Category: Featured Post

Geographic Information Systems (GIS) in Facility Management – May 2023

Haag provides a range of technical support, resources, and analyses to assist clients in the forensic, insurance, oil & gas, and architecture, engineering, and construction sectors. Services include Matterport 3D visualizations, Geographic Information System (GIS), laser scanning, small unmanned aerial systems, and more. Geographic Information System (GIS) is a powerful tool that allows companies to combine large amounts of data from different sources, order them into layers, and visualize the relationships between the datasets. GIS’ has a wide range of applications, including facilities management. 

Geographic Information Systems (GIS) in Facility Management

By Matthew Young, GIS Analyst

What is Facility Management?

Facility Management (FM) involves monitoring all facets of the day-to-day operations for an organization’s physical environment. This includes the tools and services that support the functionality, safety, and sustainability of buildings, grounds, infrastructure, and real estate. The assets could include multiple buildings across a college campus, a factory that builds cars, a commercial property that contains multiple businesses, or a downtown skyscraper that consists of multiple floors to name a few. According to Fortune Business Insights, the global facility management market size was $1,260,000,000 in 2022, and is expected to grow to $1,846,000,00 by 2029–a staggering 5.7%. Due to this tremendous increase in capital, facility management processes and plans are going to be at the forefront of these increasing demands.

GIS Role in Facility Management

Facility Management staff need have real-time data at their fingertips, whether on desktop or mobile devices. Multiple software applications exist for this but are typically limited to the interiors of structures. Geographic Information Systems (GIS) fills this need by providing real-time map-based data helping meet the demands of facilities managers and their teams. Field software like ESRI’s ArcGIS Survey123 or ArcGIS Field Maps can help facility management teams collect and organize data using a simple form driven by mobile technology in the field. These applications allow workers to capture and edit data, find pivotal asset information, report critical issues, and monitor equipment and operations from their mobile or desktop devices. Managers now have access to critical, real-time information and can easily make data-driven decisions.

Haag Facility Management Geoportal

Haag developed its Facility Management Geoportal (FM Geoportal) to meet the need of facilities managers. Haag’s FM Geoportal utilizes location-based data to assist in  guiding operations with GIS workflows and streamlined tools for data collection and management. Haag used both desktop and mobile data collection apps to help a local church map all the AC units on its campus and collect attributes associated with each AC unit and its location. Using Survey123 on a smartphone app, members of the church’s facilities department collected the AC unit locations and completed a simple form with relevant information about each unit such as overall condition, freon type, model number, serial number, and more. The collected units immediately appeared on the FM Geoportal map symbolized as red points to indicate that they needed to be reviewed. Once the facilities manager had reviewed a unit’s attributes, he updated the status to “reviewed” via the FM Geoportal editing tool which changed the point color to green. This workflow made it easy for the entire facilities department to collaborate and efficiently collect, visualize, and update information in real time.

Now that the data has been collected, multiple users have access to the information in a map-based platform which helps the team determine which AC units need to be budgeted for repair or replacement in the coming year. This same process could be used in the future to map out a sprinkler system by collecting valves and sprinkler head locations, then connecting the sprinkler heads with lines. Knowing where the lines are located would help prevent any line strikes during future construction projects.

GIS Based Client Customized Facilities Management

Organizations rely upon their facilities management tools to ensure that their day-to-day operations remain intact. Using GIS and collection software like Survey123 or ArcGIS Field Maps provides users with an efficient, scalable, and easy-to-use platform that allows stakeholders to monitor key assets. The Haag FM Geoportal is a powerful, user-friendly tool that gives users agency over their own data with accessibility and reliability at the forefront. It is also customizable to user needs and can grow with them. If you would like to learn more, please contact Matthew Young for more information. 

Author

Matthew Young, GIS Analyst
Matthew Young is a GIS Analyst with Haag Global, Inc. Mr. Young joined Haag more than six years ago as a GIS Technician. He specializes in overseeing GIS data collection and analysis. He has worked with the oil & gas industry, validating pipeline/well data collected by surveyors in order to place information into a geodatabase. The validation process includes quality control of spatial components of the data to ensuring there are no gaps, multi-parts, self-intersecting lines, etc..  He analyzes surrounding data used to make sure the deliverable data matches up with the SDE and PODS data. He utilizes tools such as Python and FME to help with these processes. He has assisted in the development of software including the Haag Facility Management Geoportal. For more information on facility management or Haag’s Geoportal, please contact Matthew Young. 

 

Any opinions expressed herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect those of Haag Technical Services, Haag Engineering Co., Haag Education, or parent company, Haag Global, Inc.

When Arson is an Inside Job- April 2023

WHEN ARSON IS AN INSIDE JOB

By Robert Shotwell, NAFI-CFEI, Fire Consultant

Haag Fire Investigations specializes in fires and explosions of any scope, from automobiles to large commercial complexes, single- and multi-family housing, manufacturing facilities, marine fire investigations, arson investigations, and heavy equipment. Our team is committed to quickly finding the answers you need through industry-recognized scientific methods and standards. The case detailed below is one of the most intriguing arson cases in recent history. 

John Leonard Orr, also known as the “pillow pyro”, gained notoriety after he was convicted in 2002 for intentionally setting approximately 2,000 fires, which resulted in millions of dollars in damage and the tragic deaths of 4 people.  Orr was a fire Captain and arson investigator for the Glendale Fire Department in Southern California.  He originally wanted to be a police officer, however, he could not pass the entrance exams and became a firefighter.  [1] 

There have been multiple psychological studies conducted to determine why someone becomes an arsonist.  However, many pre-screening psychological evaluations are lacking as it relates to determine if the firefighter candidate will become a firefighter arsonist.  If the pre-screening psychological evaluations included previous behaviors that could be linked to pyromania and was tailored specifically for firefighter candidates, it would better determine the likelihood that the firefighter candidate would become or is an arsonist.

Pyromania is associated with an individual who has multiple episodes of deliberately setting fires.  People who intentionally set fires do so for several reasons, including: releasing tension, fascination with fire, pleasure, and gratification  Research has discovered that a lot of time and mental preparation is involved for a pyromaniac to start a fire.[2]

The proliferation of incendiary fires set by firefighters has forced firefighting agencies across the world to develop strategies and polices to try and stop this upward trend.  Because fire departments do not conduct a comprehensive psychological evaluation during the hiring process, they fail to eliminate candidates that have the propensity to be or become an arsonist.  These failures can cause unnecessary embarrassment, injury, financial loss, and even death.[3]

The fire service is shedding light on the fact that some firefighters are arsonists.  A small percentage of otherwise trustworthy firefighters are causing the fires they extinguish.  The total amount of illegal fire setting throughout the nation’s fire personnel is unknown, as there has been little research conducted specifically on arson, and there is even less information on arsonists who are also firefighters.[4] 

The impact of firefighter arson can be severe.  People die or are seriously injured, including fellow firefighters, who respond to the call.  An arsonist from within the fire department can disgrace the whole department, and his actions can diminish public trust.  There are several states throughout the country that have enacted new legislation that specifically addresses firefighters that are prosecuted for arson.  Throughout the United States, many jurisdictions have enacted firefighter arson task forces.  These task forces focus on training, education, and how to conduct appropriate background checks.[5]

In the 1990’s, the National Center for the Analysis of Violent Crime (NCVAC) conducted research and developed “tell-tale” signs that a firefighter might be intentionally setting fires.  One of the “tell-tale” signs included a large increase of fires within that fire department’s area of operation.  It was also suggested that the firefighter arsonist would have been working with the fire department for less than three years.  NCVAC conducted research on 25 cases of arson fires that were started by firefighters.  The results of this research “showed that the number one motive was excitement, especially among young firefighters who were eager to put their training to practical use, and to be seen as heroes to fellow firefighters and the community they served.  In that study, 75 firefighters were found to have been responsible for 182 fires.[6]

The NCVAC report also revealed that, generally, the firefighter arsonist would start with a small fire, described as a nuisance fire.  A nuisance fire would include a trash pile, vegetation, or a dumpster fire.  The firefighter arsonist would then advance to more serious fire-setting that would involve vehicles or unoccupied buildings[7].  The results of research on firefighter arsonists have aided in developing a profile and methodologies as to why a firefighter would deliberately set fires.  The first reason, is the desire of a firefighter to be respected by their peers.  The firefighter, in order to show how proficient they are in their trade, will attempt to prove this by setting a fire.  Many of these fires are set by firefighters who are white males in their early twenties.[8]

The second reason a firefighter would deliberately set a fire can be caused by boredom at the firehouse.  This is due to the long periods of no activity, especially at a fire station that does not have a large call volume.  The third reason and more problematic reason is due to vanity which is also classified as a hero complex.  The hero complex is the result of a firefighter wanting attention or praise for the job they do.  The hero complex should not be confused with the atta-boy complex.  The atta-boy complex is described as a firefighter who wants praise from his peers and not from outsiders.[9]

The information presented provides current and future researchers with data to help in determining if a firefighter candidate has the proclivity to become a fire setter.  It is important that the practitioners, who are performing the psychological assessments of future firefighters, have this data as it can assist them with their diagnosis and ability to decide if they potentially could become an arsonist or not.  After an extensive investigation, Captain Orr was arrested December 4, 1991, and convicted on July 31, 2002, He is currently serving a life sentence in the California prison system.  Many investigators believe that Orr is the worst American serial arsonist to date.

_____________________________

[1] https://murderpedia.org/male.O/o/orr-john-leonard.htm (March 23, 2023).

[2] American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed., text rev.).

[3] Hinds-Aldrich, M. (2011). Firesetting Firefighters: Reconsidering a Persistent Problem. International Fire Service Journal of Leadership And Management, 5, 33-46.

[4] Hinds-Aldrich, M. (2011). Firesetting Firefighters: Reconsidering a Persistent Problem. International Fire Service Journal of Leadership And Management, 5, 33-46.

[5] Stambaugh, H., & Styron, H. (2011) U.S. Fire Administration.  https://www.usfa.fema.gov/downloads/pdf/publications/tr-141.pdf

[6] Stambaugh, H., & Styron, H. (2011) U.S. Fire Administration.  https://www.usfa.fema.gov/downloads/pdf/publications/tr-141.pdf

[7] Stambaugh, H., & Styron, H. (2011) U.S. Fire Administration.  https://www.usfa.fema.gov/downloads/pdf/publications/tr-141.pdf

[8] Hinds-Aldrich, M., Duggan, D., et al.  Firefighter Arson. National Volunteer Fire Council. https://www.nvfc.org/firefighter-arson/.

[9] Hinds-Aldrich, M. (2011). Firesetting Firefighters: Reconsidering a Persistent Problem. International Fire Service Journal of Leadership And Management, 5, 33-46.

Author

Robert Shotwell, NAFI-CFEI, fire consultant

Robert Shotwell is a Fire Consultant with Haag Global. He has a total of more than twenty years of forensic experience in a wide range of industries, including the U.S. Navy Reserves, U.S. Coast Guard Reserves, as a Special Agent for the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, and as a Law Enforcement Officer for various municipalities. His forensic experience includes investigations of fire and explosion incidents in vessels and commercial, industrial, and residential structures, as well as electrical and mechanical systems. Mr. Shotwell has also conducted extensive criminal investigations involving missing persons, homicides, human trafficking, fraud, identity theft, and public corruption. Robert is a Chief Petty Officer in the Coast Guard Reserves. and is a certified fire and explosion investigator.

  • 20+ years of investigative training and experience
  • Court tested and reliable. Experienced in municipal, civil & criminal trials
  • Specialty in Vessel Fires
  • Investigated multi-million-dollar fire losses

 

Any opinions expressed herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect those of Haag Technical Services, Haag Engineering Co., Haag Education, or parent company, Haag Global, Inc.

Diagnosing Cracks in Common Construction Materials – March 2023

Diagnosing Cracks in Common Construction Materials

By Amber Prom, P.E., Director of Curriculum

Identifying damage, especially when that damage has been pointed out to you, is not rocket science.  Determining what caused that condition and whether that condition is a concern is a whole other story.  Many times, we find ourselves out on site looking at a crack in a material and wondering, what on earth might have caused this?  Has the crack been there for some time, or did it develop recently? Is this crack even a concern?  While determining the cause and severity of a crack can be somewhat difficult, arming ourselves with information regarding the most common mechanisms that cause cracks to form in our most predominant building materials can help us narrow down the possibilities.

Common Crack Mechanisms in Drywall

While unsightly, drywall cracks are typically harmless.  Drywall is not commonly used as a structural material, so there is little worry that any sort of structural harm has been caused by a drywall crack.  Drywall is not part of the exterior building envelope, so there is little concern that the crack will let in moisture/weather. However, drywall cracks can be an indicator of a larger problem. Two of the most common causes for drywall cracks are:

  1. Expansion/contraction of the framing members upon which the drywall is attached (not such a tragic thing) and
  2. Localized foundation movement ( can be a major issue).

Expansion/contraction is a common phenomenon in wood particularly. Wood is a hygroscopic material, meaning it has a tendency to absorb moisture from the air. When this happens, wood will expand in size. Drywall, on the other hand, does not expand/contract at the same rate as wood, nor is it as flexible a material.  This means when the two materials are connected and the wood changes size, the drywall cracks. Most commonly these cracks will show up where the drywall is weakest, which is at the joints between drywall panels. As such, this results in very linear cracks that propagate either vertically or horizontally (See the upper-right image).

What we need to watch out for though, are cracks that are a result of foundation movement, as that is a larger problem that can cause far more damage than just cracks to finishes. Drywall cracks that are the result of localized foundation movement very commonly propagate either vertically or diagonally from the corners of doors and windows (see the lower-right image), and the cracks are typically concentrated in the area of localized foundation movement, which will need to be verified by a forensic expert. Other indicators of foundation movement are windows and doors that no longer open/close correctly and floor surfaces that do not feel level. 

Cracks in concrete

Common Crack Mechanisms in Concrete

Even more common than cracks in drywall are cracks in concrete. Concrete is a brittle material known to perform well in compression but poorly in tension. For this reason, we reinforce concrete with steel rebar to give the concrete member better tensile strength, but regardless, it is exceedingly difficult to altogether prevent concrete from cracking.

The most common cracks you will typically see in concrete are shrinkage cracks.  These cracks form when the concrete cures, losing its water content and consequently shrinking in size.  This shrinking can cause multi-directional cracks to form in the surface of the concrete, especially if the concrete cures too quickly or cures unevenly. Shrinkage cracks do not typically penetrate the full thickness of the concrete. Instead, they tend to meander in various directions across the exposed surface of the concrete and occur in higher concentrations near the perimeter edges and corners of the concrete member.

Other common mechanisms that can cause concrete to crack include, but are not limited to:

  • Issues with post-tensioning practices
  • Slab geometry issues
  • Differential expansion/contraction stresses
  • Differential movement of supporting soils
  • Overstressing
  • Impact damage

Old vs New Cracks

In addition to working to determine the cause of a crack, we are sometimes faced with determining when a crack developed. Is the cracking something that occurred recently, or did this crack develop sometime in the past? Characteristics that can assist in determining whether a crack is new or old are:

  • Newly developed cracks are well-defined, with sharp edges and a clean fracture surface.
  • Newly exposed crack surfaces are commonly brighter in color than the surrounding material.
  • Older cracks typically exhibit weathered/rounded edges, and their fracture surfaces are often stained, or grime covered.
  • New cracks often contain bits and pieces of the fractured material in and around the crack.
  • Older cracks often contain debris, grime, algae, cobwebs, paint, sealant, etc., within their confines.

Regardless of the situation, analyzing the cause, severity, and age of cracks can be difficult and arming yourself with as much information about the common mechanisms that can cause these cracks will only make things easier on you.  If you find yourself wanting to learn more, Haag Education offers an online course titled “Identifying Distress vs Sudden Damage in Construction Materials.” This course will walk the learner through many of the common reasons our most predominant building materials, like concrete, masonry, drywall, and wood, tend to crack or show distress. The course goes further and covers common causes for nail pops, brick veneer detachment, and various moisture conditions.  This course is also part of Haag’s new Haag Certified Reviewer Program (HCR). To register for this course as a standalone, or for more information on the HCR Program, visit www.HaagEducation.com.

Author

Amber M. Prom, P.E., Director of Curriculum

Amber M. Prom, P.E., is Haag’s Director of Curriculum and is based out of the greater Denver area. Ms. Prom is a Registered Professional Civil/Structural Engineer with 18 years’ experience in structural design, project management, forensic engineering, and engineering management/training. Ms. Prom previously worked in the field of forensics as a Professional Development Manager and Principal Consultant for approximately 10 years. As a Professional Development Manager, she was responsible for training all newly hired Civil/Structural Engineers and Building Consultants and providing continuing education/training for existing experts.  As a Project Engineer/Principal Consultant, she conducted forensic engineering investigations related to structures which had failed, become damaged, did not operate/function as intended, or were constructed deficiently.  Most of her investigations involved hail damage to structures caused by wind, hail, tornados, hurricanes, and earthquakes, along with fires, explosions, ground vibrations, and construction defects.  Ms. Prom has also been engaged as an expert witness in numerous mediations, arbitrations, depositions, and trials throughout her career.  Currently, Ms. Prom acts as Haag’s Director of Curriculum and develops/manages all of Haag Education’s training curriculum, including the Haag Certified Inspector and Haag Certified Reviewer Programs.

 

Any opinions expressed herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect those of Haag Technical Services, Haag Engineering Co., Haag Education, or parent company, Haag Global, Inc.

Drones for Façade Inspections- Feb 2023

Drones for Façade Inspections

Drones have changed our world in a myriad of ways. For engineers and façade professionals, drones have altered how they evaluate building facades, minimizing time and expense in the field and allowing more time for study and evaluation. Typically, a drone can capture detailed photos and videos of a multi-story tower façade in less than an 8-hour day.     

Advantages of drones for façade inspections

First and foremost, using drones for façade inspections saves time and money. Pre-drones, inspections required equipment ranging from a ladder to an aerial lift or even scaffolding. Depending upon the height of the building, inspection could take several hours to several days. Drones allow experts to conduct a visual to inspection  either while the drone is in flight or soon after, while viewing the photographs or videos. Once review of the photographs is completed, the expert can decide whether a hands-on inspection is required or if the photographs provide enough detail to make a determination.  

Safety is another advantage to drones. During any aerial operation on either scaffolding or in an aerial lift, the experts performing the inspection will typically need some sort of training, in addition the appropriate PPE. These aerial operations come with a variety of potential safety hazards including contact with live wires, falls from heights, top overs/collapses, objects falling from lifts, and many more. 

Drones can produce highly detailed photographs and videos. Many drones on the market today have cameras capable of taking 20MP or better still shots and 4k or better videos. In addition, most drone cameras contain gimbals (stabilizers) allowing vertical from -90° (straight down) to 20° (above horizontal), allowing the camera to get angles looking down and up on the façade.

Using Drones on Façade Inspections

Drones have many limitations, including where and at which altitude they can fly.   The FAA publishes near-real time airspace authorizations on the UAS Facility Maps website.   This provides maximum altitudes around airports where the FAA may authorize Part 107 operations and still requires the pilot to request a waiver to fly in these areas.  Additionally, there are limitations about flying over people and moving vehicles, so the areas around the structure may have limited access.

Resident notifications: People can be easily spooked by drones, so it is imperative that the building management provide proper notification to residents and tenants of the structure(s).   

Weather conditions: Wind can always have an impact on drones, but this is especially important on multi-story structures.  Wind speed tends to increase with height above the ground. As wind hits the side of a building, it has nowhere else to go and is pushed, up, down, and around the sides. These wind forces can cause instability in drones if not properly managed.

“Using High Quality 4k drones on our inspections has been an extremely valuable tool for Haag during inspections. The ability to see tower facades and their roofs from a higher perspective enables us to evaluate from different angles, and helps us feel confident when determining causation. Over the past 6 years, the use of 4k Drones  to inspect high density towers has changed the way inspections are performed”, said Brandon Alaniz, Principal Consultant with Haag Construction Consulting.  “We now have the acute ability to review surfaces at higher elevation to assist us with determining a final scope of repair for our clients. The camera resolutions have the capability for us to review surfaces at a granular level from hundreds of feet in the air. These drones tell us a story from an overall perspective. It’s enabled us to provide wonderfully detailed presentations for our clients. We believe as the technology continues to develop, drones will become part of the standard operating procedures for all assignments.” 

Key Considerations

  • Flight Regulations:   Follow FAA and company policies and procedures.  Obtain waivers where necessary.
  • Resident/Tenant Notifications:  Require management to provide notifications
  • Flight area walkaround:  Typical with any flight, but especially on multi-story buildings it is imperative to know that area you will be flying in locating trees, utility lines, other structures, building appurtenances, balconies, and other features that could impact your flight. 
  • Securing area under the drone:  In most cases, the FAA prohibits drones from flying directly over people.  It is critical to work with your visual observer to secure an area under the drone, as it moves along the façade to ensure compliance with this requirement. 
  • Weather considerations:  Wind speeds, not only at ground level, but at or near the building’s rooftop.
  • Aviation Insurance:  Drones, since they are FAA registered aircraft, are typically not covered under most insurance policies and need separate aviation insurance.    
  • Battery management:  Depending upon the size of the building, going through multiple batteries is a possibility.  This requires the pilot to have multiple batteries and chargers, in addition to finding adequate power supply on or around the site.
  • Pilot management: Looking up at the drone or down at the screen for an extended period of time can cause fatigue.  Establishing a procedure for pilot management (Fly through 2 batteries and take a 30-minute break) is key
  • Visual Observer:  A visual observer is critical to give the pilot a second set of eyes on the drone in the event of wind bursts that could shift the drone towards the building or other structures or in the event pedestrians enter the area adjacent to the drone.

For more information about drones and façade inspections, please reach out to Kevin Kianka, Operations Manager, Technical Services, or Brandon Alaniz, Principal Construction Consultant.

Authors

Kevin Kianka, P.E., DIRECTOR OF Operations, Technical Services

Kevin Kianka, P.E., serves the Director of Operations, based in Haag’s Sugar Land (Houston), TX office and leading Haag Technical Services efforts nationwide, including all services related to 3D Laser Scanning, 3D Modeling, Drones (sUAV’s), GIS, and other advanced technologies.

A licensed Professional Engineer in Texas, New Mexico, Colorado, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania and Florida, Mr. Kianka obtained a Bachelor of Science in Civil Engineering from Drexel University (Philadelphia, PA) and has over 15 years of experience in the field of Engineering.  His work has included bridge and structural design, NBIS (Bridge) inspections, highway and roadway design, land development and site design, stormwater design and management, zoning analysis and 3D documentation, drones (sUAV’s), GIS, and as-built modeling.  Since 2008, he has focused on 3D documentation and the completion of Engineering Surveys to assist in the design, investigation and coordination of engineering projects.  Mr. Kianka utilizes his design and documentation experience to oversee the 3D Documentation and creation of 3D models, visualization and animations for all projects that Haag completes.

Mr. Kianka oversees Haag’s drone program and maintains a Remote Pilot Certificate – sUAS Rating with the FAA. He is a Director of the US Institute of Building Documentation (USIBD), and is a subcommittee member for ASME B30.32 committee preparing consensus documented related to Unmanned Aircraft Systems used in Inspection, Testing, Maintenance, and Lifting Operations for Cranes.

brandon alaniz, PRINCIPAL Construction Consultant

Brandon Alaniz is a Principal Construction Consultant with Haag Construction Consulting Co. He is an experienced construction consultant with more than 15 years in the construction industry. He is responsible for maintenance, and completion of all consulting services and related work product. His emphasis is building reconstruction, restoration, equipment and machinery cost, and remediation cost for the insurance industry.

Mr. Alaniz prepares construction loss and restoration estimates. He oversees remediation management services for losses that will be either repaired by the owners and need constant supervision to expedite, or losses that require management to fast-track a project without the need of a general contractor. Mr. Alaniz works to ensure the favorable and equitable conclusion of a loss. His experience includes many types of construction and restoration including: multi-family dwellings, commercial buildings, industrial complexes, and institutional facilities (schools, hospitals, municipal). 

 

Any opinions expressed herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect those of Haag Technical Services, Haag Engineering Co., Haag Education, or parent company, Haag Global, Inc.

Effects of Hail-Caused Dents on the Thermal Performance of Insulation Under Single-Ply Roofing

Effects of Hail-Caused Dents on the Thermal Performance of Insulation under Single-Ply Roofing

Haag Research & Testing recently published an intriguing study in the International Institute of Building Enclosure Consultants (IIBEC)’s Interface Magazine– Effects of Hail-Caused Dents on the Thermal Performance of Insulation Under Single-Ply Roofing. This article examined whether, and by how much, hail dents would affect the R-value of a roof’s insulation. Could a property owner see a noticeable difference in their energy bills due to changes in insulation?

To conduct our testing, Haag used a heat flow meter (HFM) to evaluate the thermal performance of roof insulation and measured the thermal resistance to conductive heat flow (R-value). We measured the thermal resistance of insulation in several dented configurations, and compared those to samples without dents to determine if the dents resulted in a measurable loss of R-value.

Read Effects of Hail-Caused Dents on the Thermal Performance of Insulation Under Single-Ply Roofing, which appeared in the December 2022 issue of IIBEC Interface article here. Written by Steve Smith, P.E., Robert Danielson, P.E., and Cory Hurtubise, EIT. 

Haag Research & Testing’s IAS-accredited laboratory performs various tests that consultants, adjusters, roofing contractors, public adjusters, and manufacturers rely for analysis of roofing samples. Visit HaagResearchTesting.com to learn more and view our testing in action.  

Heat Flow Meter
Example of dents in polyisocyanurate insulation
Close-up at dent profile.

Author

Steve Smith, P.E., Director of Research & Testing, Principal Engineer

Steven R. Smith is a Forensic Engineer with Haag Engineering Co., and the Director of Research & Testing. Mr. Smith is an experienced forensic engineer who began his career with Haag more than 24 years ago. He spent seven years working as a Senior Lab Technician while earning a Bachelor of Science in Mechanical Engineering degree from The University of Texas at Arlington. He has been involved with the lab throughout his career, and has been able to leverage his extensive and practical engineering field experience with research and testing projects.

Mr. Smith’s areas of expertise include accident reconstruction, mechanical equipment evaluations, code and standards compliance, roofing system evaluations, and fires and explosions. He is a licensed Professional Engineer in Arkansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas, and Wisconsin. He is a member of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME), Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE), and Pi Tau Sigma National Honor Society. Prior to joining Haag, Mr. Smith was a Petty Officer Second Class in the United States Navy. He trained at the Navy Nuclear Power Training Command Center in Orlando Florida and was stationed on the USS Arkansas (CGN-41), where he maintained reactor and steam plant chemistry, performed radiological controls, and operated mechanical equipment in the propulsion plant.

 

Any opinions expressed herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect those of Haag Technical Services, Haag Engineering Co., Haag Education, or parent company, Haag Global, Inc.

Laboratory Testing of Roofing Samples, Nov. 2022

Laboratory Testing of roofing samples

Steve Smith, P.E., Director of Research and Testing, Principal Engineer

Art is in the eye of the beholder. One person can look at a painting of an apple tree and clearly see the arc of human history portrayed from the deep roots to the solid trunk rising from the ground, to the fruits of technological advancement in the bright shiny apples hanging from the limbs. Another peers at the same painting and sees the sun and the earth working in harmony to produce life giving food for humanity. Someone else observes the magnificent artwork and sees a tree.

Although it may be entertaining to view artwork and try to determine the true meaning or purpose of the piece, you don’t want to hire a roof consultant only to receive an ambiguous report that relies on your own subjectivity to discern their conclusions. If you had only taken roofing samples and sent them to an accredited laboratory that specializes in providing the concrete answers you seek.

Haag Research & Testing is an accredited testing laboratory that specializes in analysis of roofing samples and can provide answers to the following questions.

  • Was the condition on the sample related to hailstone impact?
  • What size of hail can damage the sample?
  • Does the damage extend through the sample or is just the coating damaged?
  • What wind speed would it take to displace these roofing tiles?
  • Did hail-caused dents in the insulation reduce the R-value?
  • Does water leak through a particular feature in the sample?

Our laboratory performs various tests that Haag Engineers have relied on for decades either for developing information used in research papers or for giving specific information on active assignments. The Haag laboratory also performs tests for non-Haag consultants, adjusters, roofing contractors, public adjusters, and manufacturers. Brief descriptions of some of our more popular tests are provided below. You may also visit our website at HaagResearchTesting.com to learn more and to watch testing videos. 

Overview of test setup with Haag IBL-7 ice ball launcher.
impact testing

Frozen solid ice balls are propelled at samples to simulate the effects of hailstone impacts. We use a wide range of ice ball sizes from 1/2 inch to 4 inches in diameter, which allows us to examine the effects of very small hail up to massive hail that can damage most roofing types. Test panels are constructed to replicate as-installed conditions and are typically impacted by simulated hailstones at 90-degree angles to replicate worst case conditions. We can vary the speed and angle of impact as needed. Learn more. 


Desaturation Testing

Bituminous roofing products, including asphalt built-up roofing (ABUR), modified bitumen (mod-bit) roofing, and asphalt shingles are subjected to hot solvent that dissolved the asphalt, allowing the sample reinforcements to be examined for conditions related to impact-caused damage. Learn more. 


single-ply analysis

Single-ply roofing products, including polyvinyl-chloride (PVC), thermoplastic polyolefin (TPO), ethylene propylene diene terpolymer (EPDM), and others are examined visually, tactilely, microscopically, and using back-lighting techniques to determine if there are fractures in the membranes associated with impact forces. Learn more. 

View of panel after Test 5.
Wind Simulation

Test panels are constructed in a manner to simulate the as-installed conditions of roofs covered with shingles, tiles, shakes, slates, or synthetic products. Panels are set at a predetermined angle and wind is blown onto the panels to determine the approximate wind speed it takes to lift, displace, or otherwise damage the product. Various configurations can be evaluated to provide a wide range of possible scenarios. Learn more.

r-Value

The thermal resistance of insulation is measured, and comparisons made between samples with and without hail-caused dents to determine if hail-caused dents resulted in a measurable loss of R-value. Learn more. 

Water Column

Samples containing suspected impact-caused conditions, including displaced surfacing, dents, cracks, etc. are subjected to 6 inches of water and then monitored over a 7-day period. Air pressure cycles are conducted following the 7-day period (with the water still in place) to determine if the roofing sample will leak. Learn more.

Author

Steve Smith, P.E., Director of Research & Testing, Principal Engineer

Steven R. Smith is a Forensic Engineer with Haag Engineering Co., and the Director of Research & Testing. Mr. Smith is an experienced forensic engineer who began his career with Haag more than 24 years ago. He spent seven years working as a Senior Lab Technician while earning a Bachelor of Science in Mechanical Engineering degree from The University of Texas at Arlington. He has been involved with the lab throughout his career, and has been able to leverage his extensive and practical engineering field experience with research and testing projects.

Mr. Smiths areas of expertise include accident reconstruction, mechanical equipment evaluations, code and standards compliance, roofing system evaluations, and fires and explosions. He is a licensed Professional Engineer in Arkansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas, and Wisconsin. He is a member of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME), Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE), and Pi Tau Sigma National Honor Society. Prior to joining Haag, Mr. Smith was a Petty Officer Second Class in the United States Navy. He trained at the Navy Nuclear Power Training Command Center in Orlando Florida and was stationed on the USS Arkansas (CGN-41), where he maintained reactor and steam plant chemistry, performed radiological controls, and operated mechanical equipment in the propulsion plant.

 

Any opinions expressed herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect those of Haag Technical Services, Haag Engineering Co., Haag Education, or parent company, Haag Global, Inc.

Visualizing the Unseen: Modern Premises Liability Analysis, Oct. 2022

VISUALIZING THE UNSEEN:  MODERN PREMISES LIABILITY ANALYSIS

Christopher DeSantis, RA, AIA, CXLT and Benjamin T. Irwin, PE, DFE, CXLT

At its core, forensic architecture and forensic engineering can simply be thought of as the application of facts and science in answering technical questions posed by a lay audience.  Similarly, premises liability evaluation can simply be thought of as a technical evaluation of the interactions between human beings and the constructed environment around them, in response to a specific incident where a specific constructed condition is alleged to have caused injury to a specific person.  Seems simple, right?

  • Step 1:  Analyze the facts.
  • Step 2:  Apply the science(s) to the facts.

Traditionally, premises liability analysis has focused largely on compliance of the constructed conditions with codes and industry norms.  Again, simple right?

  • Step 1:  Determine the applicable codes and industry norms.
  • Step 2:  Evaluate compliance of the constructed conditions.
Re-assembled jigsaw pieces

But what happens when the facts are unclear, or even partially contradictory?  What if the facts are unknown?  Similarly, how do you analyze compliance, if you can’t determine the age of the constructed conditions?  These answers require a more modern, multi-faceted, and multi-disciplinary approach.

We can start with a simple idea:

Nearly everything leaves evidence somewhere, and there are many more opportunities to technically investigate a given fact pattern now than there have ever been before.

This is modern premises liability analysis, where the key is to reconstruct a given incident to the greatest extent possible, either physically in reality, in a virtual manner, or in some combination of the two.  When an incident can be better visualized, even if the conditions have since changed, it can become much simpler to see the facts, codes, standards, and science more clearly.

Consider being faced with a fact pattern involving a fall event on a roadway construction site, where the construction site is long gone.  There were no witnesses to the incident, limited photos from the time of the incident, and the available testimony created a he-said, she-said situation that didn’t seem to make sense in the context of the other available information.  A new first step is needed, to verify the facts before analyzing them.

 

Limited construction zone protection after the incident.
Photo from the time of the incident, with limited foreground information, but broader background information.

As a part of this fact pattern, construction staging plans were provided piecemeal and in an incomplete manner, along with out-of-sequence and partially missing/redundant daily field logs.  Re-assembling these jigsaw pieces, revealed verifiable extents of the construction zone on the date of the incident, including what construction equipment was on site at the time of the incident.  It also revealed the adjacent streets on which the same contractor had performed similar work.

While the dated street level imagery did not indicate the exact conditions present within the construction zone at the time of the incident, it did indicate the construction zone protection methods utilized by the contractor elsewhere on the same project on the adjacent streets.  A repetitive pattern of construction zone protection emerged that aligned with only one portion of the testimony, but not the other.  Certain elements of the same repetitive pattern were also evident in the limited photos taken from the time of the incident.

The dated street level imagery near the construction zone showed limited construction equipment, surrounded by limited construction zone protection, which more closely aligned with the contradictory testimony, but was actually from a different point in time.  Combining all of this evidence using a multi-faceted approach, the conditions actually present at the time of the incident were reconstructed, such that these unseen conditions could be visualized clearly utilizing verifiable facts.

It is not always this complicated, though.  Sometimes, a simple review and enhancement of the video surveillance footage from an incident will provide the fact verification needed.  There are also now some interior street level images being recorded inside of buildings.  Both of these modern technologies can also be used as part of a multi-disciplinary premises liability evaluation approach, revealing details that could not be easily seen before.

Post-incident conditions
Pre-incident conditions shown in interior street level image.

Consider another example, one where the video surveillance footage brought confusion, rather than clarity.  This basic fact pattern suggested that the wrong incident location was investigated by a property owner after an incident had occurred at a known location somewhere else.  The video surveillance footage captured the incident in a verifiable location, as well as the investigation conducted at that same location, but the car shown in the photos from the investigation didn’t match the car allegedly present at the time of the incident.  So, what created this discrepancy?

Photo from the time of the incident, allegedly showing the wrong car.
Enhanced video showing a change in the car parked next to the incident location between the time of the incident and the time of the investigation.

The key to understanding what happened was to visualize the conditions present at the different points in time, as viewed from the perspectives of the different parties at those different times.  Some constructed environments are dynamic in nature, with conditions that change frequently.  Combining review and enhancement from all of the video surveillance footage (not just the two segments referenced earlier), with review of the designed site features, in combination with in-field measurements, along with analysis of the changes in the dynamic environment over time, the conditions present at the time of the incident could again be reconstructed virtually, making the unseen clear to visualize.

In each case, the early preservation of evidence was key.  Early engagement of experts can also help to bring clarity to additional unseen, but verifiable, facts early on in the claims and/or litigation processes, improving the potential for early, informed decision-making.  The evidence is often out there somewhere, and our task, together, is to locate, verify, and analyze it in a multi-faceted manner, utilizing our arsenal of modern tools.  

What can we bring into clearer focus for you?

Authors

Christopher DeSantis, AIA, LEED AP, BD+C, O+M

Christopher DeSantis is an accomplished and credentialed Architect with a solid career record of innovative and outstanding architectural design. Prior to joining Haag, Christopher worked as an architect, collaborating with structural engineers in design and preparation of project details, wall sections, and construction documents. He conducted detailed forensic investigations and structural integrity inspections, documented in field reports, in addition to performing contract administration and working as project manager for multiple projects. He also worked as a Graduate Teaching Assistant, an intern/builder at SouthCoast DesignBuild, and as a construction laborer and mason. His project experience includes investigation and restoration of multiple school campuses and commercial buildings. He has designed many large condominium projects, multi-use developments, government buildings, retail and restaurants, and commercial buildings.

BENJAMIN T. IRWIN, P.E., DFE, CXLT

Benjamin T. Irwin is a Forensic Engineer with Haag Engineering Co. With dual degrees in architecture and civil engineering from Lehigh University, and over 20 years of diverse professional experience, Mr. Irwin provides a wide array of engineering, design, construction, and safety consulting and expert witness litigation support services.  He is a registered Professional Engineer (P.E.) in 23 jurisdictions and is recognized as a Model Law Engineer (MLE) by the National Council of Examiners for Engineering and Surveying (NCEES).  He is also a Board-certified Senior Member of the National Academy of Forensic Engineers (NAFE), holding the designation of Diplomate Forensic Engineer (DFE).  He had been qualified for, and testified within, local, state and Federal courts, with retentions from both plaintiffs and defendants.

 

Any opinions expressed herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect those of Haag Technical Services, Haag Engineering Co., Haag Education, or parent company, Haag Global, Inc.

Real-Time, Interactive Storm Data: Haag Hurricane GeoPortal, Sept. 2022

HURRICANE GEOPORTAL: real-time, INTERACTIVE storm data

According to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) annual mid-season update issued by the Climate Prediction Center, atmospheric and oceanic conditions still favor an above-normal 2022 Atlantic hurricane season. NOAA’s update to the 2022 outlook — which covers the entire six-month hurricane season that ends on November 30th — calls for 14-20 named storms (winds of 39 mph or greater), of which 6-10 could become hurricanes (winds of 74 mph or greater). Of those, 3-5 could become major hurricanes (winds of 111 mph or greater). NOAA provides these ranges with a 70% confidence.

The updated 2022 Atlantic hurricane season probability and number of named storms.

Considering this outlook for 2022 as well as very active recent hurricane seasons, it is imperative for businesses and individuals to have quick and reliable access to key data points. Haag believes that there is no such thing as too much data if the data is organized, relevant, and easy to access. The Haag Hurricane Geoportal checks these boxes and much more. It gives power to the user to view multiple datasets, interact with the data, and decide which information is most valuable to them. The Haag Hurricane Geoportal utilizes a map-based interface to provide on-demand access to several useful data sources including:

  • Real-time data for active and recent storms from the current hurricane season
  • Detailed storm data from the past three hurricane seasons with options to filter data based on storm name
  • Wind speeds and pressure at observed positions along a storm’s path
  • Direct access to official National Hurricane Center (NHC) storm reports
  • Radar and aerial imagery data for storms
  • Access to local climatological data reports
  • NEXRAD radar mosaics for current and past storms
Satellite imagery, observed track and positions, forecasted track and positions of Hurricane Ida, August 2021.
Before and after aerial imagery showing damages caused by Hurricane Laura, August 2020.

The Haag Hurricane Geoportal provides timely access to reliable data in one easy-to-use platform. While we can’t stop severe weather from happening, we can create tools to help make proactive planning and recovery much easier. The Hurricane Geoportal is your one-stop shop for keeping an eye on the data for the eye of the storm.

If you would like to learn more about the Haag Hurricane Geoportal, please contact Marcie Deffenbaugh, GIS Services Manager, to view a demo or for more information. Haag’s Hurricane Geoportal is available via subscription– one year subscription for $50/month or opt for a month-to-month subscription for $75/month.

View of observed tracks and positions, as well as forecasted tracks, positions, and error cones of active storms as of 10:00 AM EST on 9/7/2022.
View of Hurricane Kay with forecasted track, position, and error cone as of 10:00 AM EST on 9/7/2022.

Marcie Deffenbaugh is the Manager of GIS Services for Haag Technical Services, a division of Haag Global, Inc.  In this role, Ms. Deffenbaugh oversees initiatives related to GIS planning, system design, and system administration. She also manages a staff of GIS technicians, analysts, cartographers, and project administrative assistants who provide data validation and project management services for oil and gas clients. As the primary liaison between the client management teams and Haag Technical Services personnel, Ms. Deffenbaugh provides technical consulting services on a regular basis.

___

Any opinions expressed herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect those of Haag Technical Services, Haag Engineering Co., Haag Education, or parent company, Haag Global, Inc.

Congratulations Daniel Behrens, Promoted to Principal Engineer

Haag is very pleased to announce that Daniel Behrens, P.E., has been promoted to Principal Engineer! Based in Minneapolis, Dan Behrens has been a Haag Engineer for 13 years, with 24 years in the engineering field. He has been instrumental in serving Haag’s clients in Minneapolis, the Midwest, and beyond. Dan is a prolific course developer and a reliable ‘go-to’ engineer who is always willing to mentor new engineers and take on challenging assignments. Congratulations on this well-deserved promotion Dan!