He's actually referring to one of our projects, but who's keeping score ...
Steve Leyton Protection Design & Consulting San Diego, CA -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Fletcher, Ron Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 2:24 PM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: Ideal World - What info would you want from a PE We always quote the "level playing field" and then offer a deductive alternate to use a more efficient pipe arrangement and maybe different zoning with smaller pipe that provides the specified design densities. Ron Fletcher Aero Automatic Sprinkler Phoenix, AZ -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steve Leyton Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 3:00 PM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: Ideal World - What info would you want from a PE Generally, we offer #9, but often clients want more limited services and have done some version of 2-8 on many projects. You left out performance specifications and that's a pretty important piece of the puzzle if you're not provided plans. I first started writing spec's by accident in about 1989. A local architect issued "boilerplate" on a large Type 5 retail project. Our firm earned the bid, prepared plans, submitted to the FD and moved on. We were at 20% when we got a memo from the GC instructing us to submit to FM ... uh-oh. Turns out the spec's overlooked the owner's insurance and it turned into a nightmare R&R of much of the installed piping and an urgent re-design on everything. After the dust settled I approached the architect and instead of blowing me off, they were very interested in improving their documents and the short version is that I started writing performance spec's for them on the side. Same firm gave PD&C its start in 1995 by hiring us to work on a very large project. For the first 4 or 5 years, most of our projects were just "spec's and submittal review". These days, we don't even do such limited scopes any more - most clients have tasted the benefits of a complete document set and that's the preference. My biggest concern starting out was that local sprinkies - many of them former competitors - would resent "losing" the design work to a design only firm. Ironically, I've heard over and over that having a "level playing field" and a solid set of spec's (project and technology-specific, not boilerplate) is a welcome asset. We generally see more competitive bids, MUCH tighter bid scatter, fewer changes and ultimately, lower overall costs and on-schedule deliveries. The highest compliment I get is when a contractor calls and says, "I see you wrote the spec' on the Such and Such project ..." I'm proud that even when there aren't plans, or if our firm isn't identified on the project directory, that our work is recognizable and apart from the crap that unfortunately still makes up the majority of work product in this sector. Unfortunately, we've had to send cease and desist letters a few times to architects and engineers who have borrowed our format. Nonetheless, a decent set of spec's can be of great value to bidders where there are no plans. A document should include accurate hazard groups and design areas, commodities classifications and associated storage design criteria, selection of sprinklers, extended coverage and residential product technologies as applicable, backflow and UG stuff, etc., etc. Too often, we still see spec's with out of date insurance references, incomplete or inaccurate codes and standards references, non-existent or out-of-business manufacturers and all that. Steve Leyton Protection Design & Consulting San Diego, CA -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steve Kowkabany Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 1:21 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Ideal World - What info would you want from a PE Since we're on the topic of contract documents, what do the contractors out there want to see as an ideal level of detail from the PE on plans and specs? I'll throw out some examples based on what I have seen ranging from the minimum (which puts the entire design onus on the contractor) to the maximum (full-blown layout). 1) No design docs - just "design per NFPA 13, 16, 20, 24, etc." 2) Hazard classifications of all areas within the building including densities to be used, size of remote area, etc. - including design criteria for special situations like dry storage of boats, special hazards, and other storage scenarios 3) System type specified - wet, dry, antifreeze, etc. 4) Water supply totally worked out including a coordinated underground design, backflow preventer location and type, and recent flow test info 5) Code references identified for sources of requirements from local building codes and fire codes 6) Fire alarm system interface details 7) Structural coordination details such as locations of mains or standpipes will need to penetrate floors or firewalls 8) Partial layout - such as the location of just mains, or just heads, or just some system components that are critical to the owner or architect 9) Full blown layout and hydraulic calcs (similar to what white paper level of detail) 10) Full blown layout plus stocklisting - contractor just fabricates components and assemblies and entire design responsibility is on the engineer In an ideal world, where every engineer and contractor had NICET 4 knowledge and experience, what would be the ideal level of detail for you as contractors? Does too much information restrict your ability to be creative and bid competitively, or would it be better to have completely engineered drawings to fabricate and install from. I'd love to hear your thoughts. Thanks, Steve Kowkabany, P.E. Fire Protection Engineer Neptune Fire Protection Engineering LLC 616 Davis Street Neptune Beach, FL 32266 904-652-4200 Phone 904-212-0868 Fax _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum For Technical Assistance, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field) __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 3607 (20081112) __________ The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. http://www.eset.com __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 3607 (20081112) __________ The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. http://www.eset.com _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum For Technical Assistance, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field) _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum For Technical Assistance, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field) _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum For Technical Assistance, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
