Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for December, 2016

“Designing and constructing buildings, civil structures, industrial facilities, interior design projects and other structures and facilities is one of humankind’s most difficult endeavors in spite of the fact that it is a common activity” 1

In the last couple of posts, I’ve discussed the importance of construction document coordination and the importance of mentoring relative to the construction process. The time has come to consider the logistics of project delivery.

Arguably, the best source of knowledge on this topic is the membership of The Construction Specifications Institute. The best tool for measuring this knowledge is the CSI Certification Program which grants one certificate to and three advanced professional certifications of construction professionals who have demonstrated a high level of expertise within the construction industry.  The CSI Certification Program dates to the 1970’s with the establishment of the Certified Construction Specifier (CCS) program.  Since that time, the CDT Certificate Program and two other advanced certifications have been added for product representatives (CCPR) and construction contract administrators (CCCA).

With this post, I will focus primarily on The Construction Documents Technology (CDT) Program. The program is aimed at anyone who writes, interprets, manages, or otherwise utilizes construction documents.  The CDT is a prerequisite for CSI’s advanced certifications, but is an important accomplishment on a stand-alone basis.  The certificate is a useful tool to all parties to the construction process including, but not limited to, designers, constructors, material sup[pliers, product representatives, and more.  The program is useful to owner’s representatives as well, particularly if they are responsible for developing multiple projects.

In general, a CDT has knowledge of project delivery methods, design and construction processes, and construction documentation. With this knowledge, a CDT is able to perform his or her job more effectively because he/she understands the roles and relationships of the participants in the construction process and also understands what constitutes effective construction documents.

By understanding what is required by the construction documents, a contractor who holds the CDT delivers a project more closely resembles what the designer intended. Design professionals who hold the CDT are more likely to produce cohesive and coherent construction documents.  Product representatives and material suppliers are more likely to propose products that are compliant with the drawings and specifications.  The result? A better project for all parties.

It is for this reason that I prefer to do business with individuals who hold the CDT.

 

  1. The Construction Specifications Institute, Project Delivery Practice Guide (John Wiley & Sons)

Read Full Post »

With my last post I spoke of the necessity of members of the AEC industry to sweat the small stuff; to consider all of the issues related to putting a project together. This week, I will explore the best way to accomplish this.

We often hear about how graduates from architecture and engineering programs have very little practical/technical knowledge in their field. The complaints seem to be loudest from seasoned professionals such as myself.  In response to this, I concentrate on mentoring young professionals in an effort to pay forward the mentoring I received in the late seventies and early eighties as a young professional just getting into the field.

That said, new graduates and young professionals come armed with the most recent thinking on theoretical issues and solutions to some of the issues we all face. They have so much to offer, that we need to listen to what they have to say.  We need for mentoring to be a two way street, as we can all learn from one another.  Example: the seamless transition of our practice from hand drafting to CAD back in the nineties was made possible by a young professional with knowledge that I didn’t have.  She made it possible in a two week time span to have our electronic drawings look like our hand drafted work.

The best way I know of to make the two-way intentional transfer of knowledge happen is through CSI. In order for the two way exchange of knowledge to take place, we have to make certain that we get the young professionals to our meetings.  The invitation needs to be made on a personal basis, regardless of how the invitation is delivered (face to face, e-mail, social media, or even (gasp) a phone call.  The future of the industry depends on it.

Read Full Post »

We’ve all heard the expression “Don’t sweat the small stuff” which is good advice for daily life, but is it appropriate for us as design professionals to apply this to our professional lives? I would argue that this advice can’t apply to our work.  All too often, documents are released for construction with dimensions missing, slopes that don’t work for one reason or another, unsupported loads, or poor coordination in general.

Within the last hour, I’ve been asked to review center line dimensions on a foundation plan and elevations on a site plan related to accessible slopes. Both are easily overlooked, particularly within a profession that has a reputation for being more concerned with aesthetics than functionality.  Overlooking these issues can result in unnecessary expense during construction or liability on the part of the design professional.

Over the years, I’ve seen multiple coordination errors between disciplines such as site plans indicating backfilling against a framed wall, slopes that do not comply with accessibility guidelines, pavement that is too flat to adequately drain. I have also seen multiple cases where structural drawings didn’t reflect what was indicated on the architectural and similar issues with HVAC, plumbing, and electrical.  In other cases, headroom over stairs and similar issues have been ignored by designers not thinking the design through in three dimensions.  And I haven’t even mentioned the project manuals produced by repurposing the previous project’s specifications that may or may not be appropriate for the project at hand.

Granted, it is not at all easy to manage the competing priorities of the various design criteria. For example, it is essential to maintain accessible slopes on a site.  This is difficult to do in rolling terrain, but designing for runoff is relatively easy in these locations.  On a flatter site, designing for accessibility is easy, but in grading parking lots, avoidance of birdbaths because design slopes are too flat becomes a problem, especially in freezing weather.  Ensuring the integration of ductwork and plumbing with the structural system becomes an issue when the budget requires a low floor to floor height.

Use of BIM as a panacea for document coordination is not the answer. The model/documents still have to be checked and carefully coordinated by an experienced professional.  All of this is further complicated by the fact that Owners often do not want to pay sufficient fees to support this level of detail, but better to spend the money on document coordination than on demolition and replacement of components in the field.

Bottom line is this, every one of us on a project team needs to be diligent in coordinating the documents. I would encourage design professionals to do their due diligence in coordinating the documents to minimize RFIs.  Constructors, if you have questions, I would encourage you to issue the RFI or ask the necessary question(s).  Attention to detail on the part of all parties will result in better communication of the design intent.

Read Full Post »