Coordinate or is there a better word

[tw]

We often put the word COORDINATE as an instruction for the contractor to review and assimilate all conditions at a location. Usually this is done to alert the builder that other issues are present here, ones the structural engineer does not have direct control over. For instance, "COORDINATE CONNECTION SHOWN WITH PRECAST MFG."

Now some general contractors do this and some don't.

I'm wondering, is the word COORDINATE sufficient? I think a more prescritive sentence might work better if the &$#* were to hit the fan.

I'd be interested in how others approach this issue.

tw

 

[jheidt2543]

I guess that I have no problem with the word COORDINATE as an identifier. Coming from a contracting background, I would always appreciate a "heads up". As the EOR I should think that you would also want to see shop drawings design information from the component designers and manufacturers to verify your original design assumptions.

In fact, when I was reviewing shop drawing submittals from the component manufacturers, before sending them to the EOR for approval, I would leave little notes like "verify connection", "is this detail ok?", "please verify design dimension" etc. The more people looking at a detail or shop drawing the less likely there will be a mistake.

 

[ishvaaag]

You can also employ ENSURE, which bears more directly the obligation.