PageBlogs | Standards Michigan |

Methods of Building Measurement

Loading
loading...

Methods of Building Measurement

December 4, 2019
mike@standardsmichigan.com
No Comments

“Pittore e Professore Universitario Tedesco” | Gotthardt Kuehl Lübecker Waisenhaus (1894)

 

The next step in the ANSI accredited consensus standard development process administered by the Building Owners and Managers Association International (BOMA) for setting the standard of care for measuring buildings is public notice of a commenting opportunity.   From ANSI Standards Action | PDF Page 9:  regarding BOMA Z65.3-201x, Gross Areas of a Building: Standard Methods of Measurement:

The purpose of the Gross Areas Standard is to provide a comprehensive and consistent methodology for measuring all building types while presenting the data in various ways that are useful to the stakeholders of any given property. This BOMA Gross Areas Standard includes four new Gross Area methods, known as Gross Area 1 (Leasing Method), Gross Area 2 (Valuation Method), Gross Area 3 (Volumetric Method) and Gross Area 4 (Construction Method). This new categorized and systematic approach provides users with an unlimited number of possible ways to dissect and analyze the areas of a building. This 2018 Gross Areas Standard includes many new features, enhancements, and clarifications. Key among them are compatibility with the International Property Measurement Standards (IPMS), greater variety of potential use cases and use by other industries, improved text and illustrations throughout, helpful hints, and an easier step-by-step layout among other things. It also addresses many questions that users have asked about previous versions of the standard.

Comments are due December 11th.

A single copy is free of charge.  You may obtain an electronic copy from: tjohnston@boma.org.  Send your comments (with copy to psa@ansi.org) to: tjohnston@boma.org

Standards Michigan will be be following, but not advocating, in this standard.  We find that advocacy in building and energy code standards for various occupancy classes are the best use of resources at the moment.  (Most educational institutions own their own buildings and when they lease square-footage they usually depend upon the building owner to meet all applicable safety and sustainability codes and standards.)  We encourage user-interest subject matter experts in education facility management to communicate directly with Tanner Johnson at BOMA (tjohnston@boma.org) or 202-326-6357 for more information.

 

Issue: [15-200]

Category: Architectural, Space Plaaning, Facility Asset Management

Colleagues: Jack Janveja, Richard Robben

 


Posted September 1, 2018

The Building Owners and Managers Association International (BOMA) is an ANSI-accredited consensus standard developer.  BOMA has initiated the process of revising its Gross Areas measurement standard — Gross Areas of a Building: Standard Methods of Measurement (ANSI/BOMA Z65.3-2009) — and is seeking volunteers to serve on its Canvass Committee.

From the ANSI Standards Action Announcement (PDF Page 39):

The balloting will begin October 5 and conclude 45 days following the initiation of the process. While we welcome all interest categories, we are specifically seeking “Users” and “General Interest” volunteers. Users include those who use space within a commercial building including tenants, tenant brokers, agents, floor measurement professionals, architects and interior designers as well as others who are in the contractual employ of tenants. General Interest includes all firms and individuals that do not have a direct alignment in the business interests of producers or users. Such firms or individuals may include management companies, facility managers, appraisers, architects and other design professionals, general contractors, design-builders, construction managers, and project estimators who have a general interest in floor measurement standards for office buildings.

Respondents must submit their application to BOMA by October 5.

We will be following, but not advocating, in this standard — though we encourage user-interest subject matter experts in education facility management to communicate directly with Tanner Johnston at BOMA (tjohnston@boma.org) or 202-326-6357 if you are interested and for a copy of the pre-canvass interest survey.

 

Issue: [15-200]

Category: Architectural, Space Plaaning, Facility Asset Management

Colleagues: Jack Janveja, Richard Robben

 

LEARN MORE:

Facilities Information Management

Guideline for Square Footage Requirements for Educational Facilities

Guide to School Site Analysis and Development

Mixed Use Standard

 

Electrical Safety in the Workplace

December 4, 2019
mike@standardsmichigan.com
No Comments

“Telegraph Poles with Buildings” | Joseph Stella (1917)

Optimal electrical safety and reliability is strongly correlated with electrical maintenance — i.e. functional checks, servicing, repairing or replacing of necessary devices, equipment, machinery, building infrastructure, and supporting utilities in industrial, business, governmental, and residential installations.   These activities take place either before or after a failure.  In either case, normal maintenance is “likely” to expose electrical workers to hazard.  In healthcare facilities, for example, there is risk of failure of backup systems (described in Article 517 of the National Electrical Code) unless maintenance is undertaken while equipment is live.

The trade-offs are well known.  Because of optimal maintenance, we have a commercial airline industry.  Because of optimal maintenance the United States has one of the most reliable power grids in the world.  

In electrical power systems, equipment and systems that control energy are designed to work, perhaps, only once or twice dependably in 25 to 50 years; if that.  Only safety-by-design and recommended maintenance can sustain the likelihood that safety and reliability expectations can be met.  Electrical maintenance usually involves exercising breakers, testing trip settings, confirming signaling paths in controls, software and the like.   Safety by design usually involves applying methods to minimize occupational hazards early in the design process, with an emphasis on optimizing employee health and safety throughout the life cycle of materials and processes.

There are several leading practice documents in this space; one of the first among them NFPA 70E Electrical Safety in the Workplace — a trademarked document available for use by the public:

2018 NFPA 70E Free Access

You will likely find NFPA 70E incorporated by reference into federal occupational safety laws and in state-level electric utility regulations.   The technical committees writing the 2021 revision met  in August 2018 and again  in July 2019 and produced the draft results linked below:

First Draft Report 2021 NFPA 70E

Second Draft Report 2021 NFPA 70E

Note the considerable “back-and-forth” on stored energy system, interactive, direct current and multiple source safety.   There are others.

After the Second Draft Report is released for public review no later than January 22, 2020,  NITMAM comments are due February 19th.

We usually coordinate our response to NFPA electrical safety consensus products with IEEE SCC-18 and IEEE Education & Healthcare Facilities Committee which meets 4 times monthly in European and American time zones.   See our CALENDAR for the next online meeting; open to everyone.

Issue: [3-3], [18-135]

Category: Electrical

Colleagues: Mike Anthony, Tammy Gammon, Jim Harvey, Daleep Mohla, Joe Tedesco

Archive / NFPA 70E Electrical Safety in the Workplace

*OSHA develops electrical safety documents of its own; the topic of a separate post since the jurisdictional politics are sensitive.  CLICK HERE for a preview.


LEARN MORE:

 

H.R. 528 / Blockchain Regulatory Certainty Act

December 4, 2019
mike@standardsmichigan.com
No Comments

Library of Congress 1868 print: “Across the Continent: Westward the Course of Empire Takes Its Way” / Shows the importance of railroads for U.S. settlement in the western territories.

To provide a safe harbor from licensing and registration for certain non-controlling blockchain developers and providers of blockchain services.

Blockchain Monthly

December 4, 2019
mike@standardsmichigan.com
No Comments

Piet Mondrian / CLICK ON IMAGE

At 11 AM Eastern time today we review the status of open source standards for distributed ledger technologies that are now rolling out across the education sector; with particular interest in smart contracts and enterprise blockchain use cases for real asset registries and financial management of nearly every dimension of the education industry.   Use the login credentials at the upper right of our home page.

Archive / Blockchain

Internet of Things

December 4, 2019
mike@standardsmichigan.com
No Comments

“View of Delft Mauritshuis” | Johannes Vermeer (1660-1661)

Standards Michigan is a member of ANSI’s US National Committee to the IEC (USNC/IEC) and collaborates with the IEEE Education & Healthcare Facilities Committee (E&H) on coordinated response to Public Commenting opportunities posted by the IEC.

IEC Public Comment Home Page

The E&H Committee meets online four times monthly in European and American time zones in which the priorities of the Joint Technical Committee 1 (JTC1) are a standing item on its agenda.

We find that the many of the technical specifics of the emergent #SmartCampus are playing out in other non-IEEE standards suites (such as the ICC, ASHRAE and INCITS suites) and open-source consortia (such as  M2M) are expanding their traditional scopes; thus diluting available expertise in the volunteer base upon which most of them depend.  The base of expertise for the user-interest is thin enough already.

Leaders of the US #SmartCampus transformation will have to sort through the competition among them because, at the moment, the blue-sky conception of a #SmartCampus is doing more to drive trade association content and conference revenue than contribute meaningfully to lower costs in the education industry.  The #SmartCampus transformation is already happening at the consumer (i.e. user-level) by slow degrees.

 

We are happy to explain the difference between speculative hype and meaningful technical specifics that show up on future campus construction, operation and maintenance balances sheets to anyone any day at 11 AM Eastern time.  We also sweep through commenting opportunities every month during our International standards teleconference.  See our CALENDAR for the next online meeting; open to everyone.

For the moment, updates on the broader policy discussions continue.   Links to a few of them are available below:

 


Korea University

 

ARCHIVE: March 2, 2018

 

The electrical power industry has long since moved from a local to a global industry. The numerous national standard power outlet configuration is a legacy of localized electricity markets. Only until electrical products were manufactured for markets in other nations did it become necessary to “standardize” on power outlets. The Internet of Things “zeitgeist” presents a similar challenge (and opportunity) for the emergent #SmartCampus and responding to Calls for Public Comment is the best way to keep pace with it.

Joint Technical Committee 1 (JTC1) of the International Organization for Standardization and the International Electrotechnical Commission has released for public review a draft international standard that will set the foundation for the vocabulary of the Internet of Things.  The education industry in all nations is a significant stakeholder in this technology not only because of its obvious interest to students and faculty but as a consumer (or as a user) on this technology.   The Korean Agency for Technology and Standards is the global Secretariat.

As in most standards projects for emergent interoperability technologies*  —  specifically ISO/IEC 20924 ED1 Information technology – Internet of Things (IoT) – Definitions and vocabulary —  the first step is to secure agreement on the terms of art; frequently complicated by action in open source or proprietary standards promoted by manufacturers.

Stakeholders generally have an opportunity to review and comment upon this document at the link provided by Subcommittee 41, Working Group 3 of the International Electrotechnical Commission (click here) though some national standardization bodies may require coordination of comments with national technical advisory groups (such as ANSI’s USNA/IEC).

Comments are due in Geneva, March 30, 2018

Getting access to the draft document and a commenting template will require providing specific security information so we will refer this commenting opportunity to the IEEE Education & Healthcare Facilities Committee which meets 4 times per month every other Tuesday in both European and American time zones.  The E&H teleconferences are open to anyone with login information available on the posted draft agenda.   Standards Michigan also keeps ISO and IEC standards on the standing agenda of its weekly teleconferences which occur every Wednesday, 11 AM Eastern time.  (Click here for login information)

Category: Electrical, Telecommunication, Informatics, International, #SmartCampus

*The IEC has special committees devoted to system integration and interoperability standards (IEC SyC)

BLOCKCHAIN & DISTRIBUTED LEDGER TECHNOLOGIES

December 4, 2019
mike@standardsmichigan.com
No Comments

“Tableau III” (1914) / Piet Mondrian

Blockchain technology is changing the financial underpinnings of all economic sectors including the education industry in every nation.   Accordingly, the International Standardization Organization has set up a relatively new technical committee — ISO/TC 307, blockchain and distributed ledger technologies — to meet the need for standardization in this area by providing internationally agreed ways of working with blockchain and distributed ledger technology to improve security, privacy and facilitate worldwide use of the technology through the highest possible level of interoperability.

The consensus products emerging TC 307  will be relevant not only to not only education industry trade associations who claim an educational/accreditation mission but to college and university marketing departments  that can, and should be interested in the ISO 307 products if for no other reason that to secure their claim to mastery of (in the argot of the moment) the most “woke” technologies for students and parents.   The executive summary and global participation map is linked below:

STRATEGIC BUSINESS PLAN ISO/TC 307

CLICK ON IMAGE FOR PROJECT HOME PAGE

In our nearly 20 year involvement in United States consensus products that affect the cost of the education industry; and nearly 20 year involvement in international standards promulgated by the ISO, IEC and ITU we find that early drafts of international standards are fairly dilutive; owing to the need to find agreed-upon definitions and the need to assemble an informed, durable and funded group of subject matter experts that can withstand the long-haul.  A few of the focus areas we recommend for leaders of #SmartCampus are listed below:

• Legally binding smart contracts
• Interactions between smart contracts in blockchain and distributed ledger technology systems
• Discovery issues related to interoperability
• Guidelines for governance

These are the ongoing focus areas of various committees that appear to contribute to building a foundation for lower cost in the education industry.  We will keep a weather-eye out for blockchain standard disruption of school district, college and university bond funding mechanisms.  The network of stakeholders involved in education facility funding may be an application of blockchain technology that should be investigated.   As always, we will try to separate speculative hype from proven, practical approaches to reducing cost.

CLICK ON IMAGE

Standards Australia is the Global Secretariat.  Our US colleagues are encouraged to communicate directly with ANSI’s ISO Team and/or the  Chair of the US Technical Advisory Group  InterNational Committee for Information Technology Standards, 1101 K Street NW, Suite 610, Washington, DC 20005, Phone: (202) 626-5737.  This standard is on the agenda of both our International and Finance & Management standards monthly teleconference during which time we sort through the issues in play that affect the education industry specifically.   See our CALENDAR for the next online meeting; open to everyone.

 

Issue: [17-351]

Category: Finance & Management, International

Colleagues: Mike Anthony, Christine Fischer, Jack Janveja, Richard Robben


LEARN MORE:

Framework of Blockchain Use in Internet of Things

December 4, 2019
mike@standardsmichigan.com
No Comments

Johannes Vermeer, View of Delft (Mauritshuis, The Hague) 1660-1661

The use of blockchain technology for Internet of Things (IoT) enables decentralized, autonomous communication (peer-to-peer, consumer-to-machine, machine-to-machine) without the need for a trusted intermediary.  These intermediaries exist in nearly every dimension of the education industry even though we may only be hardly aware of them.   Energy and municipal bond markets (that finance building construction and operation) are only two examples of spaces characterized by the presence of multiple intermediaries.

The need for standards that offer a protocol, common vernacular and support interoperability between blockchain platforms is gathering pace and the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE) is a natural home for them; though there is already significant competition among legacy standards developers; especially those financed by incumbent stakeholders.   Apart from the market-making among incumbents that is a natural part of the innovation cycle standardization of a framework for blockchain use in IoT will provide a base common understanding enabling innovation in IoT markets.

The IEEE 2418 group of standards provide a common framework for blockchain usage, implementation, and interaction in IoT applications.  Standard P2418.1 is the parent standard for the following spin-off standards which should interest @StandardsMich followers:

P2418.3 – Standard for the Framework of Distributed Ledger Technology (DLT) Use in Agriculture

P2418.4 – Standard for the Framework of Distributed Ledger Technology (DLT) Use in Connected and Autonomous Vehicles (CAVs)

P2418.5 – Standard for Blockchain in Energy

P2418.6 – Standard for the Framework of Distributed Ledger Technology (DLT) Use in Healthcare and the Life and Social Sciences

P2418.7 – Standard for the Use of Blockchain in Supply Chain Finance

P825 – Guide for Interoperability of Transactive Energy Systems with Electric Power Infrastructure (Building the Enabling Network for Distributed Energy Resources)

 

The framework contemplated in the P2418-suite addresses scalability, security and privacy challenges with regard to blockchain in IoT.  Blockchain tokens, smart contracts, transaction, asset, credentialed network, permissioned IoT blockchain, and permission-less IoT blockchain are included in the framework.  We start with foundational standard P2418.1 – Standard for the Framework of Blockchain Use in Internet of Things

P2418.1 is currently under development and, according to the IEEE Standards Association consensus product development process, will reach a milestone at the end of December 2021.  At the moment we are following but not actively participating on the committee because we are watching action in the competitive landscape among legacy accredited standards developers as well as emergent, open-source standards developers.   If you would like to participate in the development of the IEEE 2418 suite the IEEE contact person is Philip Wennblom (wennblom@ieee.org).

Whatever we do will be coordinated with the IEEE Education & Healthcare Facilities Committee which meets online 4 times monthly in European and American time zones.  We also include this standard on our Blockchain Standards teleconferences.  See our CALENDAR for the next online meeting.

 

Issue: [17-352]

Category: Blockchain, Energy, Finance & Management, Information & Communications Technology

Colleagues: Mike Anthony, Jim Harvey, Jack Janveja


LEARN MORE:

 

Standards Alabama

December 4, 2019
mike@standardsmichigan.com
No Comments

“A Race Meeting at Jacksonville, Alabama” (1841) / W.S. Hedges

As we explain in our ABOUT, we are continuing the development of the cadre of “code writers and vote-getters” begun at the University of Michigan in 1993.  We are now drilling down into state and local adaptations of nationally developed codes and standards that are incorporated by reference into public safety and sustainability legislation.

This post is a “test pancake” for generating discussion, and for developing a way forward for crafting state exceptions to nationally developed codes and standards.  Every state will have to be managed according to its history, culture, governance regime, asset-base and network of expertise.

Standards Michigan will remain the “free” home site but state-specific sites such as Standards Alabama will be accessible to user-interest code-writers and vote-getters.   Please send bella@standardsmichigan.com a request to join one of our mailing lists appropriate to your interest for #SmartCampus standards action in the State of Alabama.


Electronic Municipal Market Access / Alabama

Ethereum ERC-20

December 4, 2019
mike@standardsmichigan.com
No Comments

Much of the safety and sustainability “culture” in the education facility industry continues to be informed by fire safety and energy professionals who are funded by proven budgets.   However, as the Internet of Things transformation continues the build out of synaptic connections in every dimension of the #SmartCampus we find growing interest in distributed ledger technology (DLT).

The claim is that DLT is the Next Big Thing for the Internet.

As if our work in the physical spaces within and between buildings did not require enough time and resources, real asset managers now have to be mindful of DLT will roll out on #SmartCampus.  The rollout takes us beyond the legacy notion of artificial intelligence, beyond the cultural zietgeist of bitoin and onto the other standardization systems where Ethereum — an open source, blockchain-based distributed computing platform – – is evolving more or less continuously.

One of Ethereum’s most significant tokens — ERC-20 — has emerged as the technical standard used for all smart contracts on the Ethereum blockchain for token implementation.  The landing page for ERC-20 standardization activity is linked below:

As we have explained elsewhere on this site* open source standardization does not happen according to due processes accredited by ANSI and other national standardization bodies administered by the Geneva-based sister organizations ISO, IEC and ITU.

You may submit a proposal for improvement or comment upon the suggestions made by others at any time.  That is how open-source consortia standards work.

We refer blockchain applications to the IEEE Education & Healthcare Facilities Committee which has strong ties to the IEEE Blockchain Initiative.  The internet is, after all, an electrotechnology.  We also host one Blockchain teleconference per month.  See our CALENDAR for the next online meeting, open to everyone.

Issue: [Various]

Category: Blockchain, Information and Communication Technology, Finance, Management

Colleagues: Mike Anthony, Christine Fischer

*We direct you to ConsortiumInfo.ORG for more complete information about open source platforms.


LEARN MORE:

Layout mode
Predefined Skins
Custom Colors
Choose your skin color
Patterns Background
Images Background