Specifying Paint

Log Out | Topics | Search Moderators | Register | Edit Profile

Author Message Robert E. Woodburn, AIA, CSI, CCS, CCCA Senior Member Username: bob_woodburn Post Number: 174 Registered: 11-2010 Posted on Wednesday, March 23, 2016 - 06:56 pm:    There are old threads on this, but I don't recall much recent discussion. Since painting guide specs are inherently complex, can we streamline the process? Does anyone have opinions on the following (or other paint spec issues)? How do you do it? 1. If one has a choice, is it better to use MPI numbers or not? (or specify them for some, but not all, applications?) 2. If using MPI numbers, could adding specific product names and/or additional stipulations help? 3. Should one list only major national manufacturers (Sherwin-Williams, PPG, Benjamin Moore)? 4. When, for private work, should one allow (or prohibit) substitution requests? 5. What about regionals, other brands owned by majors (P&L, Martin Senour, Valspar etc.), big box brands (Behr), etc.? 6. Should one name one, and only one, acceptable product for each manufacturer for each application? 7. If so, what's the best way to determine apples-to-apples product equivalency? 8. Or should one not name any specific products at all? 9. Other than VOC limits, should one specify detailed criteria (wet or dry film thickness, solids content, other tests, etc.)? 10. If so, which criteria are most useful? Which are not? 11. With 3 coats, are standard products (e.g., A-100, Speedhide) preferable to premium (except for special applications)? 12. Does anyone systematically track whether the products actually used are satisfactory? Guest (Unregistered Guest) Unregistered guest Posted on Thursday, March 24, 2016 - 01:21 pm:    1. I have problems with patronizing a private, pay-to-play Canadian organization (NAFTA? ). With LEED and VOC limits in various regions, not all MPI "systems" nor "approved products" are practical or legal. 2. Yeah, you could but do you have the time and desire to research the minutia of each product's characteristics/properties to assure that it "fits" each category…in addition to each project's specific criteria? 3. You don't do yourA/E clients any favors by just naming majors when A/E has to cross-check a paint submittal with local/regional products. 4. See No. 3. 5. See No. 3. 6. Depends on specific manufacturer, but in general, I prefer to allow as much flexibility as possible within subjective (quality) limits. 7. Impossible to do…unless you have chemistry background and can make sense of the different chemistries involved….and have the time to constantly monitor for changes (in product composition/chemistry). 8. See No. 3. 9. See No. 2, but if you do, add spreading rate to the equation. 10. Useful to who? Painter, project owner, your A/E client? All have distinct…and different priorities. I also consider owner's future maintenance painting criteria. 11. See Nos. 2, 7, and 10. 12. Like most anything else I specify, I'm seldom given positive feedback…if any at all. Complex…eh? Robert E. Woodburn, AIA, CSI, CCS, CCCA Senior Member Username: bob_woodburn Post Number: 175 Registered: 11-2010 Posted on Thursday, March 24, 2016 - 03:01 pm:    Thanks - especially for taking on all 12 questions. 1. So do I, which is why I'm looking for a better way. But there may be no practicable solution... 2. Right. I've already spent too much time on this, and haven't even scratched the surface... 3. Agreed. Then does that mean its better to try to name acceptable products of all viable companies in a given regional market, or omit them all and go with a generic performance spec? 6. Yes, but then the question becomes, where do you draw the line (on subjective quality limits)? 7. Yes -- and MPI presumably has that expertise, but their system does not allow one to compare products (or even categories) to each other. In that respect, Consumer Reports does a better job. But it has its own deficiencies. 9. OK. So how does one determine what spreading rate range is acceptable? Coverage is presumably inversely related to film thickness, gallons required, and cost. 10. Owner maintenance criteria is indeed important. For compatibility, for one thing. But if repainting is routinely done frequently (e.g., every 4 to 6 years), do products with long warranties or other "premium" features make sense? Robert E. Woodburn, AIA, CSI, CCS, CCCA Senior Member Username: bob_woodburn Post Number: 176 Registered: 11-2010 Posted on Thursday, March 24, 2016 - 03:19 pm:    Another way of looking at this might be, how can one best specify to accomplish the following: A. Give the Owner the optimum painted finishes (appropriate to job requirements) for the money. B. Give painting subs confidence that they can bid competitively, and that the products and applications specified will not be problematic (so as not to increase the cost unnecessarily). C. For the design professional, streamline review of submittals. Steven Bruneel, AIA, CSI-CDT, LEED-AP, EDAC Senior Member Username: redseca2 Post Number: 537 Registered: 12-2006 Posted on Thursday, March 24, 2016 - 03:23 pm:    I am going to step away from numbering my bullet points and make more generalized comments. I do not like MPI so I only use it when it is a client requirement. My sense is that paints of different qualities can end up under the same MPI number. Also, this master list of everyone who makes a certain type of coating product seems to be at best of academic interest because as others note, paints tend to be available by region. So I have no interest in being told a paint sold in the Canadian Maritimes is equal to one sold in San Diego. For our painting sections I include an MSWord table that lists all of the required primer and topcoat finishes needed for the project. With a regular spec page in portrait format I can comfortably fit 3 manufacturers listed across the top with the products descending vertically. Providing 3 manufacturers satisfies most public bidding requirements. Paint companies tend to be regional so for each project I need to do a little research before I just plug in my local favorites. Our firm has offices all over, so usually my "research" is limited to an internal email to offices near the project site. I am much too lazy to create and maintain a master spreadsheet for all these manufacturers and their products, so my template consists of a collection of these tables from different projects that I can simply search and then copy and paste the appropriate vertical rows from. Robert E. Woodburn, AIA, CSI, CCS, CCCA Senior Member Username: bob_woodburn Post Number: 177 Registered: 11-2010 Posted on Thursday, March 24, 2016 - 03:58 pm:    Thanks, Steven. Sounds like a workable approach. I have often thought that using tables in the way you described might be a good idea for several sections. However, AFAIK, neither CSI's Section Format nor any guide spec provider has done much to encourage or facilitate that (though I believe it's possible with most if not all). One still needs to select reasonably equivalent products from three viable manufacturers (presumably with help from good reps), but taking MPI out of the mix would likely simplify that. So if you specify three manufacturers, are they generally S-W, PPG and Ben Moore? Or perhaps two nationals plus one regional? Do then also allow substitutions? Steven Bruneel, AIA, CSI-CDT, LEED-AP, EDAC Senior Member Username: redseca2 Post Number: 538 Registered: 12-2006 Posted on Thursday, March 24, 2016 - 04:31 pm:    S-W, PPG & Ben Moore are often in he loop. We are located in San Francisco, so a local project would probably include Kelly-Moore, and some projects want Pratt and Lambert. I do a lot of projects in San Diego and nearby, where Frazee, an S-W regional brand is popular. I have specified Kwal-Howells in the past in Utah, it is now an S-W brand. That brings up the point of the intense ownership changes and merging of firms that the building construction paint manufacturers have been experiencing since the last recession. I have a regular trusted local rep who transitioned in the space of a couple years through ICI, Glidden Professional, Akzo-Nobel and just plain Glidden without a change in phone number. One convenience is that due to the nature of our work, mostly large health care, the client often has a specific brand and paint lines they want to use. In regards to quality grades of paint, I collect the brand "equal" or comparison charts that most paint reps have in their back pocket. If you see the same cross listings from several brands, you can gain confidence that they are comparing apples to apples. The multiple paint lines that manufacturers create can be (sometimes intentionally) confusing. We just finished sorting out the paint submittal for a large healthcare project. The paint subcontractor tried to substitute the bottom grade line of paint made by the manufacturer (as the rep noted, super cheap paint ironically used for high end condo projects where the new buyers always immediately repainted in their own colors). We had to explain that the top grade A and B+ grade products we specified were the healthcare campus standards. Guest (Unregistered Guest) Unregistered guest Posted on Saturday, March 26, 2016 - 02:54 pm:    I too specify a matrix much like Steve does, except I've included 4 mfrs, 2 regionals and 2 majors. Did specify a Nor Cal project once; added K-M (had 5 mfrs listed, since regionals also had presence in Nor Cal). Yeah...I agree about paint mfrs intentionally confuse with product descriptions such as "premium", premium plus", "professional", "architectural", and "commercial". Steve - Why do you need to "explain" anything behind your product selections; it is what it is specified...and if subs submit something not "equal" then just straight-out reject! I do what I can in a reasonable time....and standard of care....so it is what it is. As long as I stay ahead of the (subjective) curve of my peers, I'm comfortable that I've performed a reasonable service for my clients. Initial Guest above Michael Chusid, RA FCSI CCS Senior Member Username: michael_chusid Post Number: 131 Registered: 10-2003 Posted on Saturday, March 26, 2016 - 05:14 pm:    Just asking... Does anyone specify paints via an allowance, to allow selection and pricing later? What happens when the manufacturer changes the formulation (and performance) of a product without telling anyone? Michael Chusid, RA FCSI CCS www.chusid.com www.buildingproduct.guru Jerome J. Lazar, RA, CCS, CSI, SCIP Senior Member Username: lazarcitec Post Number: 1623 Registered: 05-2003 Posted on Saturday, March 26, 2016 - 06:46 pm:    For those who don't like sarcasim, I advise not reading further: From the previous post: What happens when the manufacturer changes the formulation (and performance) of a product without telling anyone? Michael, I see you are familiar with South FL painting protocols, the Architect is the first to be advised of such changes, of course. That kind of information may be provided at punch list walk thru, "oh by the way Mr Architect, we (GC) found a premium paint manufactured in Angola and decided to use it to save money and time. We (GC) know it is a quality product because it contains lead, proving at one time it was manufactured in the USA." Sheldon Wolfe Senior Member Username: sheldon_wolfe Post Number: 909 Registered: 01-2003 Posted on Sunday, March 27, 2016 - 11:30 am:    Michael, your question about changes in formulation reminds me of an interesting discussion we had at our CSI chapter many years ago. We had a long series of monthly meetings called the Specifiers Roundtable, which regularly were attended by most specifiers. Each month, we selected a topic and invited the reps for that product. I remember only a couple of them, including the one for paint. Several reps were there, as well as a chemist from a paint manufacturer. The chemist told us that paint formulation changed almost continually; the stuff delivered to the site could be different from what it was when the specs were written and it was almost certainly different from what was produced when the manufacturer's specifications were written. During that time they tried to maintain the performance at the same level, but some change was almost inevitable. The reps also told us that the same paint often is sold under different names. It might be called one thing at the paint contractor's store, and something else at the home improvement store - or it might have one name at Home Depot and another at Lowe's. In addition to getting information from reps, I frequently ask two major painting contractors what they think about similar paints. Theoretical performance is important, but if a paint is difficult to install correctly, you might not get what you want. Dave Metzger Senior Member Username: davemetzger Post Number: 630 Registered: 07-2001 Posted on Sunday, March 27, 2016 - 04:36 pm:    I don't want to come across as an ignorant Philistine, and I concede that painting is one of the more complex sections to write, but IMHO we also can overthink things. We use either Masterspec or our own master (which is derived from Masterspec) and have not had bad experiences with either one for the painting section. For Bob's questions in his original post (and Guest's responses were thoughtful and I helpful, thank you): 1. Given a choice, I don't use MPI numbers, because for many of their systems, a given manufacturer will not have their paint for each coat (primer, topcoats) included in the MPI Approved Products List. It's more important that all paints in a given system be compatible products from the same manufacturer, than that each paint be one that is MPI-approved. 2. I suppose, but it's redundant and a lot of work, and in order to have compatible paints from each listed manufacturer for a given system, you may end up with a mix of MPI-approved and non-MPI-approved paints. 3. We usually just list 3 major national manufacturer, but the regional manufacturers in our area are not as commonly used as the majors (there was one regional manufacturer that we used to include, but it was bought by a national player years ago). 4. It's up to the owner and our architect client. Hasn't really been an issue for us; usually one of the three listed majors is used by local painting subs. 6. We do. Can be complicated to differentiate between a manufacturer's different quality/cost lines, as noted by Steven Bruneel in the last paragraph of his second posting above. 7. That's akin to hitting yourself on the head with a mallet--because it feels so good when you stop. 8. The only time I've done this is when the owner has forbidden (that's the right word) us from naming manufacturer's for any product, not just paints. In that case I did use MPI numbers. Not naming products/manufacturers creates more work for both the contractor and the architect in checking submittals. 9. The only coatings for which I specify criteria other than VOC limits is for high-performance coatings (epoxy/polyurethane systems), where I include dry film thickness. Steven Bruneel, AIA, CSI-CDT, LEED-AP, EDAC Senior Member Username: redseca2 Post Number: 539 Registered: 12-2006 Posted on Monday, March 28, 2016 - 01:01 pm:    Sheldon's comment regarding paint manufacturers selling the same paint product under more than one brand name reminded me of a similar tactic used in consumer home electronics. The big Asian audio & video consumer product manufacturers will also market virtually identical products with slightly different model numbers. This is so your local audio & video shops can "guarantee to beat any lower price", knowing full well that the stores down the street & across town buy different models. Robert E. Woodburn, AIA, CSI, CCS, CCCA Senior Member Username: bob_woodburn Post Number: 178 Registered: 11-2010 Posted on Thursday, April 14, 2016 - 01:49 pm:    Has anyone used MPI's "Architectural Painting Specification Decision Tree" to aid in selection of an appropriate (and MPI-recommended) system for each substrate? If so, what are your impressions? (It's not well publicized, likely by design, since MPI wants you to subscribe to its specification manual ($110/yr) for access, even though there's an online free version hidden on the web, developed with and for NAVFAC and the WBDG, that covers "80%" of applications.) Robert E. Woodburn, AIA, CSI, CCS, CCCA Senior Member Username: bob_woodburn Post Number: 179 Registered: 11-2010 Posted on Wednesday, April 20, 2016 - 02:37 pm:    Apparently no one out there has yet used the MPI Decision Tree (at least no one has responded affirmatively, in about a week). Other than in my query, had anyone even heard of it? If so, what are your impressions? Vivian Volz, AIA, CSI, CCS Senior Member Username: vivianvolz Post Number: 154 Registered: 06-2004 Posted on Wednesday, April 20, 2016 - 03:57 pm:    I'd run across the MPI Decision Tree, but only the pay-to-play location. I've been swimming upstream against MPI's increasing inclusion in MasterSpec for quite a while, and am glad to see that I'm not alone in this pursuit. I'm starting to like a matrix approach, since I suspect my schedule approach is as hard to read as it is to edit. I used an owner's matrix recently and it was a breath of fresh air. As for choosing paint, I mostly choose paint my trusted paint reps advise for the more challenging conditions, and I rely on a locally-produced product matrix (produced by several of my trusted paint reps in cooperation!) for more standard conditions. Robert E. Woodburn, AIA, CSI, CCS, CCCA Senior Member Username: bob_woodburn Post Number: 182 Registered: 11-2010 Posted on Wednesday, April 27, 2016 - 06:25 pm:    Thanks, Vivian. The decision tree helps, but it forces you through a multi-step process for every substrate, and is hard to transfer that information to a spec without a lot of effort. It's kind of like planning a trip by asking for directions -- I'd much rather have a good map. Is your "matrix" the paint equivalent of a "map" -- a table or spreadsheet with parallel listings of comparable products by various manufacturers -- or something else? Was it something your local reps did just for you, or available to others as well? Robert E. Woodburn, AIA, CSI, CCS, CCCA Senior Member Username: bob_woodburn Post Number: 183 Registered: 11-2010 Posted on Wednesday, April 27, 2016 - 06:46 pm:    CSI Houston is planning a program in May on specifying paint. I hope it can show us how to simplify that process, which seems to be way more complicated and frustrating than it should be. In addition to the comments above, does anyone have advice or approaches to suggest? Questions to ask? Resources? Good or bad experiences in the past with such meetings? Have manufacturers' reps been willing to appear together in a panel discussion? How did that work out? Could we put together a "paint matrix" for this program, or at least start the process? Would it be a good idea to include one or more experienced painting contractors? (Instead of, or in addition to, manufacturers' reps?) What results have you had with panels or other formats? Any other suggestions? Thanks! Michael Chusid, RA FCSI CCS Senior Member Username: michael_chusid Post Number: 141 Registered: 10-2003 Posted on Wednesday, April 27, 2016 - 08:11 pm:    Robert - Consider video recording the program and making it available online. Michael Chusid, RA FCSI CCS www.chusid.com www.buildingproduct.guru Robert E. Woodburn, AIA, CSI, CCS, CCCA Senior Member Username: bob_woodburn Post Number: 184 Registered: 11-2010 Posted on Wednesday, April 27, 2016 - 09:39 pm:    Great suggestion, Michael. We don't usually record anything on video--or even audio--so that hadn't occurred to me. That would allow 4Specs forum folks (among others) to see how it turned out. Will look into it. Thanks! Colin Gilboy Senior Member Username: colin Post Number: 426 Registered: 09-2005 Posted on Wednesday, April 27, 2016 - 09:48 pm:    I can host a video here on the 4specs server - probably an mp4 format would be easiest. Can arrange to have it streamed or download so you can keep a copy. Colin Gilboy Publisher, 4specs.com 435.200.5775 - Utah 800.369.8008 Robert E. Woodburn, AIA, CSI, CCS, CCCA Senior Member Username: bob_woodburn Post Number: 185 Registered: 11-2010 Posted on Wednesday, April 27, 2016 - 09:58 pm:    Thanks, Colin. Hadn't thought of that, either. It would simplify things, because we're not set up to do that on our website, which has already taken up too much time recently in updates and other issues. Either way, we'd probably have to get participants' permission to put it online. Vivian Volz, AIA, CSI, CCS Senior Member Username: vivianvolz Post Number: 157 Registered: 06-2004 Posted on Wednesday, April 27, 2016 - 10:50 pm:    Bob, the matrix my reps make together is available to all our local specifiers. I can email you a copy for your chapter presentation's use. (Post your email address if you like, but I can find you in the CSI directory.) The one I used by an owner is probably not something I can share, but I'll genericize it a little so you can see the concept. Since we have aggressive VOC limits here in California, your local reps may be recommending other products for standard installations without green goals. In other words, don't just use it as I send it. It would make an excellent starting point for your local "golden rep" team to use to make one for your chapter or region, though. Vivian Volz, AIA, CSI, CCS Senior Member Username: vivianvolz Post Number: 158 Registered: 06-2004 Posted on Wednesday, April 27, 2016 - 11:04 pm:    As for 3, 4 and 5 on your original question list, I spec paint for which I have excellent representation and available at the project location, which means I have a California-only company I spec regularly, and a western-US company that's in nearly all my specs. I only sole-source upon specific request by an owner (not usually an architect, who has probably chosen by color, not formula, sad to say). And I name at least the topcoat for each manufacturer's line, unless I have a compelling reason not to. I find that far preferable to MPI numbers. I'm happy in most circumstances to let the manufacturer and painter recommend the primer for the substrate and the topcoat. The matrix in the specs concept would make naming the primer much easier, but I am still on the fence about this. The fact that most of my work is privately funded trusted-GC work affects this practice powerfully; I am much more likely to control all the elements if I know the painters will be the lowest bidders. I hope your presentation does get recorded - I'd be interested to see what you all come up with! Robert E. Woodburn, AIA, CSI, CCS, CCCA Senior Member Username: bob_woodburn Post Number: 186 Registered: 11-2010 Posted on Thursday, April 28, 2016 - 02:12 pm:    Thanks again, Vivian. I'd really like to have a copy of your paint matrix, and hope it can serve as an example and an inspiration for our own version. My email address is rewoodburn@ymail.com. (If anyone else has a similar document, list or other resource that might help, and that you're willing and able to share, I'd like to see that too.) Michael Chusid, RA FCSI CCS Senior Member Username: michael_chusid Post Number: 142 Registered: 10-2003 Posted on Thursday, April 28, 2016 - 02:23 pm:    Bob - Regarding getting permission from participants, it should be sufficient to put a sign by the entry to the room and to make an announcement. You do not have to get a written release. Michael Chusid, RA FCSI CCS www.chusid.com www.buildingproduct.guru Robert E. Woodburn, AIA, CSI, CCS, CCCA Senior Member Username: bob_woodburn Post Number: 187 Registered: 11-2010 Posted on Thursday, April 28, 2016 - 02:28 pm:    Another good idea. I've seen those signs in the past (and words to that effect in the fine print on tickets). We should do that, though I was originally thinking mainly of presenters or panel members, with whom we should clear it in advance. Reps especially may have some corporate restrictions or sensitivities to navigate... Louis Medcalf, FCSI, CCS Senior Member Username: louis_medcalf Post Number: 63 Registered: 11-2010 Posted on Wednesday, May 04, 2016 - 12:47 pm:    CSI's Specifying Practice Group did two sessions on specifying paint last year with guest presenter Kent Kile, CSI, CCPR. Recordings on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wrbQrK6aaW0&list=PL1C96ECBA6E9D457A&index=60 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GXM670HYCpI&index=62&list=PL1C96ECBA6E9D457A