The ‘fuzz factor’ in engineering: when continuous improvement is neither

The biggest threat to human life in a building isn’t the potential of natural disasters, but the threat of human error. I believe it’s a reality that increases in probability every time a code or standard change is proposed. 

January 12, 2014 |
Bob Zabcik

During my nearly 25-year career as an engineer, I've witnessed some 75 code and standard revision cycles representing thousands of pages of text requiring review and interpretation. 

The biggest threat to human life in a building isn’t the potential of natural disasters, but the threat of human error. I believe it’s a reality that increases in probability every time a code or standard change is proposed. 

I know the purpose of building codes and standards is to protect the public, who need protection from the very real threats of hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes, and freak snowstorms. As an engineer who has taken an oath to protect the public, that responsibility is paramount to me and one I carry with pride.

But the system we have set up to protect society has grown beyond a manageable state into monster status. Moreover, it is a venue filled with hundreds of hyper-sensitive, over-reacting people with individual research and commercial agendas, ballooning paper and free-running ink.

Dubbed the “fuzz factor,” this trend of growing complexity and shrinking time is one I believe poses a very real threat to public safety.

Instead of continuing to further define the problems and solutions like we’ve done so well in the last century, we need to consider evolving the engineering process to match the complexity level thrust upon the practitioners.

My solution: Have a peer engineer perform a simple cursory review of projects. 

To make this fully effective, it should not just be one or two peers. It should be more like five or 10 people with widely varied experiences and preferably strong cultural diversity, each one spending an hour or so scanning the results of the design, rather than the design itself.

Read more from the Star Buildings blog.

Editor's Note: This is sponsored content. All text and images were provided by the sponsor company. 

Bob Zabcik | Metal Building Trends
NCI
Director of Research and Development

Bob Zabcik is NCI’s Director of Research and Development. He is a LEED Accredited Professional and a Registered Professional Engineer with more than 20 years of experience. He serves on several professional committees such as the MBMA Energy Committee and Sustainability Committee as well as several task groups of those committees.  He is also on the Board of the Cool Metal Roofing Coalition and serves as the Director of their technical committee.

Related Blogs

June 20, 2017 | Building Team | Metal Building Trends

Getting a project through plan review can be an unusually long process, anywhere from six months to two yea...

May 22, 2017 | Metals | Metal Building Trends

In many metal building applications, straight columns may have more steel than they need.

May 08, 2017 | Building Team | Metal Building Trends

The most important factor in making sure the where, when, what, and how go smoothly is making sure you pick...

May 03, 2017 | Metals | Metal Building Trends

There are robust, well-proven ways to protect steel so it can perform up to its potential virtually indefin...

January 31, 2017 | Metal Building Trends

GF Construction, led by Charles and Jerry Fombrun, designed an industrial manufacturing development in Hait...

December 13, 2016 | Moisture Control/Building Envelope | Metal Building Trends

The basic idea of a rainscreen is to have an exterior surface – a cladding layer - that breaks the force of...

December 01, 2016 | Metals | Metal Building Trends

Today’s codes define more efficient, effective structures, but the engineering of them has become vastly mo...

November 21, 2016 | Metals | Metal Building Trends

There is a mistaken belief among some people that steel buildings do not do well in earthquakes. The truth...

Overlay Init