4specs.com    4specs.com Home Page

Factory Mutual Review and Accetpance Log Out | Topics | Search
Moderators | Register | Edit Profile

4specs Discussion Forum » Archive - Specifications Discussions » Factory Mutual Review and Accetpance « Previous Next »

  Thread Last Poster Posts Pages Last Post
  ClosedClosed: New threads not accepted on this page        

Author Message
Marc C Chavez
New member
Username: Mchavez

Post Number: 9
Registered: 07-2002
Posted on Friday, October 11, 2002 - 02:00 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

The City of Tacoma is looking at this and have asked the "team" about cost impacts. I have heard from a fellow spec writer that this is a BIG hit requiring more than saying “FM-I-90” in the roof spec. The letter states that the “Building construction and finishing systems, roofing system” all the fire equipment, pumps et cetra “ should conform to FM Global recommended good practices”
This sounds like a major pain in the ass. Am I wrong in this assumption?
Tomas Mejia
New member
Username: Tommy

Post Number: 3
Registered: 07-2002
Posted on Monday, October 14, 2002 - 11:47 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

I don't know about cost impact but I have a few problems with the stated sentence. The "Building construction and finishing systems" is basically the entire project. You cannot require materials in the project to comply with standards that don't apply or don't exist. The word "et cetera" is undefinable and is not to be used per CSI MOP FF170.4. The word "should" means the Contractor can, but doesn't have too. Does FM Global define what "good" practices" are? If so, do they also define "bad" practices?
Marc C Chavez
New member
Username: Mchavez

Post Number: 10
Registered: 07-2002
Posted on Monday, October 14, 2002 - 12:08 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

You have misunderstood a portion of my post. I agree the sentence about “building systems” it scares the shit out of me because it is vague. That’s why it’s in quotes. And why I’m looking for some experience with FM Please note that the et cetera is not in quotes. There are other portions of the letter that I received that do make sense, so instead of quoting them I used an “et cetera.” Get it? Got it. Good!
John Bunzick, CCS, CCCA
New member
Username: Bunzick

Post Number: 34
Registered: 03-2002
Posted on Tuesday, October 15, 2002 - 09:44 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

Factory Mutual Research establishes standards for specific building systems: notably fire protection, roofing and fire separation. They publish directories of accepted products, as well as technical guides. Their roofing technical guides are excellent, I might add, and anyone doing significant roofing should be familiar with them.

An important thing to know is that FM Research is a subsidiary of Factory Mutual, which is an insurance company. FMR's primary mission is to service their clients who are insured by a Factory Mutual insurance company by reducing the risk of losses. (The origninal building codes, by the way, were set up by the insurance industry after several devestating industrial fires cost them a bundle.)

So, the FM standards are useful, but you need to focus on the need and intent of using the standards. If your owner is insured by FM, then Factory Mutual engineers are available to help make sure that the project meets the FM standards. If the owner is not an FM-insured entity, then you may be able to selectively review the standards and select ones appropriate to the project (with strong owner input, of course.) I believe that many of the FM standards are either already used by some industries, or closely parallel them.

Topics | Last Day | Last Week | Tree View | Search | Help/Instructions | Program Credits Administration