We welcome readers to submit their own stories of baffling project insulation requirements and weird specifications. Send your stories or requests to be interviewed to editor@insulation.org.

Greetings, fellow insulation enthusiasts! As we all know, the world of construction specifications can be a perplexing and often humorous place. From the sublime to the ridiculous, we've all encountered those specifications that leave us scratching our heads, wondering if the specifier truly understands what they’re asking for.

To share these experiences—and hopefully prevent future bouts of head-scratching—I’m thrilled to introduce a new column in our magazine: “Bad Specs.”

“Bad Specs” will explore the fascinating world of—yes, you guessed it—poorly written specifications. Each month, an Insulation Outlook reader will share their experiences, diving into the depths of confusion and uncovering the most perplexing, puzzling, and downright hilarious requests that have graced our desks (or, more accurately, our inboxes) over the years. Think of it as a cautionary tale, a chance to learn from the missteps of others, and a reminder of the importance of clear and concise communication in our industry.

For this inaugural column, Insulation Outlook’s Julie McLaughlin, invited me, Scott Sinclair (also from Johns Manville), and Doug Fast of Owens Corning to discuss the most common types of baffling requests we receive, so she could determine how to shape this column. We all had some good ones.

Doug Fast offered a great analogy for a common problem in specs: a lack of detail. He said, “It would be like going into a restaurant and ordering your meal as ‘beef’… You may get a hamburger or a steak, and both technically fit your request. With specifications, you need to define the details of the product you actually want.”

We see the opposite problem, too. Some people order a steak but then insist that it be cooked on a specific grill, using a specific type of charcoal, cooked precisely to 165°F, and served bloody. Only some of those requests work together.

During our discussion, we found that specification errors tend to fall into certain categories. Here’s a handy list to help future authors frame their experiences in a way that can help others:

• Cut-and-Paste Minefields
  Do you know how old that language is? Was it created in this decade? Before you were born?
• Accidental Technical Errors and Transposed Numbers
  Simple mistakes, big problems!
• Conflicting Standards and Requests
  “Waiter, I’d like one bloody, well-done steak, please!”
• Missing Links
  References to standards and materials that no longer exist.
• Prescriptive versus Performance Specifications
  Example: Nominal density versus actual density: “I need 8 pounds, but this is actually 6½.” “Yep.” “Why is XXX called 6½ pounds in the residential market but 8 pounds in the industrial market?”
• Specifying a Characteristic versus Specifying System Performance
  Example: Insisting on a certain density rather than requiring the insulation to meet a specific thermal performance standard.
• Getting the Insulation Right but Adding Bad Installation Requests
  Example: Requiring the contractor to secure insulation with staples or screws on a below-ambient system. Whoops! There goes your system.
• System Performance Metrics Applied to Products
  Example: What is the Sound Transmission Class (STC) of a fiber glass board? An STC value is a measure of the system performance of a wall, floor, or ceiling partition.

We welcome readers to submit their own stories of baffling project insulation requirements and weird specifications.

Sometimes, the requests we receive are really outdated. The question I got recently was in a league of its own. Occasionally, people specify a certain brand of insulation—only to learn that “Brand X” hasn’t been manufactured since the rotary phone was king. This was worse. Someone recently asked about a mastic product produced 100 years ago and installed on a hydro dam in the 1930s, maybe as part of FDR's New Deal. They thought it had be applied as part of a "Hoosier" expansion joint. They asked if there was a friction or cohesive test for it. I asked for more details, and in response, I received a tele-ex! For those of you asking what that is, it is a technology that predates the fax machine! And it get better. This tele-ex mentions previous information being sent via TELEGRAM. (The image below is what they sent me.) If you are working on a project that was built by telegrammed instructions, maybe stop for a moment and ask yourself if this is the best you can do. Is this the best system for the equipment or company? Maybe it is time to investment in new insulation. Just a guess, but I feel like we can make a better system for you now.

This is all the information they had in their records to go on. I feel for them. Imagine taking on a project and this is all the information that they can provide you. It mentions a asphalt and asbestos mixture so clearly that is no longer being made!

Scott Sinclair, saying that Johns Manville has also gotten calls for replacement parts made “during the war.” We haven’t manufactured those since the 1940s!

Everyone in the industry has encountered boilerplate language requesting materials made with asbestos—despite its ban in the 1970s. That means no one at that company has updated those specs in nearly three generations! I know insulation is just a small part of the job, but come on!

In future “Bad Specs” columns, we’ll delve into other fascinating topics, such as the perils of “cut-and-paste” specifications, the amusing consequences of transposed terms, and the occasional appearance of mythical insulation materials that defy the laws of physics.

So buckle up, my friends. It’s going to be a wild ride. And remember: A little laughter goes a long way in this industry. After all, what’s life without a good chuckle at the expense of a particularly perplexing specification?

I hope you find this column engaging and informative!

Disclaimer: This column is intended for entertainment purposes only. Any resemblance to actual persons, living or dead, is purely coincidental (and probably a little exaggerated). Consult the experts before trying to resurrect ancient insulation materials.