To: | "Building Service Performance (BSP) Forum" <bsp-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
---|---|
From: | "Deborah MacPherson" <debmacp@xxxxxxxxx> |
Date: | Sat, 18 Oct 2008 09:57:50 -0400 |
Message-id: | <48f213f30810180657i7b73428fq6b9ff446089884fc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
Hi Rex and Toby -
Thanks for the messages. Michelle and I communicated off list, my main concern was that the PMI was an achievable work result which has been confirmed - thanks! The specification came from an MEP engineer, fairly consistent with their other sections so it was probably based on the manufacturers originally then modified to work with the rest of the project. It is impressive how far along these systems, including BCS, have come even in the last couple years. I am an A201 purist meaning all the documents address only the Owner, Architect, and Contractor. Subcontractors and Engineers are not separate entities, my only beef with the new and improved systems is our engineers have a tendency to use the spec to divide the work by talking too much about what the plumbing contractor does, what electrical does, what the BCS supplier does. The selection of course requires expertise, but the in-field implementation is probably a bumpy road but if there has ever been a need for one general contractor to be responsible for whole systems, digital-addressable fire alarms and BCS are them.
Some time at your convenience, could some one provide a simple explanation of BACnet and how the building systems actually link up to communication networks outside the building? What is achievable / realistic expectations for project specifications today vs goals for the future especially in regards to OBIX and ED XML? Is it just an old habit for construction documents to call for "Microsoft Windows based" in this day and age?
Hope the Silver Sentinel exercise goes well. I met Chuck McLean and Guillaume Radde at the Oct 7 Expedition Workshop and am scheduled to talk with Chuck McLean about standardizing the GIS symbology/colors for building types and the pros and cons of the fire control room (also called fire command center). For example, I think this space or, panel location if there is not a space, should be consistently numbered. There is not a good match in OCCS Table 13 Spaces by Function. The closest are 13 81 31 21 99 Other Information Signal Distribution Spaces or 13 81 21 24 Telecommunications Room but neither of those are correct. Any way he said he was traveling - evidently your way. It *IS* a small world after all.
Best, Deborah On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 11:59 PM, Rex Brooks <rexb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: Hi Deborah, Michelle, Everyone, -- ************************************************* Deborah L. MacPherson CSI CCS, AIA Projects Director, Accuracy&Aesthetics Specifier, WDG Architecture PLL ************************************************** _________________________________________________________________ Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/bsp-forum/ Subscribe: mailto:bsp-forum-join@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Config/Unsubscribe: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/bsp-forum/ Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/BSP/ Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?BuildingServicePerformance (01) |
<Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
---|---|---|
|
Previous by Date: | Re: [bsp-forum] Person Machine Interface (PMI), Considine, Toby (Campus Services IT) |
---|---|
Next by Date: | Re: [bsp-forum] Person Machine Interface (PMI), Considine, Toby (Campus Services IT) |
Previous by Thread: | Re: [bsp-forum] Person Machine Interface (PMI), Considine, Toby (Campus Services IT) |
Next by Thread: | Re: [bsp-forum] Person Machine Interface (PMI), Considine, Toby (Campus Services IT) |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |