Releasing Structural Calculations 2

[jike]

We were working on a rather large commercial project. The developer was having trouble obtaining financing and decided to terminate our contract when the design was 50 to 75% complete. The footing design had received State approval but only some excavations were actually completed.

We made an agreement with the Owner to provide him our incomplete drawings. Another Architect is now requesting our structural calculations.

The project was in a state of flux at that the time we were told to stop work. The footings were approved by the State but I have no control over any future changes that the Architect may make. I know of some changes that were talked about but were never completed on the drawings or in the calculations since our contract was terminated. The Architect is stating that they only want them as a starting point.

I think maybe he wants to finish up our job without hiring a structural engineer or at least minimizing his structural fee by using our calcs. If I was starting on this project, I would prefer not to have anyone's calcs and I would start from scratch.

Additionally, I am notifying the State, in writing, that I am no longer the EOR. The foundations should be re-reviewed as a brand new project, since the design was incomplete at the time the foundation permit was issued and is now under the control of a different design team. There will inevitably be architectural/mechanical changes in the design from where we finished up at.

I am leaning hard toward telling him "No", we will not release them.

Any comments or suggestions?

 

[Lutfi]

You know. My feeling is to tell him no as well. In Florida, if any other engineer is to adopt some other engineer’s work, he has to go through rigorous procedure and steps to be able to do ethically and legally.

Architects also spell trouble to me, at least mot of them (I do not want to hear it from architect lovers in this forum, I am assuming there are none-LOL). Most architects are not versed in true structural engineering. I have seen them with gross misuse of details and concepts. Actually I do not do business with architects who pretend to be SE. I have gotten calls from them to bail them out and I refused to do so.

I would inform the state of the situation.

Did you get paid for your work? This may have legal implications. In my humble opinion, I think calculations are tools of the trade. There are many colleagues who will never give calculations even if they lost the business/deal!

Stand firm. Do not give them away, if they use them and something goes wrong, you will find yourself in middle of legal fiasco. When things go wrong, lawyers want to drag as many people in as they can. The one with deep pockets or insurance will wind up paying because it is cheaper than litigating the case.

Welcome to free society.

 

[RARWOOD]

I would not give them the calculations. In fact I would have resisted giving the owner incomplete design. drawings. In most States when you certify plans you are stating that the design was done by you or under your direct supervision. I don't think one could make that statement if they are finishing a design started by another firm.

 

[JAE]

Agree with the two above. The only thing you could possibly do is provide them your initial parts of your calcs that deal with general concepts, live loads, wind zones, etc. ... you know, the stuff that simply sets up your calcs and defines the loading. The actual calculations that define sizes, rebar, etc, should not be shared. These are your tools of your service.

But what I call the front-end stuff, as described above, is pretty harmless and at least would provide the architect with the general load assumptions to "start with".

 

[jike]

There was a specific disclaimer, drafted by our attorney, and signed by the Owner/Developer before any drawings were released as a condition of our final payment. It did state that the drawings were incomplete and that we are released from all liability and future claims by the Owner and other parties.

I am not sure about the issue of completing drawings started by another firm. How does the Board of Regulation and Licensing look at that? Good question!

 

[JAE]

If the new engineer can show that every aspect of the design was checked and designed by them personally, then they are OK. But if they adopt, say, a footing size that you designed without re-running the calcs, then they are violating most states engineering laws.

Using your initial designs as a guide, and even a kind of reverse check on their own designs is not unethical, and even can be a great help to cross check their own designs.

 

[connect2]

well you made an agreement with the developer to hand over your calc's., as they existed at the time, not sure why you would have done that but you did so there you go.??? as to the new Architect,... my considered opinion is that he should retain you if he wants you to be the structural ... The Russians have a saying, 'The only thing free is cheese in a mousetrap'. If there are bldg. permits issued based on your incomplete design ???, or work being constructed based on your incomplete design with no permits,... worse yet, and if your not being retained to complete and review that work, you should inform the "Authorites' of this. This sounds like a very complicated project with a whole bunch of 'players', sounds like a job to get rid of once you satisfied your 'duties to the public'.

 

[PEinc]

If you do give a copy of your design calcs, you should prominently mark every sheet "PRELIMINARY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION" so that they can't be given to anyone and so that the notice can not be removed form the calc sheets.

 

[jike]

We have not agreed to hand over the structural calcs. We are considering their request, but are leaning in the direction of not granting their request due to liability concerns as well as potential misuse on their part. The agreement with the Owner/Developer only covered Drawings, not calculations.

The foundations were approved by the State to begin early construction while the remainder of the structure and architectural design was completed (similar to fast track). We all know that changes happen, therefore, the new EOR should really do his own calcs and design. I know that he will probably wind up using many of our details.

We did not release drawings without the Preliminary, Not for Construction stamp.

 

[boo1]

If complete payment was not made, why should you do any thing more? Do you work for free? Apears that providing drawings and additional efforts you are....

 

[LPPE]

A little off topic, but how can you provide a foundation design without knowing what the building above it is?

I'd say no, do not give them your calculations. They can hire you to do the job if they want. Otherwise, they're on their own. Like JAE said, the front-end stuff shouldnt be much of a problem. That stuff anyone can get out of the building code anyway. If the architect wants to reverse engineer your footing designs, then let him/her. Then again, can an architect really do engineering? I think not.

 

[3dboy]

We recently had a school collapse in cincinnati because the eor released incomplete drawings for a foundation. This is dangerous ground you are walking on right now and there is no good reason to let the client push you into this and lots of bad reasons to keep away. The only upside is you might keep the client, but do you really want this kind of client in the end anyhow? Just walk away and right the letter, who knows if the foundations will work with whatever they come up with next anyway?

 

[Lutfi]

LPPE,

I heard of this being done here in Florida on large projects. The two projects that I am aware of, both had pile foundations. The engineers actually do the calculations and run column loads, shear wall loads and obtain a permit. Otherwise, projects will suffer delays if construction has to wait on the complete design of large projects.

One must admit that making changes would be more expensive if mistakes or additional loads come to light after the fat. I guess it is all about risk. The design engineer would tend to build some beef in the design. That would be my guess.

 

[denoid]

I'm not sure if they still do, but Wisconsin used to issue
"Early Footing & Foundation Permits". The building design has to be essentially complete (gravity & lateral), but the details may not be entirely done when you submit. It's just kind of a "fast track" approach.

I've had two projects in my career so far, Jike, that similar things have happened to me - in both cases, the job was halted midway, and we were paid under the condition that we give the Owner a set of our documents in the state where we left off. But less than a year later, they started up with new design teams, and the jobs were built probably using our stuff. (Pretty tough to prove).

 

[jike]

Denoid:

On those 2 projects, did the documents that you gave the Owner, include structural calculations or just drawings and specs? Or copies of every document in every file folder?

 

[damstructural]

May I suggest that you let your lawyer be the scapegoat. "I'd sure love to fork over my hard work for nothing, but gosh, Mr. Developer, my lawyer just won't let me. Liability, or something like that, I don't understand all that legal-sleeze stuff, but he just won't let me give you my calculations."

Why can't he rehire you to finish the job if he has money for a new architect?

 

[jheidt2543]

Early Start Permits for foundation construction are still issued in the State of Wisconsin. However, as part of the permit language there is a statement to the effect that the Owner agrees, at his own risk, to make ANY changes required that may come to light during the review of the final plans.

The process requires a permit application be accompanied with the foundation plans and calculations (just the foundation calculations).

 

[denoid]

Jike;

In the first instance, it was only drawings and specs; it was a local project in the city where I live, and they later hired another A/E firm to complete the design. I guess they created their own stuff, since we never gave them our calculations. In the second case, the Owner asked for the entire file contents.

For case 2, we weren't exactly anxious to give it to him, since we sort of knew where he was going with it, but he started making noises like his attorney would call us if we didn't hand it over. He had paid his bill in full; we weighed our options and decided it wasn't worth fighting over. He was out of state, the project was in a third state, and we would never hear from him again. So, we first gave him unsigned drawings and specs, stamped "Preliminary - Not For Construction". He called back, and wanted our structural calculations. After a few heated phone calls and discussions with our attorney, we finally gave him that too. I'm sure he turned it over to some "plan stamper" near the project location to re-write in his own hand writing. At least we were no longer the EOR. We signed nothing, stamped nothing, and, as I recall, wrote him a letter that we were no longer EOR and would accept no liability for the project. About a year later, I heard from the original architect who we worked with. He knew someone who lived near the site, who told him that the new building was constructed, and looked pretty much the same as our original documents. Oh well! At least we were paid.

 

[Ron]

Keep your calcs. Notify the state AND the local building official (they will likely have to do a plan review before issuing building permit if it ever gets there). Extract yourself as the EOR and to further protect your butt, file a legal notice in the local newspaper.

 

[Focht3]

Tread with care. I would not have released the drawings - or only with them frequently stamped, "Incomplete Building Design and Drawings - Not Suitable for Design or Construction." And under absolutely no circumstances would I release my calculations. Particularly to an architect -



Please see FAQ731-376 for great suggestions on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips Fora. See faq158-922 for recommendations regarding the question, "How Do You Evaluate Fill Settlement Beneath Structures?"