Contents (Revised
for 2007)
Rasha Stino is Chair of NOVA Investigations for
2007. I will chair the Jury meeting to select NOVA Award winners, based on
your investigations. I am also available to answer any questions in
the meantime. Thanks for
all of your help. Bob
Home Page for
NOVA Award Investigations
This is the home page for
NOVA Award Investigations.
It is written by me, Bob Carr, solely for use by the NOVA Award
Investigation Team. Please read it carefully, so you do not miss
important information.
Some material is confidential, such as comments on individual Nominations and sample Investigation Reports.
Therefore, the path to this page is confidential.
If you are on the NOVA Award Investigation
Team, bookmark this page but do not tell others its path. It is a resource
for you, so return from time to time, because its content may change.
If you are not a part of the NOVA Award Investigation Team or CIF, please leave
and keep the contents and path confidential.
2007 Nomination Short List for
Investigation
2007
Click on the name of each Nomination to download
the NOVA Award Nomination file. Click on People to download
the Nomination Form that identifies the people responsible for the
Nomination and others who nominated it or who can provide information to
investigators (plus any potentially useful cover letters). Nomination 7 was
nominated by Bob Carr and does not have a People
page. Bob has some information on it. Click on
Key of each Nomination to go to Jury
Key Points (in section below) to be addressed in the investigation.
2007-03 University of Phoenix
Stadium - People -
Key
2007-07 Suspension Bridge
Cable-Stayed Cradle - Sources* -
Key
2007-09 Ultra-High Performance
Ductile Concrete - People -
Key
2007-13 Rocky Flats Closure Project-
People - Key
2007-14 Liquid Flow Control Valve
Insertion - People -
Key
2007-16 Prefab Moment / Space Frame
System - People - Key
2007-24 Spinning Saw Stops on Human
Contact - People -
Key
* Nominated by CIF, no signature page
available
Jury's Key Points on
Individual Investigations 2007
At its May 21, 2007 nomination screening
meeting, the Jury raised the following points to be addressed in
investigation of specific nominations. These are in addition to general
requirements of all nomination investigations. Note: Jurors at the screening meeting please review these
points and edit or suggest additional important points to be addressed.
- 2007-03
University of Phoenix Stadium
Investigation must be extended to all significant innovations in stadium
project, which includes design and construction of the retractable roof,
retractable field, and stadium architecture, and may include other
innovations.
- Describe each significant innovation in the overall stadium project
and how it works
List what the specific innovation(s) is/are and describe each
- Why is this roof unlike other retractable roofs? What makes this
better?
- What specific benefits (money, time, quality, function) resulted
from the innovation(s)?
- Can project innovations be applied to other stadium projects? Other
projects in general?
- List other projects on which the innovation(s) have been / will be
applied.
2007-07
Suspension Bridge Cable-Stayed Cradle
- How does it work with regard to its design, construction, use, and
maintenance?
- Describe its unique/innovative features?
- What are its similarities and differences to other
“contemporary”/competing bridge suspension systems?
- For what types of bridge projects is the cradle stay system
suitable/not suitable?
- How does it facilitate or complicate architectural and/or structural
design compared to traditional methods?
- How does its time, cost, safety, function, maintenance and life
compare to traditional methods?
- Identify projects on which this system has been / will be used.
2007-09
Ultra-High Performance Ductile Concrete
- Describe design, construction, and functional characteristics of
Ductal, particularly those that are innovative and distinguish it from
more traditional materials and the many other flexible concretes on the
market and/or being researched.
- What are its costs and quality compared to traditional concrete
(specify dollar amounts if possible)?
- For what applications is it suited and not suited?
- What are its current limitations in terms of applications, physical
properties and performance?
- What research and development of Ductal is taking place / is needed?
Identify projects on which it has been / will be used.
2007-13
Rocky Flats Closure Project
- The Jury will judge this project based on the innovations it
contains.
- Identify and describe in detail the project’s specific innovations
of all kinds, including contractual, managerial, technical, methods,
quality, safety, human resources, public relations, project size/scale.
- Identify and describe any particular combinations of contractual,
managerial, technical, methods, quality, safety, human resources, public
relations, project size/scale that was innovative.
- Identify innovations / combinations of innovations that can be
applied to other projects, particularly other environmental cleanup
projects / public projects.
What are the specific time, cost, and safety benefits of each of the
innovations compared to traditional methods?
- Describe in detail what was innovative about the “Treatment”,
“Technology” and “D&D” categories described in the nomination. How much
of it was an evolution of existing treatment methods and technology and
how much of it was innovative and new?
- What are some of the limitations encountered that warrant future R &
D?
- Identify projects where the innovation(s) have been or will be
applied.
2007-14
Liquid Flow Control Valve Insertion
- Why should Insta-Valve be considered innovative compared to existing
methods for replacing valves?
- What are the cost, time, quality, safety pros and cons compared to
alternative/traditional methods?
- Does it eliminate the need for line disinfection?
- What are its current uses / limitations and what are its expected
uses in the future? More specifically, to what types of pipe materials,
pipe sizes, transported fluids, pipe systems, construction / site
conditions is it suited / not suited?
- List projects on which it has been / will be used.
2007-16
Prefab Moment / Space Frame System
- How does the ConXtech system work with regard to its architectural /
structural design, materials, fabrication, erection, maintenance?
Describe its specific innovation(s).
- How does its cost, time, safety compare to traditional structural
steel design, fabrication, erection, maintenance?
- How does the capacity of its connections differ from other
structural steel connections?
- What special architect and engineering training / skill are required
in its design?
- What worker training / skill and equipment requirements does its
fabrication and erection require in comparison to traditional steel
structures?
- Describe the laboratory /field tests / earthquake experience it has
undergone.
- What are its building frame, load, height, other limitations?
- Are there any column and beam shapes and/or sizes that are not
compatible with ConXtech?
- Identify projects on which it has been / will be used.
2007-24 Spinning Saw Stops on
Human Contact
- How does it work? Identify and describe
the specific innovation(s) in SawStop?
- Identify and describe any competing
technologies/ products and how Sawstop differs from and improves on
them.
- Under what ranges of conditions does it
work / not work with regard to material sawed, worker body part
contacted, hand orientation, hand covering (such as gloves).
- For what types of saws is it suitable /
not suitable?
- What are the costs of SawStop saws and
what are competing costs?
- How do SawStop saw functions,
capabilities, quality compare to conventional saws? Do workers,
contractors like to use them?
- Provide information on any available
experience / reviews / statistics regarding SawStop use, quality,
safety, sales?
Letter to Short List Innovators /
Nominators
CIF is now sending a letter in my name for each short
list / semi-finalist nomination, of which you can download a draft as
semi_letter_2007.pdf to all those identified in the
nomination as primarily responsible and to all who made the nomination. As
an Investigator you need to download, print, and read
semi_letter_2007.pdf so you know what the people
you contact know. You can get full names and addresses of the people to whom
it is being sent for your nomination at the People page in the
Short List of Nominations above. Note: No such
letter has been sent on Nomination 7, because it was nominated by CIF.
Investigator has to communicate directly with people who are in the
sources. The original short list
letter is semi_letter_2007.doc.
Preparing the NOVA Award
Investigation Report
Download
Preparing the NOVA Award
Investigation Report as PDF file that gives directions and
formatting for NOVA Award Investigation Reports by NOVA Award Investigators.
Each Investigator should follow this very closely, to insure that the
Investigator's Report provides the information the NOVA Awards Jury needs to
select winners from among the Nominations investigated.
See Revised "Supporting Exhibits" and Bob Carr
address/contact info in Preparing the NOVA Award Investigation Report.
See Key Points raised by Jury.
Investigation
Reports are Confidential for Five Years
Investigation Reports are held strictly
confidential for a period of five years from the date of the year’s Nova
Award presentation, after which they are available for review as part of the
Construction Innovation Forum archives. This is done so CIF investigators
can tell persons they interview that their comments are confidential, so the
persons feel comfortable giving candid opinions. Investigation Reports are
used internally by CIF on a need to know basis, distributed only to the Jury
and to others involved in the Jury and Nova Awards program processes and
available otherwise only by individual approval for construction innovation
research who agree to hold the information confidential in accordance with
CIF policy. Therefore, CIF Investigators and others are not to give anyone
access to direct information in an Investigator’s Report except as
appropriate within CIF policy. CIF Investigators may otherwise use their
professional discretion in giving personal and professional opinions to
others.
Investigation
Reports Can Be Downloaded
Nova Award Jurors, Investigators, and CIF Officers are welcome to download
the Investigation Reports on the short list / semi-finalist nominations
for 2005 listed below. However, they are are confidential to others for a period of
five years from date of Nova Award presentation, November 2005. To
download the Nomination, click on the title. To download the Investigation
Report, click on "Report."
2005-01 Prefabricated Reinforcing
Cage - Report
2005-04 Lifting Fully Assembled
Bridges - Report
2005-08 Wire Clip-On Reinforcing Tie
- Report
2005-13 5D Virtual Construction
- Report
2005-19 Contractor Wastewater
Filtration - Report
2005-25 Asphalt Milling Attachments
- Report
2005-27 Pipeline Leak Noise
Correlator- Report
2005-30 Soy Based Polyurethane Foam
- Report
Below are Investigation Reports for 2006 NOVA Awards Nominations, subject
to same provisions as described above for 2005 Reports.
2006-08 Site
Subsurface Characterization/Analysis Report - Key
2006-10 Field Welding
Polyethylene Pipe Report - Key
2006-17 Wireless Electric
Switch Controls Report - Key
2006-21 Self-Compacting/Sealing
Aggregate Report - Key
2006-22 Patterned Extruded
Concrete Wall Report - Key
2006-23 Asphalt Pavement Radar Analysis
Report -
Key
2006-24 Prefab GFRP Concrete Bridge
Deck Panels Report - Key
2006-30 3D GPS-Based Earthmoving
Equipment Report - Key
Investigation Report Deadline
/ Destination 2007
Completed Investigation Reports should be sent before July 16, 2007
to:
Rasha M. Stino
RashaStino@yahoo.com
Ph: 519-969-7692
Fax: 519-969-1549
3347 Gundy Park Cres.
Windsor, ON, Canada N9E 4R5
Contact me at Robert I. Carr
Phone: (734) 665-8287
Fax: (734) 665-1737
Email: RICarr@RICarr.com
542 Heritage Drive
Ann Arbor, MI 48105
Notes:
I need to get Investigation Reports by the deadline,
so I have time to prepare them to send to the Jury by August 1, 2007.
Please send Rasha an email or fax when you send your
report in, so I know it is finished and on the way.
NOVA Award Investigation
Report Template
ReportTemplate
is a Microsoft Word file for investigators to use as a formatted
template to write their Investigation Reports. It is a companion file to
Preparing the NOVA Award
Investigation Report,
written in the same format. It is available in the following file formats.
-
ReportTemplate.doc (19 Kb)
is a Microsoft Word file.
-
ReportTemplate.pdf (10 Kb)
is a PDF file.
I recommend you download and save
ReportTemplate.doc (see instructions
below) and use it as a starting template in your word processor. It
can even be resaved as a Word template (ReportTemplate.dot). You can
download
ReportTemplate.pdf
(see instructions below)
to see what the format looks like, but it cannot be directly used as a
template. I can also send either file as an email attachment to any
Investigator.
Sample Set of Questions To Ask
Photios Ioannou developed a letter that contains a set of
questions that can be sent to the primary person providing information on a
Nominated Innovation. Download it as
- InfoReq.doc (32 Kb) is a
rich text format file
that can be converted into a MS Word or other word processor file.
- InfoReq.pdf
(10 Kb) is a PDF file.
- InfoReq.htm (51 Kb) is
the file as a web page.
Sample
Investigation Reports
Below are several past Investigation Reports that investigators
can use as examples. For the most part the Reports use the recommended
format. (These are PDF files. See
instructions below for downloading PDF files.)
1999-06 3D Machine Control (3D-MC)
Without figures (33
Kb)
With figures (466 Kb)
1999-04 Snap-Tite
Column Reinforcement System (20 Kb)
1999-20 Asphalt Multi-Integrated Roller (AMIR) (40 Kb)
Downloading
Document Files
A Microsoft Word document can be downloaded and saved
on ones local hard drive, using your browser. The file can then be used as a
template by the investigator, with all formatting in place.
Viewing, Downloading,
Printing Files/Nominations
Nominations are stored and downloaded as PDF files. You can
view a nomination in your browser by clicking on its short-title, and you
can print the nomination once you have it in your browser.
(You need the
Adobe Acrobat
Reader to view and print PDF files.)
To download and save a file on your disk drive, click on it in whatever
manner works for your browser and operating system. (For example, in
Internet Explorer 4, right click your mouse on the short-title and select
"Save Target As" to download the file.) This will save the PDF file onto the
disk drive and directory you specify, with the name you specify. (We
recommend you retain the PDF suffix.) Nomination files are now named
according to their number. For example,
Asphalt Milling Attachments, which is
nomination 25 in 2005, is file nom-2005-25.pdf.
You are welcome to distribute the summaries, entire set, or
individual nominations either as computer file(s) or in printed form. You
may also photocopy nominations, but photocopying loses much of the detail,
particularly in the graphics.
For more information contact:
Robert I. Carr
Phone: (734) 665-8287
Fax: (734) 665-1737
Email: RICarr@RICarr.com
|
|
|
