4specs.com    4specs.com Home Page

"Basis of Design" and test reports... Log Out | Topics | Search
Moderators | Register | Edit Profile

4specs Discussion Forum » Archive - Specifications Discussions #5 » "Basis of Design" and test reports « Previous Next »

Author Message
Robin E. Snyder
Senior Member
Username: robin

Post Number: 499
Registered: 08-2004
Posted on Friday, January 24, 2014 - 11:19 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

A contractor is questioning why he needs to submit manufacturer's test reports if the drawings/spec call out a specific basis of design and he is supplying that specific product. Good question, so it got me thinking. I am thinking the reason is to verify the manufacturer's test data hasn't changed from the time I researched it, (almost a year ago) until the time the contractor is actually purchasing it. In this case, the material is a vinyl window, and the specs call out for minimum AAMA performance class and grade that is based on the published data of the basis of design product when the spec were originally written (a year ago). Any other arguments (for or against) requiring test reports for BOD products?
J. Peter Jordan
Senior Member
Username: jpjordan

Post Number: 667
Registered: 05-2004
Posted on Friday, January 24, 2014 - 12:21 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

I always assume that the appropriate test data that I might be interested in seeing will be in their Product Data. Unless it is public work and the test informaiton for the product is "mission critical", I will delete this requirement.

However, it appears to me that the Contractor may not understand the purpose of submittals. It is the Contractor's way of showing how he intends to comply with contract requirements. I will occassionally see stipulations that the Contractor does not have to do a submittal unless what he wants to use is not specified. This begs the question of how the Owner and the Architect track what actually gets incorporated into the Work. I am always more interested in Record Product Data than I am in Record Specifications. The Specs indicate the required intent, the Submittal indicates what the Contractor wants to to.

Of course, then there is the issue of the Contractor incorporating what was submitted in the Product Data and Samples into the Work.
Brian Payne, AIA
Senior Member
Username: brian_payne

Post Number: 8
Registered: 01-2014


Posted on Friday, January 24, 2014 - 04:26 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

My rule of thumb: Don't ask for it if there is nothing specific that you intend to do with it. I agree that product data usually references the appropriate standards anyways.
ken hercenberg
Senior Member
Username: khercenberg

Post Number: 688
Registered: 12-2006


Posted on Friday, January 24, 2014 - 04:26 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

I like to include phrasing in Division 01 stating that if Contractor furnishes specified products (as specified - no modifications from the specified requirements) then in lieu of submitting product data, manufacturer's qualifications, and test reports required by the Specs the GC/CM can just submit certification as an Informational Submittal noting that compliance. This eliminates a good amount of paper shuffling related to Action Submittals, speeds up the process, and cuts down on my costs. This does not eliminate the need for shop drawings, samples, etc. if required by the specs but it does eliminate the need for extraneous paperwork. If you're currently requiring test reports, consider instead requiring certification of compliance with specified rating unless there is an Owner or Code requirement or other reason for requiring the test reports.
Brian Payne, AIA
Senior Member
Username: brian_payne

Post Number: 9
Registered: 01-2014


Posted on Friday, January 24, 2014 - 06:03 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

Ken, I like the idea, but there are often accessories, options, etc. that a certification would not clearly show that keeps me from doing the same. Personally, product data alone seams sufficient for most sections assuming shops/samples are not required.
John Bunzick, CCS, CCCA, LEED AP
Senior Member
Username: bunzick

Post Number: 1552
Registered: 03-2002
Posted on Saturday, January 25, 2014 - 01:50 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

I might specify test reports for more technically demanding products as a way to insure we get the latest data, and as a way to force the manufacturer to "confirm," in a sense, they were complying with specs. For these products, current test reports are sometimes a bit challenging to get in advance. Also, if there are minor product changes, or the report they have is outdated, the manufacturer may have to retest and provide new reports.
J. Peter Jordan
Senior Member
Username: jpjordan

Post Number: 669
Registered: 05-2004
Posted on Sunday, January 26, 2014 - 09:03 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

Manufacturers will test products when they are developed and then not do it again even if they change the product, if the test changes, or if there are changes in the code. MPI requires regular retesting, and paint manufacturers complain even though they are continuously tweaking their formulations. AAMA made a major change in window categories and testing within the last five years, but I still see testing information that is 8 to 19 years old. Testing can be expensive and time-consuming. That stuff you swear by may be cruizin' on testing done 15 or 20 years ago. Sometimes it doesn't matter; sometimes it matters a lot.

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