Among CSI's 13,000 members are the top experts on construction products - the people who make and install them. Despite this wealth of knowledge, one of the most common complaints of newsletter editors and website managers is, "I don't have any articles!" To solve this problem, all we need do is turn to our industry professionals. Who better than the manufacturer of a product knows its characteristics or how it performs? And who knows more than a qualified installer about conditions required for a successful installation?
When manufacturers and installers see specifications or drawings that are unclear, incomplete, or simply wrong, they are presented with a great opportunity to help design professionals do better. Does the indicated assembly require another component? Is that manufacturer out of business? Are the specified accessories incompatible? Is the detail impossible to construct? Have the referenced standards been updated?
Many of these problems and conflicts can be discussed in short articles, then submitted for publication in chapter newsletters or websites where they can be seen by design professionals. To ignore a recurring problem - or just complain about it - doesn't do anyone any good. So the next time you see a problem, especially if you've seen it more than once, take a few minutes to explain what is wrong and how it should be done, and send it to your chapter editor. Specifiers will love you!
03 March 2010
21 February 2010
Finish Mock-Ups
I recently received an e-mail from one of my favorite architects, asking for help with an unsatisfactory drywall installation. Using the Gypsum Association's GA-216 - Application and Finishing of Gypsum Panel Products as a reference standard, he had specified a Level 5 finish, yet he still was having a difference of opinion with the installer.
I was a bit surprised this was an issue. We specify Level 4 for almost everything and have had few problems; it’s hard to imagine not getting a good Level 5 finish when specified. The exceptions, as you might expect, have been walls at an angle to large windows, or walls with down lighting, and the higher the sheen of the paint, the worse the problem.
I was a bit surprised this was an issue. We specify Level 4 for almost everything and have had few problems; it’s hard to imagine not getting a good Level 5 finish when specified. The exceptions, as you might expect, have been walls at an angle to large windows, or walls with down lighting, and the higher the sheen of the paint, the worse the problem.
02 February 2010
History Lesson
In February 2007, John C. Anderson, FCSI, Distinguished Member of the Institute, charter member and first president of the Minneapolis-St. Paul Chapter, and fourteenth president of the Institute, passed away. A visionary, John foresaw the value of computers for bringing automation and consistency to specifications, and was a founder of the Construction Sciences Research Foundation (CSRF). John continued to serve CSI and the construction industry in many ways long after his term as president; in addition to serving as a CSRF director, he also was active in AIA, a member of AIA's Professional Development and Intern Development Program Committees, and a member of the National Panel of the American Arbitration Association.
In 1986, the Minneapolis-St. Paul Chapter named its highest award in his honor - the John C. Anderson Award of Excellence. Because he was a member of the Minneapolis-St. Paul Chapter and an important influence in my life, I prepared a tribute to honor his memory at our chapter awards banquet. While working on that project, I confirmed something I had previously suspected - for an organization that is heavily involved in documentation, we have done a poor job of keeping our own records.
In 1986, the Minneapolis-St. Paul Chapter named its highest award in his honor - the John C. Anderson Award of Excellence. Because he was a member of the Minneapolis-St. Paul Chapter and an important influence in my life, I prepared a tribute to honor his memory at our chapter awards banquet. While working on that project, I confirmed something I had previously suspected - for an organization that is heavily involved in documentation, we have done a poor job of keeping our own records.
12 January 2010
On the other hand...
After CSI’s October 2009 Board Flash, I wrote “A rose is a rose…”, in which I questioned the need for a change of member classification based on the vague explanation that was offered - “The Board believes the condensing of member classifications better reflects CSI's core value of building teamwork among construction professionals.” I also asked for more justification.
In response, I was accused of “old thinking.” Interesting, given that all I had done was review a little history, show that - with the exception of choosing leaders - there is no difference between members, and point out the need to again change chapter bylaws if the amendment is approved. I hoped we might have a little open discussion, and that advocates of change would provide sound reasons for the proposed change.
Remembering how much fun I had I college, taking any side of an argument just for fun, I decided to give the proponents of change a little help, and look at reasons for making the change from three member types to one. There is a good reason for making the change, and we’ll get to it. But first, I’ll comment on the claims that were posted. Sorry, but you’ll have to put up with more of my old thinking.
In response, I was accused of “old thinking.” Interesting, given that all I had done was review a little history, show that - with the exception of choosing leaders - there is no difference between members, and point out the need to again change chapter bylaws if the amendment is approved. I hoped we might have a little open discussion, and that advocates of change would provide sound reasons for the proposed change.
Remembering how much fun I had I college, taking any side of an argument just for fun, I decided to give the proponents of change a little help, and look at reasons for making the change from three member types to one. There is a good reason for making the change, and we’ll get to it. But first, I’ll comment on the claims that were posted. Sorry, but you’ll have to put up with more of my old thinking.
02 January 2010
A Dickens of a Tale
Scrooge was an old man, set in his ways. And why not? He had been doing things the same way for many years, and the resulting success was sufficient evidence of the wisdom of continuing in that path. Whenever it was suggested that change might be a good thing, “Bah, humbug!” was his response. “I like things the way they are! I started this business, I’ve been doing things the same way for sixty years, and I don’t see any reason to change!”
One evening, a strange series of events befell our dear Mister Scrooge. Having had a particularly trying day, he tried to enjoy a rich repast and a few glasses of wine in an effort to forget his problems. As he fell asleep, he was thinking of how much fun he had had in his youth.
One evening, a strange series of events befell our dear Mister Scrooge. Having had a particularly trying day, he tried to enjoy a rich repast and a few glasses of wine in an effort to forget his problems. As he fell asleep, he was thinking of how much fun he had had in his youth.
29 December 2009
Sensible Stimulus
infrastructure: the roads, bridges, rail lines, power grid, and similar public works that are required for an industrial economy to function
I know enough about government to never expect too much, but when the federal stimulus package was proposed, I envisioned a large investment in highways, bridges, dams, and other civil works projects. I won’t pretend to understand the economics or details of the public works programs of the 1930s, but there are countless examples of well-designed, useful, long-lasting projects of the Works Progress Administration (WPA) and Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC). My own state, Minnesota, has numerous state park buildings, highways, dams, bridges, and utilities that were built seventy years ago and remain in service today.
The subject of my article, “Return on Investment”, was the ancient buildings I saw while on vacation in Europe, and how they continue to be useful today. This month, we’ll look at more recent construction, particularly the infrastructure that supports our lifestyle.
I know enough about government to never expect too much, but when the federal stimulus package was proposed, I envisioned a large investment in highways, bridges, dams, and other civil works projects. I won’t pretend to understand the economics or details of the public works programs of the 1930s, but there are countless examples of well-designed, useful, long-lasting projects of the Works Progress Administration (WPA) and Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC). My own state, Minnesota, has numerous state park buildings, highways, dams, bridges, and utilities that were built seventy years ago and remain in service today.
The subject of my article, “Return on Investment”, was the ancient buildings I saw while on vacation in Europe, and how they continue to be useful today. This month, we’ll look at more recent construction, particularly the infrastructure that supports our lifestyle.
Return on Investment
maintain: to keep in an existing state of repair; to preserve from failure or decline
Although logic tells us our world is built on the past - the inspiration, artistry, genius, and brute labor of our predecessors - it’s easy to forget what has gone before and accept everything we see as normal. If we occasionally took the time reflect on the wonders around us, or the long chain of events that led to their creation, we might better appreciate what we have, and plan better for the future.
06 December 2009
A Rose is a Rose
What's in a name? that which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet
William Shakespeare
On your next Institute ballot you will be asked to vote on elimination of the Professional, Industry, and Associate Member categories. Other than a vague suggestion that the result “better reflects CSI’s core value of building teamwork” - a questionable proposition in itself - I’m not sure what the justification will be, but I don’t believe the benefits outweigh the cost.
To put this issue in perspective, let’s take a look at the history of CSI member categories. (To make things easier, I will refer to these three member categories as “full members” to distinguish them from Intermediate Members and Student Members, who are not allowed to vote or hold elective office. And to avoid having to continually express this exception, I acknowledge that member categories are used when discussing the makeup of CSI boards of directors and committees.)
On your next Institute ballot you will be asked to vote on elimination of the Professional, Industry, and Associate Member categories. Other than a vague suggestion that the result “better reflects CSI’s core value of building teamwork” - a questionable proposition in itself - I’m not sure what the justification will be, but I don’t believe the benefits outweigh the cost.
To put this issue in perspective, let’s take a look at the history of CSI member categories. (To make things easier, I will refer to these three member categories as “full members” to distinguish them from Intermediate Members and Student Members, who are not allowed to vote or hold elective office. And to avoid having to continually express this exception, I acknowledge that member categories are used when discussing the makeup of CSI boards of directors and committees.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)