In-house Design Reviews & Quality Assurance

[jcoffey]

A question has come up about what is 'typical' in the industry regarding Civil/Structural and other engineering discipline internal reviews of designs. In my former days with Bechtel every set of design calculations and sketches was checked by another engineer within the group and signed off on. But that is my only experience with this. What is the standard practice in most private firms (I now work for a state agency) for in-house quality assurance and checking before the sealed drawings go out the door? Are there any 'industry' guidelines about this? Is there a difference between practice in big shops like Bechtel and smaller firms? Thanks for any input.
/jc

 

[Rich2001]

I work for a firm where any drawing or calculations that are sent to the customer are checked by a second engineer. Our engineering force consists of; 4- PE's, and 4 CAD operators, and one Engineering Technician

 

[Ron]

jcoffey...
I have worked in small, medium, and large firms. The QA process was similar in each, though certainly more formalized in the large firm. I am currently in a medium size firm and we are in the process of formalizing these procedures as we feel it is necessary for "protected" growth.

The small firm I worked in was my own, starting out alone and building a staff. I had come from a large firm before starting out. One of the things I missed most about the large firm was the ability to "bounce things" off other engineers. I ultimately developed enough staff to do this internally, but it took a while. When I sold out to a large firm, I was immediately placed back in that large "comfort zone" of a formalized QA program and review of everything.

I have been one of those "technical reviewers" for close to 20 years and I am a firm believer in that "second set of eyes" looking at everything...calcs, written reports, drawings, contracts, file documentation, etc. I am amazed at some of the things I have had to change or redirect from experience engineers over the years.

Ron

 

[LPPE]

I agree. A fresh set of eyes can usually point out something that you may have missed many times. It's only a mistake if you dont catch it.

 

[jcoffey]

Thanks for the comments. Has anyone had any experience with or knowledge of someone sending out drawings or design calcs to an outside firm for the purposes of review and QA? What do you think of this idea? And what would you think of the idea of sending out a set of drawings and supporting documentation to an outside firm not only to review but then also, for a fee, to seal the drawings too? As a registered PE, I would have suspicions about such practice, but this idea has been proposed. Thanks again for any input.
/jc

 

[Qshake]

I agree with RONs comments and certainly with the others posted here as well. This has been my experience in smaller, larger, and state engineering company experience. A check is performed on all drawings, calcs, specification, estimates etc before going out the door.

I believe that the last post of yours refers to peer review and I don't have any experience with that other than to know it exist.

 

[Ron]

jcoffey...your last post refers to peer review, but it is usually done as an adjunct to an internal QA process (Quality Verification), not as a process by which another engineer signs/seals the drawings/calcs/reports of another firm. In fact, in many states, laws will not allow the practice you have described.

There are peer review programs with which firms can become involved (American Council of Engineering Companies-ACEC and others). You can also set up a peer review network locally. Either would be beneficial. In general, peer reviews do not include any responsibility by the reviewer for the work that is reviewed, just an opinion as to its QA issues.

 

[ishvaaag]

In Spain most large contracts and others of ordinary size come with quality control imposed by the owner on insurance convenience or by obligation. This practice is just starting, and as lots of things in construction here is being very mismanaged, for it may turn the reviewer is less able than the designer out of hiring less than expert professionals being cheaper for the task, what causes more than reasonable disgust in designers.

Furthermore the intrusion (for as performed so can be many times) can be used and is a non despicable number of times used to further agendas not precisely on account of the good engineering, but to removal of the standing engineering team by another invisibly linked to the quality reviewing party, or to unwarrantedly encroach upon the fame of others).

That is, the problem is that the second pair of eyes not are always looking with good eyes, but as preying ones.

So I have nothing bad to say about ensuring quality, but I am not partisan of letting enter the fox into the barn. For the process not to produce the bad effects potential and actually seen, a more collaborative than competitive mind setup is required.

See, the works in a highway here have damaged through settlement another aqueduct of old. In days the reparation scheme has doubled in cost! Yes, better of course, but, I mean, Is it technical quality about we are talking about or are there always other agendas that deeply distort this?

 

[Rentapen]

Sending a design out to have a stamp from someone outside is a fact of life for most small to medium fabrication firms. We do silos and cement plant steel welding as 75 percent of our business maybe ten large jobs a year using lots of recycled designs but each new one must be stamped. why would we keep a pe on hand to do 30 days of work per year?
Just wandering
rentapen