Have been challenged by some young colleagues; how would you help me answer the following–
On the design and documentation side, only, including specifications, what are the 10 most important changes [both positive and negative] that have occurred in professional practice the last 25-30 years?
Personal Computers
- both word processing/excel and CAD drawings
Construction Managers
Lawsuits against Professionals from GC
Much more litigation than 30 years ago
more governmental regulations
internet information available
tighter budgets, creative financing
electronic exchange of information
and not being able to count…(only 8 listed)
how about,
LEED / VOC Limitations
Value Engineering
BIM
One change can account for much of what has been listed already; the access to the internet/world wide web from personal computers. This single advance has resulted in exchange of information at an unheard of speed, which has led to tighter schedules and budgets, and more demands for production. In turn, these have led to more litigation and regulations.
This one thing has also led to BIM, increased VE (more information available to everyone), and an increase in expectations. However, as I have been saying, more speed and accuracy in the tools that we use does not mean more speed and accuracy in ourselves. I have seen no data suggesting that our brains are faster or better. And I’m not the only one saying this: “People like to imagine that because all our mechanical equipment moves so much faster, that we are thinking faster, too.” - Christopher Morley, writer (1890-1957)
It ain’t true. But it’s expected.
In no particular order but as they came to mind, although I rank the PC first for the obvious spinoffs.
The PC (+)
The fax machine (+)
Spreadsheets (+)
CAD (+) and (-). Not your “grandfathers working drawings”
E-mail (+)
Copiers/scanners (+)
Internet (+)
Partnering/teaming
Design build (delegated design)
More competition (-)
Smaller fees (-)
Shortened deadlines for deliverables (-)
Fewer adequatley trained resources (-)
Undisciplined drafting compounded by poor or no QA/QC methodologies (-)
MasterFormat (+)
Section Format/Page Format (+)
SpecLink (+)
BIM (+)
Sustainability (+)
PDF file format (+)
That is a big 10 x 2, over and out
Looking at it from the perspective of the building itself, we have new systems that the architect now routinely includes in design, (for which we may not be getting additional compensation, I might add):
Hey! How come nobody mentioned a bigger and better MasterFormat?
Re Bunzick’s No.7: We are already working to enhance firestopping to include smoke containment.
It’s interesting that all (is there an exception?) of the tests governing on firestop assemblies mention only fire. But we find, upon later observation, that many asemblies shrink and allow passage of smoke.
Perhaps this is a new thread.
I would also add:
fewer “hard bid” projects, and more negotiated work
projects issued in multiple packages and fast-track format
electronic equipment – both as means of document production but also the accomodation of them in buildings (ie: much bigger “telecon” rooms and much smaller “file” rooms)
the increasing cost of money, hence the compression of schedules, the smaller contingencies, the tighter the negotiating price; the less allowance for changes
higher use of invented materials that are petroleum based – for everything from structure to wall coverings
the increasing accuracy of structural calculations which means that fewer and fewer things are grossly oversized, which means that building systems wear out faster, and fatigue faster.
To Tom Heineman - Yes, this should be a different thread, but regards firestopping, it’s the Code that governs, not the tests.
2006 IBC Section 712 does not require smoke resistance for all through-penetrations. The following is required: F- (fire-resistance) rating for fire-resistance-rated walls; F- (fire-resistance) and T- (thermal) ratings for horizontal assemblies; and L- (air-leakage) rating for smoke barriers. The L-rating is a measure of potential smoke leakage. Additionally for “smoke partitions” the IBC requires penetrations be filled with “an approved material.” Tests for F- and T-ratings are according to ASTM E 814 and UL 1479. Underwriters Laboratories also includes an L rating as an optional test in UL 1479.
This is not to say that smoke contamination from a penetration couldn’t be a problem during a fire in some situations, but the Code just doesn’t feel smoke leakage must always be regulated every place.
However, I believe firestopped penetrations should not exhibit holes or gaps, except perhaps for some intumescent wraps or devices. It would at least be worth investigating why a hole or gap exists, by determining what sort of firestopping was used, then obtaining and reading the UL listing or manufacturer’s literature for that product.
To improve quality control generally, consider requiring that firestopping be installed by a qualified installer (FM Global and now UL have programs) or recommend that the Owner hire a testing and inspection agency to perform field-quality-control inspections per ASTM E 2174 “On-Site Inspection of Installed Fire Stops.”
Back to the original thread, a few more points not yet stated:
-larger scale projects
-more abstract design (building configuration)
-more products
-more repetition of information on drawings (it is easy to copy details with CAD)
-security concerns
-color palette
-less creativity in cities with design/review boards
-death of post-modernism
-the enormous amount of paper used to create a project from A/E proposal to final completion
(especially if it is a LEED project)
-more standards
OK OK wait a minute:
“the death of post modernism” is an important change in the profession?
Like shoulder pads and many layered hairdos. The shallow fad that was post modernism faded away and is now only seen late night TV.
No “style” (and that’s all it was) has changed the profession nearly so much as the computer, and yes, security concerns to reiterate a few.
Now if you want to talk architectural theory lets start a new thread and begin with the French neoclassicists. Now there were some way-out guys. Lets get Boulles Cnotaphe a Newton past a review board.
Marc, as I stated at the beginning of the comment “a few more points NOT YET STATED:” The computer has been mentioned several times already (said once, said enough), and, yes, it has had a significant impact. I was merely adding other ideas.
The original thread asked for comments about design and documentation in the last 25 to 30 years.
Post modernism is a philosophy and is not dead. The post modern “style” may have evolved, and maybe it is not as clearly expressed as previously, but post modernism is with us. You did not indicate positive or negative on that point.
I would add: whole building design to include micro-design such as:
Air barriers and moisture control in wall design
Specialized products in interior environments, including the many wall boards and paints.
Wind design for roofs, walls and edges, etc.
Specialized glass products; visual, safety, security, and decorative.
The historic market growth including cleaners, patches, replacement materials
Some things already mentioned, but the concept of micro-engineering/design is the focus.