Shop Drawing Review Question 3

[SteelPE]

I don't know if I have already asked this question before (sorry if I did, but I couldn't find it during my one minute search of my previous posts).

I am in the process of reviewing the shop drawings for a large warehouse. We have been sent the shop drawings for the open-web steel joists and I was a bit surprised to see over a 400 page submittal. Upon further investigation, it appears as if the manufacturer has forwarded me all of their joist calculations (basically a data dump). I was a bit surprised by this as in my 20+ years in the business, I have never received such a submittal for a shop drawing review from a joist manufacturer standpoint. I don't know what the purpose is. Certainly I don't have plans of reviewing 400 pages of mindless calculations. Is this something open web steel joists manufacturers are doing now?

Currently we are indicating that we will not be reviewing the submittal after we are done with the JE drawings.

 

[Aesur]

It is one of the larger jurisdictions that the smaller ones typically mirror. It's a two pronged issue, one of which I agree with being that East Coast engineers are moving into our area but not playing by our rules with having many delegated designs (designing only the beams, columns and footings themselves and deferring lateral, etc..); the other portion is relating to deferred submittals where many jurisdictions are pushing to not allow them be submitted after permits and starting to require the EOR to review and stamp off on the layout and designs as the deferred submittal engineer is only sealing that particular component and never sees the plans, layout etc and thereby relies 100% on the contractor to coordinate (which they aren't always) and/or the salesperson/tech who prepared the calcs in their software.

We currently have a large project that was returned during permitting with the only structural comment being that the I-joist and Wood Trusses cannot be deferred submittals (which is not what their policies say), which means the owner has to select a contractor and spend the money to bring on board those companies to create those packages, which will take time and delay the permits. We are trying to fight it, but it's not easy.

I have linked below to the draft delegated design proposal in one jurisdiction:
Delegated Design
Here are the meeting minutes where the COP mentioned the EOR is responsible for coordination (what coordination means is being discussed) of deferred submittals as well:
Meeting Minutes

It's worth noting that many of the board members in my state are no longer engineers or architects. I don't know the jist of it all, but there was something over the past few years that forced this change.

 

[phamENG]

East Coast engineers are moving into our area but not playing by our rules with having many delegated designs (designing only the beams, columns and footings themselves and deferring lateral, etc..)

Hey, now. I represent that remark.

Kidding aside, the delegated design link makes sense - it's the way I've always done it. But I also spent the first few years of my career doing federal work and that was just how things were done.

I can understand wanting the deferred submittals sent in prior to permit. In a perfect world it wouldn't be necessary - issue the permit with the caveat that those be submitted and approved prior to installation, and all is well. But lots of people take advantage of that and oops...what do you mean I had to submit something else before I finished framing the building? Around here, it's common to have a truss manufacturer provide calcs for the trusses as part of their bid for the project, so it's not a big delay. There's also a line on the permit applications here that says whoever signs the application is responsible for all site environmental and safety regulations. So who in their right mind would sign that if they aren't the GC that's going to be build the project?

 

[Aesur]

@phamENG - Haha, wasn't referring to you there, I would welcome you working in our area! We will have to get KootK to introduce us offline sometime. I don't mind delegated designs and should have worded it differently to make that clearer, I have the problem with delegated designs not being coordinated by the EOR; it is my opinion that the EOR should be the main contact and responsible party to ensure proper coordination between the delegated engineers, but not necessarily between the deferred engineers as typically the delegated pieces are the lateral system etc.. and all the information may not be on the structural drawings, whereas (ideally) the deferred items are coordinated on the structural drawings (basic truss or joist layout/information/loading) and therefore the contractor should be coordinating their truss layout to the structural roof plan with the EOR only needing to review for general conformance (loading, special conditions, etc..) but not going through EVERY truss and their layout (at least without just fee to do so). I wish hourly CA was thing here for commercial projects.

For the deferred items being submitted prior to permitting, I like this for PEMB's as we then have the final reactions, but understand that it can be hard as these are bid items and therefore they may not know who the truss or joist manufacturer is at that point. Locally I haven't seen designs being run as part of the bid (at least not a set that could be submitted). For trusses it's typically looking at the span tables, for I-joists we typically design the I-joist and give a basis of design but specify as deferred submittal so that the contractor can more easily shop. The basis of design is usually included in the calculation package as well.

 

[phamENG]

No worries. And thank you - you're too kind. I hear Arizona is nice...my wife has some family out there that I've never met that keep inviting us.

I'm a bit divergent from many of my fellow East Coasters - if it's not a proprietary system, it should not be delegated. Joists, MPC trusses, etc. make sense. Standard steel connections? Metal studs? Not so much.

And I agree that the EOR should be the final arbiter or all things structural in a design. That's one of the reasons I don't love delegated design...by the time I give the other engineers everything they need and go back and make sure they did it right...I've spent more time than I would have in the first place and have not reduced my liability exposure. So the idea that it should save time/money in the design phase is baffling to me.

I wonder if there is a common standard out there for engineering calculations that could be cited in contract documents? Something that lays out, in general terms, the minimum data to be presented and how it should be presented. Force them to adhere to that standard to prevent 'data dumps'. Probably a pipe dream, but it would be nice...

 

[Lomarandil]

Something like this Pham?

Is anyone aware of other standards? I could see the USACE guide being made a little more user friendly and generalized to apply for smaller design elements, but it is certainly a good start.

----
just call me Lo.

 

[phamENG]

Lo - fantastic. The Navy probably has something similar, but wasn't enforcing it while I was doing NAVFAC work. Of course, getting manufacturers on board to present key elements of their designs in such an easy to read format won't be an easy sell.