Structural Engineers Getting Slammed 30

[steve1]

I agree with all the points being made about time and money constraints. There is one thing, however, that is being overlooked in all these posts. To our clients, whether they be architects, owners, contactors, etc, our drawings are the deliverables. Too many engineers, espicially younger ones, think that all that counts is that we have elegant calculations that are accurate to four decimal places, or that we produce a FEM solution to problems that have been solved years before. Time is money. If I'm an owner why should I pay for forty hours of engineering time to produce a 5/8 thick baseplate when for one hour I could have a 3/4 thick one and save time and money in the process.

Years ago engineers used approximate methods for analysis and produced elegant drawings. Now we use elegant analysis techniques and produce lousy drawings. Which situation is better for our clients?

Also, how many engineers have the ability and knowledge to provide guidance on matters of Autocad or other eleconic drafting means? When I first started in engineering it was not uncommon to have engineers pitch in and help with drafting duties when time deadlines were near. How many do that today?

I may have gotten off message here so I'll repeat my main point. The drawings are the deliverables, the calculations are a means to that end.

 

[LPPE]

I design and draft my own work. I find that architects moving things around right up until due date is the most annoying, and usually its by luck that I notice they moved a bearing wall 5 feet the day before CD's are due. And of course, not one architect picks up the phone to tell me! Nothing bothers me more than having to do a job 5 different times because the architects cant figure out what the hell they're doing. I'm off on a tangent here about architects, but has anyone seen a quality set of drawings from an architect lately? Myself, fellow engineers, and fellow contractors have all said "what are they teaching architects these days?". And as a point, a recent BA architect graduate was awarded a Masters Degree, because the school ruled that their BA arch. program was equal to a Masters program. Not to name names, but if you went to Tulane university......

 

[HgTX]

I went to school at a university that had a World-Famous Architecture Program. Over their five-year program, they weren't taught any structural stuff, just the aesthetic design aspect. It was assumed they'd pick up the structural stuff in their apprenticeship period.

This is getting close to the topic of another thread somewhere around here about turf wars between architects & engineers. I still don't understand how, from a public safety point of view, architects are given the power they apparently have.

Hg

Eng-Tips guidelines: faq731-376

 

[tsboxman]

It seems to a greater trend these days where speed and price are the issue. While working as Quality Manager I was once told by a customer that "quality is in the price" meaning that we couldn't suggest quality as a selling point. We all know we get what we pay for and quality is taking a hit (whether it is processes or finished goods) but with so much going over seas and domestic competition I think it will just keep getting worse. Companies will get the boot if they can't do it RIGHT NOW. Because somebody else will....

I am a structural designer in the corrugated industry and nowhere near what you all do, but I do feel your pain. You can't ask for the right information or make suggestions without reprecussions.

good luck

Thats my hourly chinese salary for the day...

 

[RARWOOD]

As a structural engineer who works for a fabricator, the biggest problem I deal with is inaccurate and conflicting information. It is a lot easier to detail a project when the information given is accurate. In that case you are interacting with the design team to produce a structural system which meets the needs of the project.

On jobs with conflicting information you often end up spending more time on establishing the information the system should be based on than you do in design, detailing, and drafting.

 

[trilinga]

Lufti and Qshake have covered almost all the points I had in mind. I am perhaps adding the last piece.

Interestingly, the term 'fast track project' is of a recent origin but it has become the first definition of any project nowadays. Apparently, the presence of numerous software in the design and drafting field with the compatible hardware to excute them in seconds makes the client believe that the engineering schedule can be squeezed drastically.

It is only partly true that the engineering automation can cut down the engineering time. The design and the drawing are not completely software dependent but requires the proper judgement, checking and the intelectual contribution of an experienced engineer for making them fit for use.

It is this crucial phase of engineering which is sacrificed in the 'fast track' journey of the project.

It is necessary that the clients and the design engineers recognise the importance of this critical phase and do not compromise the hours required carry it out. I am sure that these quality problems and the consequential rework and delays in the schedule can be eliminated.

we can not afford to wait for a tragedy to occur!

 

[BigH]

I've seen a lot of drawings issued for tender that are nothing more than preliminary (even to the point of "assuming the allowable bearing pressure!) - expect the contractor to design (or the supervision staff). Basically, everything is a cut and paste. I saw one bridge design requiring piles to be driven, yet the pile cap was in fractured bedrock! How to drive precast concrete piles into fractured bedrock? I was told to pass another drawing on to the contractor - and it had, in the title block, another project. They didn't even change the title block; nothing changed in the foundations even though the conditions were quite different.
Anyway - Steve1 - how many of the newer grads even know what an engineer's scale is? or, heaven forbid, a protractor? or a planimeter? I worked for a geotechnical firm - I learned to photocopy and collate, run blue print machines, fold the drawings correctly and make the cuts, even colour in the stratigraphic sections, fill out courier slips, etc. (I admit, though, I never learned the watercolour method). By doing drawings by hand in the younger years, you gained, in my view, a better appreciation of how things went together - not just flip this, copy drag, etc. but damn, now where is that template and eraser so I can get that thing gone?
The computer is the bane of life in many respects - the expectations of faster turn-around is a false expectation - sure the drawings are issued faster but the delays, changes, even variation requirements, etc. needed to actually build the project far outweigh the design time saved.
Seriously, I just reviewed a drawing today (earthworks) - they got the sections correct but they didn't know how to make the transition from the "section" to the next section.
Lufti - great response!!

 

[JAE]

One characterization that is so true:

Fast track projects are like trying to take 9 women and make a baby in one month

 

[LPPE]

Also, I think the Design/Build method has lead to lousy drawings.

 

[bridgebuster]

BigH - I had to laugh when you mentioned protractor. A couple of months ago, a younger engineer asked me, "...do you have one of those things, you know the one that measures angles?"

 

[jike]

My perspective (from 34 years of experience) is that we have tried to speed up the design phase of projects by various techniques: Fast Track, Design Build, etc. Foolishly, we have thought that we can do this by technological advancements only: computers, fax machines, etc. In fact, we have even created additional hurdles to speeding up the process by creating ever changing, more complicated codes. Somehow we have tried to manage this additional burden.

The thing that we have not been able to make significantly faster is the "human" decision making process and coordination. As JAE has so adaptly put it, "It is like trying to have a baby in a month, by making 9 women pregenant."

When the coordination and decision making doesn't happen in a timely fashion on a compressed schedule, the results of the design can turn into one big, ugly, uncoordinated mess. Unfortunately, many of these issues can and do land in our laps. The Owner and project manager will try to ultimately absolve themselves from having any responsiblity. The faster the project needs to go, the more critical is the timing of the decisions.

Our plates are often so full, that we bearly have enough time to do what needs to get done and now we need to tell others by what date I need this decision by? Ask yourselves this.... what are the consequences of not getting that decsion on time?

To be sucessful, we must continuously hold the decision makers and other diciplines feet to the fire so that we have the information we need, in a timely manner, to produce a quality end product. It is human nature to want to be liked and to never have to give difficult news or put pressure on others, but sometimes we have to deliver this news for our own good. Often, we are relunctant to do it.

I am not naive enough to believe that this will solve all of our problems, but it will go a long way. Proper training and mentoring is also big problem in structural engineering, other engineering disciplines, architecture, construction, etc. Many companies put more emphasis and give recognition to project management instead of technical development. This only exaceberates the problem.

When we receive poor quality information from other disciplines, how can we be expected to produce a good quality work product? All disciplines need to attack this problem thru a unified effort.

 

[swthwdy]

How can a structural engineer make a decision, or give an opinion, when he or she cannot visually see what the problem is? Our completed home has built in problems and continued developing problems. Destructive investigation cannot be done, therefore our Structural Engineer can only give an opinion as to what the cause of the problems may or may not be. This certainly places the structural engineer in a poor light through no fault of their doing or not doing.

 

[LPPE]

Well said, jike, especially how project managers get the recognition (and big bonuses) instead of the people who actually got their hands dirty and did the work.

 

[casseopeia]

Hey swthwdy,

Sorry to change the subject, but what problems are you having with the house? A major part of my job is to evaluate structural issues with single family tract homes involved in class action lawsuits.

Almost every week we have a project with destructive testing and have managed to amass a fairly large data base that ties defects to construction or design flaws. These tend to be fairly regular with tract homes.

If you want, start a new post here and let us know what defects you are experiencing. Also, is the home 1 or 2-story, slab on grade or basement. General location helps (high wind or seismic load considerations). The more detail, the better I can give you options to consider looking at closer. And I would not rule out DT.

 

[swthwdy]

Thanks Casseopeia: We have a 2 story, post-tension foundation on expansive soil, in the Houston unincorporated area, that is labeled as: "Extremely non uniform, below typical industry standard", (cables range from approx 1 inch to over 5" in the 4 inch slab, one cable has never been stressed, soil plasticity index is 24 at least, the located 5" cable is not in a beam, there was no 4" layer of sand compacted as mandated in the soil preparation report, the vapor barrier was not layered, just butted together, and the duct tape had separated as shown in one core sample. The production builder had only a flip plan of this house. At least two GPR photo indicates pockets of subsurface water, we have differential settlement, plus other code and poor workmanship issues. We are in an 80 MPH windload area and there are no hurricane clips or straps installed as the plans call for. The Appraisal District has substantially lowered the value of our home. The structure is built to the highs and lows of the foundation. My husband and I are senior citizens and have a June jury trial in District Court. Thank you for your interest. It is so difficult for a Structural Engineer to recommend repair on what cannot be visually seen in the walls, ceilings and the foundation. We wish that the legislature would license home builders and mandate inspections in the unincorporated areas, so some home builders would be more accountable and responsible to the home buyers. Maybe the Engineering membership will initiate those possibilities in the future.

 

[LPRooster]

Please excuse this detailer for offering a post. I've read with great interest this thread and have found that most of you guys are experiencing exactly what we've thought for so long. The design drawing quality is suffering (and detail drawing quality in terms of completeness are a direct result). I've noticed several comments though that indicate there are a few out there that don't see things from our side. If your firm is now considering outsourcing the packaging of design documents, find out how successful some fabricators have been with offshore detailing. Furthermore, passing along the pressure only causes a backup that eventually gets passed back to the owner with alot of extra bills to pay and a dose of ill will. We've seriously considered trying to market ourselves as an outsource for preliminary design review, only to seek and destroy all of the questions that the detailer is GOING to ask you later, only then it will be one question at a time and perhaps a year from now. Why not consider a detailer to take a week or so to troubleshoot the project, iron out all of the annoying issues with the EOR, spend a few days to get the drawings up to snuff and send out as usual. We've seen so many instances that would have saved the staff engineer at least 20-30% of his time in the long run. Your CAD staff can be quite versatile at turning out nothing. Why not make sure that as many issues as possible are taken care of BEFORE you HAVE to deal with it later? This can only come through experience on the part of the EOR, his CAD staff, or a steel detailer. Which of these is your best option? If you have to fast-track a project, there is a way to fast-track this issue as well. Just a thought and thanks for the debate.

 

[TomBarsh]

swthwdy, You may be interested in this discussion by a Katy-area structural engineer regarding the new Texas Residential Construction Commission (the foxes are guarding the hen house).

see

http://www.polhemus.cc/blog/news.php

 

[swthwdy]

Thanks TomBarsh for the Open Letter. I have printed it out and would only hope that more home owners would be enlightened before their purchase. I am well aware of the TRCC and the inadequacies thereof. Many of us are hopeful that HB3404 will pass this year. At least it would be an improvement over the present, definitely not a cure all.

 

[JAE]

LPRooster - your comments are well thought out and I can see an advantage in what you are suggesting.

But one issue pops up here that would interfere with this proposal - that is that our design is a contractual effort that would require some form of concurrance by our client before we offer bid documents (or potential bid documents) out to a potential bidder. I can see howls of protest by one fabricator if another fabricator is given the opportunity to see the job prior to its public issuance and have input into its content.

On public projects, this sometimes could even be considered unethical or illegal.

 

[casseopeia]

swthwdy,

Sounds to me like the problem has been identified as an improper foundation design and/or construction for the soil conditions. I'm assuming that the cores were taken in your home.

I've worked on projects in Dallas and Houston, primarily 3-4 story multi-family or hotels. We had drilled piers with post-tensioned slabs and used a product, if I recall, called SureVoid, to separate the slab from the soil. The concept is that the cardboard-like surevoid product would collapse as the soil heaved, but not transfer load to the structure. Seemed to work faily well.

Here in the California bay area we have pockets of expansive soils where the developers are allowed to put post-tensioned slabs on grade. I don't think our soils are as expansive as in Texas, though. It does not seem to work well in any case, based on the number of litigation cases. I've seen a number of instances where the soil heaved significantly. One case (2-story town home in Santa Rosa) heaved about 2 feet. One building in the development had to be evacuated and was torn down. A second building is still being evaluated. The repair recommendations that I reviewed were expensive, complicated and there was absolutely no guarantee that the results would be satisfactory. I wish I could tell you more positive news.

I hope your case settles well for you.