Kickback to specifiers

[Ranch]

I have been on both sides of the fence. My observation is that, although favoritism exists, graft is extremely rare.

So be proud America on your holiday, and know that NEC serves this purpose.

 

[templdl]

jrdsg,

As one who has read specs for many years you're right on.
You can tell when the specifier doesn't have a clue or it's a cut an past spec.
My favorite is when they want a dry type transformer and the spec is permiated with liquid filled specs.

 

[Ranch]

....... when the specifier doesn't have a clue or it's a cut an past spec.
My favorite is when they want a dry type transformer and the spec is permiated with liquid filled specs.

My favourite is IEEE519 cited by those who have never seen a copy.

 

[kingpb]

Unfortunately, specs are often used from one job to the next, because that jobwas "like" this one. The engineer doens't realize there are Owner specific requirements in them. Then they get slightly modifed to meet the "new" project, so on, and so on, job after job. Pretty soon you have a convoluted mess that contradicts itself over and over. Unless you go back to the guide spec, you run the risk of improperly specifying.

As far as kick-back, manufacturers give a lot of free luches and so forth, but as others have said it's a preference and familiarity issue. Usually, you can request to provide similar equipment by someone else. Single sourcing can run the risk of overpaying since there is no competion in bidding, and the Owner's want the cheapest price.