The Abyss.........Poof!

Log Out | Topics | Search Moderators | Register | Edit Profile

Author Message Ralph Liebing, RA, CSI, CDT Senior Member Username: rliebing Post Number: 1319 Registered: 02-2003 Posted on Wednesday, May 09, 2012 - 08:38 am:    120509 THE ABYSS-- POOF!!!!! By Ralph Liebing, RA, CSI, CDT, Cincinnati, OH Poof!............it’s gone! Oh, sure-- didn’t mean anything any way. Poof!..........be gone-- to naysayers, cynics, doomsayers, critics and other deniers. The shame of the abyss is that it exists, and has existed for far too long-- perhaps several decades]; is so roundly misunderstood and ignored; withholds so much good information to the project; is vitally needed to round out the technical aspects of the project; and that mostly shamefully, NO ONE seems to give a whip-stitch about it! The lack of understanding and comprehension is that deep!! And this even has an effect on manufacturers and their representatives. Good products are often misused and misapplied; the good work of the product side is compromised by the lack of understanding of it in the full context of how it should properly be used on the project. Good as it may be [no doubt there] there is still an aspect of superficiality in BIM—a false sense that everything is covered and well done. May be in most areas, but the good of abyss still exists prohibiting useful construction knowledge and information to the documenters. It has been there, in increasing size since the’30s until now that knowledge and expertise seem irrelevant-- sorry, it’s not! State laws mandate safe construction to protect all communities and citizens; this creates building codes and mandatory registration for architects and engineers and requires lawful practice [i.e., projects must be made code compliant by the design professional!]; but this well directed sequence is undermined by SYSTEM in place, out of synch; and disjointed with no one is in charge or caring. No one seems to be able to explain this, as each of the organization with an interest in the profession has its own agenda which does not include the good of the profession [and its work] overall. Architects have abdicated portions of their influence and expertise for years—and continue to do so [Why?]. “Delegated design” is one of the latest abdications, and sanctioned in AIA Document A201, but not in all contracts [is “Fill in wall openings”, a good spec?]. It is as if the rendering can be “magically” transformed into useable drawings, forget the lack of valued and necessary construction knowledge-- i.e., how do you put this together [Geez, even LEGOS come with usable instructions!]. Maybe the Beaux Arts [“if it looks good, that’s all that counts”] has never really died. But then some renowned architects like Michael Graves provide quotes like, “When I went to Harvard for graduate school [Bachelor from University of Cincinnati] I was the only one in my class that could detail a building-- but then the others knew about Proust!” Much is said about BIM in design, scheduling, planning, managing costs and other contractor functions. What else may find itself into the associated database really isn’t ballyhooed all that much—except for speed, and a few other production features. But working drawings [2-D?], specifications? uhhh………….. Product representatives and their associated manufacturers have a stake in this too. They have an enormous store of information about their products and system, including details, variations, material test data, finishes, etc. If the design professional has little or incomplete knowledge, the correct installation falls to the manufacturer. Problem is that the professional also has no absolute information if the installations are proper and correct-- and that is NOT to say that manufacturers cheat or short-change as a common practice. It is how the work is being judged in the final state by someone who really does not understand what SHOULD be in place, connected, flashed, finished, etc. “Very” professional! And so in keeping with the contractual obligations to the client. What to do? What supports the persistent dichotomy in the aspects of the profession? Why is it ignored even if is several decades old-- it still is NOT right! DICHOTOMY: a division into two especially mutually exclusive or contradictory groups or entities <the dichotomy between theory and practice>; also : the process or practice of making such a division <dichotomy of the population into two opposed classes> Here is some very revealing thinking-- http://www.di.net/blog/2010/04/is-the-profession-of-architecture-corrupt/ If we have independent Schools of Mortuary Science, why not a School of Architecture [devoid of university connections], established [perhaps in a charter format]and charged to provide appropriately and fully trained, "registrable graduates”? [in compliance with various legal concepts and state laws]. No one else is doing anything-- why not CSI!! We can meet, talk, plan, and make initial contact, soon. Other developments will come over time, but at let our expertise is known to student and young professionals-- and we can make the abyss disappear-- finally. Much to do!!