Re: Professional Engineers to Supervise Construction Projects

[3gls9]

I am wondering about this topic and your experience and thoughts on the matter.

Is it necessary to have a Professional Engineer supervise construction of a project? This differs from stamping a design for construction. And is it the case of the designer being the supervisor? A lot of designers know very little about construction, thus could not do this work (perhaps that is the problem / issue here?).

I am in Alberta and supervision by a P.Eng. is not a requirement, but in other provinces and states, it is. Is it a case of liability? The design may be correct, but if something goes wrong, is it really the design or is it how it was put together?

I'd appreciate some feedback please.

If this is in the wrong forum, please move it there.

Thanks in advance.

 

[civilperson]

Means and methods are a contractor's perview. Safety, scheduling, temporary bracing and manpower loading can only be done by the responsible party with control of the building process and cost. Most building codes require special inspections related to structural components that must have certified inspectors. On projects with multiple disciplines of engineers, one engineer is to be "Principal in Charge". I require a sealed calculations and plans for contractor designed formwork, shoring and crane pick plans. On design/build projects, the design and construction sides of the team must work in harmony to produce preliminary design loads for foundation design and construction with future refinements in actual loads checked against what was constructed. General contractors have a variety of engineering skills on their payroll including quantity takeoffs, scheduling and structural analysis. This expertise is necessary to get a completed structure. The fact that the contractor supplies a bond and list of similar completed projects to be able to bid qualifies them for entering a contract. Requiring Professional Engineers as supervisor on the General Contractor's staff is an owner's perogative but not necessary.

 

[3gls9]

If this were to happen, it seems that requiring engineering supervision would put a huge onus on engineers that should be borne by contractors. EPC firms can undertake construction supervision as part of a specific contract; would engineers have to register as construction managers?

Which brings up some more questions...

- Is it the architect’s responsibility since the architect is the final signing authority (coordinating registered professional)?
- Would engineers put construction supervisors out of business?
- Should engineers be supervising electricians? What would happen here?

 

[gerhardl]

Some thoughts from another part of the world (Scandinavia)

On one side you have the law, and what is common practice, on the other side the available human resources, experience
and knowledge of the single persons together.

The question is then again two: what and how much extra resources (inspectors) should we in this particular case put in as QA, what will it cost, and who takes the bill? Secondly: what are consequences if anything goes wrong, and who is paying then?

This is a common discussion and issue at all complicated engineering tasks.

Normally a contract or company policy will describe at least part of this, but obviously this is not clarified in your case.

You are lucky (or a good engineer), however, in many cases this comes up as questions 'after the deed' - after something has gone terribly wrong. Here you are in my opinion thinking the way an engineer should think: what can we do to deliver a project to the correct and safe specifications?

My advice is to make up in your own mind, as you already have started to, about the answers to the questions above. Try to back it with some estimated figures and present your recommondations for the proper forum (descision makers).

A project is always a group task, and the descision will then be taken the correct way at the correct level.

 

[JStephen]

From the Texas state rules:
(c) The practice of engineering includes...
(9) engineering for review of the construction or installation of engineered works to monitor compliance with drawings or specifications;

I don't think that implies supervising construction, or that the person that designs it is involved with inspection, but that inspection of the work can be an engineering function.

 

[3gls9]

Thanks for the replies. My main reason for the questions is that there was a death at a construction site and questions were raised whether or not the construction should have been supervised by an engineer. I am assuming the drawings were followed by the foreman. Thousands and thousands of projects are constructed without engineer's involvement without incident.

 

[JStephen]

I would expect that the design engineer's inspection and supervision would be limited to seeing that the project was built per the plans and specs, and would not extend to construction safety. That is usually delegated to the contractor, who may or may not have any engineers involved on his behalf. In some cases, such as trench safety or scaffold design, there may be a legal requirement for engineering expertise, but this wouldn't normally be the project engineer. If the owner or the owner's engineer is on a jobsite and sees something just stupid going on, it's prudent to stop it, but it's not his job to patrol for that.