Technology in Architectural Practice

 View Only
Expand all | Collapse all

Are you ready to start including QR Codes in building model or even the build itself?

  • 1.  Are you ready to start including QR Codes in building model or even the build itself?

    Posted 10-11-2011 10:32 AM


    Are you ready to start including QR Codes in building model or even the build itself? QR Codes originated in the automotive industry to assist in the tracking vehicles during the manufacturing process. This code can now be found on many everyday items from potato chips to building products. The popularity of these two-dimensional barcodes is becoming apparent in your everyday lives. You can learn more about QR codes at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QR_code

    Think of the endless opportunities by including these codes into our design documentation and buildings. Contractors could scan a QR code from our construction documentation to better understand the design intent, bid requirements or link to an intelligent project data base of information. Design Professionals, Project Managers and Construction Managers can have real time updates of the construction status.

    For example, as the windows are delivered on site they are scanned and the GPS location is record into a centralized construction cloud based data system that notifies the appropriate parties. Then each windows tracked as it is installed (location, date/time, by, etc.). This could revolutionize the building industry.

    Another example, a visitor is at a large facility looking for a department and cannot find anyone to help. He/She could simply scan QR code located near the elevator (etc) and download textual directions and map to the department. Emergency Exit Plans, Location Maps, Building Data can be easily shared as well.

    -------------------------------------------
    Bernie Duncan
    Director of Solution Services
    CADworks
    South Park PA
    -------------------------------------------


  • 2.  RE:Are you ready to start including QR Codes in building model or even the build itself?

    Posted 10-12-2011 09:22 PM
    In the design/construction business, the items specified are seldom the same as the items purchased and installed. The design professional typically has no contractural authority to keep up with construction schedules in such detail. So, such a system would add cost without any payback.

    It may be more helpful within the construction industry, itself.

    -------------------------------------------
    Charles Graham AIA
    Architect
    O'Neal, Inc.
    Greenville SC
    -------------------------------------------








  • 3.  RE:Are you ready to start including QR Codes in building model or even the build itself?

    Posted 10-12-2011 09:41 PM
    At last month's CSI Meeting for the Baltimore Chapter, a local stained and polished concrete installer mentioned many of the products he's using are starting to come with these codes on the packaging so that an installer could scan and instantly access MSDS sheets, installer instructions, etc. from his smartphone.

    I agree with Mr. Graham, that seems to be the better use for this technology.

    -------------------------------------------
    Marvin Kemp AIA
    Senior Associate
    Design Collective, Inc.
    Baltimore MD
    -------------------------------------------








  • 4.  RE:Are you ready to start including QR Codes in building model or even the build itself?

    Posted 10-13-2011 12:26 PM
    What Bernie Duncan originally proposed was not QR codes linked to specific product/item ("SKU") information (which, of course, may change between initial design and final installation without the architect's knowledge), but rather to link back to design intent information such as construction documents and specifications, which the architect/engineer controls.  There could be considerable value to this to everyone in the design and construction process (architects/engineers, general contractors, trade contractors) because everyone would have ready access to the correct, latest construction documents and specifications at any time, and would no longer have to worry whether the version of a document that they have in their hand is the latest (and correct) revision, or whether the product they are holding in their hand complies with the design intent expressed in the construction documents.  Just imagine being able to scan a QR code on a window and immediately being able to call up the specification and/or the installation detail for that window.

    Issuing revisions to documents would be as simple as sending out an e-mail notification to all parties advising them to "scan the QR code on [document or specification name/page] to access the latest revision of the document."  The same notice could appear beneath the QR code on every page of a construction document (drawing or specification).

    Contractors could stick QR codes on materials/equipment/building components as they arrive on-site (or before they leave the manufacturer or fab shop) to link back to the same design-intent information.  The architect would not have to be responsible for that, but the contractor, knowing that QR codes have been published, could take advantage of it.

    This is basically a technological advance over the concept of tagging building materials with bar codes or RFID tags, which only link the item to a unique identifier that then has to be linked to information in a database elsewhere, which requires significant "information management" overhead.  QR codes eliminate the need for BOTH the unique identifier AND the intermediate database, because they can link directly to the data itself.

    The cost of embedding QR codes in models, construction documents, specifications, or even actual componments or assemblies, and linking them to an available Internet-accessible database, would be inconsequential, especially once it became a "standard operating procedure."  Even the initial cost of setting up the system would amount to very little for most design firms.  Large firms already have the necessary network/Internet infrastructure to support it, while smaller firms could purchase the necessary Internet-accessible data storage at commodity pricing, especially as cloud computing solutions become more common.  QR codes can be read by most smartphones and smart pads (iPads, Android tablets), so there would be no cost to the "publisher" of the QR codes for access to the data on the receiving end.

    Bernie's proposal would be a brilliant original idea if QR codes were not already so ubiquitous (just ask your iPhone-equipped 13 year old, but be prepared for an eye roll).  This is just another example of how slow the building industry is to adopt and implement truly useful technologies.  As an industry, we should be all over this, but then again, simple bar codes have existed for 30 years, and as an industry we never fully exploited that technology.  But now we don't have to - we can leap right over it to QR codes. 

    -------------------------------------------
    Michael Tardif Assoc. AIA, CSI, Hon. SDA, LEED AP
    Director, Integrated Project Delivery Systems
    Grunley Construction Company, Inc.
    Rockville MD
    michaeltardif@grunley.com
    -------------------------------------------








  • 5.  RE:Are you ready to start including QR Codes in building model or even the build itself?

    Posted 10-14-2011 04:58 PM
    Just because we "can" do something doesn't mean we "should".

    For example, in the case of distributing updated construction documents via QR code: Who assures that installers check the QR code before installation in a QR code document distribution system and how do they assure that? Who assures that outdated documents are pulled off the site to avoid their inadvertent use and how do they assure that (especially when anyone can have outdated, self-printed documents without managers knowing it)? How can a project manager be assured that all applicable parties have been notified of changes and clarifications? If the QR code is in addition to a more reliable, controlled system for document distribution, how is it more than a gimmick?

    Furthermore, is it easier to see and use the content of a document on a smartphone or tablet device than it is to see and use a full-size paper copy, particularly under the conditions encountered on construction sites? Can the document access device be left out for use by multiple workers and trades or does each individual need his or her own device?

    Early or timely adoption of a new technology is only valuable to the extent that the technology solves an existing problem without creating new problems. Frequently, simpler (paper) is better.

    -------------------------------------------
    Sean Catherall, AIA
    Herriman UT
    -------------------------------------------








  • 6.  RE:Are you ready to start including QR Codes in building model or even the build itself?

    Posted 10-17-2011 02:23 AM

    Interesting idea and good counterpoints.  Someone needs to try it and see what develops.  Does it solve existing problems or create more unintended ones as was mentioned.  So often it seems, the most meaningful development come through secondary combinations with other processes, developments, etc., that the only way is to move it forward and see how others respond to it.  In doing so, something really useful may grow up and out.

    -------------------------------------------
    Richard Skorick AIA
    Studio Form, Tokyo

    -------------------------------------------



  • 7.  RE:Are you ready to start including QR Codes in building model or even the build itself?

    Posted 10-18-2011 09:39 AM

    There several problems with the concept.
    The biggest is that the drawings are part of the contract for construction.  All changes to the drawings need to be issued in a manner that maintains the integrity of the contract.  The cost impact of the change needs to be determined from the material suppliers up through the general contractor then the Owner needs to accept or decline that change in cost.  So during construction there can be several versions of the drawings.  Need to be sure that the contractors are building off the accepted contract set. 
    Scale of the drawings - drawings are detailed to a viewed at a certain scale.  An example is a drawing of an area being remodeled.  Rarely are there completely accurate drawings of the existing conditions, areas that are critical should be redrawn to a reasonable accuracy.  If the drawing is overly enlarged it is no longer accurate.  The same is true for details, each product is slightly different so the details need to be developed to work with the approved products which means they are not completely accurate so they need to viewed at the intended scale and modified by the craftsman (yes craftsman) installing the product.
    The problem with placing standard installation details on the drawings is two fold - those documents are subject to change, change that may not work with your design or change that affects costs,  Another concern is what happens when your use is not included in the standard application.  If you are doing straight forward cookie cutter buildings and only using materials in the few ways that they manufacture describes then that might work.  We often call tech staffs to discuss non-standard uses for products. 
    We need to change but we need to understand the ramifications to the entire industry before implementing it.

    -------------------------------------------
    Robert Carlson AIA
    Principal
    Carlson Design Team PC
    Iowa City IA
    -------------------------------------------








  • 8.  RE:Are you ready to start including QR Codes in building model or even the build itself?

    Posted 10-17-2011 09:32 AM
    We are such terrible business people. The QR technology sounds like another way to get more overworked, paid less, and held liable for trying to create more control. Rather than expand our client base, we obsess over figuring out how to add more services while chasing the same small group of clients. The GA State Capitol building was built using 4 sheets of paper and the Architect received a 3% fee. Today it would take 400 drawings plus a Bush Tax Cut or Health Care Law sized spec book (depending on your polarization) and many of us are only getting 2% fees. Now, the Architect spent more time on site, but what happened? Why are we working much harder today, why do we have much more liability, and why are we getting paid less on top of it all?

    I've found that I make much better money per hour designing small residential renovations and unique spec houses than I do designing commercial buildings or custom homes for the end user. The total fee may be larger on commercial, but you spend so much time producing all of the required documents. At the end of the day, if you want to be successful, you're looking at dollars per hour, not total fee. Here's a basic analogy: If you go to the cable company and they offer a bundle of services like phone, cable, and internet, how do they get you to bite? They offer a discount for bundling. Every time we add more services to a proposal, we find ourselves giving a little break to entice the client to buy more stuff. We're creating more work, while getting paid less. The cable, phone, and internet infrastructure is paid for, so discounting services adds more money without more cost. We're offering these discounts for a service requiring manpower, not paid for infrastructure. On the flip side, if you offer the least amount of service to the smallest project, you get to charge the minimum set up fee. This is the price you pay for the cable guy just to show up. He's charging you the same price whether it takes 20 minutes or 3 hours, but he's always charging for the 3 hour scenario. I made the most money per hour designing a 30sf bathroom addition and the least on a 20,000sf medical office.

    Look at how the spec book has caused more harm than good. Rather than place responsibility on the contractor, we take it away thinking we're seizing control. Our spec books give instructions for installation, storage, etc. which are the Contractor's responsibility. The moment we start dictating how the work is implemented, we open ourselves up to additional liability. How many lawsuits involve discrepancies between the spec book and drawings? We all know there are books and college courses that teach future contractors how to exploit the discrepancies between our spec books and drawings to charge the client with more change orders $$$. Change orders anger clients and when the contractor can exploit these discrepancies in our documents, they have legal grounds to exploit the owner's wallet and blame us for it. The more documents a lawyer has to sift though, the more $$$ they'll find for their client. I'm sure none of you have experienced this before. 

    Lawsuits are a matter of perception. If the owner thinks you're to blame, then they will focus their anger on you. The more present, the more involved, and the more you cross the line of Design-Installation, the more risk you create. In contrast to my commercial experience my experience with lesser residential work is that builders love to take over a home project, mostly because they're not used to Architects being involved. They are perceived by the owner as being responsible in this case. When I design a modest home renovation, the home owner can't afford a $20k set of drawings w/ CA services, but they do have a few thousand to spend on a good idea and permit drawings. Because there is a HUGE wealth of these types of projects all around you, there is no need to try to extract every cent out of these people (they can't afford it). I found that the least amount of time I spend, the more money I make, no matter how many services I try to sell them. When you get in and get out as fast as possible and let the builder take over, then all the eyes of perception are on them, not you. I have over 200 built projects and have never been threatened with a lawsuit.

    Instead of trying to figure out how to create more work for ourselves that will eventually be absorbed into the same fee we already get, we need to focus on expanding our client base. Residential generated 200% more GDP than Commercial at the height of the boom. Residential designers do not have the expertise to solve complicated structural problems and thus clean up the way spaces flow and communicate when starting with a bad home. Renovating stick framed structures is far more complicated than many of the commercial projects I've worked on. There is a huge need for us in this sector and this is where we could begin to insert ourselves in a very lucrative and bountiful market. People are still getting pregnant and married, but they can't sell their houses. Renovations are the only possibility for most people. Get involved in your neighborhood. I've practically taken mine over. All it takes is a couple of yard signs to look like you're the only game in town. Give them your minimum set up fee for good idea and a permit and you will make better money per hour. It's much faster to create a reputation in the place you live because people love having a neighborhood Architect. We need to provide access to real Architecture for regular people and they will soon appreciate the power of design. Impressing residential clients is like shooting fish in a barrel. Many of you are far more talented than I, so if I can change the attitudes of southerners stuck on tradition and history, then I'm sure we all can make a difference with the masses. When I first moved to my neighborhood, all of the real estate agents were hateful of anything that wasn't a craftsman bungalow. What defined a craftsman was anything with a front entry porch with tapered wood columns on a brick base. Greene and Greene never used these types of columns, nor were the large covered porches used as an entry. Our absence from this sector has created a majority consensus of Architectural History according to the salesmen. If we want to make ourselves important as we should be, we need to figure out how to reach out to the masses. We want to control all aspects of projects, which has limited us to a small group of projects. In order to get involved in more residential work, letting go of control and finding a place where we are more like the consultant (who always makes better $$$/hr), we can get in and out while letting the builder shoulder the majority of the liability. More client base + less work = more profit!


    -------------------------------------------
    Eric Rawlings AIA
    Owner
    Rawlings Design, Inc.
    Decatur GA
    -------------------------------------------








  • 9.  RE:Are you ready to start including QR Codes in building model or even the build itself?

    Posted 10-17-2011 10:50 AM
    I have difficulty seeing the downside (and can see plenty of upside benefit) of providing access to accurate, up-to-date information, especially if it can be done for little or no cost.  If other parties choose not to take advantage of the available information, that's their problem.  But at least the age-old specious argument  - that the architect did not provide the latest, correct information - would be moot.  Simply making accurate, up-to-date information available and accessible in real time would help reduce the design professional's risk in these types of disputes.  As a publisher of information that entails significant professional liability risk, which architect or engineer would not prefer to be in that position?

    And does anyone really believe that making design information available only on paper ensures that the intended recipients will actually read it?  BEFORE something gets built using incorrect or outdated information?  The behavior of intended recipients is entirely independent of the communication medium and is entirely outside the control (and scope of responsibility) of the publisher of the information. No technology, whether implemented or withheld, will solve this problem. 

    As for whether the documents can be read on the smartphone or tablet, this is not the responsibility of the
    publisher of the information (the architect/engineer), either.  If this were the criteria for the deployment of any new communication technology, no new technology would ever be implemented, because the implementation of every new communication technology has a similar chicken-and-egg dimension to it. (4G cellular technology is a good recent example; why would anyone manufacture a 4G device until 4G networks are built out, and why would anyone build out a 4G network if no 4G devices exist? And why would anyone buy either the 4G device or the 4G service until both elements of this technology are fully mature?)

    In any event, this point is also moot; the resolution and navigability of information on many recently-issued devices (iPad, Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1) are astounding, and in some ways better than viewing the same information on a PC.  If the information is available and the intended recipients value having access to it in real time, they will purchase the devices they need to access it effectively.  If the information is not available, there's no point in purchasing the device.  Making the information available is the first step.

    The underlying point of my original post is that as an industry we seem to reflexively look for reasons why this or that technology can't work, instead of creatively (very deliberate choice of word here) trying to figure out how best to exploit new technologies to our maximum advantage.

    We have a choice between a culture of stasis and a culture of innovation, and as an industry we reflexively and overwhelmingly choose the former, to our own disadvantage and the disadvantage of society as a whole.  When bar codes were first introduced to the retail industry in the mid-70's, naysayers said it would never work, because of the vast scope of cooperation and integration that would be required in an industry and supply chain then considered to be woefully technology-challenged.  Yet it became standard operating procedure across the entire retail supply chain - from producer to retailer - within a few short years, and none of the predicted disaster scenarios came to pass.  And it's one of the reasons that food in the U.S. remains so relatively cheap.  The building industry has far fewer players and far fewer products, and yet we have all but missed the boat on an "industry-wide systems implementation" of that technology, the cost of which, over the last 30 plus years, is immeasurable.  Will we position ourselves to do the same thing with QR codes?

    -------------------------------------------
    Michael Tardif Assoc. AIA, CSI, Hon. SDA, LEED AP
    Director, Integrated Project Delivery Systems
    Grunley Construction Company, Inc.
    Rockville MD
    -------------------------------------------








  • 10.  RE:Are you ready to start including QR Codes in building model or even the build itself?

    Posted 10-18-2011 09:35 AM

    Greetings All,

    I want to thank you for sharing your thoughts, experiences and perspective about possibly including QR code technology in Architecture. I also want to thank the unknown person who sent the October issue of Metropolis.  The large QR code across the front cover of Metropolis Magazine and topic of "Data-Driven Design, How new digital tools are profoundly shaking up the profession" is uncanny. See it for yourself at www.metropolismag.com .

    Again, thank you for sharing your thoughts and perspective about QR codes technology in Architecture. Please keep them coming....

    -------------------------------------------
    Bernie Duncan
    Director of Solution Services
    CADworks
    South Park PA
    -------------------------------------------








  • 11.  RE:Are you ready to start including QR Codes in building model or even the build itself?

    Posted 10-18-2011 07:31 PM
    "What Bernie Duncan originally proposed was not QR codes linked to specific product/item ("SKU") information (which, of course, may change between initial design and final installation without the architect's knowledge), but rather to link back to design intent information such as construction documents and specifications, which the architect/engineer controls. "

    Your sentence contradicts itself. The first part says the codes are NOT linked to specific items, then the last part states that it IS linked to the specific specification.

    Can  you really have it both ways?

    -------------------------------------------
    Charles Graham AIA
    Architect
    O'Neal, Inc.
    Greenville SC
    -------------------------------------------