Electrician Talk banner
41 - 56 of 56 Posts

·
Registered
Scada Supervisor
Joined
·
4,755 Posts
View attachment 168961
There isn’t a revision note for the 10 anywhere.
Welcome.
Ok with the limited information you gave in this opening post, it is very hard to give you an answer.
You know what a cloud is, but we have no idea of the area/system. If I have to guess it is the addition of the fans to the building because that is where it stops at.
In the future if you want information please provide a little more background information or clearer questions to get better answers. Otherwise you can expect some razzing because you are asking us to just make a guess or state the obvious.
Cowboy
 

·
Banned
Commercial/Industrial and Service work
Joined
·
1,799 Posts
Welcome.
Ok with the limited information you gave in this opening post, it is very hard to give you an answer.
You know what a cloud is, but we have no idea of the area/system. If I have to guess it is the addition of the fans to the building because that is where it stops at.
In the future if you want information please provide a little more background information or clearer questions to get better answers. Otherwise you can expect some razzing because you are asking us to just make a guess or state the obvious.
Cowboy
Here here
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19 Posts
I'm an engineer. Mechanical , but installed lots of projects with multiple trades. Any trade person, not necessary to be a foreman, could simply ASK me. . . anything. I would get it answered ASAP. This is WAY too much time spent circling around when a call to the owner's rep, engineer, or GC's rep would have solved it. It is apparent to me that the drawing revisor simply forgot to put in the note for modification #10. Besides that, SOMEthing should have been provided to the sub(electrical) specifically describing what is required to accomplish the job. NO work should be initiated by any sub without a job description included with the change order or RFQ.

You should not be wasting your time even considering this without such detail.
Just my opinion!
 

·
Registered
36th year apprentice & Floor Sweeper
Joined
·
2,117 Posts
I don’t understand? Revision 10 is listed in the title block. It was issued 10/26/21 and is part of ASI-10.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
12,464 Posts
I'm an engineer. Mechanical , but installed lots of projects with multiple trades. Any trade person, not necessary to be a foreman, could simply ASK me. . . anything. I would get it answered ASAP. This is WAY too much time spent circling around when a call to the owner's rep, engineer, or GC's rep would have solved it. It is apparent to me that the drawing revisor simply forgot to put in the note for modification #10. Besides that, SOMEthing should have been provided to the sub(electrical) specifically describing what is required to accomplish the job. NO work should be initiated by any sub without a job description included with the change order or RFQ.

You should not be wasting your time even considering this without such detail.
Just my opinion!
Trouble with that is...

#1- When EC's bid jobs after paying for a copy of the drawings, they can't be expected to catch every little detail or flaw or mistake on the drawings provided, And sometimes., contracturally, if they're awarded the bid, they're obligated to do Whatever TF the job requires even IF the drawings are wrong or way off or whatever because the contract is about 18 trillion pages of fine print... \\ANd to boot, and put sim[ply...

#2- There's almost always a provision in the fine print contract requiring all the subs to complete the job their tasked all to specs and/or code, and printed plan errors are not a hedge against gitten' er' dun. Contractor must eat the error or do whatever it takes to comply with the overall scope and should a conflict or disagreement arise... the sub is responsible for doing even a complete revision and re-engineer the whole shebang should the original bid documents prove to be lacking and/or incorrect. It'll take a savvy fast-talker to get out of what begins to prove to be a disaster. And NYC is famous for that, and I know the reason why, but, that aside...

Even if an absolute code violation such as an undersized feeder to an elevator, the EC bidding must do the correct thing anyhow, and there's no if's, ands, or but's about it. Put the right thing in that meets minimum code, change order be damned.

Once I worked for an EC we were retrofitting a new modern addressable fire alarm system to an existing, historic NYC courthouse all in GRC but required to be chopped into the masonry walls and plaster ceilings... no exposed wiring or unnecessary infrastructure related to the install other than what CODE requires to be visible could be seen anywhere.

And that wasn't easy but heck... nobody's paying this bill anyways... (thats when I first met the infamous "Judge Judy" of "the people's court" fame) way back then... She was awestruck at the way I marked and measured a pipe to bend and then bent it, by hand, to fit exactly... and started pickin' my brain... Great lady... But/and the engineered drawings (From B.E.S.T> - a company that engineers fire alarm systems on the regular and KNEW NYC F.A. code specifics as well as each different "authorities" in NYC like the specs and procedures and standards for the Port Authority ar edifferent from the Schools COnstruction Authority or the Department of General Services,,, etc... and so, the plans specifically and clearly mapped all the speaker/strobes signals with all those on the North side be fed from amplifier "A" and the South side of this symetric building to be on the "B" amplifier... The strobes part of the combo all on the same power supply, 1 each per floor... BUT...

But when I followed that instruction I got red-tagged, and veritably tarred and feathered by... tarnished with my first, and only I may add.. red ticket violation and the Fire Marshals were so mad at me and visably insulted and seemed on the verge of getting physical, that I wanted to drop dead right then and there.

But in fine print: "Errors on drawings are not the responsibility of the City of New York, agencies, assignees... yadda yadda blah blah blah... All work shall comply with relevant codes. Should errors exist, or codes conflict with the written drawings, the contractor is responsible for correcting it/them at their own expense to a minimum standard of code compliance."

Same thing happened at the Men's homeless shelter on 2nd St across from the NYC Hell's Angles headquarters... Same engineering company too. Most of you guys are cookie cutter copy & pasters, so... save you'r "Im and EnGiNeER" cuz' I'm not impressed by the title. I learned better, most of yas are quite lazy and uninspiring, no personal offence intended of course. Welcome to the board, I hope you have a blast. I know you registered long ago but, never read a post of your's that I can recall.
 
41 - 56 of 56 Posts
Top