If you’ve ever worked in construction, demolition, or even large-scale industrial maintenance, you’ve probably heard the term “by opening method” tossed around more than once. I’ve been supplying tools, training, and on-site support for this exact approach for over 12 years now, and every other week I get the same question: “Is this actually a systematic way to do this, or just a random hack we’ve been using for decades?” By Opening Method
Let me cut to the chase—at first, it was definitely the latter. Back when I started out (fresh out of trade school, working for a small demolition crew in Ohio), by opening was just a quick fix. If we needed to get through a concrete wall, we’d punch a small hole in the top, slide in a jackhammer bit, and go to town. No plan, no sequence, just “make a hole and work it.” But over the years, I’ve watched it evolve into something way more intentional—and that’s where the confusion starts. A lot of people see the end result (a clean, precise opening in a structure without compromising the rest of it) and assume it’s just common sense. But if you dig into how teams actually use it now, it’s become a lot more systematic than most folks give it credit for.
First, let’s get on the same page about what by opening actually is, because that’s half the battle. From what I’ve seen, most crew leads define it as a controlled, localized opening in a structural element (concrete, masonry, steel beams, whatever) that uses the surrounding intact material as a support structure. The whole point is that you don’t have to demo or cut the entire element—you only remove what’s necessary for your access or modification. Early on, that definition was loose, but now? It’s got a clear step-by-step process that most reputable crews follow, even if they don’t call it a “system.”
Let’s walk through a recent example I was on last quarter. We were supporting a crew retrofitting an old hospital’s elevator shafts—they needed to open up a 4-foot by 6-foot space in a 12-inch concrete shear wall to run new piping. First, the foreman didn’t just grab a jackhammer. He started with a pre-job assessment: he pulled up the original structural blueprints, marked where the rebar was (using a rebar detector I supply to most of my clients), and calculated exactly how much the wall could flex without failing. That’s step one now: site and structural audit. No shortcuts here. If you skip that, you might accidentally cut a rebar beam that the entire building relies on. I’ve seen that happen once—crew didn’t check the blueprints, nicked a load-bearing rebar, and had to bring in a structural engineer to fix it before they could even start. Cost them $20k in delays. That’s not systematic?
Next, we did a “starter hole” at the top corner of the planned opening. Why top? Because gravity works with you, not against you. Drill a small, 6-inch diameter hole at the highest point, then feed a hydraulic jack or a diamond saw blade through it. That way, when you cut or break down, the debris falls down away from your workspace, not on you or the new structure. Old way was to start at the bottom, which meant hauling debris out and risking damage to the floor below. Now? It’s part of the system: location of the starter hole to leverage gravity and material integrity.
Then came the sequence of removal. We didn’t just jackhammer the whole opening at once. We cut three sides first, left the fourth “hinge” side intact, then carefully broke that last section away once the other sides were free. That prevents the wall from cracking unexpectedly—something that happens all the time when you hit it unevenly. The foreman had a checklist he worked off: 1) mark boundaries, 2) detect utilities/rebar, 3) cut three sides, 4) remove core, 5) smooth edges. That’s not a random process. That’s a system.
But wait, I know what a lot of skeptics will say: “That’s just good construction practice, not a unique ‘by opening’ system.” Fair point—sort of. What makes by opening different is that it’s tailored specifically for localized openings, not general demo. Most construction methods (like full wall demo, or core drilling) are one-size-fits-all. By opening is adjustable, but only within a set of rules. For example, there are load limits: you can’t open a spot in a wall that’s more than 50% of the wall’s height without adding temporary bracing. That’s a specific guideline I include in the training I sell—most crews that don’t use our training figure that out the hard way when a wall shifts mid-project.
Another thing people miss: by opening isn’t just for concrete. I recently worked with a steel fabrication crew using it to cut openings in I-beams for new mechanical lines. The process is almost identical: audit the beam’s load rating, mark the opening at the top, cut three sides, leave a hinge. Same rules apply. So it’s not tied to one material—it’s a framework that adapts, which is what makes it systematic. A true system isn’t rigid, it’s a set of principles you apply to different situations. That’s exactly what by opening is now.
But let’s be honest—there’s still a lot of “non-systematic” use out there. A lot of small crews, especially in residential work, still do by opening as a last-minute fix. Someone needs a door cut through a basement wall, and the guy with a jackhammer shows up, punches a hole where it looks okay, and calls it a day. That’s not systematic. But that’s not the method’s fault—that’s the crew’s. The method itself has evolved to be way more structured than it was 10 years ago. I’ve seen engineering firms start incorporating it into project specs now. Last year, a school district in Chicago used by opening (following our step-by-step system) to cut 12 openings in concrete foundation walls for new plumbing, and the structural inspector signed off on it without a second look. That’s not a hack— that’s a validated approach.
So why the confusion? A lot of people in the industry learned by opening the old way, and they don’t want to adjust. They think if it worked when they were a kid, it’s fine. But construction has changed. We have tighter timelines, stricter safety rules, and higher liability now. You can’t just wing it. That’s why more of my clients are asking for the systematic version, not the old random one.
I’ll admit, when I first started supplying training materials, I called it “advanced by opening tips” to make it sound less intimidating. Now I call it the By Opening Standard Method (BOSM), and it’s got a full set of protocols: pre-job structural review, equipment calibration (we sell digital jackhammers that adjust power based on material density—another systematic touch), sequence checklists, and post-opening inspections. Last month, I sat in on a project where they used BOSM to open a 10-foot wide hole in a 16-inch concrete wall for a new fire escape. They finished 2 days ahead of schedule, had zero safety incidents, and the engineer signed off on the structural integrity report in 24 hours. That’s the payoff of a systematic approach.
Wait, let’s address the counterpoint someone will bring up: “What about small jobs? Like cutting a 12-inch hole for a dryer vent. Do you need a full system for that?” No, but even there, the rules apply. You still check for rebar or gas lines, drill a starter hole at the top, and work carefully. It’s just a scaled-down version of the same system. The core principles don’t change. A system doesn’t have to be complicated—it’s just a consistent way to get a result, every time, without guessing. That’s exactly what by opening has become.
As a supplier, I see the gap between the old and new all the time. We recently had a contractor come to us because his crew had been using by opening for years, but they kept getting damaged walls and delayed inspections. We sent our training team out for a two-day workshop, and after that, they used our standardized process on their next three jobs and had zero issues. They even upgraded from their old manual jackhammers to our hydraulic ones that sync with the opening sequence. That’s when it clicks for most people: systematic methods don’t just make jobs easier—they save time, money, and keep people safe.
I don’t want to pretend by opening is perfect. There are still edge cases where it’s not the right approach—like if you need to cut a hole that’s too big, or in a load-bearing column that can’t be modified. But for the vast majority of localized openings, it’s a really solid method, and the shift to systematic has made it even better.
So if you’re out there wondering whether to treat by opening like a random trick or a formal approach: look at your project, look at the rules, and think about consistency. If you want a result that’s safe, on time, and inspectable, follow the sequence. If you want to wing it, you might get away with it once, but sooner or later you’ll pay for it.
I’ve been in this game long enough to see trends come and go. Back when I started, people thought core drilling was the only “safe” way to make an opening. Now core drilling is reserved for small, round holes, and by opening is the go-to for larger, precision cuts. The reason? It’s become systematic. It’s not just “make a hole” anymore—it’s a process with checks, balances, and rules that anyone can follow, as long as they take the time to learn it.
At the end of the day, construction is about doing work that lasts. You don’t want a wall that’s going to crack in five years because you hacked an opening into it. A systematic by opening method ensures that the opening is there for what you need, and the rest of the structure stays intact. That’s why we’ve invested so much in refining our training and equipment around this—because we believe it’s more than a hack. It’s a valid, systematic approach that’s only going to get more standard in the industry.
If you’re working on a project and want to talk through whether by opening (the systematic kind, that is) is right for you, or if you need equipment, training, or on-site support to get it done right, reach out to our team anytime. We’ve helped crews from residential renovations to large-scale industrial projects make by opening work for them—safely, on time, and without the headaches that come from winging it.
Sectional Garage Door References
- Construction Safety Association of Ontario. (2022). "Localized Structural Modification Guidelines: By Opening Methods." Retrieved from industry safety publications
- American Concrete Institute. (2021). "Practice for Concrete Repair and Alteration." ACI 562-21
- National Demolition Association. (2023). "Standardized Protocols for Controlled Demolition and Access Openings." NDA Technical Report Series
Hangzhou Shenborui Industry & Trade Co., Ltd.
Address:
E-mail: markrod@163.com
WebSite: https://www.markrod.com/
