AmirZamanian
Structural
- Jan 17, 2006
- 11
I work in a market that includes engineers that routinely under-design the buildings they engineer. Specifically, I seen many designs that are based on moment arms for overturning that are shorter than where they must be. I have seen designs that calculate uplift forces for shear walls inaccurately. They assuming that shear wall of buildings see only the shear from the roof. They routinely ignore the uplift that would be imparted onto the shear wall by the seismic force acting at the center of gravity of the roof. The same calculations ignore the uplift that is transferred to the shear wall by wind forces. If going by the letter of the building code, this is an underestimation.
Does any one have any suggestions for dealing with this? Do I go to the building departments and ask them if they sanction the practice that my competition engage in? Do I just let my clients go off to those that are exposing themselves as well as my client to potential liability? Am I obligate under the board rules to alert authorities to this practice? Do you suggest I take the bull by the horn or pretend that I don’t know what I suspect?
There is a wide spectrum of avenues this issue can be approached and dealt with. The way I see this, I would be unfairly competed against as long as there are other engineers who are willing or unaware that they are assuming the liability associated with shorter moment arms for wind and seismic case as discussed above. I may point out that this practice expose everyone involved to potential risks. In support of exposing this practice, I have an ethical dilemma and continence to deal with. I may also choose to underplay this and take the complacent approach. This wouldn’t rock many boats and wouldn’t pull chains.
On the other hand, my predicament cannot be a unique and I cannot be the first engineer to come face to face with such dilemma. I am hoping that I can draw on someone’s experience in similar position.
I appreciate any comments and suggestions on how to deal with this seemingly no so unique situation.
Thanks
Amir Zamanian
Does any one have any suggestions for dealing with this? Do I go to the building departments and ask them if they sanction the practice that my competition engage in? Do I just let my clients go off to those that are exposing themselves as well as my client to potential liability? Am I obligate under the board rules to alert authorities to this practice? Do you suggest I take the bull by the horn or pretend that I don’t know what I suspect?
There is a wide spectrum of avenues this issue can be approached and dealt with. The way I see this, I would be unfairly competed against as long as there are other engineers who are willing or unaware that they are assuming the liability associated with shorter moment arms for wind and seismic case as discussed above. I may point out that this practice expose everyone involved to potential risks. In support of exposing this practice, I have an ethical dilemma and continence to deal with. I may also choose to underplay this and take the complacent approach. This wouldn’t rock many boats and wouldn’t pull chains.
On the other hand, my predicament cannot be a unique and I cannot be the first engineer to come face to face with such dilemma. I am hoping that I can draw on someone’s experience in similar position.
I appreciate any comments and suggestions on how to deal with this seemingly no so unique situation.
Thanks
Amir Zamanian