Large Binocular Telescope Project

Questions & Answers

concerning the RFP for the

EMBEDDED BEAM and CIRCULAR RAIL

June 27, 1997

Question 1. (received 05 June 1997, regarding drawings such as 270e002)
Where can we obtain information regarding UNI-ISO tolerance call outs, i.e. UNI-ISO 2768-1-F and 2-H?

Answer 1. The relevant standards are:

This information was located from the International Organization for Standardization at URL http://www.iso.ch/cate/cat.html. In the United States these documents may be purchased from the American National Standards Institute at http://www.ansi.org/.

For the purposes of constructing the Embedded Beam and Circular Rail, these tolerance standards are not extraordinary if you use typical good workshop practices and achieve the overall dimensional tolerances indicated on the drawings. Any equivalent ANSI / ISO / UNI / AWS standard would be acceptable to the LBTPO. There is not an official correspondence between ISO, UNI and any other standard.

Other ISO standards mentioned in these LBT bidding documents include:

For UNI standards see: ENTE NAZIONALE ITALIANO DI UNIFICAZIONE the Italian National Standards Body


Question 2. (received 05 June 1997, regarding Section 8.3 of the Technical Specification 270e500)
Could you clarify the circular rail weld type, size and inspection requirements? Annex A, as stated on page 15 of the technical specifications, does not provide this information.

Answer 2. The welding specification (which should be used as a guideline) comes from Section IX of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code. EIE has provided the attached Excel document or GIF images ( page 1, page 2, page 3 ) that was intended for Annex A.


Question 3. (received 05 June 1997, regarding Section 8.7 of the Technical Specification 270e500)
The 25 year service life or two months continuous salt spray exposure during shipping for the specified paint system does not seem to be a practical requirement unless such a statement like "after cleanup and touch up at its arrival at the site and periodic maintenance throughout its life" is added to this requirement. This will especially be more difficult to be achieved with the machined rail surfaces not being painted.

Answer 3. Paragraph 8.7 "Surface Treatments" contains the requirements for the definition of the protection type to be proposed. The supplier must identify the products and the interventions (example: touch-up after erection) which are adequate to satisfy the requirements. Specific requirements related to the interventions during and after the erection on site will be treated in separate specifications, which are not part of the present offer. With reference to the last sentence, we state that the machined surfaces shall be protected as indicated in paragraph 10.0 "Packing and Transport". (Document 401e037, the LBT Technical Specification for Packing and Transport, was not included in the present package of bidding information.)

In the particular case of the Circular Rail, it seems that the simplest form of protection for both transportation and erection on site may be to apply the primer coat to the entire rail including the machined surfaces. This layer can easily be removed before the Circular Rail is put in service.


Question 4. (received 06 June 1997, regarding Section 2.3 of the Proposal Format)
Could you please clarify if we need to provide a technical write up in paragraph 2.3 about how we will meet the requirements of the Statement of Work or is this only required if we propose an alternate?

Answer 4. Yes, the regular proposal should include a description of how the requirements of the Statement of Work will be met.

Also section "2.3 Technical Requirements" of the Proposal Format should be amended as follows:

2.3 Technical Requirements.

[Discuss the ability of the Respondent to meet the requirements specified in the Statement of Work. Such discussion will include, at a minimum, the methodology, equipment, personnel, Subcontractors (if any) and accuracy involved in such testing, measurement or verification.]

[Alternate Proposals only: provide a short description of how the work proposed is different from what is contained in the Statement of Work.]


Question 5. (received 10 June 1997, regarding Section 1.1.3 of the Statement of Work)
We are afraid the 1 November 1997 delivery date for the Embedded Beams is impossible to meet. Is this an error? The proposals are due on July 2, 1997. By the time the contract is negotiated and awarded, it will be 1 August 1997 at the earliest. This leaves only three months to fabricate, machine, proof assemble, paint, package and ship. This is not practical and reasonable for us.

Also, we thought you would like to see the Embedded Beam and the Circular Rail be proof assembled together. Could you please clarify this matter?

Answer 5. Yes, we realize that this is a very tight schedule. The language in the Statement of Work was carefully worded to say "preferred date" and not "absolutely required date". It could be that all vendors will say that the delivery date for the Embedded Beam is impossible to meet. The LBTPO will select the offer which comes closest to meeting our cost, delivery and technical requirements as indicated in Section 8 of the RFP.

Pre-assembly of the Embedded Beam and the Circular Rail would be a desirable feature of the Supply.


Question 6. (received 12 June 1997, regarding Section 4.0 of the Technical Specification 270e500)
We did not receive a copy of drawing 270e009 "Wall Bracket Fastener". Is this drawing needed for the Supply?

Answer 6. No, the "Wall Bracket Fastener" shown in drawing 270e009 is a fixture used in the installation and alignment procedure, and is not a part of this Supply.


Question 7. (received 19 June 1997, regarding T1 steel)
We are looking for a European supplier of 150 x 150 mm square rolled bars of ASTM A517-64 T1 steel (to obtain 140 x 135 mm after machining) and no one in Italy, Belgium, Luxembourg or Germany is able to meet our request. The maximum available thickness seems to be 100 mm.

While we continue our own investigation, can you please give us the name and address of any T1 supplier in Europe for 150 x 150 mm bars?

May we also take into consideration alternative steels?

(This question was synthesized from several similar questions that were received. The availablity seems only slightly better in the USA.)

Answer 7. The "T1" material shall be found in Belgium by Messrs. Fabrique de Fer. in thickness up to 150mm (standard productions) and thickness from 150mm up to 200mm (periodic production, pay attention to delivery terms).

Alternative proposals for the steel of the circular rail are possible. The reference characteristics are:


Question 8. (received 20 June 1997, regarding Section 8.2 of the Technical Specification 270e500)
We are unable to identify the "UNI" specifications referred to in the technical specification of the steel plates. Our most urgent need is for a copy of "Fe 510C UNI EN 10025".

Answer 8. UNI is the Italian national standards body (see Answer 1 above). We have not been able to locate an English copy of "Fe 510C" or determine what the proper equivalent is.


Question 9. (received June 27, 1997)
What is the request for proposal number as indicated in Attachment C (Proposal Format) sections 1.1, 2.2, 3.1 and 4.1?

Answer 9. There is no proposal number only a proposal name which in this case is Embedded Beam and Circular Rail.


Previous Page