Who Pays for the Mockup?

Checking the gaps between the spec and supplier quotes

The spec calls for a performance mockup. You found it, flagged it, and sent it out for pricing.

The glass supplier included the mockup glass. The framing supplier included material. The lab sent a testing proposal. Your installer priced the building.

So the mockup is covered?

I would check that again. Who fabricates the frame? Who crates it? Who unloads it at the lab, installs it, and comes back to take it down?

You can have a quote from everyone and still have work nobody priced.

In the last article, we used AI to find written requirements that could affect the bid. Here, we take one of those requirements and compare it with what the suppliers actually offered.

Start with the Requirement

Before comparing prices, make sure everyone is pricing the same assembly.

A visual mockup may establish appearance and workmanship expectations. A performance mockup is built for specified testing. One assembly can serve both purposes, but that needs to be established in the project requirements.[1]

Check the stated size, configuration, materials, interfaces, test sequence, and approval timing. If a corner, operable vent, or adjacent wall transition is part of the required assembly, the quotes need to address it.

The test reference matters too. AAMA 501.1 addresses water penetration using dynamic pressure.[2] A proposal mentioning only static water testing needs checking against a requirement for dynamic testing. Do not assume a general “water test” line covers both.

Guide specifications show how detailed this can get. UFGS 08 44 00 separates mockup construction, performance testing, and the approved mockup into distinct provisions.[3] It is a guide for preparing project specifications, not an automatic requirement on your job. Read the issued package.

Break It into Cost Items

“Mockup included” is too broad to close the review.

I would break the obligation into pieces before asking who has carried each one:

• Mockup drawings, calculations, and coordination.

• Glass, framing, anchors, infill, sealants, and accessories.

• Fabrication and assembly.

• Packing, freight, unloading, and storage.

• Test support, interfaces, and perimeter closures.

• Installation labor, supervision, access, and equipment.

• Initial testing, reports, and required attendance.

• Repairs, replacement material, and retesting.

• Dismantling, disposal, return freight, or retention.

That is a review list, not a claim that every project requires every item. Some costs may be bundled. Others may belong to another party. Keep the source language beside the item so you can tell the difference.

Read the Exclusions First

A supplier’s base price is only part of the quote. I want the inclusions, exclusions, alternates, and assumptions in front of me too.

“Mockup glass included” does not tell me whether replacement lites are covered. “Framing material included” does not tell me whether fabrication is covered. “Testing included” does not tell me whether the price includes a return visit.

An allowance needs checking as well. What does it cover, and what conditions change the price?

Then check the revisions. A quote for the original mockup cannot clear a requirement added later unless the supplier has confirmed the change.

AI can help line these statements up. It should quote the evidence and preserve the exclusions. It should not turn a broad phrase into a list of services the supplier never agreed to provide.

Four Quotes, Several Open Items

Suppose the project requires a laboratory performance mockup. For this fictional example, the supplied project clause assigns the glazing subcontractor fabrication, delivery, erection, and dismantling. It separately assigns the initial laboratory testing fee to the general contractor. Retesting responsibility is not addressed in the supplied excerpt.

Now compare four fictional quotes:

The materials have been quoted. Several activities have not.

For this example, I would get the lab installation and dismantling priced, confirm who fabricates the framing, and resolve packing and freight. I would also ask how repairs and retests will be handled.

I would flag a possible overlap on the initial testing fee. The project clause assigns it to the general contractor, but a lab quote is sitting in my package. That needs coordination before I carry it twice or leave it out based on an assumption.

The table identifies the problem. Written clarification closes it.

Who Owes It, and Who Priced It?

These are separate questions:

1. What does the project require from our scope?

2. What have our suppliers and subcontractors actually priced?

If a supplier excludes an item assigned to us in the project documents, the exclusion leaves a purchasing gap to resolve. It does not establish that the project requirement has disappeared.

Likewise, a supplier including something does not prove that our scope requires it. There may be duplication, an alternate, or a misunderstanding.

When the documents conflict, I want the exact language and the question that needs answering. I do not want the model deciding which document takes precedence without support in the supplied terms.

Until responsibility is settled, keep the item open. Do not label silence as coverage.

The Scope Gap Audit Prompt

Use this after the specification review. Supply the relevant requirements, scope documents, quotes, revisions, and clarifications. Label each file clearly.

If the output says installation is included, open the quote and check where. It may mean installation at the building. The requirement you are checking may be installation at a lab in another city.

Close the Open Items

The follow-up should be specific enough to answer.

Instead of “Does your quote include the mockup?”, ask:

Does your price include fabrication and assembly of the specified mockup framing, packing for shipment to the laboratory, and loading? Please identify exclusions and confirm the drawing revision used for pricing.

Ask the installer separately about the lab location, crew, equipment, travel, attendance, and dismantling. Ask the lab what it expects others to provide and how additional work is charged.

Testing firms offer different services and facilities. Intertek, for example, describes preconstruction mockup testing across curtain wall and other facade systems.[4] That establishes capability, not the contents of your particular proposal. The written offer still needs checking.

Record the answer with the cost item. Before calling it closed, confirm the required work, who carries it, and where the price or clarification is documented.

Watch the Second Attempt

The first test is not the only cost to think about.

If a repair or design change is needed, who provides replacement material? Who sends the crew back? What does the lab charge for another test or additional time? Does a change require revised drawings or further approval?

I would ask those questions before the test. The answer may depend on the cause of the problem and the agreed terms. Do not have the model assign every retest to the glazing contractor or assume someone else will absorb it.

Mockup testing can identify issues before the facade is built across the project.[1] That is part of its value. The bid still needs to account for the work required to get through the agreed process.

Leave a Usable Record

At the end of this review, I want more than a table of flags. I want each open item tied to an answer: revised quote received, responsibility confirmed, cost carried, or clarification still pending.

AI can help compare the documents and draft those questions. I still need to read the source, confirm the scope, and decide what goes into the bid.

The next time someone says “the mockup is included,” I want to know which part.

This article is part of a series on machine learning for glass and glazing professionals.

Sources

[1] Intertek. Keys to a Successful Building Mock-Up.

[2] Fenestration and Glazing Industry Alliance. AAMA 501.1-17: Water penetration using dynamic pressure. Use the edition required by the project.

[3] USACE, NAVFAC, and AFCEC. UFGS 08 44 00: Curtain Wall and Glazed Assemblies, sections 1.3.5.1–1.3.5.3. Guide specification; project requirements must be checked separately.

[4] Intertek. Building Mockup Testing Services.