May have talked myself out of a project

[dik]

from eMail

Rather than think climate change and the corona virus as science, think of it as the wrath of God. Feel any better?

-Dik

 

[phamENG]

Sounds like you did the right thing.

 

[dik]

Yup... been playing engineer too long...

Rather than think climate change and the corona virus as science, think of it as the wrath of God. Feel any better?

-Dik

 

[dik]

didn't go away yet...

Rather than think climate change and the corona virus as science, think of it as the wrath of God. Feel any better?

-Dik

 

[Settingsun]

Isn't this somewhat like what North Americans refer to as delegated design? Supplier flogs their product, staying inside their box with blinkers on, and someone else has to make sure the lego tower stands up? At least that's my perception from the outside.

 

[jayrod12]

That is 100% how delegated designs seem to work nowadays.

This is not much different to my experience with crane and hoist suppliers. They tell the client that they can provide a solution to their problems, they just conveniently neglect to mention that it will likely trigger upgrades to the structure until they submit the final shop drawings. It's greasy.

 

[phamENG]

It's greasy.

Agreed. I've started doing some delegated design work for a couple of fabricators. Since I started as an EOR (or more accurately, an EOR's designated representative), I go out of my way to hold my client accountable to the project as a whole. Usually I get an "oh, I didn't realize that" and they go along because they realize that if all the pieces don't line up, they'll look bad eventually. Maybe I'll start changing this small corner of the market...or maybe I'll be pushed out. Time will tell...

 

[Ron]

@dik...Run!

@phamENG....I have done a lot of delegated engineering through the years. Occasionally I get a comment like "We never had to do that before, why are you requiring it?"....my answer is that it's necessary or I wouldn't require it and it's my license on the line, not yours. It will also protect your liability in the event you get a spurious legal claim. Being involved in forensic work for so long and having suffered through hundreds of legal proceedings, maybe I'm slightly jaded, but I always consider that any deliverable I provide will be read by some lawyer for some reason. My goal is to never get invited to their party on one of my projects.

 

[dik]

Na... I don't run usually... just solve problems... doin' that for over 50 years. Owner has been informed and we are awaiting new information... suggested owner hire a student to prepare an 'existing' roof plan cad file with all the info on it. Another new one... I'd posted a query of concrete thickness for steel stairs. for a 4' span, I've indicated the tread should be 2-1/2" of concrete and the owner wants to use 2"... he originally wanted 1-1/2"... just cannot get away from it these days... my only reasoning being that is the thickness, I'm comfortable with.

Rather than think climate change and the corona virus as science, think of it as the wrath of God. Feel any better?

-Dik

 

[FACS]

Maybe it's because you don't know the difference between They're and Their.

 

[dik]

???

Rather than think climate change and the corona virus as science, think of it as the wrath of God. Feel any better?

-Dik

 

[phamENG]

FACS - How is that a productive comment? Not only would it be petty had somebody used the improper form of they're/there/their, a quick text search shows that you're the only one who said "they're" and "their" is used 4 times...all as a possessive...in other words, it was used correctly in every case.

 

[SuperSalad]

Not to mention that the error appears to be in the message Dik was replying to (ie. not something he wrote).

Andrew H.

http://www.MotoTribology.com

 

[phamENG]

ah...there it is. Explains why my text search didn't find it - it was in an image. And you're right..not even dik's words...

 

[Enable]

If I may, I want to use dik's query to talk about a broader topic. There are always components of any job, regardless of whether it is delegated or not, that we as designers cannot verify the adequacy of. Naturally, if we deem it to be an important system we must indicate that even if it is not us, some professional must take a look at it. This typically pops up on most of our DWGs as "designed by Others".

Now, I don't think the above is in controversy. We don't look at every subsystem all the time on every project. Nor should we be expected to.

On the other hand, at what point does it become ethically questionable to stop at saying someone else needs to look rather than requiring you be given the mandate to be that person (or else walking from the job)? At what point is a system or subsystem so important to the project that even if not given the mandate to do the design for it, we must put our foot down and say we need to be party to the design or else we cannot be involved?

I'm honestly not clear on where that line is to be drawn.

 

[jmec87]

Enable, I think you raise a good point. I don't think there always is a clear line. A general guideline that I would start with is requiring our involvement if our lack of involvement is likely to result in an unsafe situation.

For example, it may be ethical to certify a load rating for a beam conditional on specific connections and supporting structure if we know that other competent engineers will verify that the connections and supporting structure are suitable. If we think it likely that no engineer will verify the suitability of the connections or supporting structure and the beam is likely to create an unsafe situation (justified by our load rating), then it may be unethical to certify a load rating for the beam (even with disclaimers that we know are likely to be disregarded) because of the safety risk it is likely to create.

 

[dik]

A recent example on one of my projects to design some angle supports for curtain wall... this was the load information I was given.

and this is the manner I handled it...

I've not encountered this type of problem before. Connection geometry is bad and I don't know what of the load is supported by the curb and what by the angle. Minimal clear edge distance for the fasteners and fastener too low on the angle. Missing from the snapshots is that the loads are supported by two fasteners plus a bunch of added printed material not shown. Vertical load eccentricity shows up on another sketch.

Rather than think climate change and the corona virus as science, think of it as the wrath of God. Feel any better?

-Dik