Goody, Bay Equity Real Estate Acquisitions; and Dr. Andrea Belz, Dr. Kevin Scanlon, and Davis Thompson from the Pasadena Angels. During the 2003 fire season, over 3,500 homes were destroyed by wildfires in Southern California. To solve this problem, CFP has designed and developed the FOAMSAFE system, a patent pending exterior fire protection system that automatically activates whenever a property is threatened by fire, discharging an environmentally safe foam solution that covers the property and prevents it from burning. They have years of experience in the industry and they have their first customer – The Forest Service.
Irene received a $25,000 cash prize; six months free rent, high-speed Internet access and mentoring in California’s largest tech incubator – The Business Technology Center in Alta Dena; an invitation to present to a group of investors at the Kieretsu Forum; and an automatic berth in the statewide business plan competition sponsored by Draper Fisher Jurvetson and Zone Ventures for a prize of $250,000.
The second place plan – EnviroMill, a patented extrusion technology to reduce tires to a valuable product called ultra-fine crumb at a third of the cost of virgin rubber—will also participate in the statewide competition. EnviroMill’s team included Ryan Armstrong, James Frinier, Fernando Rivas, and Alon Schwartz.
The competition was sponsored by the Greif Entrepreneurship Center, the Center for Technology Commercialization at Marshall, and through gifts from alums Torin Pavia, Joe Kaplan, Steve Robbins, Scott Adelson, and Blair Salisbury.
The final competition was the culmination of four months of reviews. Thirty-nine teams from both campuses of the university entered the competition in January. That number was whittled to 24 teams who submitted complete plans on March 30 and qualified to enter the competition. A panel of faculty reviewers reduced that number to 10 based on how well the plans met the qualifications of the competition. These semi finalists were submitted to an outside panel of reviewers that consisted of Jim Sowers, entrepreneur and member of the Greif Center advisory council; Richard Koffler, President of LAVA and a member of the Tech Coast Angels; and three members of the Pasadena Angels: Andy Thornburg, Bill Zimmerman, and Steve Reich.
TOP
