I thought Howard McKew's "Tomorrow's Engineer" column on commissioning services ("How Do You Sell Commissioning Services?" July 2005, page 70) was informative, but I feel it failed to mention a problematic area that has been occurring on larger projects with increasing regularity: The lack of overall system integration.
In my experience, one of the trouble spots in project specifications is coordinating the control panels furnished with mechanical equipment with the standards that apply to the balance of electrical equipment on the project. Regardless of what you may include about NEMA enclosure types, short-circuit ratings, and other features, manufacturers tend to supply their standard control panel. The result is often an installation that cannot be verified to meet code or project requirements.
The largest ever AHR Expo 2006 in Chicago was a kaleidoscope of change, powered by the windy city itself. The energy and feeling of the transition into a new era was everywhere. Industry synergy abounded and the feeling of all the pieces fitting together was never greater. When I returned from this event, I wrote down 10 observations that I formulated at the show, which I call "My 10 Takeaways from AHR Expo, Chicago," and which appear on the AutomatedBuildings.com website
For years, consulting engineers would blame the ATC contractor when systems did not operate as designed or as hoped. Blaming the ATC contractor seemed like an easy target, since the design engineer probably used the ATC firm's standard sequence of operation within their contract specification and abdicated the responsibility for the system to work to the ATC contractor in the construction phase.
In the life of a building design and construction process, various formal and informal forms of communication are used - written or verbal communication and body language are a few. Communication influences decision, and these decisions ultimately need to be documented in formal written formats such as meeting minutes, memos, phone logs, and contract documents (specifications and drawings).
In response to Howard McKew's "Tomorrow's Engineer" column about construction CAD layering standards (April 2005, page 78), it seems to me that the AEC industry as a whole would benefit from having such standards, although this would likely be difficult to achieve. With each company having their own standards, the transfer of information becomes infinitely more difficult, and it would be interesting to watch how the use of building information models might force such a change.
As far as song titles go, you can't get much more generic than "We Belong Together." In fact, a quick search of www.allmusic.com reveals at least 50 recording artists who have released a song with that title, and I'd bet almost all of those are separate compositions. Personally, I prefer Rickie Lee Jones' version, but if you take the title and apply a typical late-winter head cold, then you get where we're headed this month: the new ES Blog at http://blog.esmagazine.com.
Federally chartered independent system operators (ISOs) now control the power grids and wholesale markets for more than half the retail power customers in the U.S. In such areas, electric bills may soon (or already) include a charge to pay for keeping installed generating capac-ity (ICAP) available regardless of how much electricity it actually produces. While that ICAP charge is controversial (some regions avoid or have fought against it), power customers having backup generators may also be able to make money from it.
What is the definition of a great building? One of the keys to success for a great building project is achieving the intended performance (design intent) of the building systems at the end of the project. However, owners don't usually undertake the effort and expense of a capital project in order to simply say that the project was great. Owners want buildings that stay great and meet the needs of the people and programs for which the buildings were designed and constructed.