Further Discussions on SpecsIntact

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

Author Message David J. Wyatt, CDT Senior Member Username: david_j_wyatt_cdt Post Number: 251 Registered: 03-2011 Posted on Monday, June 11, 2018 - 09:47 am:    The original thread on this is archived in:4specs Discussion Forum » Archive - Specifications Discussions #5 » SpecsIntact I tried to continue the discussion, but could not do so, hence the new thread. My firm is now part of a much larger firm with its own engineering departments in different cities. Because the firm does DOD projects, learning SpecsIntact is important for my survival. So far, I am finding the instruction manuals and the online tutorials to be very helpful. Of course, gaining fluency with a new system only comes from working on real projects, making mistakes , and learning from them. My more distinguished and accomplished colleagues have mainly negative feelings about SpecsIntact, but, so far, I have found nothing objectionable about the system that merits any comment. As I move forward with it, I will post anything notable here. In the meantime, I look forward to observations from experienced users. Margaret G. Chewning FCSI CCS Senior Member Username: presbspec Post Number: 303 Registered: 01-2003 Posted on Monday, June 11, 2018 - 10:11 am:    Hi David, My business is also dependent on SpecsIntact for the most part. Most of my training goes way back and was mostly SOP. I too find it to be a good solid program altho' there are times I'd like to toss it into the Bay. Still learning new tricks and techniques tho'. If you have any questions or run into problems give me a call. Margaret David J. Wyatt, CDT Senior Member Username: david_j_wyatt_cdt Post Number: 252 Registered: 03-2011 Posted on Monday, June 11, 2018 - 10:19 am:    Thanks, Margaret. So far, I see no manufacturer products in the Sections. Should I assume that specifying manufacturers is up to the A/E, or are the performance-based criteria to stand as they are? Melissa J Aguiar Junior Member Username: melissajaguiar Post Number: 2 Registered: 09-2015 Posted on Monday, June 11, 2018 - 10:53 am:    I am using this on every project lately. I am so glad I have a coding background. LOL! Margaret G. Chewning FCSI CCS Senior Member Username: presbspec Post Number: 304 Registered: 01-2003 Posted on Monday, June 11, 2018 - 11:16 am:    SpecsIntact and UFGS are set up for use on military and Government work. Therefore are primarily performance based and reference based guide specs. IE all public money and requiring the "3 or equal" rule if manufacturers are named. If you have a specific product that is your basis of design, You can name it as having the criteria you want, BUT you need to include a minimum of two other products/manufacturers that meet the critical criteria you need for the project and you need to spell out that criteria. Use BOD judiciously, sometimes depending on the project and Gov't PM you can get a waiver, but don't always count on it. Melissa J Aguiar Member Username: melissajaguiar Post Number: 3 Registered: 09-2015 Posted on Monday, June 11, 2018 - 11:19 am:    Thank you Margaret!!! Also...I think I already know this answer...but I am not going to assume.....(:?) Have any of you using SI ever been asked to do a BOD and include the local rep name and contact info as well with your BOD product data? David J. Wyatt, CDT Senior Member Username: david_j_wyatt_cdt Post Number: 253 Registered: 03-2011 Posted on Monday, June 11, 2018 - 11:20 am:    Thank you, Margaret. That is helpful. Margaret G. Chewning FCSI CCS Senior Member Username: presbspec Post Number: 305 Registered: 01-2003 Posted on Monday, June 11, 2018 - 02:25 pm:    I've many an architect that wants this information, and I'm sure the rep who assisted them would appreciate it; however, in light of federal procurement policy of open specifications, even with BOD that is not recommended. I personally do not like to do so in the PM on any of my work. Recommend checking the recommendations in the CSPG under chapter 14 specifically article 14.4. David J. Wyatt, CDT Senior Member Username: david_j_wyatt_cdt Post Number: 254 Registered: 03-2011 Posted on Monday, June 11, 2018 - 02:45 pm:    Lesson of the day: Accelerate editing using the navigation pane. Guest (Unregistered Guest) Unregistered guest Posted on Wednesday, June 13, 2018 - 11:25 am:    I have found that with D-B Fed/Mil contracts that I'm often asked (and permitted) to list/name BOD manufacturers and/or products. I've learned from day one that you make a change then immediately save, go-on the next edit, immediately save, etc. In that manner if last change initiated a programming error you can easily undo last change; otherwise you end up trying to figure out which one (or more) previous edits is the culprit. I've also found that NASA-KSC is helpful if/when you have questions or problems you can't resolve. Ellis C. Whitby, PE, CSI, AIA, LEED Senior Member Username: ecwhitby Post Number: 389 Registered: 03-2003 Posted on Wednesday, June 13, 2018 - 12:53 pm:    Some words of caution: on Federal projects: Margaret covered the technical issues of having “3 ’or equal’ “products very well. Just remember that these products/models actually have to be “or equal”: rejecting them as submittals will not end well for the AE. Some PMs and Users will ask for specific products or models, but unless the Contracting Officer gives written permission for “sole sourcing” you are best sticking with a performance based specification. Only the CO can authorize “sole sourcing”, and written permission is necessary to protect the AE. David J. Wyatt, CDT Senior Member Username: david_j_wyatt_cdt Post Number: 255 Registered: 03-2011 Posted on Wednesday, June 13, 2018 - 02:01 pm:    Ellis, Margaret, and Guest: Thank you for your advice, all of which is well-taken. Please continue to add your thoughts as they occur to you, as will I. ken hercenberg Senior Member Username: khercenberg Post Number: 1167 Registered: 12-2006 Posted on Wednesday, June 13, 2018 - 05:15 pm:    A couple of things: 1. I have found Margaret to be among the best resources in the country when it comes to SpecsIntact. She provides sound advice and is always very helpful. If she offers, use her. 2. UFGS content is questionable at best and should be heavily modified to suit your project. Do not presume that their content suits your project. More often than not, it won't. 3. I have rarely had issues when listing three equivalent products and manufacturers. Include the product, not just the manufacturer. List Chevy and you'll get a Spark for the price of a Corvette. Don't be vague, get into the weeds. 4. As Margaret noted, include the salient features that the product must meet including optional and peripheral items needed to suit your project. Do not presume that anyone will fill-in the blanks to make your systems work; they won't. Do not think that you will get your basis of design or any of the products you list. Make sure that all of the products you list can meet your prescribed content and performance criteria. This can be a humbling experience otherwise. Chris Grimm, CSI, CCS, SCIP, LEED AP BD+C Senior Member Username: chris_grimm_ccs_scip Post Number: 406 Registered: 02-2014 Posted on Wednesday, June 13, 2018 - 06:24 pm:    Great points, everyone. I second what Ken is saying about the content! For a few more tips on the program itself -- I often use alt s,n,r to toggle tags, notes, and revisions. I normally read with them off, and type with them on. A trick I use a lot is shift + delete, with my cursor right before a start tag. This will automatically delete everything contained between start and end tag, including any nested subparts, helping you to avoid validity errors. From the navigation pane you can click a heading and ctrl + d to cleanly delete it. Also hit ctrl + s often -- saving will prompt you if there is a validity error. While getting used to the program, you can use alt, t, v, even more often, if you want to check validity between saving (then if there is a real mess you caused but are not sure how, you have the option of close without saving -- i.e. a mega-undo). If you do get validity errors, double-clicking the paragraph address from the error report, will automatically take you to where the error is so you can fix it. Don't let errors accumulate ! These and other tips are at my blog, you can find by web search for SpecsIntact Tips and Tricks. David J. Wyatt, CDT Senior Member Username: david_j_wyatt_cdt Post Number: 256 Registered: 03-2011 Posted on Thursday, June 14, 2018 - 08:31 am:    Thank you Ken. Your points 2-4 are good things to remember no matter whose master guide specification you are using, but I will certainly keep them foremost in mind in my current endeavors. Chris Grimm, thank you for directing us to your helpful blog. I am keeping several of your documented tips handy for getting around the roadblocks that lie ahead.