No? That’s good because the dinosaurs went extinct a very long time ago and Jurassic Park is only a movie. The extinction took place because most dinosaurs couldn’t adapt to uncontrollable external forces. Some, however, did and eventually became the birds we see today. Those were flying dinosaurs and they were able to get away from whatever was happening around them.
Can we apply the theme about extinction, adaptation, and survival to the mechanical insulation industry? I think we can, and that’s what this article is about.
I meet with mechanical engineers across Canada through ASHRAE, trade shows, and lunch-and-learn sessions. I sense there is a movement underway that is driven by our industry’s inability to regulate itself. We, collectively, have created a vacuum that has to be filled. Each of the engineering firms I’ve encountered is dealing with that vacuum in its own way. The implications are serious.
The mechanical engineering community is without question very concerned about:
• Quality.
• Unauthorized substitution of products.
• Underfunded contractors.
• Contractors who don’t read specifications.
• Lack of contractor technical expertise.
• Lack of input by manufacturers and distributors into updating mechanical insulation specifications.
Let’s explore each of these concerns.
Quality
This area is by far the most contentious. The cost of entry into the insulation contracting business is very low and basically consists of a bit of experience (sometimes not even that), a ladder, a pick-up truck, and a distributor willing to extend credit. There is no professional accreditation that we see in so many other trades. There should be minimum standards that have to be met before anyone can call himself or herself an insulation contractor.
You will see specifications state a contractor must be a “member in good standing” of TIAC or of a provincial mechanical insulation association. So what? Does this convey confidence the contractor will produce quality work? TIAC is not organized to vet contractor-members or inspect installations. What is evident on too many job sites is that quality suffers when a contract is awarded strictly on the lowest bid.
A mechanical engineering firm instituted a process requiring any interested contractor to submit a three-page application form, irrespective of the contractor’s history and experience. The engineering firm selected five contractors authorized to bid on projects. If any other contractors want to bid, the application form has to be submitted and approved. If a contractor refuses to go through the process and become an approved contractor, that bid will be rejected. The engineering firm is insisting the contractor produce the highest quality, be financially viable, and contribute meaningful recommendations.
The mechanical engineer recognizes that quality and financial stability comes at a cost and they are prepared to pay. In the long run, the “cost” is insignificant.
Unauthorized substitution of products
It happens – let’s face it – when a product isn’t available, the spec is incorrect, in the case of special orders, etc. Be aware that if this is done without documentation, the contractor is at risk. If the substitution is an inferior product (by reason of non- compliance or quality, to name a few), the contractor is at risk.
Underfunded contractors
Should a contractor accept a contract without having the ability to fully fund the project, the contractor is at risk. Should a bonded contractor go bankrupt part way through a project, the mess that’s left is serious, with major delays, and then there’s the challenge of finding a contractor to come in and complete the job along with the realization there will be additional costs.
Contractors who don’t read specifications
This incident happened recently and underscores another frustration mechanical engineers have with our industry. Previous specifications out of this firm allowed for flex wrap on elbows and fittings. Then one day that changed. The contractor, forever and a day, always installed flex wrap. The contractor was accustomed to the engineer’s specification. You know what happened, right?
The new specification read, in part, “Elbows and fittings: pre- moulded rigid mineral fibre pipe insulation for elbows and fittings. Flexible or blanket insulation is not acceptable.”
What happened? The contractor installed flex wrap and had to replace it with what was specified. Arguments, bad feelings, and unnecessary costs to the contractor followed.
Lack of contractor and distributor technical expertise
There is an overall lack of understanding when it comes to energy codes and product recommendations for specific applications. I include here the inability to use calculator tools to determine optimum insulation thicknesses, payback, and GHG emission reductions.
A mechanical engineering firm decided that although it is the authority, it isn’t the expert when it comes to a topic as specific as mechanical insulation on ducts. The firm was not going to state what product to use and what thickness for whatever the application. Instead, the firm dropped the NECB- 2015 minimum duct insulation table into the specification and basically said to anyone wanting to bid: you figure it out, let me know, and I’ll approve the proposal (or not).
Lack of manufacturers’ and distributors’ input into specifications
I hear both sides. From the manufacturer’s perspective, “Why should I spend time updating a generic specification when it helps my competitor?” From the distributor’s perspective, “I pay my sales people to sell, not to do the manufacturer’s job.” From the engineer’s perspective, “I don’t have time to do the research, so incorrect information will remain in the specification.”
How to reconcile these opposing viewpoints? To do nothing means unavailable or obsolete products are specified, insulation thicknesses don’t reflect current requirements, and confusion permeates the entire process.
My take on how to resolve this situation is that any sales/ marketing type worth his or her salt will immediately see the competitive advantage being offered. Since this article is not about “Selling 501” (a few steps up from “Selling 101”), I’ll leave the resolution to your imagination.
Where is all of this going?
The answer is a national Quality Assurance Program, and the sooner the better. A relevant QAP will tie together everything we stand for as an association.
Without question, we need to take control of our future because to ignore the drumbeats means others will determine our future. To those in our industry who understand the implications, it means they will move forward. Let’s call this survival [or, “Live long and prosper” (thank you Mr. Spock)].
To those who remain disinterested or unable to see the writing on the wall, well, remember the dinosaurs. They’re gone!
