ANSI A118 Numbering

[Platypus]

As an aside, it "bothers" me that ANSI, an international standards institute that really should know better, uses '118.1' instead of '118.01'.

Why does it bug me just a little? Because it doesn't sort alphabetically. I used to be a software development professional, and believe me, this causes much more trouble that you might think. Not to the guys in the field, just the guys who have to manage the data, look at reports and so forth.

Otherwise, I am inferring that A118.1 (.01) is not as "sticky" as A118.2 (if such a thing existed), which is less "sticky" than .15. Does this also mean that .15 can be substituted for anything that calls for .11? Seems obvious and logical, but I don't want to make assumptions.

[cx]

Valid point, I think, Gerry.

The A118.1 would definitely be less "sticky," as you put it, than an A118.4 (which does exist) and the A118.4 would be less "sticky" than the A118.15. I don't think there exists an A118.15 mortar that does not also meet the requirements of A118.11, but I've never tried to verify that.

Those numbers are simply designations for purpose of property identification. Not quite random, but not of any particular significance, either. I can certainly see that it could cause a problem for those of you who might need to sort the numbers logically, which problem I've never encountered. I personally have always faulted the numbering of the A118.1 and A118.11 because of the similarity and ease of mistaking the two with simple typing or reading error.

I definitely support your thinking of changing A118.1 to the more logical A118.01. Makes perfect sense to me and I think you should make the proposal through the TCNA's ANSI Committee.

It would take a while to get proper traction, but I think it could be done with a minimum of disruption in the longer term if properly presented, which I think you could do. Would likely require, or perhaps should include, a similar numbering change to all the products between 1 and 10. Biggest hurdle I see would be the simple human inertia to resist change. Manufacturers resisting product labeling packaging changes, publication re-printing, and that sort of thing. But perhaps there are other logical ramifications I don't see.

For those reading who are not familiar:

A118.1: American National Standard Specification for Dry-Set Cement Mortar.

A118.4: American National Standard Specification for Modified Dry-Set Cement Mortar.

A118.11: American National Standard Specification for EGP (Exterior Glue Plywood) Latex-Portland Cement Mortar.

A118.15: American National Standard Specification for Improved Modified Dry-Set Cement Mortar.

Might aughta separate this discussion into a separate thread.

Actually, I think I'll just do that. Gerry's comment was originally in the "Bonding foam shower pan to subfloor" thread.

[e3]

The ISO designations make more sense but that's a horse of a different color !

[cx]

Well, so does the metric system of measurement, Eric, but..........