Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

RE: CSI MasterFormat revisions

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Title: Message

Charlie, are you talking about the expansion from the ol’ reliable Sixteen Divisions to the thirty-something that they are going to?


If so, that might be a “recent revision” in the sense that some are only just now hearing about it, but it has been in the works for more than ten years. Personally, I started using it a couple of years ago because (1) hardly any of the contractors I deal with even know the OLD format, much less the new, and (2) they had published “for public comment” detailed lists of section numbers for specs, and I couldn’t resist using the free information vs. having to purchase their current documents under the old system just so my spec section numbering met the standard. Yeah, that’s right, I’m “cheap.” Matter of public record.


Anyway, I like the argument in their CSI website “FAQ” when they say “don’t you know that no one is going to follow this because they’re not going to want to change?” The response: “That’s what they said when the OLD system was first introduced.”


Think “LRFD”.


From: Carter, Charlie [mailto:carter(--nospam--at)]
Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2004 3:58 PM
To: seaint(--nospam--at)
Subject: CSI MasterFormat revisions



Anybody involved (or know a structural engineer who was involved) with the recent revision of the CSI MasterFormat system?