| Author |
Message |
Robin E. Snyder
Senior Member
Username: robin
Post Number: 821
Registered: 08-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 14, 2021 - 10:00 am: |    |
Has anyone ever prepared a spec for blasting? I have suggested to the Architect that this would fall under methods and means, but he is pushing for some type of a spec, or even a reference in Division 01, to regulatory requirements etc. Anyone ever done anything like this? |
Melissa J Aguiar
Senior Member
Username: melissajaguiar
Post Number: 11
Registered: 09-2015
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 14, 2021 - 10:09 am: | |
Robin,
Please email me at mjaguiar@garverusa.com. I will share with you what Betty Hays and I did for blasting work at a college campus several years ago when we had to demolish rock for a below grade parking deck. You can review it and modify it to your project needs. |
ken hercenberg
Senior Member
Username: khercenberg
Post Number: 1410
Registered: 12-2006
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 14, 2021 - 10:13 am: | |
Demolition or excavation?
It's been about 10 years since I last wrote one and that was for a civil engineer. If I recall correctly they based it on the local State or City DOT specs. They provided the technical content. The spec was mostly focused on obtaining permits and permission from AHJ's, protecting everyone who could possibly be affected, and monitoring adjacent structures. Designing and setting charges was delegated but I don't recall how the performance was defined. |
David L. Heuring, AIA, CCCA
Advanced Member
Username: daveh
Post Number: 5
Registered: 04-2020
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 14, 2021 - 11:03 am: | |
Interesting topic. I believe a spec for building and partial structure demolition should specifically prohibit blasting. This would be more of a site prep issue, and as such the Architect is likely not covered for liability by their standard insurance policy if directing anything on blasting rock demolition. Seems this is more of a civil engineering issue.
David L. Heuring, AIA, CCCA, LEED AP, NCARB |
Robin E. Snyder
Senior Member
Username: robin
Post Number: 822
Registered: 08-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 14, 2021 - 11:06 am: | |
I should clarify, this is for site excavation |
Greta Eckhardt (Unregistered Guest)
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 14, 2021 - 11:12 am: | |
If the project requires site excavation there should be a civil engineer and a geotechnical engineer on board. These professionals are qualified to prepare a blasting specification and should not be relying on the architect or specifier who do not have the training or experience to do this. |
Melissa J Aguiar
Senior Member
Username: melissajaguiar
Post Number: 12
Registered: 09-2015
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 14, 2021 - 02:11 pm: | |
Agreed. |
anon (Unregistered Guest)
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 15, 2021 - 11:30 am: | |
Perhaps an architect could prepare such a section if it were Delegated Design? MasterSpec has such sections, and I am thinking specifically here about Section 315000 - EXCAVATION SUPPORT AND PROTECTION, which delegates the engineering responsibility for design to the Contractor.
It might be an option for a blasting specification as well. |
Greta Eckhardt (Unregistered Guest)
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 15, 2021 - 11:46 am: | |
Just as with other delegated design, meaningful specifications need to include something about the performance requirements and constraints. Therefore someone who knows the existing site conditions, including the anticipated nature of the bedrock, along with the design goals and relevant local laws and regulations should take responsibility for preparing a blasting specification, even if it is up to the contractor to decide exactly how they should execute it. I think it degrades the quality of specifications in general to just include a placeholder. |
ken hercenberg
Senior Member
Username: khercenberg
Post Number: 1411
Registered: 12-2006
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 15, 2021 - 01:06 pm: | |
I agree Greta. Even when writing the spec for the civil engineer on my project we agreed that the level of information was an issue. Delegated design is meaningless if performance cannot be established. As I recall a large portion of the spec package had to do with safety, monitoring, storage, transport, and disposal. The risks associated with blasting and explosives are incredible, especially if the project is anywhere near underground utilities such as gas or water lines, transport systems such as subways, or foundation systems for buildings or infrastructure. |
Lisa Goodwin Robbins, RA, CCS, LEED ap
Senior Member
Username: lgoodrob
Post Number: 397
Registered: 08-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 15, 2021 - 01:15 pm: | |
This:
"I think it degrades the quality of specifications in general to just include a placeholder."
One of my least favorite words in specifications is "boilerplate". Poor quality generic information just encourages contractors to ignore the good stuff.
- |
Greta Eckhardt (Unregistered Guest)
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 15, 2021 - 01:17 pm: | |
Thank you, Ken and Lisa - I am glad you are still out there producing specifications sanely! |
Mark Gilligan SE,
Senior Member
Username: mark_gilligan
Post Number: 964
Registered: 10-2007
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 15, 2021 - 02:18 pm: | |
Civil Engineers, there may be very rare exceptions, do not know about blasting.
I expect that that focus should be on permitting, site protection, and evaluating unanticipated damage. |
Melissa J Aguiar
Senior Member
Username: melissajaguiar
Post Number: 13
Registered: 09-2015
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 15, 2021 - 02:44 pm: | |
Collaboration is the key here. There should not be a boilerplate specification for this type of work, I agree on that point. Although, if we are requested by the Owner to work with the DOR's/EOR's to develop said CD's, then every player needs to come to the table to discuss the project requirements in order to develop a specification that is both transparent and concise. To all parties involved.
Some items to remember on developing blasting work with the DOR's/EOR's, contractor's, blasting specialist:
1. Work with the local AHJ's so they understand what the engineers and the blasting contractor efforts are going to require for the project scope.
2. Work with the local AHJ's in dealing with the traffic. Rock removal will require to be hauled away. Need to determine haul routes, and timing for said removal.
3. Work with surrounding businesses to ensure they remain operational and safe from blasting procedures.
4. Would be wise to hold public safety meetings. The blasting specialist, DOR's, EOR's, Owner/Agency should state that the purpose of this meeting is to gather the residents and other concerned, interested parties into one group where the project can be presented to everyone. Precision controlled blasting projects in urban areas always attract attention. If improperly handled, residents and business owners feel as if their concerns have not been properly addressed. This is handled by holding a public meeting where all concerned individuals are informed as to the control methods used in a project of this nature, followed by an open discussion forum.
5. Review any regulatory agency restrictions.
6. Discuss a blasting schedule.
7. Discuss project duration.
8. Discuss blast warnings, need for blast area signs, etc.
9. Discuss preblasting surveys and blasting control methods.
The contractor and the owner/agency needs to write into the CD's whom (usually the blasting specialist/contractor on any work I have done over the last 25 years) is ultimately liable to handle all claims/issues that may arise out of their blasting operation.
Need to discuss seismograph work as well. The blasting contractor would need to employ a qualified individual to monitor vibrations, specifically applicable to this job. The blasting contractor would of course need to get the approval from the Owner/Agency and Contractor of this qualified individual. That seismograph operator needs to be on the jobsite at all times when blasting is occurring and capable of electronic evaluation of the seismic data immediately after each blast.
That is just some of the items to keep in mind when we work on developing a specification such as this, in my humble opinion. I believe everyone on this board is both highly-qualified and educated in our fields, and no one is producing poor-quality work. Thanks for reading. Have a blessed day! |
Phil Kabza
Senior Member
Username: phil_kabza
Post Number: 691
Registered: 12-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 15, 2021 - 05:35 pm: | |
Sounds like a good time to have a chat with your liability insurance provider's risk management specialist. The last I knew, establishing blasting requirements is not part of an architect's standard of practice and would therefore not be a part of practice covered by your insurance when a piece of rock takes off and lands somewhere you really wish it hadn't.
Phil Kabza FCSI CCS AIA
SpecGuy Specifications Consultants
www.SpecGuy.com
phil@specguy.com |
4specs.com Home Page