DST (Dynamic Stabilisation Technology) Game Changer or Not?, page-30

"What we know about it so far" ..... more like what you know about it so far.

Here's a short description of how DST works.

Side note not a practicing controls engineer, but I have dabbled and can get points across.

You can break Hadrian X into 2 parts, the laying arm and laying head. From the laying arm perspective, there is no way to stabilize a 30m laying arm down to millimeter brick laying accuracy, it's impossible. You would need to have an infinitely rigid cantilever beam that can extends and retracts with all the joints and extensions required to move over a job site area. Engineers can apply controls to the laying arm and minimize swaying motion but not completely resolving the issue to achieve millimeter accuracy.

DST really takes hold at the laying head of Hadrian X. Once the laying arm is stabilized to a reasonable accuracy. The laying head (or end-effector in robotics terms) takes over to make fine adjustments needed to achieve millimeter laying accuracy. This is done through a control loop that uses tracking laser from a stationary stand not attached to Hadrian X. This laser stand sends position data to the end effector 2,000 times a second. This signal corrects for the error between the current and desired position of the next brick being laid. This is all done through the software that takes the corrections signal and applies it to a multi-body dynamic model of the machine. Which means that it knows the position of each piece of the machine in time.

Now if one can't articulate the technology beyond the terms of "challenging physics". They really shouldn't be asking Q1-7 or trying to restructure a company. This is simply jumping the gun and that is shown by the comment that you would take this technology into the healthcare for surgical robots. This makes absolutely no sense. The technology was developed for outside stabilization with a correction signal coming from a stand tens of meters away to correct the end effector. DST would offer NO advantage to a surgical robot. They're extremely precise and have no environmental factors disrupting them.

After those comments, I don't think your restructuring would offer any value. If anything it would destroy the company. I do believe this company could be primed for an acquisition, but I wouldn't much rather see Mike and Mark Pivac at the helm for the next several years. As the shareholder, I still believe they are the right people for the job.

"What FBR is really about"
FBR is trying to take a 3D CAD file of a house and rapidly assemble a brick structure to geometric tolerances. This allows other components such as windows, doors, cabinets, electrical, plumbing and roofs to use a just-in-time assembly process to rapidly increase the assembly of a full home structure. The whole construction process will begin to be more seamless over time greatly reducing amount of time/labor it takes to build a home. This will greatly affect how skilled trades (labor costs) and supply chains (material costs) handle the new era of digital construction. In a recent interview, Mark Pivac mentioned how this will take time and could eventually affect the price of housing costs. What intrigues me the most is that real estate has been one of the few assets that appreciates overtime. In the digital age of construction I don't believe this will always be true. For real estate it is always location, location, location. Meaning the land or location holds the value, not the structure. The structure itself is a depreciating asset roofs, floors, siding, windows, interior styles and decor all wear out over time. Now if vertically integrated supply chains begin partnerships with robotic construction firms, they will be able to drive down costs through rapid production of structures. The interesting part is what happens to the value of all previous homes. These homes weren't produced with vertically integrated supply chains and required extensive amounts of labor cost to build. Looking from the future back, the houses were built with more expensive components and labor. They have also had 30, 40, 50 years to allow mortgage interest rates and real estate transactions fees to create inflationary value on the material and labor cost components. What FBR is trying to do is provide a homeowner with a bill of materials and an estimate of the amount assembly which corresponds to a direct value of the home at that point in time. Processes would likely to continue to get better and prices continue to fall. The housing market and digital construction could have a very big disagreement on price. This all depends on how much profit the digital construction environment decides to retain. Just my opinion on what could happen. DYOR

Another good example of a company trying to accomplish this is Katerra check out their YouTube channel. They are redoing the supply chain for multi family units in the woods structure industry. My guess is that FBR and it's partnerships will be following a similar process, yet more customizable.