Issue link: https://www.e-digitaleditions.com/i/954267
diligence by reviewing a simplified check- list prior to bidding these high-profile jobs to ensure that the project will have good chance to succeed. The following is an example of this type of checklist. Architectural Finishing Project Pre-bid Checklist • Competent product design • Job site location and environmental classification • Reasonable lead time • Substrate metal alloy material quality • Correct fabrication methods • Material handling and transportation plan • Reference to finishing specifications and applicable standards • Prints and identification of significant surfaces A,B,C, etc. • Masking details • Metal preparation and pretreatment processes for the alloy(s) used • Powder material(s) chemistry selection • Powder application control • Applied powder thickness range values • Curing method and validation • Finish performance quality testing and quality control • Finish surface attributes (color/gloss/ surface texture) • Packaging for transportation to jobsite • Jobsite storage of finished product • Assembly and installation concerns • Jobsite environmental conditions • Service life expectations and warranty or guaranty contract language • Field care, inspections, maintenance, cleaning, and touch up Typically, the specifications and stan- dards referenced for a given project are in documents that are authored by the design authority and must be followed in detail by the general contractor and all of the subcontractors. It is not uncommon to see language in the instructions from the architect or plan- ner that any deviations, substitutions, or changes to the original design specifica- tion must be authorized in writing by the design authority. The deviation option allows for changes to be made if it is discovered that any part of the spec- ification as defined is determined to be incomplete or not fit for purpose for any reason that is discovered after the approval and procurement documents are signed. For example, if there is a chemical clean- ing and conversion coating process call- out on a processing specification for cold rolled steel and the metal is received with heavy corrosion, a mechanical abrasion process would be necessary prior to the chemical cleaning and conversion coating to achieve the desired performance characteristics that the product needs. Following the process specification without address- ing the rust issue would result in a pre- dictable catastrophic adhesion and cor- rosion failure. Metal finishing profes- sionals wouldn't allow this important detail to be overlooked. The proper pro- tocol would be to provide a formal writ- ten request for a deviation from the specification and provide an add-on requirement for the cost and abrasive blast cleaning process due to the condi- tion of the metal that was not identified on the original plan. In conclusion Incomplete, improper, or unclear archi- tectural design, fabrication, and finishing specifications can present a significant liability concern for contractors and sup- pliers at all tiers in the supply chain. Add to these factors any faulty workmanship, out of control processing, or material quality issue, and you increase the chance for noncompliance and failure. When architectural finishes applied to building components fail to provide the protective and decorative value in a short period of time, contractors in the supply chain may be at risk of liability to some degree. Specifying the finish f o r m e t a l b u i l d i n g c o m p o n e n t s exposed to various outdoor weather environments is serious business. A fin- ish is more than just color. The combi- nations of product design, fabrication methods, metal alloy selection, finish processing, finishing materials, envi- ronmental stresses, and customer care and maintenance can and will affect the expected service life of the finish. Creating an effective project specification requires the collaboration of everyone involved in the project, including materi- al suppliers. If unforeseen problems arise, the contractors need to work with the architect and building owner to resolve problems and to discuss concerns and issues. Regular progress meetings are typ- ically conducted by the general contractor to keep the project on track. By following a clear, complete, and accurately written specification and using products and processes that meet the stated objectives, contractors can minimize their liability and ensure long-lasting, high-quality products and finishes. PC Editor's note For further reading, visit Powder Coating magazine's website at www.pcoating.com and search the Article Archive by keyword, subject, organization, author, or issue date. All articles listed in the archive are available for free download to registered users. Michael W. Cravens is pres- ident of Powder Finishing Consultants, Inc., Yorba Linda, Calif., and president of IKON Powder Coating, Inc., Anaheim, Calif. With more than 3 decades of experience in the pow- der coating industry, he has written numerous articles and a training series. He is also a video producer, a seminar leader, and a member of many finishing industry organizations, including the Powder Coating Institute. This column discusses problems encountered by powder coaters during the daily operation of their powder coating lines. These are in- the-field experiences from coaters. Its intent is to provide practical information to line personnel who coat all day to help them improve in their work. If you would like to contribute to this column, contact Alicia Tyznik, editor, at 651/287-5620, or email atyznik@cscpub.com. 36 POWDER COATING, March 2018