Dumb Contractor Request 7

Find another contractor.

LOL!!! These guys never cease to amaze. To think that these guys probably make a good living being incompetent morons. More power to them, I guess.

That's how the game is played. The contractor's job is to get the designer/owner to specify as much means and methods as they can. Then, it's not the contractor's fault when things don't work out.

TigerGuy, good point. I may have spoken too soon and judged too harshly when I said incompetent morons. I still think most of these guys are incompetent morons, but some of them may actually be mastermind geniuses.

We're seeing this more and more in industrial work too. The experienced labor force is just not the same so we're having to field many more questions that would've been simple field routed or means & methods types of things in the past.

We are approaching a crisis point: many many decades ago, the construction industry split and a group focused on learning more about design (architects and engineers) while another continued to focus on building. The architect who was in charge of construction largely died off (literally and figuratively). Even where it's still allowed and even encouraged (simple residential builds), things are looking more and more rough. Unfortunately, that specialization was done to the detriment of knowledge of the other side. So now we have a whole bunch of architects and engineers who have no idea or respect for how a building gets built, and a whole bunch of builders who have no idea why or respect for why the designers design the way they do. And each side is leaning more and more on the other to fill and/or offset knowledge gaps. A bit scary.

I say this as a millennial who hasn't reached the half way point of my career (I hope...). I can see the problems around me, and do what I can to fix them in my small sphere of influence. But it's very small and not very influential. Mentorship and training is not what it should be in most places in our industry.

phamENG,
Not to worry, 3D printed AI designs will come to the rescue and eliminate both ends of the problem, particularly when the new, green home norm will be a 2-BR the size of a nest.

I say this as a millennial who hasn't reached the half way point of my career (I hope...)

Click to expand...

The phamENG hasn't reached half way point of his career??? ?? mahn, I can't to see when you reach your full potential.
True Ultra Instinct, Goku-PhamEng!!!!!

Another call today....

Me: Hello

Caller: Hi, I'd like to build a 30x60 carport. Is that something you can help me with?

Me: Um, maybe, tell me more about it.

Caller: Well I already have the material. Are you familiar with Unistrut? I have had it fabricated into bar joists. I'm also going to use 3 inch schedule 40 rigid conduit for the poles.

Me: No

Clearly an electrician who has been hoarding job site material.

Well in aerospace we have a similar issue, a whole bunch of engineers who have no idea how an airplane gets built, and a whole bunch of people in operations who have no idea why or respect for why the aircraft is designed the way it is. And management wants to outsource both functions to "low cost countries". Sigh.

The response to the contractor should be "My rate for teaching you how to do your job is $1000/hour, payable in advance".

XR250,

Just like how Johnny Cash built his car.

Please note that is a "v" (as in Violin) not a "y".

...and sometimes engineers need to climb down from their 'ivory tower' and get to the 'smell the roses' with the contractors.

This came up a few years ago on a project I was working on.

Large multi-disciplne EOR detailed an increase to the negative moment capacity of existing PT beam to a pool deck, and they 'simply' wanted to install new 4 each x #9 rebar x 40' long. Bit of concrete chipping, bend out the stirrups, install the rebar, re-bend the stirrups, place concrete.

By not showing the real as-is sitiation their drawings did NOT detail the top slab rebar (#6 bars, perpendicular to beam), so I sent a RFI asking the EOR for 'means and method' of instalaltion of the new #9. Got a initial reply the from EOR that M&M was the responsibility of the GC. I replied with a 'means and method' that included cutting every #6 top slab bar to install the new #9's. The formal RFI reply came a few days later from the EOR was that their section detail was a drafting error. Yeah right!



We design/built an altenative negative moment beam strengthening that was buildable.

phamENG said:

The architect who was in charge of construction largely died off (literally and figuratively).

Click to expand...

Literally, when Mike Brady died.

XR is that call about the Unistrut joist and rigid conduit real?

Absolutely, I could not make that up

My professor always stressed that you need to be aware of how much space #9 bars take up compared to #4's. They are all the same size dot on the detail. I would tease the rod busters that even if they were having a difficult time, it worked on the drawings.

I still think most engineers would be well served by helping build what they design.

Engenuity and TigerGuy, yes it goes both ways. Sometimes engineers do specify overly simple design solutions that ignore real world complications, expecting that the folks in the field doing the dirty work will bail them out using know-how that the engineer doesn't possess. I totally agree that engineers need to be aware of constructability issues, and the best way to learn these issues is with hands-on field experience during construction.

In this case though, the OP was about repairing a deck. XR250 didn't say, but I am guessing the deck in question is a residential, wood deck, and I'm guessing it needs repairs because it was probably built by a construction cowboy and probably without a permit. A bit different scenario than chipping concrete, cutting rebar, and reinforcing a PT beam.

...and sometimes engineers need to climb down from their 'ivory tower' and get to the 'smell the roses' with the contractors.

Click to expand...

A bit of an understatement IMO. Its good to be confident but arrogance drives a ton of cost via engineering mistakes and inflated supply costs.

Trades requesting work instructions for a straightforward task is a standard method of forcing the engineer to find their mistake and avoid confrontation/embarrassment/meetings.

CWB1 said:

Trades requesting work instructions for a straightforward task is a standard method of forcing the engineer to find their mistake and avoid confrontation/embarrassment/meetings.

Click to expand...

Very true. And while it's not our job - and shouldn't be - to tell the contractor exactly how to build something, we still need to have an idea of how it can be built. If I'm designing something and think "hmm, I wonder how they'll pull that off" then I'm probably doing something wrong.

Though in the OP's case, I doubt that's the problem. Those sorts of broad and generic questions are usually the result of a contractor not knowing what they're doing or just being lazy. When I get good, specific questions about my designs, I'm happy to engage and discuss them - even change them if it makes sense to do so. But "what size joists do I use?" is lucky to get a response saying "read the drawings."