Foundation Engineering Without going on site 3

[XR250]

One of our local foundation companies apparently uses an Engineer who will take the foundation companies field notes and come up with a repair plan. They said if it is a simple job, he will not go to the site. For more complicated ones, he will make a site visit. On this particular project, they installed 11 helical piers without the Engineer going out there ($24,000). Does that seem unethical to y'all?

 

[TigerGuy]

I've signed many reports based on the information provided me by my field technicians and Jr. engineers.

The situation you describe does not sound unethical to me. Depending on the foundation company's staff, it may be quite risky.

 

[XR250]

This is a third-party engineer that is not an employee of the foundation company

 

[skeletron]

Isn't the capacity of a helical pile entirely based on the installation torque? Isn't it also dependent on the soil conditions observed?

I'm of the opinion that you always need boots-on-the-ground if you are signing off on design. I think if the Engineer was part of the Pile Company, then there may be some obvious cross-over in which the Field Tech is a delegate and can be relied upon. This is also dependent on the Pile Company's QA/QC processes, training processes, etc.

However, if the Engineer is third-party I would think they would need to make adjustments to their system. In this case, the Engineer would need to have the QA/QC process, training process, clear instructions, etc. and provide those to the delegated firm.

 

[JStephen]

It may not be best practice, but I don't see anything inherently unethical about it. A lot would depend on the details.

 

[dik]

I don't know for sure, but in a given area, the torque is a fairly good measure of the installed load capacity. I don't know how this varies from place to place.

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

 

[XR250]

Isn't the capacity of a helical pile entirely based on the installation torque? Isn't it also dependent on the soil conditions observed?

Basically - yes. That is not my point though. He came up with the design without actually going out there and counted on field notes from someone who does not work for the same firm.
Some of the work was supporting girders in the crawlspace. I cant imagine being able to gather sufficient information for a repair without seeing it in person.

 

[TigerGuy]

XR250,

Having eyes on the situation is great, whenever it is possible. However, we all know many engineers that never set foot on a project site for which they are responsible. We don't know the relationship this engineer has with the person providing the information. Have they worked together (even for different companies) for many years and developed a level of trust with one another? We (the responders on here) don't know.

I have a number of contacts that I would not question over their field data. They are competent and trustworthy, as well as being quite thorough with their information gathering. Many of them have never worked for the same firm as me. Similarly, if I receive an inspection report from a certified inspector, I tend to not question it. They have to maintain their certification, as I have to maintain my license.

If you have information that contradicts the field notes, contact the engineer and let them know. Just because they aren't doing things the way you would do them, does not make them wrong.

 

[XR250]

@Tigerguy,

I imagine you work a large Geotech firm which has a bunch of techs on staff and I think that is fine and pretty typical.

In this case, I feel a conflict of interest exists because:

1) The business model of most residential foundation repair companies is to sell you repairs you do not need. That is how they stay in business. Almost half of the foundation jobs I go to are from homeowners requesting a second opinion from me. Most of the time I tell them not to do any repairs or much more limited repairs.

2) If you are in bed with the foundation companies, it is unlikely you have the homeowner's best interest in mind.

3) There are way too many nuances to determining the cause of framing/settlement issues inside house - unless it is just a simple, one story house with a trussed roof. You really have to have your own boots on the ground to do an effective assessment.

 

[TigerGuy]

1) Yes, they tend to be quite conservative in their recommendations, which will cost the owner more money than an optimized design.

2) Sadly, there are engineers that tend to be so overly conservative, that some of their designs are unreasonable to construct. This is also not in the client's best interest, but is often tempered when other engineers get involved. That sounds like what you find yourself doing on many of these.

3) Agreed!!! There is a lot of information to assess settlement in a building. However, that engineer may charge so much for the in-person assessment, that the extra foundation elements are more cost-effective.

I have to fight my colleagues often to get a chance to get out into the field. And no, my firm isn't all that big.

It could be that a site visit would help them provide a more efficient solution. Or, it could be they tend to be extra conservative, since we all know working on private residences leads to increased risk and litigation with decreased rewards.

I just don't see that it counts as an ethical issue. They are doing what they think is the best to protect life and property.

 

[XR250]

ince we all know working on private residences leads to increased risk and litigation with decreased rewards.

I hear that and I have been doing residential since 1991 and have not been sued yet. Been threatened once though and it can be quite lucrative,

I just don't see that it counts as an ethical issue. They are doing what they think is the best to protect life and property.

"protect life and property". I seriously doubt this is the case. More than likely they are protecting their best interest - which is continued work from the foundation company.


For me, it is an ethical issue because they are not working for the homeowners best interest.

 

[MintJulep]

@XR250
In a week of debate your position has not been altered.

You believe that you are aware of unethical behavior by an engineer.

As a PE, you are obligated to report it.

 

[Settingsun]

I don't think there's a professional ethics problem with respect to the owner's interests - not the engineer's client. Maybe a personal ethics question.

Maybe a concern that the contractor's reports to the engineer are doctored/censored to encourage the engineer to recommend expensive repairs.

This situation unfortunately arises from the owner's desire to cut cost, by cutting out independent advice. About the only way to combat is to leave a bad review online and hope it helps the next person - if there are indeed unnecessary repairs being pushed.

 

[dik]

I don't know how many buildings I've designed without seeing the site, or even the finished product. I rely on the geotekkie for providing the design data, pretty much the same way he relies on his help to provide him with the raw information. I don't see there's a difference.

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

 

[XR250]

This situation unfortunately arises from the owner's desire to cut cost, by cutting out independent advice.

That is true. However, in most homeowner's defense, they do not know any better. That was the case here. The homeowner called me after the fact and asked for a second opinion. I told her exactly that and that once the work is done, it is hard to give a second opinion as I have know baseline reference.

 

[gte447f]

XR250, "once the work is done"? So have these piles already been installed? If so, it sounds like the homeowner maybe has buyer's remorse, and there is probably not much you can do for them. On the other hand, if the work has not yet been done, then I think you are in a good position to perform a structural condition assessment for the owner and offer your professional opinion with regard to any foundation issues, and whether and to what extent pile underpinning will be beneficial as a remediation/repair procedure.

To your original question about whether it is unethical for a third party engineer to design foundation repairs based on information about existing conditions provided by a foundation contractor that is paying him/her for the design. I personally think that it is, but, unfortunately, the profession in general doesn't seem to think so, since I think that the exact scenario that you describe occurs often with little thought or pushback.

I recall reading an ethics case brief from one of the professional organizations (e.g. ASCE or the like) several years ago that addressed a similar issue. In that case I believe the issue had to do with an engineer relying on site photos and information provided by a contractor to address an issue in the field during construction of a building. If memory serves, the panel's opinion was that the engineer should not have relied upon the contractor's photos and information, because the engineer did not have responsible charge over the contractor. I wish I had a copy of this particular case brief, but I have googled for it several times over the years and have not been able to find it again. Does the case sound familiar to anyone else.

 

[XR250]

So have these piles already been installed? If so, it sounds like the homeowner maybe has buyer's remorse, and there is probably not much you can do for them.

Yes, the piers and crawlspace work has already been performed. I imagine she does have buyers remorse and because she is still seeing some cracking (which is pretty normal as adding piers in one area can typically cause distress in other areas).

To be clear, in my opinion this situation is different that an EOR relying on a geotech to provide site info for a new build.. I feel that is fine and something I do as well.

 

[CWB1]

Yes and no. If outside techs can provide enough standardized test data for the engineer to definitively determine the root-cause and provide a solution then there is no ethical issue. OTOH if the engineer is guessing based on limited data or not requiring the techs to be properly trained and follow established test procedures while collecting data then yes, the engineer has failed ethically on an epic scale. Ultimately a lot depends on the system complexity.

 

[XR250]

I think for me, one of the differences is the nature of the foundation repair business compared to, say, normal residential contracting. For instance, when I am engineering a house, there is zero incentive for me or to the contractor for me to make the framing package more expensive by adding unnecessary structural elements (over and above my generally high standards). The opposite is true (for the contractor at least) when designing an underpinning plan.
I might ask our board attorney for an opinion as they have had a lot of problems with foundation repair contractors practices.

 

[Settingsun]

Is this company a monopoly? If they over-spec the repair, they risk losing the job to competition. Pretty similar situation to your framing example: make the framing more expensive and the profit is larger if marked up on percentage basis.