House designs issued all over the country 1

[WARose]

I have knowledge of what I think might be a issue in terms of ethics for PEs/AIAs. The situation is this: a company that sells house designs all over the country includes (among other things) structural steel in their designs without a seal. They do have a PE review the drawings, but he is not licensed in some of the states these drawings are being issued.

A loop hole in all this may be that they say on their drawings that what they sell conforms/is consistent with the IRC.....but AISC steel isn't mentioned once in the 2015 IRC.

So what do you think?

 

[IRstuff]

A couple of thoughts:
> A landowner still has freedom to do what they wish on their own land
> A house design PRODUCT is ostensibly pre-engineered, and no engineering services are necessarily offered. In most states that offer an industrial exemption this will may fall into that category

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg

faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list

http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm

 

[JAE]

In our area, single and dual-family residences are usually exempt from the Engineering Practice laws unless the occupiable area of the house (floors plus basement but not garage) is more than 10,000 s.f.
So residential, even if there are steel beams, doesn't require a licensed professional.



Check out Eng-Tips Forum's Policies here:
faq731-376

 

[WARose]

> A landowner still has freedom to do what they wish on their own land

Not really. Especially if it's falling outside of the IRC. it's true that a lot of jurisdictions are not requiring seals on housework (from what I understand: even if the designs are getting outside the scope of the IRC).....but this is still a real question in my mind. Some places are more strict than others.

 

[WARose]

So residential, even if there are steel beams, doesn't require a licensed professional.

Thanks for the info JAE. I still kind of wonder about it because the IRC mentions (in several cases) a design professional is supposed to do it if it falls outside of certain criteria.

 

[jdgengineer]

My understanding is that if the design deviates from the prescriptive requirements of conventional framing then at least the components that deviate from these requirements need to be prepared by a licensed engineer.

I'm not completely familiar with the industrial exemption requirements, but I would not think that would apply.

In my opinion, if the company is selling these house designs without a licensed engineering stamp in the state that it is constructed in and the design deviates from the conventional framing requirements, that the company is in violation of the professional engineers act. The specific requirements likely vary state to state, but I don't see how that would be acceptable.

 

[WARose]

My understanding is that if the design deviates from the prescriptive requirements of conventional framing then at least the components that deviate from these requirements need to be prepared by a licensed engineer.

That's how I've always understood it.

In my opinion, if the company is selling these house designs without a licensed engineering stamp in the state that it is constructed in and the design deviates from the conventional framing requirements, that the company is in violation of the professional engineers act. The specific requirements likely vary state to state, but I don't see how that would be acceptable.

That's what I am thinking. They even say on their web site that they hire a structural engineer to review the plans. Well, I know the guy they use.....and he sure isn't licensed in all 50.

 

[JStephen]

Hard to say. You may read the fine print and find "Not available in State X" in there on some of the designs, or "Requires review/whatever by local PE".

One issue you get into is that state laws require registration in certain circumstances and building officials require registration in certain circumstances, but those two sets of circumstances aren't always the same.

 

[msquared48]

A lot of the house designs I have seen are not compliant with the prescriptive requirements of the IRC, throwing them into the IBC for analysis by an engineer.

Moreover, a lot are designed to minimal wind and little to no seismic, necessitating further analysis and changes anyway by a local engineer.

Mike McCann, PE, SE (WA)

 

[charliealphabravo]

If the drawings are not signed and sealed then I'm not sure how they would be clearly connected to a specific engineer.

If the drawings are unsigned and simply state that they meet the IBC-RBC latest edition without reference to a jurisdiction then this further separates the engineer from the final construction, even if the designer contracted with an engineer to check general compliance with the RBC.

In most cases I have seen a note on the drawings that states that the owner/builder is responsible for all jurisdictional-specific requirements which may include site specific engineering for the foundation. In Florida this meant that I got to engineer the entire house and foundation since the design criteria (wind speed) and code (FBC) was different.

 

[WARose]

If the drawings are not signed and sealed then I'm not sure how they would be clearly connected to a specific engineer.

If the drawings are unsigned and simply state that they meet the IBC-RBC latest edition without reference to a jurisdiction then this further separates the engineer from the final construction, even if the designer contracted with an engineer to check general compliance with the RBC.

In most cases I have seen a note on the drawings that states that the owner/builder is responsible for all jurisdictional-specific requirements which may include site specific engineering for the foundation. In Florida this meant that I got to engineer the entire house and foundation since the design criteria (wind speed) and code (FBC) was different.

Those are good points. But if you are issuing a AISC steel design on one drawing.....but in another saying you conform/are consistent with the IRC.....I'm not sure how those 2 things co-exist. Perhaps there is enough wiggle room in "consistent".

 

[cvg]

per the exemption language below, there is no state requirement to stamp and sign a house design plan. Other states are similar. Item 3 is an exemption for all single family homes and interior partitions for multiple-family units. Item 4 addresses steel beams. Item 7 is an industrial exemption.

https://www.azleg.gov/viewdocument/?docName=https://www.azleg.gov/ars/32/00144.htm

 

[charliealphabravo]

I agree. The entire delivery is problematic for something as complicated as a home. I suspect most modern homes exceed the thresholds of the RBC and the inclusion of steel leaves me a bit mystified as well.

This still sounds more like a buyer beware problem unless the engineer is providing some site or jurisdiction specific deliverable. Or perhaps it could be said that the engineer is facilitating unlicensed activity.

Is anyone aware of prescriptive guidelines for the use of structural steel sections? Say perhaps for a steel beam supported on and supported by wood in residential construction? Or does the inclusion of a steel component imply engineered design under AISC? I mean suppose a company was labeling and selling steel beams the way adjustable steel posts, steel connectors, and "engineered" lumber are sold.

 

[WARose]

Is anyone aware of prescriptive guidelines for the use of structural steel sections? Say perhaps for a steel beam supported on and supported by wood in residential construction? Or does the inclusion of a steel component imply engineered design under AISC? I mean suppose a company was labeling and selling steel beams the way adjustable steel posts, steel connectors, and "engineered" lumber are sold.

The IRC doesn't mention AISC at all. To me that puts it outside of it.

I don't see how it would work in a residential home anyway. These people were having it sit on a double top plate (with no stiffener). That goes against AISC's assumed support conditions for the allowable flexural forces.

 

[dhengr]

WARose:
Most Bldg. Depts. (AHJ) and Registration Boards don’t want to try to police, or mess with this kind of stuff, unless it is brought to their attention in a big way, or on a real significant issue or violation. Then, the most they usually do is issue a ‘cease and desist order’ to the CAD’er, builder, or whoever, was pretending to practice engineering. It really seems that the Boards are there primarily to stick it to professional registrants who step out of line in any way, however minor. They have some leverage against the registrants and fine them quite liberally. I’m not condoning bad engineering, bad engineering practice or unethical activity here, just stating the facts. The Boards sure as hell aren’t there to protect our domains or feather our nests. The AHJ isn’t responsible, they are just there feathering their own nests by reading a code verbatim and not really knowing the reasons why it is that way. The code people assume no responsibility, except their own nest, and insist that if they can only make a code complex enough, any damn fool can do construction and all will be well. Single family homes, ag. bldgs., and industries’ own bldgs. and products, etc., have pretty much been exempt and self-insured for so long nobody wants to try to fight those special interest groups. Besides that, who needs engineering until they get in real trouble, then its your mess to try to make right.

Unless the owner or builder is willing to pay you to do a proper and reasonably complete design you are probably just better off writing that kind of engineering business off. You just can’t compete with a $300 set of CAD’ery to get a permit. The owner, builder, material promotor, etc. don’t want to pay for a proper site investigation, construction observation, proper set of plans and calcs., shop drawing review, etc., they just want you as an insurer of last resort, and at a very low fee too. Then, you end up involved and in the middle every time there is any problem, even though no fault of your own. You are better off picking up house bldg. engineering work, and the like, once the problems start showing up. Then, everyone is more than willing to pay for your time and effort to keep them out of court or to get the AHJ to remove the red tags because of code violations in the construction. All of a sudden, the contractor who knew everything yesterday, and was downright snotty (arrogant) when you suggested doing his detail differently to meet code, becomes very willing to listen to good advice, and to make the changes you say are needed so that the Bldg. Dept. will let the construction continue.