1163

BUSINESS NEWS VIRTUAL REALITY COMPANY, IMMERSACAD, UNVEILS NEW WEBSITE, APP ImmersaCAD , an innovative company bringing light to the emerging platform of virtual reality, has announced the launch of its new website, and its app, now available in the Google Play Store. With the help of Lee Martin from the University of Tennessee’s College of Engineering, four classmates came together to design a virtual reality software for navigation of 3-D CAD models. “What makes ImmersaCAD unique is that it solves the problem of motion sickness

app – ImmersaCAD Cardboard Version 1.0 or ImmersaCAD GearVR Version 1.0 – features integrations for both the Google Cardboard and Samsung GearVR immersive displays. “Working with ImmersaCAD is an incredible experience, and it will revolutionize how design professionals communicate their work,” said Kyle Leinart, vice president of software development and a co-inventor of One-touch Navigation. “Through ImmersaCAD, designers will be able to show the emotional impact of their work instead of simply presenting a project on a piece of paper or on a 2-D screen.”

typically associated with virtual reality through its intuitive patent-pending One-Touch Navigation system,” said Martin. “Now you can explore without getting uncomfortable and fully navigate your models with ease.” ImmersaCAD targets architects, interior designers and engineers who want to experience their CAD designs and serve their clients in a compelling way. The software is made to adapt virtual reality equipment for use in architecture and engineering applications. The devices enable architects to walk through and around planned structures, rather than simply reviewing sets of drawings. The new

WILLIAM QUATMAN, from page 9

form? Only time will tell, but more than a few attorneys and insurers are concerned that the AIA’s planet saving motives will result in increased claims and liability for its members. The AIA’s white paper states: “While acknowledging the potential benefits of transparency, some architects and legal counselors have raised concerns about the possibility of increased exposure to legal liability coming from seeking and retaining information on product contents. One common concern is that a building occupant may claim to have been injured by a substance contained in a product, and may assert that the architect was aware of the presence of the allegedly injurious substance and had a duty to avoid specifying products containing that substance.” The paper goes on to say, candidly, “With limited information about the risk of new forms of transparency information, and with legal precedent not yet established, there are legitimate concerns.” The paper then goes on to discuss mitigation strategies and solutions. The AIA Contract Documents Committee has prepared model contract language to limit the risk for architects who undertake materials transparency initiatives. The new language is in Section 20 of the AIA Guide for Amendments to AIA Owner-Architect Agreements Document B503-2007. The question is whether architects will want to use this lengthy disclaimer as a red-lined revision to the AIA forms, and whether an owner will accept it. The answer is “no” or “doubtful” to both questions. The AIA Board’s Position Statement “encourages architects to promote transparency in materials’ contents and in their environmental and human health impacts.” The white paper goes a step further than encouragement, calling this an “ethical imperative” and saying that this “strong urging” to AIA members is supported by the AIA Code of Ethics charge that “AIA Members should be environmentally responsible and advocate for sustainable building.” Is this an area that the Jefferson Literary and Debating Society should weigh in on? Or is it too late to turn back the HPD tide? WILLIAM QUATMAN, Esq., is general counsel and senior vice president at Burns & McDonnell Engineering Co. He can be reached at bquatman@burnsmcd.com.

by the manufacturer, not required by law. Some feel that if architects require an HPD for any product they specify, then the building material manufacturers and sales reps will either have to disclose the contents or risk not being specified. If the HPD shows a toxic content, this disclosure might pressure manufacturers to change the contents, a voluntary way to get bad stuff out of building materials, even though not required by law. Some question whether this is a proper role for the AIA to take, and whether this should be driven instead by a governmental agency, like the EPA. But, the AIA is never shy about taking the lead on environmental initiatives. This time, however, many lawyers are wondering if the Institute has helped the planet but hurt their members. As for the risks, they are obvious. When an architect specifies a material that has volatile organic compounds, say for a new elementary school, hospital or day care center, and there is a published HPD alerting of the contents, one of two theories might be argued in a lawsuit against the design firm. First, that the designer “knowingly” specified a hazardous material, thereby exposing the building occupants to a health risk, or that the architect was negligent in not checking the product’s HPD before specifying it. We can only imagine the cross- examination and deposition questioning of architects in either scenario, creating a troublesome situation. Perhaps ignorance is bliss in this case, and not knowing the content is better than having all of this information in the public domain. What is now in the public domain, however, is downright scary. As an example, the HPD for a ceiling tile lists cancer-causing contents. The question posed to the architect might be: “So, let me understand. You knew that this ceiling tile had cancer-causing components, and yet you specified its installation throughout my client’s building, is that correct, sir?” These are no-win questions, to which a “yes” or “no” answer creates potential liability. While the AIA has provided sample disclaimer language, not court-tested at this point, what about the 95 percent of contracts that do not have AIA language in them? Will the standard of care now require an architect to review all materials specified for the HPD disclosures, and only specify those that don’t have a “cancer” box checked on the

THE ZWEIG LETTER August 8, 2016, ISSUE 1163

Made with FlippingBook Annual report