Must I follow the Standard/Code? 2

[testrun]

Does a Structural Engineer have the right NOT to follow a PORTION of any given applicable Design Standard / Code (AISC ASD for instance, in steel design), if he doesn't want to (because it is very detailed and time consuming)?

I know that the Design Standards (AASHTO, ACI, ASD, ASCE, IBC) aren't perfect, they can sometimes be very tedious, and that they can't possibly cover every single situation, so an engineer must use common sense and good judgment in using them. However, the thought that I'm getting at is that of: “The budget only allows for a certain amount of DEPTH of design, so I will do only as much as the budget affords (with no gross omissions of design), and then stamp the design and take ownership for it.”

 

[Taro]

Lack of time or money is no excuse for not following the code. Sometimes you don't enough budget to do a sophisticated analysis and optimize the design of every element. In this case you can use conservatively simplified analyses and design similar elements for worst-case conditions. But the final design must always comply with the applicable code.

 

[testrun]

Thanks Taro. I ask because of what I've seen my superiors do in the workforce. I'm trying to understand some decisions they've made. I've received pressure on me to simplify or omit design steps because of budget issues.

 

[Taro]

When I first started, I was amazed at how the older engineers could design with minimal calculations. Now that I have a few gray hairs of my own, I've picked up some tricks and shortcuts along the way. I would recommend that younger engineers always do a thorough analysis until they develop a good feel for what the answer should be. Your supervisors probably have developed this feel and don't need to do as much analysis. But they shouldn't pressure you to cut corners if you don't have enough experience. It usually costs a lot more to fix mistakes than to just do something properly in the first place.

 

[SlideRuleEra]

You did not say what type project, but sometimes certain Owners and/or specific type projects are exempt from Code requirements (usually industrial applications). This is not the "everyday" situation, but if this is a possibility it may be worth asking your superiors.

http://www.SlideRuleEra.net

 

[chichuck]

testrun,

Don't confuse using (conservative) simple calculation and analysis methods with "not following the code". You must always meet the requirements of the governing code. If for exampele, you can arrive at a design that meets, say, the seismic provisions for a steel structure, without going through the long and arduous (sp?) calculations that are indicated by ASCE 7-05, then this is acceptable. The analysis is not what is specified in the code, it is the actual load requirements that are specified.

Similar things can be done with steel, concrete and wood designs.


regards,

chichuck

 

[whyun]

Rule of thumb I use is when the condition occurs once or twice, simplify and be conservative. When it occurs all over the place, be accurate and try to find an optimum solution.

In any case, the design must meet all applicable codes.

I agree with Taro. But remember also that not all grey hairs equal experience.

 

[Bagman2524]

Legally you're only required to follow whatever federal regulations such as OHSA that may apply and whatever codes have been adopted by your state or local government. When you put your PE stamp on something you may only be required by state/local governments to ensure the design was done under your cognizance and that the structure will perform satisfactorily. However, many places have now adopted IBC, which incorporates codes such as AISC steel specifications and ASCE-7 by reference.