I have a PDF copy of the changes to Master Format it goes to division 48 now...

If you want a copy send me your email address. If you email me off-board through Archinect it will be later today I reply since it will go to my home email.

The 16 CSI divisions are about 40 years old. You think about how many new building products have been developed in the past 40 years and it kinda makes sense to reorganize. Whole building industries like IT didn't even exist when the original divisions were laid out.

Here's the new breakdown (not scheduled to take effect until January 2006 i think)

I have yet to come accross a common (& even not so common) building material that could not be classified into the existing 16 divisions. I would much rather that CSI provide additional extension numbers and ammend the current numbering system. Everyone in this industry is so familiar with the current system. This change will require massive reorginaztion of existing arch./contractor general notes & spec's...a huge waste of time and money ...and for what? Although I do appreciate the orginization of this new format, I will sincerely miss the simplicity of the 16 divisions.

I personally would love to know the projected revenue that CSI is going to rake in on selling this new system.

my thoughts exactly.

Well, if you look at it, divisions 1-14 are the same. The current system basically becomes on of the 5 subgroups in the new system.

I don't know how CSI stands to make much money off of this, seeing as how they give away all the info you could want about it for free.

CSI makes money by selling Masterspec... its not cheap either.

they have changed division 2 - its now plucked out into several sections in the thirties. i have passed this around my office and they are asking me when it will take effect? does something like this need to be adopted by a local building department, or is it just upgraded automatically?

Thanks Frit

i agree with Frit. whole systems needto be address and they're given correct biling in the new format. for very techical jobs like refineries, tunners, bridges, clean rooms, etc. the more technical and precise breakdown will allow for a more accurate specification instead of lumping those in div 11,13,15,16.

we're switching over for any project that will begin construction in 2006.

my 2cents worth.

Frit, you are correct: "You think about how many new building products have been developed in the past 40 years and it kinda makes sense to reorganize. Whole building industries like IT didn't even exist when the original divisions were laid out." ... "I don't know how CSI stands to make much money off of this, seeing as how they give away all the info you could want about it for free."

3ifs, no way dude!: "CSI makes money by selling Masterspec... its not cheap either."

For the record, CSI is not affiliated with Arcom's MASTERSPEC guide specification system, which is spec CONTENT. CSI is responsible for the standard numbering system, much like they have been instrumental in bringing construction industry participants together the write the National CAD Standard.

CSI is not out to make money on this. CSI is primarily a volunteer organization. The new standard in its final form is on the web at http://www.csinet.org/s_csi/docs/9400/9361.pdf

MasterFormat is what we are talking about, the revised 50 division, 6+ digit numbering system that used to be 16 divisions and 5 digits.

All the information you could want about it is free and on the web at www.csinet.org Clik on Standards & Formats at the top left, then MasterFormat 2004 Edition.

If you want to buy it as a hardcopy with a few extras, you can. It comes with a CD that has a transition matrix in Excel, and the pages have cross references, and there's a very handy keyword index in the back. A valuable resource while you do the conversion for your office. Many CSI local chapters offer it at a discount. The cost is very reasonable considering all that went into this effort.

Other handy links:

MF04 in 10 easy lessons: http://www.csinet.org/s_csi/docs/10800/10706.pdf

An excellent Q&A article with one of the central minds behind the guts of the new system: http://aec.ihs.com/newsletters/aec-june05-2.jsp

Who's converted/convertin/requiring MF 2004?: http://discus.4specs.com/discus/messages/1097/1650.html?1124502308
Most notably, the GSA is requiring as of this fall. There is also a very extensive list that CSI has collected.

Chris Grimm, RLA, CDT, MAI, CSI
Schmidt Associates, Indianapolis

Indianapolis comes through with the hard facts! Yay for the Midwest!

But jeez I can hardly keep 16 divisions straight in my head (and I use them frequently); 48 is going to cost me hours and hours of billable time...sigh.

I know... first it was just CSI Las Vegas, and now theres CSI Miami and CSI New York...

The positive side to this, especially for owners, is less unforseens and conflicts with documents (once we get used to the new system anyway).

What I wonder is can we help see to it that owners/FMs get the message of the value in this for them?

Here are a few more links to some good articles I have collected:

Owners: "Using MasterFormat's 2004 Edition Could Cut Building Costs 5 to 10 Percent While Reducing Changes and Delays During Construction"
http://www.csinet.org/s_csi/sec.asp?TrackID=3DB5DKYRF7TTLWXHSEKT5F7QLVT7DFKZ&CID=123&DID=10027

Owners: Owners and Facility Managers Push for MasterFormat 2004 (Including the General Services Administration, the largest facility owner in the US)
http://www.csinet.org/s_csi/sec_CSIWeekly.asp?TRACKID=3DB5DKYRF7TTLWXHSEKT5F7QLVT7DFKZ&CID=1227&DID=10695

Facility Managers: MasterFormat 2004 Edition: Improving Construction Project Delivery and Facility Management
http://www.appa.org/FacilitiesManager/articleDetail.cfm?ItemNumber=2295&parentid=2286

Engineers: MasterFormat 2004: Preventing Costly and Time-Consuming Project Afterthoughts
http://www.csemag.com/article/CA509853.html

Contractors: Acceptance of MasterFormat’s 2004 Edition Grows
http://www.smacna.org/pdf/SMACNewsOct04(c).pdf
Full Steam Ahead
http://www.nsca.org/nscaweb/content/masterformat/default.asp
Organizations Adopting New MasterFormat Continues to Grow
http://www.nsca.org/nscaweb/content/resource/news/article.asp?document=1264

The bottom line is $15.8 billion per year is lost due to lack of building industry interoperability according to the August 2004 study by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). Owners and facility managers are the stakeholders who bear the greatest portion of that burden. MasterFormat 2004 is a significant step towards standardizing building information.