BSD Section 01 4219

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

Author Message Dewayne Dean Senior Member Username: ddean Post Number: 123 Registered: 02-2016 Posted on Tuesday, March 07, 2017 - 10:10 am:    Do any of the BSD SpecLink users here use this: Section 01 4219 Reference Standards. Just curious. Seems useless to me. None of the standards are linked. If you wanted to use it, you would have to edit it for every project. There are 3355 lines. Wayne Yancey Senior Member Username: wayne_yancey Post Number: 803 Registered: 01-2008 Posted on Tuesday, March 07, 2017 - 10:36 am:    Dewayne, Not used by me. I include references in Section 014000 Quality Requirements as follows: 1.2 REFERENCES A. For products or workmanship specified by reference to association, trade, or industry standards, comply with requirements of the standard, except when more rigid requirements are specified or are required by applicable codes. B. Should specified reference standards conflict with Contract Documents, request clarification from Architect before proceeding. C. Conform to edition of reference standard in effect as of [date of Project Manual.] [date of [Owner/Contractor] [Owner/Construction Manager] Agreement.] [____.] D. The contractual relationship of the parties to the Contract shall not be altered from the Contract Documents by mention or inference otherwise in any reference document. I do not use the References Article in Part 1 of sections. To retain adds a level of coordination difficulty that I try to avoid. I am moving my specifications to the "less is more" standard of practice. Time is always of the essence for every project. I make some executive decisions to stay within the time budget which seems to be more important to the PM bean counters. Wayne Michael Chusid, RA FCSI CCS Senior Member Username: michael_chusid Post Number: 252 Registered: 10-2003 Posted on Tuesday, March 07, 2017 - 12:24 pm:    Wayne - I understand the need to reduce time spent writing specs. I have always found it useful, however, to use the References article because the full name of a standard helps me understand what is being specified. Have you had any feedback from contractors about omitting References? Michael Chusid, RA FCSI CCS www.chusid.com www.buildingproduct.guru 818-219-4937 Wayne Yancey Senior Member Username: wayne_yancey Post Number: 804 Registered: 01-2008 Posted on Tuesday, March 07, 2017 - 12:44 pm:    Michael, No pro or con feedback from any party. Back in the days before Google and other search engines, specifying the full name was useful to the readers and the specifier. Very few firms could afford a complete library of standards. In my opinion, now it is easy to GOOGLE for the complete name. Any contractor performing any kind of construction work will have, or should have, the required reference standards that affect their trade at their fingertips or key board clicks. I am a follower of Herman Hoyer's shorter form specs. Robin E. Snyder Senior Member Username: robin Post Number: 672 Registered: 08-2004 Posted on Tuesday, March 07, 2017 - 01:23 pm:    i haven't used the references article in 16 years, thousands of project manuals, never heard a complaint Dewayne Dean Senior Member Username: ddean Post Number: 124 Registered: 02-2016 Posted on Tuesday, March 07, 2017 - 02:36 pm:    Thanks folks, valuable insight as always. Walter Broner New member Username: walterbroner Post Number: 1 Registered: 03-2017 Posted on Wednesday, March 22, 2017 - 05:23 pm:    I just joined the group. I am going to be taking care of upkeep and editing of Divisions 00 and 01 sections at BSD. When using BSD Speclink-E, (9.0.3) the key to making this section "useful" is as follows: In File>Summary Info panel, in the upper right hand corner, check the box "Consolidated List of Citations" What that does is that in other sections, if the paragraph with that reference (in Part 1 Article) gets turned on, it will turn on (it's a built-in software automatic and invisible link) corresponding paragraph in section 01 4219. When the section is printed or exported, only the "turned on" paragraphs will print. So this obviates the need to edit this section manually. Hope this helps SpecLink-E users out there. Spread the word. As to whether it is useful for various project manuals? YMMV. Dewayne Dean Senior Member Username: ddean Post Number: 128 Registered: 02-2016 Posted on Wednesday, March 22, 2017 - 06:55 pm:    Walter, Thanks for the insight. Not sure if I will use 01 4219 or not. Great to have a BSD expert on board Margaret G. Chewning FCSI CCS Senior Member Username: presbspec Post Number: 288 Registered: 01-2003 Posted on Thursday, March 23, 2017 - 08:31 am:    For those familiar with SpecsIntact there is a similar feature that automatically includes and edits the references section in Div 01. I find it helpful and sometimes frustrating at the same time. It is good to know that it can be turned off in SpecLink. Dale Hurttgam, NCARB, AIA,LEED AP, CSI Senior Member Username: dwhurttgam Post Number: 129 Registered: 10-2005 Posted on Thursday, March 23, 2017 - 10:41 am:    I'm with Robin - we never use the reference section and have never had any questions or concerns arise. Brian Payne, AIA Senior Member Username: brian_payne Post Number: 81 Registered: 01-2014 Posted on Thursday, March 23, 2017 - 11:02 am:    Ditto Elias Saltz, CSI, CCS, LEED AP Senior Member Username: elias_saltz Post Number: 21 Registered: 03-2009 Posted on Monday, May 01, 2017 - 01:29 pm:    I recently changed from a BSD office to a MasterSpec office. When I used BSD I never used the references section. BSD by default lists all the references used in a particular section in Part 1 of that section, and I generally left that information in the section. Now I use MasterSpec and it doesn't include a consolidated list of reference standards in Part 1 and I don't miss it. We also don't include the list of references in Division 01, and as far as I know we haven't had any complaints. Sheldon Wolfe Senior Member Username: sheldon_wolfe Post Number: 962 Registered: 01-2003 Posted on Monday, May 01, 2017 - 08:24 pm:    Now if only the References article would disappear if not needed. David J. Wyatt, CDT Senior Member Username: david_j_wyatt_cdt Post Number: 177 Registered: 03-2011 Posted on Tuesday, May 02, 2017 - 09:50 am:    Elias, Congratulations on acquiring MasterSpec. I have used several other master guide specification systems. While all have their own merits, I think you'll find that MS is the best information/knowledge source available. Chris Grimm, CSI, CCS, SCIP, LEED AP BD+C Senior Member Username: chris_grimm_ccs_scip Post Number: 372 Registered: 02-2014 Posted on Tuesday, May 02, 2017 - 10:40 am:    I've always felt that including asphalt paving, forestry, etc. (and the rest of the whole long list in Division 01) when there is no asphalt paving or forestry, seems to make the specs look foolish. In MasterSpec there is also an option for just referencing to an external source for commonly-used organizations, that I much prefer. 014200 then seems to be good mainly for definitions, which are part of the glue that holds specs together (provide = furnish and install, etc.) Since we have the internet now, it hardly seems necessary to attempt to list every source of reference standards, and their addresses and phone #'s, which become out of date and it is probably a fool's errand to keep up with it, especially if you need to customize the listing per project. As Margaret mentioned, SpecsIntact does automatically customize it, when you go to print PDFs. With Walter's tweak above it sounds like BSD does too. On a bit of a tangent, I question whether there is any value or just inherent problems with the way SpecsIntact throws in dates of reference standards. I prefer the MasterSpec approach when allowed, that all referenced standards go by whatever was their current edition when the Contract Documents were issued, unless otherwise stated. The infrequent occasions when it has come up in an inquiry about the specs, it has not been all that hard to pinpoint which version of the standard was the one per contract, and in my experience it has never caused a problem. If an older standard is specifically necessary, then it could be referenced in the specs by date. (Usually though, that comes from poorly written manufacturer guide specs referencing some standard from 1970's even though a much more current version exists now. As long as the current version is compatible, perhaps mfr guide specs would have been better off leaving out the date? Just keep it in the product test reports, and maybe in product data. Why on earth they put the dates in the specs too, I don't know. Designers will unwittingly then call for way out-of-date testing in their current project specs.) Anon (Unregistered Guest) Unregistered guest Posted on Tuesday, May 02, 2017 - 11:23 am:    Are those of you doing the automatic customizing of references with BSD or SpecsIntact incorporating references from consultant sections as well, or is it only for the sections that you author? Of course, this assumes there are other contributors to the project manual. Perhaps that is not the case for your projects. Paul Sweet (Unregistered Guest) Unregistered guest Posted on Tuesday, May 02, 2017 - 12:21 pm:    A lot of states still use older versions of building codes, or take a couple years to go through all the procedures to update to the latest version of the IBC. Automatically using the version of a standard that was the current one when the spec was written might cause a conflict with the building code. Scott McIntosh-Mize Senior Member Username: scott_mize_ccs_csi Post Number: 106 Registered: 02-2009 Posted on Tuesday, May 02, 2017 - 02:24 pm:    SpecLink-E gives the user the option of turning off the edition dates throughout the project manual. That option is in the same dialogue box ("Summary Information for [Project Title]") as the option that enables the linking between 014219 and the rest of the sections. If neither of these features are widely understood, BSD clearly needs to emphasize them more in training materials. The user also has the option of copying the reference standard paragraph and manually editing the edition date if the user wants to use a version of the standard other than the current one. I can think of only two occasions in twenty-plus years of full-time specifying where I cited an old version of a reference standard *on purpose*. Your mileage may vary. As far as building codes go, the user can explicitly state which building code (and what edition) is in force for the project using Section 014100 - Regulatory Requirements, with the same options stated above: current edition, no edition date, or edition date revised to user preference. I hope this clarifies how easy and flexible this option is to use.