as indicated by manufacturer's design...

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

Author Message Chris Grimm, CSI, CCS, SCIP, LEED AP BD+C Senior Member Username: chris_grimm_ccs_scip Post Number: 363 Registered: 02-2014 Posted on Sunday, February 05, 2017 - 11:07 am:    Just curious if there are other specifiers who, when using MasterSpec, frequently revise "As indicated by manufacturer's designations" to just "As indicated." Or if you keep it, what is the benefit of saying "by manufacturer's designations"? Chris Grimm, CSI, CCS, SCIP, LEED AP BD+C Senior Member Username: chris_grimm_ccs_scip Post Number: 364 Registered: 02-2014 Posted on Sunday, February 05, 2017 - 11:14 am:    This may also spark conversations about using just "As indicated" vs. "As indicated on Drawings", vs. "As indicated in Finish Schedule on Drawings", vs. ...Finish Legend..., vs. even saying the dwg sheet number (please no), vs. other variations ad infinitum -- but my question is really about the "manufacturer's designations" wording. Liz O'Sullivan Senior Member Username: liz_osullivan Post Number: 220 Registered: 10-2011 Posted on Sunday, February 05, 2017 - 11:20 am:    Chris, I don't use that option ("As indicated by manufacturer's designations"). In places where that would work, I use "Manufacturer's standard" instead. I think the intent is the same - you specify one particular model, which has specific standard accessories or colors or hardware, which go with that model number (the manufacturer designation), but they're the standards. It's shorter. Chris Grimm, CSI, CCS, SCIP, LEED AP BD+C Senior Member Username: chris_grimm_ccs_scip Post Number: 365 Registered: 02-2014 Posted on Sunday, February 05, 2017 - 12:06 pm:    I'm referring to places where color selection is involved. I believe those are the only places where that exact wording is used, but sorry I was not more clear. This brings up another tangent, specifying "Manufacturer's standard _______" seems to add some risk for cases when _______ turns out not to be standard with some other manufacturer. So unless I'm trying to explicitly say I don't care what they use, I often leave out "Manufacturer's standard" and just say the requirement. Steven Bruneel, AIA, CSI-CDT, LEED-AP, EDAC Senior Member Username: redseca2 Post Number: 572 Registered: 12-2006 Posted on Monday, February 06, 2017 - 01:31 pm:    We schedule color and finish options for major systems on the Drawings, but that still leaves out many items. I tend to say, "...the full range of the Manufacturer's Standard________ Options..." in case there are hidden price points or tiers that we may not be aware of. Michael Chusid, RA FCSI CCS Senior Member Username: michael_chusid Post Number: 246 Registered: 10-2003 Posted on Monday, February 06, 2017 - 06:25 pm:    The most important part of "the full range of the Manufacturer's Standard________Options" is "_________". Let me give an example: Pigments for integrally colored concrete range from simple iron oxide with high tinting strength to oxides of exotic metals with lower tinting strength. Yet they are all the manufacturer's standards. If you specify "manufacturer's standards" without indicating price range, it creates uncertainty for the bidder and sets the stage for conflict later on. One pigment manufacturer tags its color cards with $, $$, $$$, and $$$$. I highly recommend you specify which level you want. If you specify "manufacturer's standard $ or $$ options", it is clear to all parties. If the design architect later decides $$$$ is required, the contract price can be adjusted accordingly. IF YOU ARE A MANUFACTURER: please include pricing categories in your literature. Michael Chusid, RA FCSI CCS www.chusid.com www.buildingproduct.guru 818-219-4937 Vivian Volz, AIA, CSI, CCS Senior Member Username: vivianvolz Post Number: 167 Registered: 06-2004 Posted on Monday, February 06, 2017 - 06:47 pm:    When I use "as indicated by manufacturer's designations" I try only to use it when the architect has actually scheduled, say, a paint color or an airfoil profile or a perforation pattern. It's different from "manufacturer's standard" (as Michael points out). Probably I could be saying "as scheduled" for most of those instances where the architect has named a color or pattern. I think the only place where that particular phrasing is really useful is when you'll accept any of several manufacturers' paint formulas, but the architect has designated a paint color from one manufacturer by name and/or number. It's probably better, clearer, to say "match color indicated by manufacturer's designation in finish schedule" in that instance. Most of the time, "as indicated" is perfectly appropriate, so long as the requirement really is indicated. Michael Chusid, RA FCSI CCS Senior Member Username: michael_chusid Post Number: 247 Registered: 10-2003 Posted on Monday, February 06, 2017 - 06:59 pm:    Is it ever necessary to say, "as indicated". If it is indicated, it is in the contract documents. Michael Chusid, RA FCSI CCS www.chusid.com www.buildingproduct.guru 818-219-4937 Steven Bruneel, AIA, CSI-CDT, LEED-AP, EDAC Senior Member Username: redseca2 Post Number: 573 Registered: 12-2006 Posted on Monday, February 06, 2017 - 08:04 pm:    Michael, For things as important as integral coloring agents for concrete, I will want a sample that clearly defines the required coloring agents. We use that terminology, "the full range of the Manufacturer's Standard________Options" is "_________". for much more banal items where the project team never had (has) the time to drill down to that level during design phases, but want (hope) to make a choice on the shop drawing. An example might be the style, color and formatting of "FIRE EXTINGUISHER" on the FEC. Another is when there is a small price difference not shown on the available product data. Where the cost difference isn't in the cost of the material from the original source, but in the way the manufacturer purchases and stocks it. An example might be price tiers for different plastic laminate options applied to lockers, toilet partitions, etc., where their is no price difference from the original plastic laminate manufacturer. Which reminds me of my down time at work habit of playing with on-line car configuration at car manufacturer's websites. Black, White, Yellow and Red are all no cost color options for a Porsche 911. Metallic colors are a $710.00 add, which seems very reasonable because it is a different paint chemistry usually with an additional clear coat. But if I want an orange Porsche, that is an extra $3140.00. Why (aren't we halfway between that free red and yellow)? Because, that's why. Sheldon Wolfe Senior Member Username: sheldon_wolfe Post Number: 951 Registered: 01-2003 Posted on Tuesday, February 07, 2017 - 12:10 am:    It's because you should be punished for ordering an orange Porsche. Steven Bruneel, AIA, CSI-CDT, LEED-AP, EDAC Senior Member Username: redseca2 Post Number: 575 Registered: 12-2006 Posted on Tuesday, February 07, 2017 - 12:32 am:    Sheldon: There may be truth in your statement, but it looks good. Chris Grimm, CSI, CCS, SCIP, LEED AP BD+C Senior Member Username: chris_grimm_ccs_scip Post Number: 366 Registered: 02-2014 Posted on Tuesday, February 07, 2017 - 07:16 am:    My original question is about when the color *IS* selected and indicated. Why add to that "...by manufacturer's designations"? I'm just curious what is the precise meaning of that phrase or benefit of adding it. Chris Grimm, CSI, CCS, SCIP, LEED AP BD+C Senior Member Username: chris_grimm_ccs_scip Post Number: 367 Registered: 02-2014 Posted on Tuesday, February 07, 2017 - 07:24 am:    Now, to go with that next tangent, when the color is not yet determined... yes I do encourage the designers to decide if they can live with selecting from standard colors so the estimators have somewhat of a better idea. And yes it would be ideal to even specify the price range(s) for colors as Michael suggests. So rare is the designer who can spare the time to do more than just say they want everything to be a "custom" color. Explaining the process of changing colors (especially in a coil-coating operation!) usually falls on deaf ears. Guest (Unregistered Guest) Unregistered guest Posted on Tuesday, February 07, 2017 - 11:31 am:    I rarely use the phrase myself, but the only time I think it might make sense is when the manufacturer's designation is also a common or generic designation. If I can specify a product by name and the manufacturer's options for standard colors are named things like black, white, charcoal, green, yellow, etc. then I might want to make sure the contractor understands that I'm making specific reference to Manufacturer X's green color rather than a generic reference to some color that is generically understood as 'green.' If the contractor were to choose to procure the product from another available manufacturer they might need to provide a custom green color in order to match the specified green color which could easily be different than the other manufacturer's standard green color.