Chamberlin LTD Articles RSS Feed

RoofPoint: A New Sustainable Rating Tool for Facility Managers

Hillary Dye - noemail@chamberlinltd.com — Thu, 02 Feb 2012 21:00:00 GMT

By Dr. Jim Hoff, Research Director, Center for Environmental Innovation in Roofing

When the U. S. Green Building Council initiated the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Green Building program in 2001, one of its primary objectives was to "transform the built environment."

Now, 10 years on from the introduction of LEED, the evidence for this transformation have become obvious. Ten thousand LEED buildings have been certified and over 100,000 LEED-Accredited Professionals participate in the program. As a result, it is rare to find a professional facility manager who hasn't been involved with a LEED project or with LEED-influenced construction practices.

Today, 10 years after the introduction of LEED, a similar transformation is occurring in the roofing industry. At the beginning of 2011, the Center for Environmental Innovation in Roofing (CEIR) launched a sustainable guideline for roofing systems that seeks to transform roofing – both in practice and in public perception. This new guideline, called RoofPoint, is similar in function and structure to green building rating systems such as LEED, but it embraces important differences offering unique value to building owners and the green building community.

Similar to green building rating systems, RoofPoint functions as a criterion-based assessment system for sustainable roofs, featuring broad categories of environmental impact with specific strategies to reduce environmental impact within each category. These credits are assessed against specific measurable goals, and the summation of this assessment is expressed as a total point score. Roofing projects meeting a minimum score overall as well in each major category are then recognized to embody the key principles of sustainable roofing.

Although the basic structure of RoofPoint is similar to existing whole-building green rating systems, there are several important differences. Obviously the most important distinction is that RoofPoint focuses exclusively on roofing systems. This approach goes a long way to address roofing industry concerns about potential shortcomings of whole-building rating systems when applied to roofing projects. As an example, the current LEED program specifically addresses roofing in regard to only two characteristics: cool roof surfaces and rooftop vegetation. Although many other roofing-related characteristics are embedded within many LEED credits, they may be difficult to winnow out and apply to a roofing project. As an example, LEED contains exhaustive criteria regarding overall energy efficiency, but because these criteria depend primarily on the use of whole-building energy modeling, the criteria may be difficult and costly to apply to a typical roofing project. RoofPoint addresses this challenge by providing a series of prescriptive energy standards, including recommended minimum R-values, elimination of thermal discontinuities and installation of roof air barriers that allow roofing practitioners to effectively meet the intent of whole-building approaches without requiring complicated and expensive energy modeling.

A second and perhaps more important difference in the RoofPoint program is its emphasis on roof system performance, both initial durability and long-term life cycle management. In addition to reducing environmental impacts, truly sustainable buildings and roofs need to provide superior service life so that the full benefit of reduced environmental impact is achieved. Perhaps nothing could be worse than a sustainably-designed building to end up with a leaky roof that shortens the working life of the entire building and compromises key environmental goals. Examples of durability concepts within RoofPoint include protecting the roof from traffic, assuring positive drainage, adding critical detail enhancements and installing a vapor retarder when needed. In addition, RoofPoint credits focus on key construction processes including on-site moisture protection, project quality assurance and long-term roof maintenance.

For building owners and facility managers, the most important feature is that RoofPoint targets an important construction segment effectively ignored by whole-building green rating systems - the over 2.5 billion square feet of annual nonresidential reroofing activity. Not only are complex whole-building rating systems difficult to apply to reroofing, but the costs of certification are far too expensive to apply to the average reroofing project. As a result, many building owners are increasingly interested in the RoofPoint program.

Behind this interest in RoofPoint for reroofing projects lies another important feature. Almost every facility manager I have talked with recently confirms that before any reroofing contract is awarded, the facility manager is asked by upper management, "Are we doing the right thing?" in regard to sustainable construction. That's why roofing professionals across North America are constantly being asked by facility managers, "Is this a sustainable roof?" With the RoofPoint program, facility managers can now answer this question with a program that provides tangible evidence that the roofing system meets well-defined sustainability criteria - and this achievement can be documented and recognized in much the same way that LEED and similar programs address this need for entire buildings.

In addition to targeting reroofing and validating sustainable roofing practice, RoofPoint delivers several other benefits to building owners. Because RoofPoint embraces every major type of nonresidential roofing in a non-proprietary manner, the program supports building owner demand for choice in selecting roofing systems. And compared to whole-building rating systems such as LEED, RoofPoint is a simple and affordable program that can be easily integrated into almost any roofing project with minimal expense. Finally, large building owners whose organizations have embraced Total Quality Management systems such as ISO 9000 will appreciate RoofPoint's process-based approach to roof system sustainability.

To better understand the value this program can bring to your roofing inventory, please go to the RoofPoint website (www.RoofPoint.org) and visit the Project Profiles page. There you will see a wide variety of roofing projects. I think you’ll also see that, while some of these installations are more complex than the average project, the great majority of these roofs are no different than what you demand for your own facilities– roofs that save energy, conserve resources and provide long-lasting value. And as you see how your roofing assets can easily fit into the RoofPoint database, I encourage you to join the RoofPoint team and help build the professionalism of your organization and the entire industry. All it takes to get started is to download the evaluation form and see how it works for outstanding roofing projects you have specified and managed in the past year. And if you need assistance, please don’t hesitate to contact CEIR.

Dr. Jim Hoff (jhoff@roofingcenter.org) is Research Director for the Center for Environmental Innovation in Roofing and president of TEGNOS Research, Inc., a research organization dedicated to advancing understanding of the building envelope. Dr. Hoff also serves as a board member of the Roof Consultants Institute Foundation and the Cool Roof Rating Council.

2-Feb-12 3:00 PM

Restoring a Piece of Texas History

Hillary Dye - noemail@chamberlinltd.com — Thu, 02 Feb 2012 20:00:00 GMT

The Hipolito F. Garcia Federal Building and U.S. Courthouse has seen many ups and downs in its lifetime. It was built in the mid 1930s as part of Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s Federal Public Works program during The Great Depression as a means to relieve widespread unemployment by generating jobs through its construction. In addition to creating job opportunities, the building housed local federal agencies and helped to streamline San Antonio’s growing postal needs.

The historic building is six stories tall with a traditional grand entrance that makes it a skillful example of the French Beaux-Arts style architecture. Constructed of steel and concrete clad in Texas’ finest pink granite and cream limestone, this polygonal-shaped building highlights a recessed porch behind a screen of six monumental Ionic columns rising to support an entablature that continues around the entire building. Located in the Alamo Plaza Historic District, the building is listed on the National Register of Historic Places and serves as the United States District Court for the Southern District. In 2004, the building was renamed in honor of Hipolito Frank Garcia, a San Antonio native who served on the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas from 1980 until his death in 2002.

Fast forward to 2011 when, during another economical downturn, the Federal Building is making an impact again on the economy, but this time with its complete renovation and goal to attain LEED Gold certification when the project is complete in mid-March. Chamberlin was awarded the roofing scope of work from general contractor The Beck Group. The 25-year-old roof system was leaking in several places and began to cause

major problems for the building and its occupants.

Chamberlin’s scope of work consisted of refurbishing the existing clay tile mansard roof, installing an internal gutter system and replacing the existing flat roof system to prepare it for a Photovoltaic solar array on level six and a vegetative system on level two all while court is in session.

A Nationally Registered Historic Landmark

“Restoring a nationally registered historic building comes with unique challenges,” said Chamberlin Superintendent Jack Vaughn, “and it was very important to perform our work in accordance to their historic preservation standards without disturbing the building occupants’ daily business.”

Chamberlin was ready to tackle the challenging project with Vaughn and Project Manager, Patrick Beasley, at the helm organizing Chamberlin’s action plan. The first priority was to stop the ongoing leaks by installing a temporary roof over the existing one to keep the building dry while it was being restored. The building was occupied during the day, so Chamberlin had to work around the court’s schedule in order to keep the disruptions at a minimum. Anytime Chamberlin needed to mobilize material, to the roof areas, it had to be done on the weekend when the building was closed, which made it extremely important to plan ahead and follow a detailed production schedule. In order to safely mobilize material, Alamo Street was shut down and off-duty police officers helped to keep the area safe while tourists strolled near the work site.

Part of Chamberlin’s scope was to remove 20,000 sq. ft. of mansard clay tiles, replace all underlayment and install new stringers. Each tile was removed, power washed and re-installed to retain the original look as closely as possible. Chamberlin commissioned custom tiles to replace the pieces that were broken in the process and each one was color blended to match the original, historic tiles. With the clay tile roof being six stories high, extra care had to be taken that no tile fell from the roof are during the replacement process. This was one of the major safety challenges Chamberlin faced. To prevent injury, safety nets were installed in the areas where the roofing team was working to keep pedestrians and tenants safe from possible falling debris.

As is sometimes typical of older structures, asbestos was found in portions of the wall flashings and roofing

materials, so an abatement company was brought in to safely remove the affected areas.

Roof Recycling for LEED Points

Roof levels two and six of the building had an existing black EPDM ballasted roof membrane installed directly over a built-up roof system. In order to remove the rock ballast from the roof, Chamberlin employed the use of a vacuum truck and every load of ballast was weighed and recycled to obtain points for LEED certification. In order to remove all ballast in the allotted time of two weekends, a set of mobile truck scales were utilized to track the amount of rock that was removed. Like the ballast rock, Chamberlin recycled the roof membrane and flashings as well. Additionally, Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) certified lumber was used where needed to further enhance the building’s sustainability.

A major logistical challenge was delivering the materials to a roof area constructed on level two, which is an interior recessed roof with the building walls surrounding it on all sides like a bowl. The material could not be mobilized to the interior roof through the building; therefore, a crane was used to lift the material over the building walls.

Chamberlin removed all 42,000 sq. ft. of flat roofing down to the concrete deck and adhered poly ISO insulation. Installed over the insulation are a one-half inch cover board and a fully adhered 60 mil TPO single-ply reflective roof membrane. Chamberlin will then install protective slip sheets atop the level two roof to accommodate the vegetative roof system that is being prepared for installation.

The vegetative system, or green roof, will consist of small grasses and shrubs native to the central Texas region and will create an insulating layer that helps reduce building heat, therefore decreasing strain on HVAC systems. Also, rather than shedding rain water to drains, the green roof’s soil will absorb the water to feed plants. Additionally, the green roof will help lower the noise level transmitted through the building and will make great scenery for offices facing the roof area.

A Photovoltaic Team Effort

Chamberlin teamed with Texas Solar Power Company, to install a Photovoltaic (PV) System atop the new roof on level six. The team provided engineering to determine structural attachment requirements for the PV system for wind resistance and weight loading. The building was not originally designed to accommodate a solar panel array, so Chamberlin removed the roof system to expose underlying structural elements to allow for the connection of attachment devices. The solar panels will be rack mounted and tilted to maximize the amount of solar power the building will collect.

Once the PV system is connected into the power grid, the owner will obtain the benefit of offset power usage. The 50 kilowatt PV solar panel system can provide enough electricity to power 15 average family homes. Not only will it reduce current utility bills and the building’s carbon footprint, but it can add value to the property.

“This project required a team effort from each trade, so every person involved was a key player,” said Project Manager Patrick Beasley. “When a challenge came up, our field operations team quickly found a way to overcome it.” Together with Beck, Chamberlin rose to the occasion and worked hard to limit business interruptions during the roof replacement phase while successfully improving sustainability and contributing LEED points to the historic Hipolito F. Garcia Federal Building.

2-Feb-12 2:00 PM

Employee Profile

Hillary Dye - noemail@chamberlinltd.com — Wed, 02 Nov 2011 15:00:00 GMT

Bill Lawson

Operations Manager –

Roofing & Sheet Metal

Houston, TX

Bill is one of our favorite Yankees, and we are not talking about the baseball team because he is a diehard Mets fan. Bill began his career in the roofing business in New York straight out of high school and has been “living the roofer’s dream” ever since he joined Chamberlin 14 years ago. On the field and off, Bill is a go-to guy who has a lot of knowledge to share from the school of hard knocks.

Experience:

Bill started out in the roofing industry working alongside his brother as a laborer. He has come a long way since his first job tearing off cold tar pitch roofs and cleaning up the work site. After 10 years of roofing in New York, Bill moved to Houston where he applied at Chamberlin and was hired as a Foreman. With his competitive nature and desire to get results, Bill steadily worked his way through the ranks to his current position of Roofing Operations Manager for the Houston office. Bill has managed roofing teams on many notable projects including L’Auberge du Lac Hotel and Casino, U.T. M.D. Anderson’s Administrative Support Building, Hess Tower, Texas Children’s Hospital West Tower and the large roof replacements atop George H. W. Bush Intercontinental Airport’s Terminal A and D.

A Day in the Life:

Bill is a proactive problem solver and does whatever it takes to get the job done properly with a spirit of cooperation between all parties. That is why you will find him working with Chamberlin superintendents, project managers and estimators to set the course for each project. You will also see him meeting with general contractors and property owners to ensure his team is meeting and exceeding their expectations.

Outlook:

“Project management is an integral part of customer service,” said Bill, “there is no better way to demonstrate our commitment to deliver more than to perform well on the project from start to finish.”

Bill’s goal is to always listen, effectively communicate, be proactive and follow through on all commitments to clients and colleagues. That is a tall order, but Bill knows it is the only way to manage projects and earn future business. He takes pride in his profession and encourages his team to do the same.

Likewise, Bill is a natural teacher. “He is one of the most knowledgeable roofers in our industry,” said Executive Vice President Art Canales, “and I have learned an awful lot from him over the years. Bill has a curious mind along with a focused attention to detail.”

Outside the Office:

Bill likes to spend time with his wife and daughter and participates in their many activities. He takes out the golf clubs for a few swings when he is not at a swim meet or soccer match. One of his favorite pastimes is making homemade pizza. Those in the Chamberlin Houston office are sometimes the lucky recipients of Bill’s creations made with fresh vegetables from his father-in-law’s backyard garden. He will let you have a slice as long as you stick around for a good razzing about that week’s fantasy football results.

We asked Bill to choose his favorites from this random list of things as a way to get to know him a little better:

Online or Offline

St. Patrick or St. Valentine (It’s my anniversary)

NFL or MLB – If I had to choose just one.

Pork or Beans – Both

Led Zeppelin or The Beatles

2-Nov-11 10:00 AM

When Roofs Become Much More Than Simple Roofs

Hillary Dye - noemail@chamberlinltd.com — Tue, 01 Nov 2011 16:00:00 GMT

By: Ken Ollinger RRC, RRO, CCCA, Austech Roof Consultants, Inc.

A decade ago the desire of most knowledgeable owners, designers, and contractors was to “keep it off the roof.” Finding that eliminating unnecessary foot traffic and equipment such as satellite dishes, antennas, piping, etc., was the first step in extending the roof’s useful service life, great efforts were made to limit these things on, as well as penetrations through, the roof. In recent history these simple roofs have evolved and the question now is this: “How can we use the roof surface effectively for other non-roof related functions?”

Roofs are now being used as the location for many functions that need to be designed and integrated into the roof system. Solar arrays, wind turbines, satellite antennas, commercial communication equipment and many other systems are now being installed on the roof. Roofs are also being designed and built to support various amenities such as garden or vegetated roofs, observation, recreation, and meeting areas. Restaurants use roof areas as additional outdoor dining areas, and the list of similar purposes goes on.

Other influences have been affecting roof design as well such as the U.S. Green Building Council’s LEED program, the EPA’s ENERGY STAR program, energy codes, along with environmental regulations and ongoing code changes. While these issues and requirements are beneficial, they can create a confusing list of requirements that contractors, designers and owners must be aware of and incorporate in new or replacement roof systems. These influences and requirements are contributing to the need for a greater degree of coordination between the team members to result in a successful project.

Project Planning

The first step of a successful project is planning. Each roofing project undertaken is unique and will have special issues that must be addressed, but there is a plethora of typical items that must go into the planning and design phase to result in a successful project. The considerations can include understanding the code requirements, insurance, uplift resistance, drainage, roof function, deck type, insulation, foot traffic, desired service life, annual maintenance, warranties, etc. While each one of these items can be regarded as a typical heading, each will have several subheadings and can be affected by the additional functions required of the roof.

When it is determined that the roof is being asked to be the platform for non-roof equipment or will be required to support some of the special functions described above, it is beneficial to begin a design checklist or matrix of those functions. The design considerations for each item can then be tracked. I suggest taking into account the design, typical construction, potential damage to the roof and maintenance of each non-roof item and then coordinate that information with the roof design as a whole.

One of the most important items of any successful project is constructability. At the end of the day the owner must have a project that can be built within the anticipated budget, support the non-roof functions, meet all of the requirements and remain watertight for the anticipated service life of the roof. Constructability for each project typically means coordination of all the design requirements for the roof and roof top functions to determine that each works and does not create a harmful effect on the other.

A Team Effort

Construction of today’s roofs must be a team effort. Contractors, owners, manufacturers and designers must maintain an open relationship to construct today’s complicated roof systems incorporating the desired non-roof functions. Manufacturers of the roof mounted equipment are often a good source of information regarding the requirements for their particular systems. They also must be made aware of the end requirements necessary to make the roof perform as desired for its anticipated service life while supporting their equipment. Roof membrane manufacturers are typically an excellent resource for warranty requirements, roof protection, code compliance and general roof installation information. Qualified and knowledgeable contractors are also a key element in successful projects. In today’s market, contractors must be versed in a multitude of roof systems and also be knowledgeable about the non-roof systems that are to be incorporated. In addition, the roof system must be integrated with the entire building envelope, so contractors must be versed in the nuances of coordinating the roof and building envelope. It is beneficial to open the dialogue with qualified contractors early to discuss systems, constructability, requirements, maintenance and probable costs.

The entire team must understand the construction sequencing. Roofs are typically constructed to resist foot traffic and other abuse after construction, but when the roof is going to be used for other functions, the need for roof protection may be immediate to prevent damage during installation of other equipment and penetrations. The team must determine what the protection requirements are and who will provide the work.

A knowledgeable and cooperative team is also a great benefit during construction. While designers make every effort to provide a good set of complete details and construction documents, they cannot anticipate all of the sequencing and field modifications that may become necessary; therefore, the team approach is essential to make field decisions and provide modification documents in a timely manner as the need arises. Successful projects also benefit greatly from qualified construction observation. Qualified field observers commissioned by contractors, architects, engineers, owners and consultants become an integral part of the construction team.

Commissioning

In the current construction process, commissioning has become a key element for many projects. While commissioning is typically accomplished for the entire project, for this discussion the concentration is on the roof. While accomplishing the punch-list review, the roof system designer should consider the entire roof assembly including non-roof functions. When considering the roof as a platform, all of the items that affect the roof’s performance should be noted even though correction of some of those items will likely not be accomplished by the roof installer. Noting items that need to be completed by trades other than the roof installer on the roof punch-list report will indicate the importance of coordination and how each function will affect the others.

The primary function of the roof is to keep the facility watertight. Failure of owners, designers and contractors to keep that basic function in mind while achieving the larger goals will result in long-term problems, expensive repairs and a potentially reduced service life for the roof. The days of the “keep it off the roof” approach are rapidly fading into the sunset. Today, the roof is a valuable contributor to the building’s overall appearance as well as its environmental and energy performance. The team must “stay on top of the game” taking an all-encompassing approach to the roof design, construction, and management to result in watertight, long-term performance while supporting the other non-roof functions desired.

REFERENCES

Thomas W. Hutchinson, AIA, CSI, FRCI, RRC presentation at RCI Convention “Roof as a Platform”

Biasell, Natasha “Innovative Roofing Inspires Solar Energy Collaboration.” RCI Interface July 2009

Ken is a Senior Consultant with Austech Roof Consultants, Inc. in Austin, Texas. Austech was established in 1984 and has offices in both Austin and San Antonio, Texas. Austech specializes in roofing, waterproofing and building envelope technology. Austech provides Construction Documents, Reports, Moisture Surveys, Quality Control Monitoring, Design Reviews, and Expert Testimony on both new and retrofit projects. Ken can be reached at 512-443-7255 or ken@austechrci.com.

1-Nov-11 11:00 AM

Houston Food Bank: Ready to Serve Even More

Hillary Dye - noemail@chamberlinltd.com — Tue, 01 Nov 2011 13:00:00 GMT

The Houston Food Bank has been serving Harris and 17 other southeast Texas counties since 1982. At In their first year they delivered about one million pounds of food to community distribution programs. In 2010 the Food Bank dispersed 70 million pounds of food and fed 137,000 individuals each week through its charitable network of food pantries, shelters and nutrition programs. With an admirable goal of increasing its output to 120 million pounds of food annually by 2018, the Food Bank needed larger digs to help them reach their full potential.

The Food Bank purchased a warehouse facility from Sysco Foods, Inc. on the east side of Houston that fit the bill; it is four times larger than their previous location, and it has a warehouse area to prep and house dry goods as well as a massive refrigerator and freezer to store perishable items. The nonprofit organization made one of the biggest leaps in its history when they decided to buy this facility, and each dollar spent in its renovation is being maximized to its fullest. They chose a “guaranteed maximum price” project delivery method so that all cost savings could be given back to the organization’s cause.

General Contractor, Tellepsen Builders, selected Chamberlin as the roofing subcontractor for the 308,000 sq. ft. facility. “It was a no-brainer to hire Chamberlin for this project,” said Tellepsen Quality Coordinator Bob Dulovics. “Not only were they the low bidder, but they have the expertise and infrastructure to meet the demands of this challenging project.”

The integrity of the entire building envelope is a vital part of this food processing facility because of its large refrigerated areas and low tolerance for moisture intrusion. The existing roof systems atop the facility were a hodgepodge of EPDM, BUR and Modified Bitumen. Chamberlin’s task was to remove the roofs and replace them with reliable, energy efficient systems.

The 70,000 sq. ft. freezer and cooler spaces came with their own set of challenges. The potential for moisture formation around a cold storage unit in Houston’s hot, humid climate created a critical need to get the design right from the beginning to ensure airtight integrity. Chamberlin worked with the construction team to come up with design details to solve problems associated with the different internal temperatures of the large refrigerated coolers while considering moisture protection, energy efficiency and cost control.

“Chamberlin’s attention to detail, making sure edges were properly sealed to keep water and air out, was very important,” said Dulovics, “a lot of thought went into making a building envelope that looks and performs well.”

The freezer had an EPDM black membrane system that was removed down to the metal deck, which was found to be rusting. The Chamberlin team painted and primed the deck with rust inhibitor and sealed all penetrations and perimeters with a vapor barrier to ensure its airtightness. Ten inches of insulation was adhered to the deck to the meet the required R-55 thermal resistance for the freezer and refrigerator. A white, reflective Carlisle TPO single-ply membrane capped off the system to reduce heat transference for further energy efficiency.

A large portion of the existing roof over the 200,000 sq. ft. dry good warehouse and truck facility had a Loadmaster-type deck, which can be tricky to work on during replacement. With a deck of this type, heavy materials or equipment on the roof could easily overload its capacity. So, Chamberlin was mindful to stage material and coordinate manpower to prevent any damage to the deck or injury to workers. The new roof system over the warehouse has a thermal resistance value of R-30 with five inches of roofing insulation. This is unusual because, by code, the Food Bank could have gone with an assembly as low as R-17, but chose to upgrade for the comfort of their volunteers who work in the warehouse each day.

Part of the warehouse roof was a good candidate for a TPO overlay with new insulation rather than a full removal and replacement, saving the Food Bank as much as $100,000 in additional expenses. Chamberlin also installed approximately 100 skylights and curbs over the warehouse and enclosed offices providing access to daylight and reducing the need for artificial lighting.

Though there were significant safety concerns on the roof with a large number of existing skylights to be removed and the Loadmaster carrying capacity, Chamberlin was experienced and detail oriented in preparing the safety plan.

“Safety challenges were easily overcome by Chamberlin due to their safety-minded culture,” said Dulovics, “we didn’t have to worry about them because they are very professional about what they do.”

Fall protection hazards at the building perimeter and around skylights were identified and discussed in Chamberlin’s morning team meetings and regular site visits were performed by in-house safety inspectors.

The Houston Food Bank opened the doors of their new facility to donors and the community on September 23, 2011. On that day the warehouse was filled with over one million pounds of food donations.

"In its first quarter-century, Houston Food Bank has touched the lives of hundreds of thousands of individuals - men, women and children from all walks of life and income levels," says Brian Greene, president/CEO of Houston Food Bank, "but, sadly, we must continue to work harder. As the economy fluctuates and people find themselves without work or are unable to make ends meet, they are turning to organizations such as the Houston Food Bank for help, many for the first time ever. This incredible new facility lessens our restrictions so our reach can extend further to help those in need."

1-Nov-11 8:00 AM

Are Employee Badges a Big Deal?

Hillary Dye - noemail@chamberlinltd.com — Mon, 01 Aug 2011 20:00:00 GMT

We think so. Chamberlin has been using an employee badging system for many years as a means to provide proper and obvious identification of our team members on high security projects and in clients’ occupied buildings. Our badges also display the types of craft and safety training the employee has completed ranging from OSHA 10-Hour certification to scaffolds and more.

Each badge includes a photo of the employee, their title and craft. These features provide an extra level of security for you, your tenants and coworkers because you will be able to clearly identify the Chamberlin technician and know they belong there. You will also know at a glance that the worker is fully and properly trained to carry out their duties as their certifications are stamped right on their badge.

All training is performed in-house through our Chamberlin University program by OSHA Outreach Trainers who have certifications from various third party groups such as powder-actuated tool manufacturers and the National Roofing Contractor’s Association. Additionally, new training courses are added to the instructional library and training certification card as required time to time by clients.

The next time you see one of Chamberlin’s 650+ team members take a look at their employee badge. The ID and training badge system, along with our in-house safety inspectors, ensures we are staffing our jobs with skilled workers who are prepared to perform their work safely and productively.

1-Aug-11 3:00 PM

Employee Profile

Hillary Dye - noemail@chamberlinltd.com — Mon, 01 Aug 2011 20:00:00 GMT

Bryan Payne

Estimating Manager –

Waterproofing & Caulking

Dallas, TX

Over the last 12 years, Bryan Payne has worked his way up from a project coordinator to estimating manager and has become one of the most award winning project team members to boot. Matter of fact, he has helped Chamberlin rack up five national project awards for outstanding workmanship and innovation. Here is a bit more about the award winning golden boy.

Experience:

For Bryan, his career at Chamberlin fell into place on its own like a happy accident. He began working for Chamberlin in Dallas one year after graduating from University of Texas upon a suggestion from his former college roommate. Bryan began as a project coordinator in the waterproofing and caulking department.

“Bryan has been a vital part of the success of the waterproofing division in the Dallas/Fort Worth office,” said Chamberlin Vice President David Neal. In 2005, Bryan served as project manager on the North Lake College renovation in Irving, Texas which earned Chamberlin their first Associated Builders and Contractors (ABC) National Excellence in Construction Award. In 2007, Bryan’s team also won the McGraw Hill Excellence in Construction award for their work on the J. Erik Johnson Library. His achievements continue to multiply with the 2009 and 2010 ABC Excellence in Construction awards for the Dallas County District Office and the Perry Gate/Fair Park Esplanade Renovation.

Outlook:

Bryan is consistent with his work and knows what it takes to meet clients’ needs. “To me, customer service, safety, quality installation and productivity are the guiding principles for what makes our company great,” Bryan says, “Without these principles Chamberlin is no different from the next low bidder.”

Bryan brings a lot to the table and makes sure all clients are satisfied no matter what. “The best thing about working at Chamberlin is the company’s reputation,” Bryan explains, “In general, Chamberlin’s clients know when we are hired they will get quality work from our company that is executed safely.”

Outside the Office:

Bryan enjoys being active. When he is not winning awards, he is out training for his first marathon. He also enjoys fly fishing in Colorado at his family’s cabin every summer. A little known secret is that if Bryan was not at Chamberlin today he would have followed in the footsteps of his father who is an investigative commander for the Dallas Police Department.

Sponge Bob or Family Guy

4 Door or Coupe

Tweet or Twit

Ribs or Brisket

~~Hardback~~ or ~~Paperback~~ iPad

1-Aug-11 3:00 PM

Are You Prepared for Hurricane Season?

Hillary Dye - noemail@chamberlinltd.com — Mon, 01 Aug 2011 19:00:00 GMT

Hi there. Chamberlin Man here. If you live in the southern states, you know now is the time to get your emergency plan in place for a potentially active hurricane season. One thing to check off your list is setting up emergency response services with a responsible roofing contractor – like the Chamberlin team!

You know better than I that a serious storm can do heavy damage to the roof and exterior walls of your building. And, the folks at Chamberlin are equipped to help you prepare for – and recover from – the full gamut of potential storm damage to your building envelope or parking garage.

The National Hurricane Center predicts we could have 12 to 18 named storms and six to 10 hurricanes, three to six of which could be at least Category 3.

Who knows where those storms will fall, but I guarantee it only takes one hitting the gulf coast to ruin your weekend plans. We’ve seen ‘em in our neck of the woods, and we’ll probably see ‘em again.

So, after you contact the fine folks at Chamberlin to create an emergency plan and secure priority service for your urgent roofing and waterproofing needs, here are some simple tips to help you weather any potential storms:

Remove debris from your roof. Airborne objects can be worse than D-Day during a hurricane.
Don’t let water stand on your roof! Severe ponding can lead to a total roof collapse, so check and clean all drains and scuppers. The same goes for gutters and downspouts. You talk about easy and important!
In high winds, perimeter sheet metal is the first to go if it is not properly secured, so double check it.
Check your HVAC equipment, too. Doors, panels and loose parts will skip like river stones across your roof creating some serious damage if they are not secured.
Trash cans, benches, urns and the like can blow through a building like a freight train, so secure them or store them away before a hurricane or high wind event.

As they say, “an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.” I say be educated and prepared so you can be cool-headed if Mother Nature strikes.

Until next time, I’ll be seeing you around.

1-Aug-11 2:00 PM

The Impact of Building Envelope Commissioning

Hillary Dye - noemail@chamberlinltd.com — Mon, 01 Aug 2011 15:15:00 GMT

By: Bill Coltzer, Jr., AIA

President, Zero/Six Consulting, LLC

If you’ve participated in the construction of high performance buildings, you’re probably familiar with the term “commissioning,” although the term has an ever growing range of meanings. In short, commissioning verifies building systems actually perform as they are designed and engineered. Historically, commissioning has focused on mechanical, electrical and IT systems; however, it’s becoming more common to also include the exterior building envelope particularly in the healthcare and research arenas. Unfortunately, no one really knows how to scope the work for the envelope portion of the commissioning process. The envelope is often added as a single line item to a lengthy commissioning specification. One can imagine the variety of responses “commission the exterior envelope” garners from proposers. As an industry, we have the opportunity to influence the development of envelope commissioning protocol.

Multiple reasons exist for the increased popularity of envelope commissioning, but two factors stand out above all others. First is the vast amount of litigation related to water infiltration. This immense market is comprised largely of new buildings less than five years old. In fact, projects that have yet to achieve final completion and are suffering moisture infiltration comprise a large portion of the work at Zero/Six. Second, the demands on mechanical systems for efficiency and air quality control continue to rise. The building envelope is the ultimate building plenum (duct). The ability of sub systems within the envelope to perform is closely related to the tightness of the building envelope.

Develop the Intent

Commissioning is as much a design verification process as a quality assurance process. In traditional MEP/IT commissioning, the commissioning agent is placed on the project team very early to provide input during design. This is to ensure that if a facility is constructed as shown in the construction documents, it will perform as specified. It is equally important that the envelope commissioning begins early along with MEP/IT. Think about it. If a pump, switch or air handler does not perform, it can be replaced; however, if a flashing is left out, portions of the cladding may have to be removed to install it. Then consider the same flashing might have been left out at every window of an occupied high rise structure and now you have a remedial project that will require significant time and funding. One of the goals of envelope commissioning in the design phase is to address details before they become issues.

Because building architecture varies from project to project, mock ups of the project specific conditions are invaluable. Although cladding systems may be repeated among various projects, the relationship to adjacent systems is always changing. In these interfaces lie unlimited new scenarios needing to be fully considered and addressed. With the evolution of Building Information Modeling (BIM), many of these mock ups can be generated inexpensively on a virtual platform, although for testing purposes, there is no substitute for a full size working mock up.

Inspect the Product

Once construction documents convey intent, the next step is a quality control (QC) program executed by persons who understand how the various systems will interface. The success of the QC program is largely dependent on the ability of the inspector to safely access hard to reach areas regularly. As part of the QC program, deficient work is logged as it is observed and tracked to resolution. In other words, no punch list surprises at the substantial completion date.

Test the Collaborative Effort

Because testing verifies design as well as construction, it should be done as early in the process as practical so repetitive deficiencies can be corrected prior to a full blown remediation effort. In other words, if a window is being improperly installed, catch it with testing at 10 percent completion, not 100 percent. Testing commonly included in envelope commissioning includes:

Flood testing of below-grade areas and waterproofed terraces
Pull testing of sealant joints
Water infiltration testing of windows per ASTM E1105
Roof Uplift Testing per ASTM E907
Thermal imaging envelopecomponents

Count the Cost

While commissioning the exterior building envelope is an additional line item in the project estimate, it rarely adds to the bottom line of the total project cost. More often, it safeguards project budgets and deadlines. Projects that do not address envelope issues up front often end up addressing them near substantial completion due to failed testing. The cost associated with recovery programs are almost always more than the cost associated with an envelope commissioning program, sometimes substantially more. Unfortunately, the following case study is not unique:

A high rise project had over 1600 high performance, prefabricated punched windows in pre-cast concrete openings. In an effort to provide better quality control of the window units, the contractor elected to fabricate these units off site in a shop environment. The project team included a premier architect, a first class construction team, a first class product and the world’s easiest window installation detail. No problem, right? Wrong! Somewhere between the shop and the project site, the units were ever so slightly damaged resulting in water infiltration during rain events. We suspect the damage was related to shipping and crating due to the consistent nature of the defect, but it really does not matter. (Mind you, the units were laboratory tested in the city where manufactured.) A commissioning program would have tested these installed windows early and established a recovery plan which would have prevented the post mortem removal of 1600 windows delaying occupancy for three months. The process of testing would have been pennies compared to the removal of installed windows.

In closing, the “whole building” commissioning process – including the envelope -- is an invaluable tool for the entire project team. Potential performance issues can be identified and addressed during design thus defusing construction defect claims where mediation finds everyone writing checks. Additionally, commissioning provides well documented building performance at building delivery preventing maintenance issues from becoming design or construction claims. Commissioning is a vehicle that allows you to simultaneously protect your firm while increasing client satisfaction.

Develop the Intent + Inspect the Product + Test the Collaborative Effort

With a background in both construction and architecture, Bill formed Zero/Six Consulting in 2003 with the goal of improving technical quality from all disciplines regarding exterior envelope. The firm provides peer reviews, forensic investigations, quality control inspections and expert testimony. In 2010, the firm’s existing testing department formed Z6 Commissioning, LLC – a certified HUB entity. Bill can be reached at 409-740-0090 or info@z6consulting.com.

1-Aug-11 10:15 AM

Encore for Oncor's Building Envelope Renovation

Hillary Dye - noemail@chamberlinltd.com — Mon, 01 Aug 2011 14:00:00 GMT

The 1616 Woodall Rodgers complex near Victory Park in Dallas is made up of two eight story towers.

The south tower of the building was constructed in 1978, and in 1992 the adjoining north tower was built. The campus has more than 260,000 square feet of office space, an atrium lobby, a data processing center, two levels of underground parking, an employee fitness center and a cafeteria.

In 2004 the building became vacant and remained so until 2009 when Oncor, a power line operator, bought the property with plans to make it their headquarters by 2011.

Chamberlin Roofing and Waterproofing was hired by General Contractor, JE Dunn, as the single source contractor for both the roofing and waterproofing repairs on the building before Oncor moved in. The scope of work included removing and replacing the roofs on both building towers as well as a complete restoration of the exterior façade.

Tight Working Conditions:

The total roof area on the property is 36,500 sq. ft. and consists of several elevations with multiple permanently mounted mechanical units on top. Due to the particular placement of the mechanical units, removing and replacing the roof system under each was a challenge because of the tight two foot vertical clearing between the units and the roof deck.

To replace the roof around and under the mechanical units, Chamberlin crews had to physically crawl underneath the units and remove the roof in sections by hand. This space limitation also restricted the type of tools that could be used for the removal process; a process that was ultimately limited to small hand tools such as knives, grinders and Sawzalls.

After removal was complete, Chamberlin had an equally challenging task of installing the new roof membrane under the mechanical units. The limited space under each unit would not allow for the use of a torch applied process (the process used on the main roof assembly), so a different compatible system was implemented. The system consisted of a cold-applied process that could be installed by hand underneath each unit and seamlessly tie into the surrounding sections of roof. The modified roofing membrane was rolled out underneath each of the mechanical units with adhesive, and then the seams were heat welded using a handheld leister. This was a tough task but one that was successfully completed by the Chamberlin team and resulted in a leak-free installation.

Planter Excavation and Waterproofing:

The building had been unoccupied and unmaintained for over five years, so several areas suffered from general disrepair including the planters surrounding the complex, which developed severe and extensive leaks. Chamberlin crews excavated the soil, trees and other existing vegetation in progress.jpgfrom the six-feet-deep planters. Workers had to physically climb into the planters to shovel the dirt out by hand. While some crew members were manually pulling up the trees, others were loading the soil and gravel into wheelbarrows and moving it to a holding area where it was sorted for re-use. All six planters were cleared out and waterproofed with drainage board and root barrier to prohibit the roots of the new trees from penetrating the waterproofing and causing future leaks.

Chamberlin remediated the rest of the building by cutting out and re-caulking the joint sealants, cleaning the precast concrete and granite panels and patching panels.

Sloped Sidewalks:

The concrete sidewalks surrounding the southwest side of the building were cracked and severely sloped toward the building. With the sidewalks in their current condition, water flowed directly into the building even during the slightest of rain storms. To level out the slopes and decrease the likelihood of water entering the building, Chamberlin re-leveled the existing sidewalks using Tremco Vulkem 360 and 350-351.

First, Vulkem 360 was poured onto the slopes in the sidewalk. This product is a water-based coating that is used for high-fill applications or sloping. When the product is poured, it self-levels and cures for 24 hours. Vulkem 350-351 was poured on top of the 360 as the final step of the waterproofing and re-leveling process. Once it was all said and done, the sidewalks were sloped away from the building toward the planters and aesthetically matched the surrounding walkways.

Roofing System Solutions:

All roofs must slope to shed condensation. The Oncor roof plan was to be a typical one that sloped in two different directions toward the drains. But due to the elevation of the specified roof and insulation assembly, the stairway access to the roof as well as the height of the existing mechanical units, it quickly became apparent that a typical slope would not work. If a traditional system was installed, it would have covered up the roof access point as well as create ponding and poor drainage for the many mechanical units.

To solve this issue, Chamberlin suggested utilizing a directional tapered system with multiple angled slopes built into the roof. This directional approach would meet the contours of the roof, avoid covering the only roof access point and facilitate proper drainage around the mechanical units.

Once the assembly was designed, it was reviewed and approved by both the architect as well as the manufacturer to ensure the integrity of the assembly for warranty. This new design helped the owner save money by foregoing the task of redesigning new roof access doors and raising fully operational mechanical equipment.

Additionally, the specifications for the roof changed just prior to project commencement because the building became Factory Mutual (FM) insured. This meant the new roof assembly had to follow the criteria required to meet a FM I-90 wind uplift pressure rating. With this new condition in mind, Chamberlin revised the process in which the roof system was to be installed. The change required the roofing adhesive meet higher roof uplift standards by decreasing the space between the adhesive beads in order to strengthen the bond of the roof assembly. As always, Chamberlin rose to the occasion and quickly implemented the change with no affect on their ability to get the job done.

1-Aug-11 9:00 AM

Certification of Facade Access Supports for Powered Platforms and Lifelines

Hillary Dye - noemail@chamberlinltd.com — Fri, 29 Apr 2011 16:00:00 GMT

By: Alfredo E. Bustamante, PE, CDT and Gary R. Searer, PE, SE with Wiss, Janney, Elstner Associates, Inc.

Building owners often need to access the exterior facade of their buildings, whether for maintenance, window washing, repairs, or construction. The most common means of accessing the facade of tall buildings is the use of powered platforms or scaffolds, which can be either building- or contractor-supplied. The purpose of this article is to present a general overview of inspection and testing requirements to provide certification of building-supplied components and to discuss building owner responsibilities.

Permanent supports for building access typically consist of anchorages and davits. Anchorages are points of attachment that are used to anchor lifelines or tie-backs (pictured left) for certain types of facade access equipment. Davits (pictured right) are devices, typically used singly or in pairs, for suspending powered platforms on a building for the purposes of performing exterior maintenance or construction activities.

Applicable Standards

The only universally applicable standards for testing and inspection of facade access support systems are provided by OSHA; however, OSHA requirements are often unclear and sometimes conflict with one another. To make matters more complicated, OSHA standards vary depending on the type of work being performed. For example, scaffolds used for building maintenance have different requirements than scaffolds used for construction.

For building maintenance activities, such as window cleaning, re-glazing, and caulking, OSHA 29 CFR 1910.66 and 1910.28 apply. For construction activities the requirements of OSHA 1926 Subpart ‘L’ apply. The meaning of “construction” is not well-defined in the OSHA standards, but the general industry consensus is that anything beyond normal window cleaning, glazing, and caulking would qualify and trigger OSHA 1926 Subpart ‘L’, including painting, installing a sign or stringing holiday lights. Since facade access is achieved by either building-supplied or contractor-supplied equipment, different requirements can apply to the contractor and the owner.

In this context, applicable structural requirements include the provision that davits, davit bases and equipment tie-back anchors be able to support four times the rated load of the attached motor or hoist for maintenance activities and four and one-half times the rated hoist load for construction activities. Regardless of the type of work being performed, fall arrest anchorages must be able to sustain a 5,000 pound static load for each attached lifeline.

Summary of Testing and Inspection Requirements

OSHA requires that facade access installations be both tested and inspected, as summarized below.

Testing Requirements

Testing requirements for new installations are provided in OSHA 1910.66(g)(1):

Installations and alterations. All completed building maintenance equipment installations shall be inspected and tested in the field before being placed in initial service to determine that all parts of the installation conform to applicable requirements of this standard, and that all safety and operating equipment is functioning as required. A similar inspection and test shall be made following any major alteration to an existing installation…

Nominally, proof load testing to verify that an installation meets the capacity requirements of OSHA is only required for initial certification of the installation or after any major alteration. For new installations, the proof load testing must be performed prior to putting the installation into service. For installations that are not new but that have never been adequately tested, proof load testing is usually the best method of ensuring that the installation meets the minimum capacity requirements.

Once the capacity of the installation has been confirmed, certification can be provided to the building owner. After that, the system is only required to be visually inspected once a year to verify that elements have not been damaged and are being adequately maintained. However, if damage and/or deterioration are suspected (e.g., due to years of exposure and use or due to outward signs of degradation), or if the owner of a building lacks documentation that the building’s equipment has the required capacity (e.g., a building without proper documentation is purchased), load testing is a valuable tool that can be used to verify that the equipment has the minimum capacity required by OSHA.

Inspection Requirements

Annual Inspection: OSHA 1910.66(g)(2)(i) and (ii) require that building supporting structures and all parts of the equipment be inspected by a competent person at intervals not exceeding 12 months.

Maintenance Inspection:OSHA 1910.66(g)(3)(i) requires that maintenance inspections be performed every 30 days or prior to each work cycle if the work cycle is less than 30 days.

Testing Specifics

Testing is usually the best method of verifying the capacity of an existing installation that is at least partially obscured by roofing such as most davit bases and anchorages. Although the capacities of exposed elements, like davits and attachment devices, often can be determined through analytical methods, even in such instances, verification via load testing is often the best approach. This is especially true for installations with materials whose properties are not documented.

To satisfy the testing requirements of OSHA and verify the actual capacity of facade access support elements, the test load must equal or exceed the minimum capacity required by OSHA. Testing to a lesser load will only verify the ability to carry that lesser load. The proof test load applied to a platform support element (e.g., davit or davit base) should be equivalent to the rated load of the supported hoist multiplied by the appropriate load factor. The proof test load for anchorages should be 5,000 lbs times the number of lines that are allowed to be attached (usually one). Anchorage testing should verify adequate strength in all directions for which use is anticipated.

To the extent possible, we recommend that every permanent component of a building’s facade access support system be proof load tested before providing a written certification to the building owner. If access or other constraints prevent testing of certain elements, we recommend exposing the attachment of those installations to the building and verifying the capacity analytically.

There appears to be some confusion in the industry regarding the appropriate level of testing. Testing of facade access support system components to a maximum of one-half the OSHA required capacity is recommended by California OSHA and the International Window Cleaning Association (IWCA). Unfortunately, such testing does not verify compliance with minimum OSHA standards. Since OSHA (including California OSHA) requires building owners to assure users of their equipment that it meets minimum OSHA safety requirements, half load testing does not give owners the information they need. Testing an installation to half of the required strength only proves that the installation is at least half as strong as it needs to be.

On occasion, we have found that older proprietary roof anchor elements are not designed to remain elastic when subjected to the loads required by OSHA. These elements are problematic because proper in-field load testing would likely cause damage. Since load testing cannot be used to certify such elements, more costly methods such as exposure and analysis must be used to determine capacity.

Building Owner Responsibilities

OSHA 1910.66(c)(3) requires that building owners of all installations, both new and existing, inform the user of the facade access support system in writing that the installation has been inspected, tested, and maintained in compliance with OSHA’s testing, inspection, and maintenance requirements. If a system was installed or was modified since July 23, 1990, OSHA 1910.66(c)(1 and 2) require the owner to inform the user that the system meets all of OSHA’s requirements relating to minimum strength as well as the load test requirements, including verification that the installation has the minimum required capacity by a professional engineer.

Inspection requirements germane to the building owner mandate that the davits, davit bases, fall protection anchorages and related building elements be inspected by a competent person every 12 months.

OSHA requires daily and start-up inspections (maintenance inspections) of the equipment and record results of these inspections in the daily log book. Building owners are required to maintain documentation of the maintenance inspections, as indicated by OSHA 1910.66(g)(3)ii:

The building owner shall keep a certification record of each inspection and test performed under paragraph (g)(3)(i) of this section. The certification record shall include the date of the inspection and test, the signature of the person who performed the inspection and/or test, and an identifier for the platform installation which was inspected. The certification record shall be kept readily available for review by the Assistant Secretary of Labor or the Assistant Secretary's representative and by the employer.

Maintenance inspections performed by a competent person are required at monthly intervals, but OSHA has previously indicated that monthly inspection can be reduced to coincide with the start of each work cycle when the cycle is longer than 30 days. OSHA defines a competent person as a person who, because of training and experience, is capable of identifying hazardous or dangerous conditions in powered platform installations and of training employees to identify such conditions. The competent person can either be a building owner employee, the contractor, or an outside firm. The building owner is obligated to keep a record of such inspections.

Conclusions

OSHA requirements are often unclear; nevertheless, owners are required to comply with the requirements or risk fines and penalties. The authors hope that the brief overview presented above helps explain some of the pertinent requirements with which building owners must comply.

Authors

Alfredo E. Bustamante, PE, CDT is a Senior Associate with the Houston office of Wiss, Janney, Elstner Associates, Inc. He has been involved with the evaluation and testing of facade access support systems, non-destructive testing of concrete structures, steel/masonry computer modeling and analysis, exterior wall cladding repair, and investigation of parking structures. Bustamante is a member of the American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC). He can be contacted via e-mail at abustamante@wje.com.

Gary R. Searer, PE, SE, is an Associate Principal and Unit Manager of the Los Angeles unit of Wiss, Janney, Elstner Associates, Inc. He has been involved with the assessment, repair, and maintenance of parking structures, civil structures, and office buildings, as well as facade access systems for the past 17 years. Mr. Searer can be contacted via email at gsearer@wje.com.

29-Apr-11 11:00 AM

Sustainably Preserving the Past - City of Houston Central Permitting Center

Hillary Dye - noemail@chamberlinltd.com — Fri, 29 Apr 2011 14:00:00 GMT

Restoring and reusing an existing building is an exemplary act of sustainability in the built environment. It reduces construction waste and sometimes can be extremely cost effective. For the City of Houston, it made economic and environmental sense when they chose to renovate an 86-year-old former rice warehouse near downtown to consolidate their Administration and Regulatory Affairs (ARA) and Public Works and Engineering (PWE) permitting operations under one roof. This new Central Permitting Center will also house the city’s Green Building Resource Center, an extension of PWE that shares sustainable energy saving strategies with the public.

Studio RED Architects, Haynes Whaley Associates Structural Engineers and Manhattan Construction Company were chosen as the project team to lead the renovation. As the waterproofing and masonry restoration subcontractor to Manhattan, Chamberlin performed new construction and remediation work to restore the 187,000 sq. ft. building.

The masonry restoration scope of work included brick, clay tile and CMU replacement and exterior building cleaning and coating. Chamberlin removed paint, graffiti and mastic to expose the original red brick in several locations. To protect the building from further vandalism, an anti-graffiti sealer was applied to the lower exterior levels with traditional waterproof coatings on upper elevations.

To provide structural reinforcement Chamberlin installed approximately 625 lineal feet of epoxy injection to strengthen cracks in load bearing basement walls. The team also replaced damaged concrete, repaired concrete columns, cleaned and sealed structural metal and repaired concrete window head beams.

“The window head beam repairs were challenging because of the unforeseen conditions that became apparent during the demolition phase,” said Chamberlin Senior Project Manager, Jonathan Winkles. “We were also very safety conscious because large pieces of concrete could potentially fall when removed, so we created a failsafe method of containing debris.”

To overcome the safety challenges of removing large pieces of concrete from window head beams, the Chamberlin safety department constructed a rolling scaffold platform for craftsmen on the interior of the building to correspond with their counterparts working from the exterior on swing stages. The platforms were tied off to structural columns and secured with weights so Chamberlin team members could safely remove and replace overhead concrete around the windows.

“It was a real team effort,” said Chamberlin Superintendent, Mike Hicks. “Each window restoration required a team of two people – one working on an exterior swing stage and the other providing support from the interior of the building.” Plywood was strategically placed between the swing stage and window to further protect other tradesmen below from possible loose concrete.

Because of its deterioration, Chamberlin removed approximately 200% more concrete around the windows than initially estimated. “That is the nature of restoration projects,” said Winkles, “you sometimes don’t know the full extent of work required until you start digging in, so it becomes important to be able to provide solutions on the spot for existing conditions.”

A 3,750 sq. ft. curtainwall construction addition was built on to the existing structure as a public entry into the permitting center along with new fire exit stair towers on the east and north sides of the building. Chamberlin installed terrazzo-filled expansion joint assemblies on the first floor to connect the two buildings. When it came time to install the interior two and one-half inch joint, though, Chamberlin discovered the existing floor level was not exactly flush with the new one. Because of its unevenness, the existing floor height difference ranged from one-quarter inch to over two inches in some areas. To remedy the difference, Chamberlin made a 12 gauge steel plate with a two inch riser, which was slowly filled with concrete to square off and build up the existing floor. Once both surfaces were uniform, Chamberlin installed the joint, which was filled with terrazzo to seamlessly match the floor’s new finish.

“This building was built to last,” said Winkles, “You don’t see these types of construction means and methods used anymore, so it provided a history lesson of sorts during its restoration. For example, exterior walls are three bricks wide, rebar is squared and twisted and structural concrete columns are cone-shaped at the top.”

Though the building needed a little more TLC than expected, all teams worked together to find the best possible solutions. The interior of the building was largely left in its original state for aesthetic value. Structural repairs were made where necessary, but brick walls, concrete columns and ceilings were left exposed providing a raw, historic look.

The project is seeking LEED Silver status, which fulfills the City of Houston’s Green Building Resolution target for all new construction and renovated buildings owned by the city that are over 10,000 sq. ft.

As architect, Pete Ed Garrett of Studio RED Architects, wrote in his recent article in the Houston Business Journal, “… in essence, recycling buildings through renovation is one of the most sustainable things we can do... the added bonus is that Houston can demonstrate that it cares about its buildings, their stories and its soul.”

29-Apr-11 9:00 AM

Continutiy of the Weathered Exterior Envelope- Can it be Realistically Achieved?

Mitzi Roadcap - noemail@chamberlinltd.com — Mon, 17 Jan 2011 17:00:00 GMT

By: Mitzi Roadcap

Senior Consultant, Curtainwall Design & Consulting, Inc.

The majority of those in the construction industry have sat through at least one presentation or read at least one article that discusses the issue of how to build a more energy efficient building; how to manage condensation and water infiltration; how to enhance thermal performance of the exterior envelope without creating condensation issues; or how to build “green buildings.” One important method utilized in achieving enhanced building performance is to provide continuity between the systems that comprise the weathered exterior envelope.

The weathered exterior envelope includes all of the assemblies that are used on the exterior of a building’s structure to isolate the interior from the exterior. This includes the roof assembly, the exterior wall assembly and the below-grade assembly whether it is a waterproofing or dampproofing system. Beyond aesthetics, the sole purpose of each of these assemblies is to protect the building’s structural members, interior finishes and the conditioned interior space from the detrimental effects of the exterior environment. The assemblies must control air infiltration and exfiltration, control moisture migration in both liquid and vapor form, provide thermal isolation between the conditioned interior space and the exterior climate and use individual components that will not adversely affect the indoor air quality or have a detrimental affect on the environment. They must also accommodate all imposed structural movements transferred into the systems from the building’s structure in addition to their individual component thermal movements, fabrication and construction tolerances from adjacent systems as well as individual component tolerances within the assembly, imposed deadload and windload forces, and (depending upon the building’s end use and location) seismic, impact and blast loads.

Failure to fully design the transition between the exterior envelope assemblies prior to field installation quite often leads to improperly installed materials or incompatible materials coming into direct contact with one another leading to failure of one or both of the components. This in turn leads to water infiltration issues on the interior, uncontrolled air flow and decreased thermal performance of the exterior envelope. The type of materials used in each assembly will affect the means and methods used to complete the transition as well as the installation sequencing, so the design of the assembly transitions should be project specific based upon the individual products used in the application.

For the sake of brevity, assume that the design team consisting of the architect, the structural engineer, and their assorted consultants have done their job in the initial design stages so that the exterior envelope systems depicted within the architectural drawings and specified in the project documents meet the overall building performance requirements for air, water, thermal and structural integrity. Let’s also assume they meet the building and energy code requirements and will complement and enhance the HVAC system design to reduce energy costs. Obviously, if issues are discovered with the document details or specified products, then they should be brought to the attention of the design team as soon as possible for a quick resolution.

If we acknowledge that providing continuity between the exterior envelope assemblies is good construction practice and that it will improve the overall performance of the building, then the question becomes, “How do we realistically achieve this continuity?” The short answer is a massive coordination effort between all involved trades and members of the design team ending with working details. The details should clearly define and depict all materials used in the transition and in the proper installation sequence.

A general checklist for the process would be:

1- Choose the individual components of each exterior envelope assembly that is to be used on the project. Once the manufacturer and the material are chosen then it can be determined how the membranes will be married together to achieve continuity.

2- Define all of the different conditions that exist on the project so a detail can be generated for each condition. Pay particular attention to changes in plane where a low roof parapet terminates into the face of a return exterior wall; inside and outside corners; plaza deck waterproofing and roof membrane transitions into the sill of an exterior wall; and glazed curtain wall parapets. Keep in mind that the water-resistant barrier on the roof must marry into the water-resistant barrier of the opaque exterior wall which must marry into the water-resistant barrier of the below-grade waterproofing or dampproofing to achieve continuity. The laps of the various barriers must be in a shingle type fashion in the direction of drainage, starting with the roof over the exterior wall and the exterior wall over the below-grade. Additionally, an air and water tight weathered surface compatible with the weather sealant should be provided adjacent to the glazed fenestration systems for the primary weather seal. The adjacent water-resistant barrier must integrate with the weathered surface to provide the continuity between the exterior wall assemblies.

3- It is important that all team members responsible for the installation of the water-resistant barrier at the exterior opaque wall, roof, below-grade system and plaza decks (if applicable) should have a general understanding of how each of the exterior wall components will function. Where is the water-resistant barrier located for each system? Is the exterior wall system a cavity wall, a barrier wall or a wall with a hidden drainage plane? How does the system drain accumulated water? Where is the primary weather seal located? These are just a few of the questions that need to be addressed.

4- Termination of the water-resistant barrier behind opaque exterior wall elements at openings is a special condition which should be addressed once the type of glazed fenestration wall is established. This is particularly important when the opening is adjacent to a wet cavity wall construction as both water and air in the cavity wall must be isolated from and prevented from entering the opening.

5- Discuss installation schedules of the various exterior envelope systems so the sequencing of the materials involved in developing the transition details can be properly installed in the correct manner. This may require some tweaking of the installation schedule, so be flexible.

6- All involved parties sit down together and work through each of the details so that the assembly transitions work for all scopes.

So the answer to the question, “Can we realistically achieve continuity of the exterior weathered envelope,” is, yes, we can as long as all involved parties are willing to work together to achieve the final goal. While each individual element used in the exterior envelope assembly may be provided and installed by a different party, all of the elements must work together as a whole at the end of the day to produce an exterior weathered envelope that will provide the owner with successful long-term performance. Upfront cooperation between the interested parties prior to construction and follow through during construction definitely contributes to the success of achieving this goal.

Ms. Roadcap started in the construction industry in 1980 and has been with CDC, Inc. since 1982, starting in the Production/Engineering Department and moving into the Consulting Department in 1997. She is a Senior Consultant and has worked on low-rise to monumental high-rise projects across the United States, the Pacific Rim and Europe. Her primary responsibilities include working with the Design Team on new construction projects from the Schematic Design through the Construction Administration phase. Her particular expertise is focused on the exterior wall elements which include both fenestration systems and opaque wall systems. She can be reached at 972-437-4200 or email to mroadcap@cdc-usa.com.

17-Jan-11 11:00 AM

Employee Profile

Hillary Dye - noemail@chamberlinltd.com — Mon, 17 Jan 2011 17:00:00 GMT

Paul R. Hay

Superintendent – Waterproofing & Caulking

Austin, TX

“Paul is as calm and cool as the center seed of a cucumber,” describes Waterproofing Senior Project Manager, Pat Halaszyn, “that’s why Chamberlin employees and clients alike enjoy working with him.” As a waterproofing superintendent, we were curious to know how Paul handles the occasional twists and turns of overseeing large waterproofing projects throughout central and south Texas. Here’s a bit more about the guy who takes it all in stride.

A Day In the Life:

The day starts at about 5:30 a.m. for Paul with a quick check of the weather since it plays an important role in the installation of waterproofing material. “After that, there really is no ‘typical’ day,” Paul says. With constantly changing manpower needs, job site conditions and scheduling issues, the day can change from hour to hour. “Simultaneously supervising multiple projects can be challenging, demanding and rewarding at the same time.”

Experience:

“I worked in a lot of different fields before joining Chamberlin 10 years ago,” Paul remembers. He did everything from fast food management to retail inventory and even operating a taxi service. In March of 2001, Paul started his career at Chamberlin as a laborer. Over a period of time, with a combination of hard work and “being in the right place at the right time,” Paul says, he was promoted to foreman then superintendent.

Outlook:

Paul articulates his outlook on customer service, safety, quality and productivity as such:

“Each of these affects the other. If we are not productive, providing quality work in a safe manner, our customer service will inevitably suffer. Customer service is the lifeblood of repeat business. Safety is the cornerstone of our employees’ health and well-being, and productivity is useless without a quality installation.”

Outside the Office:

Paul enjoys cooking and boasts a Veal Piccata specialty with a white wine and lemon caper sauce. Just one question: when can we come over for dinner? He also likes spending time with his wife and kids and taking part in his other hobbies that include fishing, woodworking and watching movies.

We asked Paul to choose from this list of random items to help us learn a little more about him:

Paul’s Picks:

Freshly Squeezed or Concentrate

Rolling Stones or Flintstones

Newspaper or Internet

Mickey or Mighty (Mouse)

Manual or Automatic

17-Jan-11 11:00 AM

Protection From Above: ORU City Plex Towers Roof Replacement

Monica Keels - noemail@chamberlinltd.com — Fri, 22 Oct 2010 15:00:00 GMT

Oral Roberts University (ORU) is a charismatic Christian university founded by evangelist, Oral Roberts, in 1963. Based in Tulsa, Oklahoma, the university has an enrollment of over 3,500 students and offers more than 65 undergraduate programs.

In 1981, Oral Roberts developed several buildings just south of ORU’s main campus to make up the City of Faith Medical and Research Center. The campus consists of three buildings: a 60 story clinic, a 30 story hospital and a 20 story research center. In 1989 the City of Faith Medical and Research Center closed because of financial problems and lack of demand for medical services. Today, the facility is known as CityPlex Towers. It is owned by Oral Roberts University and is now mostly leased as commercial and medical office space.

In August of 2008, as part of a complete renovation project, Chamberlin was hired by Oral Roberts University to replace the roofs on the CityPlex Towers. The scope of work included the three tower roofs, a large base building roof and five canopies.

City on a Hill

The design of the 2.2 million square foot complex is quite unique. Though they are not located in Tulsa’s central business district, the buildings are an architectural landmark that boasts the second tallest building in Tulsa’s skyline. Each building is triangular in shape with a golden facade and is joined together at the fifth floor by a large base structure. The base building is a spacious complex with three auditoriums, a fitness center, cafeteria, food court, convenience store and catering services among other amenities. The 60 story tower, which is the tallest of the three, is not only used for medical and office space but it also houses high power radio antennas on the roof. These antennas broadcast a local radio station and are active 90 percent of the time.

Toils and Snares

Like most renovation projects there were a few construction challenges. These challenges included multiple roof installations on varying high rise levels, inclement weather and the protection of personnel from potentially harmful radio frequencies.

Chamberlin’s scope on ORU was to install a TPO adhered roofing system on all the roofs as well as canopies. One of the biggest challenges was hoisting and transporting roofing materials. With multiple crews and elevators that were not accessible, the only option for the team seemed to be hand carrying materials through occupied offices up to the appropriate roof levels. After much consideration, Chamberlin instead chose to utilize a helicopter service to deliver materials to the roofs, which saved the team precious time on the project.

High wind conditions and harsh winter weather occurring during the peak time of the project made it extremely difficult to keep the job running on schedule.At any given time, the wind could be two to three times greater on any roof level than on the ground, so Chamberlin crews had to be extremely careful to secure all materials and equipment even as they were performing the daily roof installation.

The FM broadcast radio station antennas located on the roof of the 60 story tower emit high level radio frequency radiation. To protect personnel, Radio Frequency Clothing was required to be worn at all times by Chamberlin roofers and supervisors who worked on this particular roof. These special suits prevented Chamberlin workers from being exposed to potentially harmful radio waves while they installed the TPO roofing. Additionally, Site Superintendent, Darrell Hordern, developed a schedule for the workers which kept track of the amount of time each person spent on top the roof next to the radio antennas.

Blessed Assurance

When work wrapped up on Oral Roberts University’s CityPlex Towers in the summer of 2010, Chamberlin had successfully completed the $2,000,000 project in their given time frame, productively and accident free. The owners are now working to market and lease available space in Oklahoma’s largest office center with much success.

22-Oct-10 10:00 AM

Air Infiltration and Water Penetration Testing of Glazing Systems

Richard Gish - noemail@chamberlinltd.com — Fri, 22 Oct 2010 15:00:00 GMT

By: Richard J. “Jeff” Gish, P.E.

Senior Associate, Terracon Consultants, Inc.

In recent years, the waterproofing consulting industry has witnessed an increasing demand for air infiltration and water penetration testing of the building envelope and glazing systems. This article will focus on field testing of installed fenestrations, storefront and curtain walls systems, and sloped glazing systems. Testing is generally done to document performance of buildings that are under construction or being renovated, but it can also be performed on existing buildings, in a diagnostic or forensic capacity, to identify improper installation, inadequate performance or material defects in the installed systems. As of late, several factors have combined to create an increased demand for testing services:

Testing requirements are now included in most specifications and are generally required as a means of quality assurance during construction to document that the assemblies (and their integration into the barrier system) are performing to the appropriate specifications.
Glazing systems are constantly evolving leading to new technologies and building techniques that make them increasingly air and watertight.
Increased focus on green building (LEED^®, energy efficiency, carbon footprint) demands that the systems perform to higher standards and under tighter tolerances than their predecessors.
The public has become aware of the potential negative impact of water infiltration on building materials (mold, reduced indoor air quality, structural decay).
Energy costs are expected to increase in the future. Leaky, inefficient systems increase a building’s operating cost making owners and property managers more focused on constructing (and documenting) an air and watertight building envelope.
In some cases, deficiencies in the design and/or installation of glazing systems result in significant damage and costly insurance claims or litigation. In these cases the source, origin and pathways of the water infiltration must be documented in order to determine the cause(s) of damage and the responsible parties.

TESTING SPECIFICATIONS

The test methods in common use today are somewhat interrelated and are published by two organizations: American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) International and the American Architectural Manufacturers Association (AAMA). These organizations reference laboratory tests (to establish design performance) and field tests (to document installed performance). Some AAMA documents reference ASTM test methods but with a slightly different procedure or with additional requirements. The test procedures are also relatively new. These factors can combine to create some degree of confusion for the owners, architects, design professionals and contractors involved in the project.

Not surprisingly, the first challenge that testing consultants often face is getting everyone involved in the project “on the same page” from a testing perspective. The testing consultant will review the available specifications, drawings, submittals and manufacturer’s literature in order to identify the type, frequency, number and schedule of tests, and the test pressures and allowable leakage rates for the products to be tested. Some specifications are very well written and provide all of the above data with no ambiguity. However, many specifications are ambiguous, insufficient in scope, poorly written or absent of the data required for testing. Some of the common challenges the testing consultant faces when developing a testing proposal include:

The designated test pressures and/or allowable air leakage rates are not in agreement between the laboratory tests (performed before the project started, usually for the manufacturer) and the field tests to be performed after installation.
The designated test pressures and/or allowable air leakage volumes for field testing are not consistent with the manufacturer’s published data.
The project documents contain no direction as to the method of specimen selection and/or the minimum size of each test specimen.
The project documents contain no direction as to the testing schedule (stage of installation at which to test – all tests at the end of the installation, test at 10%, 35% and 70% completion, test the first 30 linear feet of system installed, etc.) or the number of specimens to test for each test event.
The percentage of the area to be tested is not consistent with accepted standards. On a recent small curtain wall retrofit project the architect used a testing specification from a previous large office building. As a result, the specifications required that the consultant test nearly 90% of the total installed curtain wall.

FIELD ACTIVITIES

Once armed with a detailed and appropriate scope of testing, the consultant employs a variety of technology and equipment to perform air infiltration and water penetration testing. These test procedures range from use of a calibrated hand-held spray nozzle (AAMA 501.2) to large-scale testing using a vacuum chamber assembly and calibrated spray rack to simulate a wind-driven rain on a building under cyclic pressure (common tests include ASTM E783, ASTM E1105, AAMA 502 and 503).

The vacuum assemblies, instrumentation, spray racks and wands used in these test procedures are typically commercial systems that have been custom-manufactured specifically for testing. However, some consultants use “pieced-together” or “home-built” systems made from parts available at your local home improvement store. Regardless of the type or manufacturer of the test equipment, ASTM and AAMA require calibration of the equipment at six month intervals.

Hand-Held Testing

Prior to testing, the consultant will perform a visual observation of the test specimens and document any notable features or defects in the specimen. For a hand-held spray test (AAMA 501.2), the exterior of the specimen is sprayed with water at a given pressure and volume, and the interior of the specimen is visually observed for water infiltration. Generally speaking, if water leakage occurs, the specimen fails the test, at which point the consultant may confer with the installation contractor and project team to determine possible causes of failure and appropriate corrective actions.

Chamber Testing

In the more stringent chamber tests, pressure chambers are fitted to the interior or exterior face of the test specimen to develop a pressure differential across the specimen. The consultant will create a negative pressure differential on the interior of the specimen and document the air infiltration rate through the test specimen. If the actual rate is higher than the allowable rate, the specimen fails the test and corrective action is required.

Water penetration testing is performed after the air test; in some cases air infiltration testing is not specified so the water test is the only test required. Pressure chambers are fitted to the interior or exterior face of the building envelope aroundthe test specimen as opposed to being fitted directly to the specimen in the air test. A water spray rack consisting of a grid of calibrated spray nozzles is fitted to the exterior of the test specimen to simulate a rain event. The consultant will create a negative static or cyclic pressure differential on the interior of the specimen and document any water penetration beyond the inside edge of the test specimen. If water penetrates beyond the innermost face of the test specimen, the specimen fails the test and corrective action is required.

Chamber testing can also be used in forensic investigations of existing buildings, such as is outlined in ASTM E2128 and AAMA 511. In some cases, the appropriate test pressures may be provided by the manufacturer. Alternatively, the consultant may research the historical weather data and determine wind speed and direction at the time the specimen failed and calculate (via ASCE 7) the pressure on the specimen at the time of failure. The consultant will use that pressure as his basis for testing with the approval of the Architect/Engineer of Record.

CONCLUSION

Who will benefit from air infiltration and water penetration tests? Everyone. Architects, engineers and contractors will have written documentation that the field installed systems are performing to manufacturer’s specifications. Building owners can expect lower energy costs and an increased service life of building systems. Building occupants and tenants are more comfortable due to reduced temperature fluctuations. The risk of future moisture related material damage and biological growth is reduced. In cases where existing systems are not performing adequately, testing by a skilled consultant will identify how, why and where the systems are failing so that the appropriate corrective actions can be taken.

Mr. Gish joined Terracon Consultants, Inc. in 2005 and is a Senior Associate. Mr. Gish is Terracon’s Practice Leader for building envelope testing and infrared thermography and manages the Facilities Services groups of several of Terracon’s Texas offices. His primary focus is the forensic assessment of failed or deficient building systems and components. He can be reached at 210.641.2112 or email to: rjgish@terracon.com.

22-Oct-10 10:00 AM

Another Perfect Storm

Edward Britt - noemail@chamberlinltd.com — Mon, 02 Aug 2010 21:00:00 GMT

Guest Column By: Edward G. Britt, Jr.

President and Partner of Bowen, Miclette & Britt, Inc.

With rising premiums and shrinking coverages, owners and contractors have described the current general liability insurance environment as the “perfect storm.” But this is by no means the first perfect storm. The fact is, over the past 20 years the construction industry has seen some tumultuous times in both cost of insurance and in scope of insurance coverage.

As you may recall, in the mid 1980’s the insurance industry introduced a whole new general liability coverage format that contained numerous changes. This new general liability coverage format was developed in response to the “perfect storm” of the early ‘80’s. Two new emerging areas of significant losses for the insurance industry caused this storm: asbestos and pollution claims. The cost of these claims had never before been priced in the cost of insurance for the insured. In response to the losses from asbestos and pollution claims, the insurance industry reacted by doing two things. First, they raised premiums dramatically to cover the losses they were encountering. Second, they severely restricted the coverage afforded in their policies by issuing endorsements to the general liability policies that essentially excluded any coverage for losses arising out of an event that involved their insured where pollution or asbestos was the source of the claim.

Today, we are experiencing an event similar to that which we saw in the ‘80’s. It is the same type of “storm” but with more and different ingredients. In metaphorical terms, instead of wind and rain, we have stronger elements like lightning, thunder, smoke and fire. The components in today’s insurance market storm are EFIS, mold, terrorism and construction defects on residential buildings (i.e. condominiums, apartments, homes, town homes, etc.). This storm, like the one in 1986, is being caused by the substantial losses the insurance industry has suffered on risks that the insurance underwriters never anticipated and, therefore, had not adequately priced in the cost of insurance to their insured. This, in turn, has not only increased premiums but has also reduced the number of companies willing to write insurance. But, most importantly for building owners and contractors, it has eliminated some important insurance coverages.

As a result of this “perfect storm” current insurance policies may look the same as their predecessors on the surface, but they are indeed quite different. As a certificate holder you can no longer trust fully certificates of insurance to fairly represent the coverage depended upon in the past.

These changes are of particular concern in regard to existing construction contracts. Some of the changes in coverage will likely not be in compliance with the contractual terms of work currently under contract and in progress. Additionally, since standardized contracts and remedies contemplating these changes have not yet been developed, it is likely there will continue to be gaps between contractual requirements and actual coverage provided. Obviously, any gap between these two could work to the detriment of the owner - contractor relationship. Eventually, standardized contracts and remedies addressing these changes will emerge. Until then, owners and contractors alike need to draw upon the resources of their insurance agents, attorneys, and other counselors to identify potential problem areas and develop creative solutions.

The following table identifies common exclusions and limitations in use today on general liability and umbrella liability policies. Almost all insurance companies are mandating their use as a condition of underwriting a particular account or class of business. It is important to note there is wide variation of the definitions in the endorsement from the various insurance companies. Additionally, depending upon whether you are an owner or contractor, exclusions can apply differently. When evaluating risk and risk management solutions, owners and contractors alike must be aware of the impact these coverage limitations have on the overall operations of both parties.

Exclusions Made in the 1980s: These exclusions are uniformly attached to general liability and umbrella liability policies for owners and contractors.
Absolute Pollution	Excludes coverage for injury or damage connected to the treatment, transportation, disposal, storage, monitoring, or clean up of a pollutant.
Absolute Asbestos	Excludes coverage for injury or damage in any way connected to asbestos, or manufacturing products containing asbestos.
Exclusions Resulting From Present Day Issues: The following exclusions and limitations apply primarily to residential owners' and contractors’ general liability and umbrella liability policies.
EFIS – Exterior Finish Insulation Systems (Synthetic Stucco)	Excludes coverage for injury or damage connected to the manufacture, sale, distribution, installation or service of an EFIS system.
Mold	Excludes virtually all coverage for claims arising out of presence of, exposure to or inhalation of fungi, including all varieties of mold and bacteria.
TRIA – Terrorism	Excludes coverage for liability or property losses arising out of terrorist acts. This is of particular concern for large property owners in perceived target areas. Coverage buy-back is usually available.
Residential Construction Defects	Excludes coverage with respect to liability arising out of the completed operations hazard in connection with property intended for habitation. *Note: There is little standardization on what types of structures are to be considered habitational. Most include single-family dwellings, apartments, condominiums and townhouses. Some variations may provide limited coverage if claims are brought within a specified time limit. Other variations may include coverage for completed operations, but only for work initiated after the inception date of the policy thereby effectively excluding completed operations for all previous work.

Considering the volatile and mercurial nature of the insurance industry today, it is absolutely critical that all parties to a construction contract fully understand their obligations and the extent those obligations can be transferred to an insurance carrier. Some of these obligations i.e., construction defect, EFIS, and mold can have catastrophic, economic ramifications to the party assuming these liabilities in the event they cannot be transferred to an underwriter. Involving your insurance agent and legal counsel in the initial negotiation of a construction contract is more important today than ever before. With the current “storm” brewing, the expression “buyer beware” is definitely in vogue in today’s insurance environment.

In addition to serving as President and Partner of Bowen, Miclette & Britt, Inc., Mr. Britt is the President of both Camden Capital Mortgage, Inc. and Foster Insurance Services, Inc. He has more than 30 years experience in the insurance industry and holds a Bachelor of Science Degree in Economics.

2-Aug-10 4:00 PM

Chamberlin's Restoration Expertise Gives a Ft. Worth Landmark a Second Life

Monica Keels - noemail@chamberlinltd.com — Mon, 02 Aug 2010 20:00:00 GMT

Cats may have nine lives, but who has heard of a skyscraper having two lives? That is exactly the case in Ft. Worth, Texas. Chamberlin’s restoration team is hard at work in downtown Ft. Worth. Their task: to restore a landmark and give it new life through a complete metamorphosis.

The Bank One office tower at 500 Throckmorton and Fourth Street in Ft. Worth was damaged by a tornado that rocked downtown and destroyed several buildings in its wake in March of 2000. While the other buildings were rebuilt, the Bank One tower was left abandoned for almost three years.

Plans were made to demolish the skyscraper and use the land for parking, but the discovery of asbestos and the high costs of abatement and implosion made that plan impractical. In late 2003, principal architects, Corgan Associates, Inc., unveiled new plans to give the 37-story building a second chance at life, complete with a new use, a new name and a new design. The City of Ft. Worth and developer/owner TLC Green Property Associates I, L.P. agreed to abate, renovate and develop the building. This $65 million project would turn the Bank One tower of office spaces into The Tower, a high-rise condominium with over 300 residences and 30,000 square feet of retail stores, restaurants and offices.

To begin the project, CST Environmental removed hundreds of thousands of square feet of plaster containing asbestos from the vertical structural columns and other areas. Being that this is a very delicate process, Chamberlin was called in to seal the outer walls to create an airtight atmosphere inside the building. Chamberlin’s team installed a special string reinforced polyethylene material on the outside of the building sealing all window openings without glass using batten strips and fastening anchors as required.

After asbestos abatement, Turner Construction acquired the task of removing the entire interior and exterior skin of the building. Interior and exterior walls, air conditioning equipment, plumbing and wiring were extracted until only the skeletal concrete frame remained.

Chamberlin was responsible for the removal of all exterior glass, glazing, mullions, louver panels and temporary building wrap. In order to remove the exterior skin, eight swing stage scaffolds, one scaffold for each side of the building, were rigged. The swing stage work began at the 6^th floor and worked its way up to the 38^th floor at roof level.

Removing the remaining glass on the structure was no walk in the park, and safety was a big concern. While Chamberlin was working on the demolition of the upper levels of the building in the middle of downtown Ft. Worth, new construction was taking place below. Chamberlin had to develop a 100 percent safe and creative plan to prevent any and all debris from falling and seriously injuring someone.

Chamberlin waterproofing Project Manager, Bryan Payne, faced the challenge by coming up with a creative solution that was two-fold. First, the team put together the “swing stage diaper.” “In order to prevent falling debris,” Payne said, ”we attached a mesh netting directly to the building beneath the floor in which we were working. The debris net was attached using self-drilling screws and anchored into the existing curtain wall frame system.” The debris net hung under the swing stage and attached to the top of the back rail there by catching any debris that might fall.

Secondly, and most uniquely, all remaining glass was completely covered with an elastomeric sheet membrane. “This sheet membrane, which is actually designed for below grade waterproofing, bonds tenaciously to glass,” Payne said. The Chamberlin crew was then able to safely break the windowpanes to the inside of the building without the risk of losing shards of glass below. Once the glass was removed the glazing was cut and the mullions were detached and then demolished with pry bars.

After the demolition was complete, the process began to transform the building into The Tower. Chamberlin restored the concrete frame by utilizing high strength mortars to patch the spalling and damaged concrete beams and columns on the exterior of the building. An elastomeric coating was installed on all exterior exposed concrete surfaces after the completion of the entire exterior wall package to provide a new cosmetically appealing look and also to protect the concrete skin from future water infiltration damage. Chamberlin also constructed 372 new apartment balconies and installed a concrete topping on each to create positive drainage.

The building now has an entirely new exterior building envelope. The former tower, slick with reflective windows, now is encased in a cool, blue-green shell with inset balconies that create a sort of basket weave effect. The lower level is reconfigured from its familiar angled concrete columns into a box base skirt consisting of five floors and two below-grade levels that contain retail stores, restaurants and office space. The roof of the skirt features patio areas, a dog-walking path and a swimming pool for the condo owners. The Tower is scheduled to be finished and occupied in early 2005.

Payne reflects on the project with pride: “One thing that I consider the most unique about Chamberlin’s role in this project versus other projects is the degree in which we were able to impact the schedule. All finishes, dry wall, etc. could not take place until our work was complete and the new glass was installed.”

Chamberlin’s 20+ employees working on the exterior skin went the extra mile, sometimes working seven days a week in order to stay ahead of the curtain wall contractor’s work. Undoubtedly, it was the Chamberlin team’s commitment and creative problem solving that enabled them to both meet the project deadline and save the owner money. Chamberlin’s Superintendent, Paul Watson, applied his years of experience and lead crews to complete the demolition work 30 days ahead of schedule and under budget – a feat companies with less manpower and experience may have not been able to deliver.

2-Aug-10 3:00 PM

Employee Profile

David Neal - noemail@chamberlinltd.com — Mon, 02 Aug 2010 20:00:00 GMT

David Neal, Vice President,

Dallas, TX

One of Chamberlin’s most valued and influential team members, David Neal is respected by all those who have the pleasure of working with him. Time and again his actions prove his honest, knowledgeable and professional character. For those who may not know David, here’s a glimpse into how he works and his capabilities.

Education:

TexasA&M University– Bachelor of Environmental Design

University of NorthTexas- Master of Business Administration

Continuing Education & Memberships:

David has completed OSHA Training as well as various manufacturer application training certificates. He is a member of the International Concrete Repair Institute, American Subcontractors Associationand Associated General Contractors of America.

Experience:

David has worked on virtually every type of waterproofing project imaginable; new construction, remedial, restoration and anything that falls in between. Though his focus has been primarily on waterproofing and restoration, he has also completed a handful of roofing projects. He joined the ranks at Chamberlin 13 years ago and has since held a variety of positions serving as Project Coordinator, Project Manager and Operations Manager. The variety of his experience has given David insight that serves him not only as a manager, but also enables him to understand his clients’ needs.

A Day in the Life…

On a daily basis, David manages the Waterproofing Operations teams in Chamberlin’s Dallas and Austin/San Antonio markets. David will list the rest of his duties — but in keeping with his modest character only when prompted. In a nutshell, he also sells work; negotiates pricing with vendors; promotes the company through various marketing efforts and participates in sales efforts in his territory. “Yes - it is daily; I wear a lot of hats,” he assures to anyone who may be left jaw agape when he finishes running down the long and varied list.

Outlook

When asked to describe his approach to client service, David speaks with ease, for his commitment to customer service runs deep. “I want to provide our customers the best possible service and quality so when new projects come up, they think of Chamberlin first,” he said. “In order to achieve this, we must provide a high quality product at a competitive price, and promptly address any customer concerns or needs and produce results. This demonstrates to our clients that there really is good reason to use Chamberlin on their next project.”

Outside the Office…

David and his wife Diane have three daughters. He spends his time away from the office acting as soccer coach, Indian Princess leader, participating in church activities and just hanging out with his family.

2-Aug-10 3:00 PM

Roof Maintenance Pays

Monica Keels - noemail@chamberlinltd.com — Mon, 02 Aug 2010 19:00:00 GMT

By Ed LaMont, Jr., Senior Project Manager, Roof Maintenance & Leak Repair Department

By properly maintaining roofing systems, many crisis situations created by roof failures can be avoided, even prevented, along with the hassle, potential property loss and financial burden that can result from unexpected leaks.

Many times failures or leaks are initiated by extreme conditions— hurricanes, heat and cold to name a few. But more times than not, problems stem from plain old rainstorms. On a particularly stormy day the roof maintenance department at Chamberlin Roofing & Waterproofing could receive over 100 new roof repair projects, the majority of which could have been prevented with a proactive roof maintenance system.

A roof leak can be a very serious problem for everyone affected. At a minimum, a roof failure can be a catalyst for the development of mold growth in the building and ruin or destroy its contents. Be it merchandise, machinery, furniture, computers or paperwork that is damaged the effects can be devastating. Even worse, a major roof failure can force a business to temporarily close its doors. At that point the issue is two-fold: lost goods and lost business. Unexpected repair costs, coupled with the associated issues a roof problem causes tenants, can lead to loss of goodwill at the least, or the loss of a tenant at the worst.

Truth is, few building investments are more valuable than a roofing system, yet few are more neglected. Do you budget for elevator repairs, cosmetic improvements like paint and wallpaper or other building upgrades? Naturally. Do you budget for roofing expenses? Do you take precautionary measures to maintain the roof, circumvent leaks and avoid the overall stress such a scenario can cause? Maybe not.

In many respects, a roofing system is a capital piece of equipment. Roof maintenance can and should be budgeted and planned. Doing so will better able you to avoid unexpected expenses and/or unpleasant conversations with tenants being affected by a leak. And here’s the good news— if you are proactive, most leaks can be prevented. Better yet, roofing needs can be anticipated and repairs planned. Imagine viewing roofing issues not as crises but as part of your regular maintenance schedule. Making this vision a reality is in your hands.

A regularly scheduled roof survey will help detect minor roofing deficiencies that need attention and is the starting point for a proactive, preventative roof maintenance program. A survey can help establish a baseline for deterioration so any potential problems can be monitored and addressed before they become costly and potentially disruptive to building occupants. Performing a roof survey can quite literally save thousands of dollars in the long run. What could be a $500 repair today may become a $5,000 repair over time. Repairs not addressed today may become a source for unknown leaks and subsequent mold problems. Certainly mold is something that no building owner wants to deal with for any reason.

Beyond being a low-cost means of establishing a benchmark and monitoring potential problem areas, surveys are also a requirement for many roofing manufacturers to honor warranties on materials. Further, the data collected from regular surveys can help project potential needs and costs, an essential planning tool when it comes to setting budgets.

Chamberlin recommends roof surveys twice a year. The first should take place in the early spring to note and correct damages that may have occurred in the winter; the second should be conducted in the fall to prepare the roof for winter conditions. Key components of our comprehensive surveys include a visual inspection of the roof system flashing, expansion joints, membrane and drainage systems. Samples of the roof core and sealants may also be taken for evaluation. In addition, a visual inspection of the building interior to identify and document past leaks is conducted. And photographs are used to capture current conditions clearly and accurately. Upon completion of the survey, a written report describing the existing roofing system, our evaluation and analysis is provided. This document outlines a recommended course of action and budgetary considerations.

In summary, a good roof maintenance plan pays in several ways. First, proactive and preventive maintenance can save you from the stress that emergency maintenance situations can cause, be it in the form of financial issues or tenant complaints. Second, regular roof maintenance will establish a baseline for monitoring problems and assure all warranty requirements are being met if the roof system is still under warranty. Third, and very importantly, early diagnosis of problems or potential problems can save significant amounts of money. Fourth and finally, regular maintenance can extend the life of your roof system. The benefits really do add up.

2-Aug-10 2:00 PM

Chamberlin LTD Articles RSS Feed

RoofPoint: A New Sustainable Rating Tool for Facility Managers

Restoring a Piece of Texas History

Employee Profile

When Roofs Become Much More Than Simple Roofs

Houston Food Bank: Ready to Serve Even More

Are Employee Badges a Big Deal?

Employee Profile

Are You Prepared for Hurricane Season?

The Impact of Building Envelope Commissioning

Encore for Oncor's Building Envelope Renovation

Certification of Facade Access Supports for Powered Platforms and Lifelines

Authors

Sustainably Preserving the Past - City of Houston Central Permitting Center

Continutiy of the Weathered Exterior Envelope- Can it be Realistically Achieved?

Employee Profile

Protection From Above: ORU City Plex Towers Roof Replacement

Air Infiltration and Water Penetration Testing of Glazing Systems

Another Perfect Storm

Exclusions Resulting From Present Day Issues:

The following exclusions and limitations apply primarily to residential owners' and contractors’ general liability and umbrella liability policies.

Chamberlin's Restoration Expertise Gives a Ft. Worth Landmark a Second Life

Employee Profile

A Day in the Life…

Outside the Office…

Roof Maintenance Pays