Author |
Message |
Blake
| Posted on Friday, December 31, 2004 - 06:47 pm: |
|
Steve, I walked right by the IMechE headquarters building in London a few years back. Very cool. I was kinda like hallowed ground for a fellow BSME. I agree the term "engineer" has become diluted. It seems many fancy themselves an "engineer" without truly appreciating what that title really means and the level of responsibility it conveys. Much of the general public just go happily about their lives taking for granted the products of dedicated expert engineers everywhere. What fries my brain even more are the jerks who see fit to badmouth and belittle engineers. Show me someone who does that and I'll show you someone who is likely incompetent at their own job. Rant off. Happy New Year! |
Jprovo
| Posted on Friday, December 31, 2004 - 07:19 pm: |
|
BSME 1999, EIT 1999 Working in the RV industry, I am one of two in the 20+ person "engineering" department with a degree in engineering, the other person being the Engineering Manager. Most people in this industry are not degreed, especially when most things are built from experience, tested, and then documented (Reverse Engineered). Luckily, my peers respect my degree and look to me for guidance in future design. James |
Steveshakeshaft
| Posted on Saturday, January 01, 2005 - 07:16 am: |
|
IMechE, Birdcage Walk, London. Pity you didn't take a look inside. All old leather and dark wood panelling, oil paintings of the true victorian masters of engineering as an art form as well as a science etc etc.... hallowed ground indeed. All the very best to BadWebbers the world over for a happy and indeed safe 2005. Be sure anyone, to look us up when you visit the UK. Steve www.ukbeg.com steve_s@ukbeg.com |
M2nc
| Posted on Saturday, January 01, 2005 - 10:57 am: |
|
Country, I would want a PE to stamp a drawing for a bridge that is going to carry my tail across it, but there are many other forms of engineering that a PE is not required. In our engineering department many are two-year tech graduates. They set up machines to manufacture parts. In the past, I designed and stamped drawings for special options to our products, no PE. My wife's step-father worked and retired from P&G as an Engineer. He designed the electrical requirements for new plants. He two had a two-year technical degree. I see your point that the term "engineer" is mis-used. Sanitation Engineer, need I say more. But until the English language is change to differientiate between a designer, a layout tech and a professional engineer, I will continue to represent myself as being an Engineer. |
Lornce
| Posted on Saturday, January 01, 2005 - 02:58 pm: |
|
"Hey, don't knock engineers. If it wasn't for those guys and their goofy notions, we'd all be out'a work." - One Millwright to another. Lornce |
Blake
| Posted on Saturday, January 01, 2005 - 08:18 pm: |
|
Carlos, With what did you "stamp drawings"? Anyone can sign off on drawings internal to a corporation. The onus is upon the corporation to ensure the integrity of their product. Try and build a public bridge, any public/civil structure, roadway, foundation, electrical works, dams, etc without the stamp of a PE and or Architect as applicable. Ain't gonna happen. When you say "stamp" that implies licensed professional approval. Representing oneself professionally as an engineer without having the applicable professional license is simply dishonest and is illegal in every state I know. Telling new acquaintances in answer to their casual question of "what do you do" that one is an engineer is certainly not illegal.I used to do the same myself. But I now see it as not quite 100% honest and diminishing of the title, achievements and efforts of those who truly are licensed professional engineers. |
Mbsween
| Posted on Saturday, January 01, 2005 - 08:21 pm: |
|
Hey Blake, do you know if you have to retake the EIT exam after a period of time? |
Blake
| Posted on Saturday, January 01, 2005 - 09:53 pm: |
|
In Texas the FE is good for around 8 years I think, but you can ask for a waiver if you go over that time before taking/passing the PPE. Not sure what the criteria for granting waivers is. |
Vegasbueller
| Posted on Saturday, January 01, 2005 - 10:28 pm: |
|
"Hey, don't knock engineers. If it wasn't for those guys and their goofy notions, we'd all be out'a work." - One Millwright to another. But Lornce... how many times have you ever said: "Why in the heil did the engineer do that"?
|
Craigster
| Posted on Saturday, January 01, 2005 - 11:18 pm: |
|
HR Professionals in (semi-conductor anyway)use the terminology of: Assembler = builds product Mechanic = builds installs and repairs product Technician = fixes engineers mistakes and makes them actually work Designer = (used to be draftsman) makes pretty 3D images of product as well as telling the Engineer what GDT is over and over again 'X' Engineer = (place Mech, Elec., software, Process etc. in the X) Gets hung for any and all delays in design and test of prototypes. Usually given a budjet of $16.00 and one week to develop something that should take 8 months and $900,000 Sr. Engineer = Been doing Engineering long enough to to know better and is usually looking for a new job Seriously - When a company advertises for Mechanical Engineer - I'd bet fewer than 5% are PEs. Like you say Blake, it's not illegal - but I think it's also understood and accepted; If you have your degree and it's on your card - you're an engineer. If your're a PE, you can and should take credit for it. My sister has her PhD. She's not a an MD - Does that mean we shouldn't call her doctor even if she has her doctorate? Now that I think about it - I guess what I'm thinking is that if one is employed as an engineer - they would be an engineer. I've known several folks who have left industry to do other things and now no longer call themselves engineers, (and rightly so). If one is a Professional Engineer they should take credit for it. I have one patent, and several applied for. But I'm not a PE. Does that mean I didn't engineer a new solution to an existing problem? The patent would seem to argue that. As Kevin cameron wrote: many motorcyclists spend nights in the garage 'fixing' what the factory did wrong. When motorcyclists do more than just hack a new bracket or bolt on a shiny part - When they actually look at a scenario and explore the evidence and attack the problem perhaps with some experimentation involved - and develop a new design to solve our problem - are those men not engineering? Thus they must be engineers. please excuse the typos - my son is in my lap and has helped strike keys quite a bit during this post |
Lornce
| Posted on Saturday, January 01, 2005 - 11:50 pm: |
|
But Lornce... how many times have you ever said: "Why in the heil did the engineer do that"? Vegas, I used to say that but now just proceed straight to: "If it wasn't for those guys and their goofy notions, we'd all be out'a work." I've seen some pretty funny engineering oversights over the years. Of course human nature tends more to remember the oversights than the brilliant successes. My hat's off to them, either way. |
Whodom
| Posted on Sunday, January 02, 2005 - 08:31 pm: |
|
Mbsween, In SC, there used to not be a time limit on the EIT. Not sure whether that's still true or not. I took and passed the EIT in my senior year (1978) and didn't take the PE until about 1997. Passed both on the first try. The requirements are on line; I'm sure you can find out with a little effort. Hugh |
Rek
| Posted on Sunday, January 02, 2005 - 08:43 pm: |
|
As an ironworker I ran into an interesting engineering oversite while whorking on a dam in NM. The bottom six feet of a spillway we were building called for #11 rebar to be spaced on 2" centers. Since #11 rebar is 1.25" in diameter it was (is) physically impossible to accomplish this. The really horrible part is the general-foreman of the job insisted that we drive these 40' long sticks of #11 rebar into the wall until he heard otherwise. (read freak'n moron). It was a agonizing two days before the spec's were changed. Rob |
Shawn_9r
| Posted on Sunday, January 02, 2005 - 09:44 pm: |
|
ok... catching the tail end of this thread and too lazy to read back. Are you guys saying that just because you have a degree for some where that makes you and "Engineer"? I have deployed to Afghanistan and Iraq and it never seems to fail that I run into some "Electrical Engineer" who does not know his Buttocks from a Hole in the ground. They never want to take into consideration ampacity of cable, fucntionablity and placement of transformers. Now I don't have a degree(yet) but have installed/operated and maintained power plants and designed distribution systems 4160VAC and a distribution system for 11,000 VAC for the Army. All meeting OSHA and NEC standards and all that other HAZMAT stuff. I guess what I am trying to say is... just because I don't have a degree(yet) does that mean I am not an Engineer? Or better yet... just because a guy attended school but has no practical experience and does have a degree (and don't know caca)does that make him "An Engineer"? Thanks for letting me rant, Shawn "Army Engineers" Essayons! |
Blake
| Posted on Sunday, January 02, 2005 - 11:27 pm: |
|
just because I don't have a degree(yet) does that mean I am not an Engineer? In most cases, yes. "Technician" or "designer" would usually be a better description in your case. just because a guy attended school but has no practical experience and does have a degree (and don't know caca)does that make him "An Engineer"? I don't know anyone with an engineering degree who doesn't "know caca"; I know some that are what I would consider lacking in technical depth of knowledge. The answer to your question though is "absolutely not." Rob, That sounds like a simple typo type of mistake that should have been caught by a drawing checker. That said, engineers are human beings like everyone else and sometimes they make mistakes. BTW, #11 rebar should be 1.410" in diameter. Up to #8, rebar # is designated in 1/8 inch increments of "nominal" diameter with #8 then being 8/8"=1.000". For some reason of which I am ignorant, above #108 the rebar diameter is slightly larger than the preceding 1/8" numbering convention and thus instead of 11/8"=1.375" for #11 we have 1.410". Also that type of mistake is very strange since the minimum allowable spacing of parallel strands of rebar is the greater of 1" or one diameter of free space between bars (two diameters center to center). For #11 rebar, the absolute minumum spacing any engineer or designer should ever consider is set by code to no less than 2.82" center-to-center. As project manager if such an egregious mistake made its way onto final construction drawings, I would darn near be forced to issue a stop work pending comprehensive review of all essential structural/construction drawings, and you can bet the engineer of record would have some serious splaining to do. Rebar spacing is also limited to a minimum of no closer than Here's a pretty comprehensive checklist that will give you an idea of what a structural engineer must consider before putting his seal upon any drawing... |
Blake
| Posted on Sunday, January 02, 2005 - 11:32 pm: |
|
quote: References ICBO, 1994, Uniform Building Code, Structural Engineering Provisions, International Conference of Building Officials, Whittier California ICBO, 1997, Uniform Building Code, Structural Engineering Provisions, International Conference of Building Officials, Whittier California ICBO, 1994, 1994 UBC Structural CheckList, International Conference of Building Officials, Whittier California DPIC, 1988, Lessons In Professional Liability, Design Professionals Insurance Company, Monterey, California CHECKLISTS FOR THE QUALITY ASSURANCE OF CALCULATIONS, DESIGN AND DRAWING PRODUCTION CALCULATIONS, ANALYSIS, AND CODE Verify the that the following items have been addressed and are included in the calculations and Code checks: Gravity Loading Review and compare initial dead load assumptions with the weights of the members chosen for final design Are Dead Loads overly conservative, i.e. very heavy such that wind uplift and lateral overturning are not safe, use .85 dead load or less to resist overturning Dead load slope correction factors 100 psf at all exits, corridors, common areas HVAC Loading, RTU's, suspended equipment, tanks 20 psf partition loading (UBC 94 pg 2-3) [UBC 97 pg 2-2] Live load reduction (UBC 94 pg 2-4) [UBC 97 pg 2-3] Unbalanced loading combinations Deflection, ponding, vibration perceptibility Hydrostatic uplift Load Combinations (UBC 94 pg 2-2) [UBC 97 pg 2-4] All combinations included (preliminary design vs final) 1.33 stress increase for combinations with wind and seismic (UBC 94 pg 2-2) [UBC 97 pg 2-5] IF 1.33 stress increase is applied to load combos as .75, then don't also apply 1.33 to stresses Do not apply that .75 to deflection calculations Clearly clarify which calculations use Working Stress/ASD vs LRFD/ULT Snow Loading (UBC 94 Appendix 16 pg 2-1199) [UBC 97 pg 2-387] Snow drift at parapets, equipment, screen walls, low roofs, snow (Pg vs Pf), rain on snow surcharge (UBC 94 pg 2-1203) [UBC 97 pg 2-389] Wind Loading (UBC 94 pg 2-8) [UBC 97 pg 2-7] Exposure, Enclosed/partially open Wind speed: note fastest mile or 3 second gust Pressures on walls and roof are all applied simultaneously? 1.5 factor of safety for overturning (2/3 dead load resisting moment), except for short, squat buildings (UBC 94 pg 2-9) [UBC 97 pg 2-7] Net uplift: Is assumed Dead Load appropriate for resisting wind uplift and overturning? Uplift forces, H clips at wood trusses, brace bottom/compression flange of beams Wind drift < .0025 h Quartering wind, corner columns Real plan torsion (UBC 94 pg 2-2) [UBC 97 pg 2-1] Elements and Components if < 1000 sf (UBC 94 pg 2-33) [UBC 97 pg 2-29] 5 psf interior partition loading (UBC 94 pg 2-6) [UBC 97 pg 2-3] Seismic Loading Irregular structure, plan or vertical (UBC 94 pg 2-14) [UBC 97 pg 2-12] Simplified static procedure limitations [UBC 97 pg 2-12] Dynamic analysis trigger (UBC 94 pg 2-14) [UBC 97 pg 2-12] Near-source factor [UBC 97 pg 2-11, 2-35] Base Shear (UBC 94 pg 2-16) [UBC 97 pg 2-14] 97 UBC redundancy, overstrength factors [UBC 97 pg 2-13] Seismic weight: 25% of storage live load in seismic weight, (combine Seismic lateral load with 100% of vertical live load + dead load) 10 psf partition seismic weight to floors (UBC 94 pg 2-16) [UBC 97 pg 2-13] Snow load if > 30 psf Operating weight of equipment in seismic weight Ballpark check: Period T approximately = 0.1 x Number of stories Ballpark check:: For S=1.5, regular building, Ct = 0.020, T=Ct(hn)^.75; the following relationships hold true: C=2.75 when T < .56 sec C=2.75 when hn < 85' (approx. 6 stories) (UBC 94 pg 2-16) Rw, R with height limits (UBC 94 pg 2-37) [UBC 97 pg 2-32] Rw, R combined along different/same axes, use lower value (UBC 94 pg 2-18) [UBC 97 pg 2-15] Vertical distribution of force formula (UBC 94 pg 2-18) [UBC 97 pg 2-15] 5% accidental torsion included (UBC 94 pg 2-18) [UBC 97 pg 2-15] Column strength (3 Rw/8) load combinations for irregular structures (UBC 94 pg 2-19) [UBC 97 pg 2-16] Calculated drift < .04/Rw & .005h ("Calculated" drift does not include 3 Rw/8 factor) (UBC 94 pg 2-20) [UBC 97 pg 2-16] 3 Rw/8 x deflection, pounding Deformation Compatibility (UBC 94 pg 2-24) Building Separations (UBC 94 pg 2-26) Use 1.7 allowable stress increase for "strength" calculations, but do not include 1.33 stress increase. Coordinate with .75 factor in load combinations Delta s vs Delta m [UBC 97 pg 2-16] P delta (UBC 94 pg 2-20) [UBC 97 pg 2-14] Vertical component of seismic, effects greater than 1.33 gravity? Seismic Forces on Parts of Structure Rigid equipment, > 400 lbs (UBC 94 pg 2-22) [UBC 97 pg 2-18] 2/3 Fp if supported on ground (UBC 94 pg 2-22) [UBC 97 pg 2-18 formula (32-2)] If tank with toxic substances, Ip=1.50 (UBC 94 pg 2-35) [UBC 97 pg 2-30] Seismic Detailed System Requirements 0.85 DL for uplift load combinations (UBC 94 pg 2-23) [UBC 97 pg 2-19, 2-4] Corner columns, orthogonal effects, SRSS combine (UBC 94 pg 2-24) [UBC 97 pg 2-19] 3 Rw/8 x deflection, pounding Deformation Compatibility (UBC 94 pg 2-24) [UBC 97 pg 2-19] Building Separations (UBC 94 pg 2-26) [UBC 97 pg 2-21] Use 1.7 allowable stress increase for "strength" calculations, but do not include 1.33 stress increase. Coordinate with .75 factor in load combinations Delta s vs Delta m [UBC 97 pg 2-16] Cladding connections (UBC 94 2-24) [UBC 97 pg 2-19] Ties Collectors Anchor walls, 200 plf min (UBC 94 2-25 and 2-6) 280 plf [UBC 97 pg 2-20, 2-3] Diaphragms: Deflection Force equation (31-1) (UBC 94 pg 2-25) [UBC 97 pg 2-20 eqn (33-1)] Rw =6 if flexible diaphragm with heavy walls Continuous crossties No cross grain bending or nail withdrawal If plan irregular, then no 1 1/3 stress increase for diaphragms and collectors Projecting wing motion out of phase Building Separations (UBC 94 pg 2-26) [UBC 97 pg 2-21] Nonbuilding Structures (UBC 94 pg 2-26) [UBC 97 pg 2-21] and Table 16-P (UBC 94 pg 2-39) [UBC 97 pg 2-34] Rigid structures eqn (32-1) (UBC 94 pg 2-27) [UBC 97 pg 2-21 eqn (34-1)] Tanks Global Load Path Load Path: continuous and in proportion to relative rigidities of elements Gravity: From roof to foundation, connections Seismic: From each mass and/or level to foundation, connections Wind: From walls and roof to foundation, connections Stability Global Local Sloping members, sloping bearing surfaces: forces accounted for? Computer Analysis Units consistent, ft, in, kips, degrees vs radians Member orientation correct? Weak vs strong axis bending. Global vs local loading direction Positive y loading is up or down, self weight loading is down Check plot of model for configuration, load and reaction direction, case by case AISC unbraced lengths may be greater than the default length of node to node; k, Cm, Cb defaults, x, y directions Global Restraints: Are global restraints appropriate? If a large horizontal reaction is output, then the foundation must be designed for that force. Are mid span moments, forces, deflections reported and critical? Or reports at nodes only? Connection design based on load path vs reported member end force: e.g. For a concentric braced frame with an in-plane offset, the connection of beam to column may need to be designed for the reported end force plus the horizontal component of the brace. Thermal expansion and contraction stresses (building greater than 200' in plan) Foundations (UBC 94 pg 2-48) [UBC 97 pg 2-43] Allowable bearing pressures, net? Working stress? (UBC 94 pg 2-57) [UBC 97 pg 2-49] 1.33 stress increase OK (UBC 94 pg 2-2, pg 2-56) [UBC 97 pg 2-49] Piling: group action reduction factors when closely spaced Tie piles together for 10% of axial load (UBC 94 pg 2-52) [UBC 97 pg 2-45] Lateral earth pressures: Active equivalent fluid pressure or higher "at rest" pressure if top is constrained (i.e. basement wall) Hydrostatic pressures or adequately drained condition Retaining Walls Factor of Safety and minimum loads (UBC 94 pg 2-6) [UBC 97 pg 2-4] Surcharge loading, parking, construction equipment Allowable bearing pressures, net? (UBC 94 pg 2-57) [UBC 97 pg 2-49] Check overturning stability, sliding, bearing pressure, concrete bending/shear in wall and footing, assure adequate development length in footing rebar. Concrete Include Load Factors, 1.4 DL, 1.7 LL Include phi factors on materials Flexure ballpark check: As req'd (in^2) = Mu (ft-k) / [4*d (in)] Spread footings: check bending, one way shear, punching shear Stirrups for torsion Shear friction calcs: ld on each side of plane (ACI 11.7.8) similar at construction joints Lightweight concrete: Reduction factor, lambda, for shear, ld Splices: factors affecting splice length: f'c, Fy, spacing, cover, col/beam/wall/ductile, top bar, lightweight conc, epoxy coated, excess reinforcing, class A or B, zone 3& 4 Beam deflection, long term creep One way slabs: crack control: "z" equation Concrete Seismic (UBC 94 pg 2-232) [UBC 97 pg 2-154] Load factors, 1.4 DL , 1.7 LL, 1.4 for seismic combinations UBC 94 1.0 x seismic for UBC 97 seismic loads 135 degree stirrups and ties @ 4" oc, ductile detailing Anchor Bolts and Headed Studs Reduce capacity for close spacing, edge distance. Use conservative UBC 94 Table 19-E pg 2-267, double tensile values if special inspection, or calculate pullout cones as per pg 2-254. [UBC 97 pg 2-181, 2-168] Expansion Anchors Reduce capacity for close spacing, edge distance Concrete Block Masonry (CMU) No special inspection if 1/2 stresses are used in design, E does not get divided by 2. (UBC 94 pg 2-310) [UBC 97 pg 2-209] Check bond length of flexural reinforcement Minimum 200 plf anchorage of walls to roof (UBC 94 pg 2-6) [280 plf UBC 97 pg 2-3] Deflection for lintel or veneer support < L/600 (UBC 94 pg 2-317) [UBC 97 pg 2-2133] CMU Seismic Working Stress Design (UBC 94 pg 2-320) [UBC 97 pg 2-214] 1.5 factor for seismic loads in shearwalls, working stress (UBC 94 pg 2-321) [UBC 97 pg 2-215] Steel Verify material grade used i.e. Gr 50 for shapes, but also for plates and small angles? Steel Beams Brace compression flange: bottom flange for continuous beams, net wind uplift, design brace for 2% + of flange force Beam stiffeners required atop steel columns for stability Torsion accounted for? Steel Columns K > 1.0 if moment frame, i.e. column not braced with shearwall or X braced frame. Moment due to eccentricity of beam end connection used Steel Connections Prying Action Eccentricities on bolt groups Eccentricities on welds Gusset plates: width thickness, Whitmore section Net section Bolt bearing on thin plates Bolt capacities, SC or N Collector and chord forces Steel Seismic Allowable Stress Design For 97 UBC, Reduce earthquake forces by E/1.4 (UBC 97 pg 2-5 and 2-255] Member strength allowables 1.7 * allowable: do not also include 1.33 stress increase, increase loads by 3Rw/8 (UBC 94 2-359) [UBC 97 pg 2-255] Column strength, splices, slenderness (UBC 94 2-359) [UBC 97 pg 2.255] Ordinary Moment Frame requirements OMF (UBC 94 pg 2-360) [UBC 97 pg 2-256] Special Moment Frame requirements SMRF (UBC 94 pg 2-360) [UBC 97 pg 2-256] Connections, seismic provisions, follow Code Steel Seismic Braced Frames (UBC 94 pg 2-363) [UBC 97 pg 2-257] Concentric Braced Frames (CBF) (UBC 94 pg 2-364) [UBC 97 pg 2-257] Slenderness minimums Fas = B Fa for brace member Max 70 % of braces oriented in same direction Built-up members, stitch plates, local 1/r Width thickness minimums Chevron bracing requirements, 1.5 factor (UBC 94 2211.8.4.1 pg 2-365) apply to diagonal brace member only and not to beams, columns or brace connection [UBC 97 pg 2-258] No K bracing, no non-concentric bracing One and two Story buildings, OK to design for 3 Rw/8 [Omega zero] forces with relaxed requirements Non-building Structures: Rw from Nonbuilding table (UBC 94 pg 2-39) [UBC 97 pg 2-34], need only comply with connection requirements for braced frames (UBC 94 pg 2-365) [UBC 97 pg 2-258] Steel Seismic Bracing Connections Brace connections: Seismic*3Rw/8 < 1.7 allowable (UBC 94 pg 2-366) [UBC 97 pg 2-258] Net area Special Concentric Braced Frames (SCBF) (UBC 94 pg 2-364) [UBC 97 pg 2-258] Slenderness minimums Max 70 % of braces oriented in same direction Built-up members, stitch plates, local 1/r Width thickness minimums Chevron bracing requirements, no 1.5 factor for SCBF's, but check post buckle strength (UBC 94 pg 2-366) [UBC 97 pg 2-259] Steel Seismic Bracing Connections for SCBF's Brace connections: Seismic*3Rw/8 < 1.7 allowable (UBC 94 pg 2-366) [UBC 97 pg 2-259] Net area Gusset plates Bracing configuration Columns, splices (UBC 94 pg 2-367) [UBC 97 pg 2-259] Eccentric Braced Frames (UBC 94 pg 2-367) [UBC 97 pg 2-259] Bottom flange of beam must be braced, hence do not locate in exterior walls of elevator shafts, or similar. Prescriptive, follow code Zone 1 and 2 Steel Frames (UBC 94 pg 2-369) [UBC 97 pg 2-261] Relaxed requirements Wood Allowable stress adjustment factors for: duration, size, repetitive member, flat use, wet use etc. Wind: 1.6 duration factor in lieu of 1.33; members only, not connections (UBC 94 pg 2-810) [UBC 97 pg 2-291] SPF studs, low allowable shear and E Dead load slope correction factors Wood Connections Bolts: Min edge distance, end dist, spacing Nails: Adequate penetration, reductions for wet use Increases for metal side plates No cross grain tension or bending stresses No heel cuts or bottom notches near bearing (UBC 94 pg 2-813) [UBC 97 pg 2-292] Adequate bearing area for engineered products, LVL, PSL Wood Seismic Ties Collectors Chords Anchorage to heavy walls, 200 plf min (UBC 94 2-25 and 2-6) [UBC 97 pg 2-3 and 2-20] Diaphragms: Flexible, Deflection Force equation (31-1) (UBC 94 pg 2-25) [UBC 97 pg 2-20, eqn (33-1)] Rw =6 if flexible diaphragm with heavy walls Continuous cross ties Large diaphragm openings detailed (UBC 94 pg 2-825) [UBC 97 pg 2-279] Calculation Epilogue Review and compare initial dead load assumptions with those of the members chosen for final design. Check camber calculations, check self weight of truss and self weight of gusset plates. Key plans accurate and up to date Verify that engineers show units in all equations Building Department calculations for: Stairs, handrail/guardrail, ceiling assemblies, interior partitions, suspended equipment etc. Title sheet with project identification for Building Department use: Project name, project address, permit number, scope of work. Design Basis: for Building Department use: Code used, wind speed, see general notes above. Index and cross reference calculation sections, pages Sign and seal calculations DESIGN AND DRAWING PRODUCTION Verify the that the following information has been adequately defined: All Drawings, General Title block, project name, drawn by, checked by Sheet number (matches architect's system) Sheet title (matches architect's index) Issue date (updated) Stamped "PRELIMINARY, NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION, FOR BID", etc. Autocad plot Time and Date stamp Revisions ballooned, w/ triangle, dated, revision block description Firm Logo and job # All Plans, General North Arrow, scale shown, bar scale Not to scale items labeled NTS Grid lines and dimensions shown and consistent at each level, all extents dimensioned Existing construction shown as double dashed line or labeled "(E)" or "EXISTING" New construction located with respect to existing "Field verify" dimensions clearly noted and reasonable Recessed areas defined or noted Foundation Plans Datum elevation defined, coordinated with civil, architect Pipe penetrations through footings, slab; sleeved Compaction and quality of fill defined Floor Framing Plans Elevations: Top of steel, top of concrete, finished floor, joist bearing, top of plywood, top of column Does fabricator have enough information to determine length of steel beams and columns? Rebar? HVAC duct openings shown, located and framed Vertical Bracing locations shown, type Moment connections locations shown Roof Framing Plans Roof drainage accounted for, built up insulation or sloping top of steel, slopes, work points HVAC openings shown, framed Weight of roof top equipment shown on drawing General Notes Abbreviation list, symbols and marks defined Safety and means and methods of construction disclaimer Shore and protect existing Design Basis: Code used (i.e. UBC `97) Clearly clarify which loads are Working Stress level /ASD and which are Ultimate, LRFD/USD Live load listed Snow load, exposure, rain on snow surcharge Wind speed (fastest mile or 3 second gust), exposure, enclosed/partially open, Importance factor Seismic zone, Z, R/Rw, I, S, C Material Specifications: Concrete, Steel etc., See below Coordinate with specifications No proprietary product names on Government jobs Soils report referenced Basis of foundation design noted, allowable bearing pressure, equivalent fluid pressure etc. Geotechnical site presence and soils verification defined Submittals defined (shop drawings, etc.) Field testing defined (compaction, concrete, UT) Special Inspection, list types required (periodic/continuous) Structural Observation Concrete Concrete Notes f'c, regular weight, w/c ratio, slump, fly ash, admixtures Air entrained 5 to 7 % where subject to frost Rebar: Grade 40/60, A706 where welded Concrete cover Splice lengths called out Hook dimensions Concrete Plans All slab rebar called out All beam marks labeled Top of concrete elevation Show where slopes to drain, recesses Concrete Detailing Adequate hook embedment Adequate development length Rebar spacing large enough to allow flow of concrete between bars, at splice locations also Add bars at openings, reentrant corners Corner bars at wall and beam intersections Section cuts are consistent for layering of bars (walls, slabs, beams) Construction joints are located, type (keyed, rough etc.) Steel Embed Plates Adequate thickness if field welded (prevent concrete popping) Adequate room or weep holes to allow concrete to flow under horizontal plates Nelson studs in specifications Stud or anchor bolt locations compatible with rebar Spread Footings All footings have ID mark, or sizes and detail callout Detail and schedule Plan dimensions, location, thickness, bottom of footing elevation Bottom below frost depth, or below soils report recommendation Sleeve holes for utilities, max size allowed, add bars Step continuous footing where elevation changes Retaining Walls Contraction and construction joints Allow movement at top to occur Drainage behind wall, drain rock with geotextile fabric Detail length of lap splice between vertical bars in wall and footing dowels Drilled Piers, Caissons Plan showing location with individual piers numbered Tip elevation, top elevation, 6" socket into rock Reinforcing called out Spiral lap splice length If the doweled rebars protruding from top of pier have hooks, are they compatible with casing removal? Hooked bars compatible with grade beam rebar? Auger Cast Piles No rebar cages within pile Concrete Driven Piles Precast performance specification Dowels to grade beams Slab on Grade (SOG) Top of Concrete (TOC) elevation, thickness, reinforcing or mesh called out 2" sand, membrane, 4" drain rock Support for mesh or rebar, height, type and spacing Joints: spacing, type: contraction, construction weakened plane, keyed, thickened edge, greased dowel Sawcut within 12 hours of pour, or plastic strip Expansion joint material at walls or existing construction (floating slab), or dowels for tied together construction Expansion joint material around steel columns Sump in pits, specify rebar Edge detail: with steel angle, guardrails Concrete Floors Finish: Hard Trowel/Broom, F number Recesses, slopes, drains, openings shown on structural Curbs, housekeeping pads; locate and detail Concrete Beams and Cols Stirrup and tie spacing and size, type of hook 90/135 Corner bars at corners and intersections Intersecting bars are compatible and layered Rebar spacing large enough to allow flow of concrete between bars, at splice locations also Avoid hooking both ends of a continuos bar, accurate length problems Chamfer corners "Top bar" splice length values for horz top bars Concrete Walls Add bars at openings and re-entrant corners Corner bars at wall intersections and corners Add bars around handrail post sleeves Damproofing, bituminous coating (basements) Construction joints: keyed, waterstops, chemical/jet fuel resistant material Foundation dowel lap length "Top bar" splice length values for horz top bars #3 rebar on each side of handrail sleeves Tilt-up Wall h/t < 42 Chord bar connection Continuous cross ties Precast Performance specification, design responsibility, seal by fabricator Allowable camber, deflection, weight Detail shear transfer and load path Wall panels, see UBC 94 pg 2-216, and Cladding UBC 94 pg 2-24 [UBC 97 pg 2-144 and 2-19] Concrete Masonry Units (CMU) CMU Notes Block grade N, lightweight or normal weight if exposed to weather, moisture controlled, compressive strength Rebar grade, lap splice 40+ bar diameters Horizontal bed joint reinforcement, size, type, spacing Mortar type M if below grade, otherwise type S Grout 3/8" max aggregate size, f'g, 8 to 10" slump f'm (=1500 psi), bond pattern (running/stack) CMU Reinforcing Vertical bar size and spacing, foundation dowels to match, show lap splice length and hook Horizontal bond beams, locations and max spacing, size Additional rebar: corners, wall intersections, door and window openings (extend 24" beyond openings), below beam bearings Define which cells to grout (cells w/ rebar only, or all cells) Note if 1/2 stresses were used and No Special Inspection required CMU Plans Dimension to only one face of wall (nominal dimension problems) Wall joint spacing, type CMU Details Joint types, cut rebar and joint reinforcement at joints except at floor and roof bond beams Lateral bracing at top of non-bearing walls, with vertical slots CMU Lintels Bottom of lintel elevation, minimum depth, reinforcing Bearing condition, extend bars 8"+ beyond opening Structural Steel Steel Notes Grade of Steel (A36, Gr50) Shapes, Plates, Tubes, Pipes High strength bolts (A325, A490), Anchor bolts (A307) Weld electrode(E70) Surface prep (SSPC-SP6 etc.) Paint: None/primer/galvanize/galvanize and paint, surface prep (none if fireproofed) UT testing for complete penetration welds Procedures for welding SMRF's All grout to be non-shrink, cementitious, flowable Expansion anchor (i.e. Hilti...), Epoxy, Headed studs Powder Actuated Fasteners (i.e. Hilti...) size, penetration Steel Framing Plans Top of steel defined Edge of deck condition, edge angles defined Cladding connection detail Framing for roof screen columns and braces Vertical bracing locations shown, type Moment connections located Steel Beams All beam sizes are labeled Camber, composite stud size, length and spacing Steel Columns All columns have ID or size shown, orientation, schedule Top of col, bottom of baseplate elevation Splice elevation and type Baseplate type called out, detailed Steel Tubes Slot tube with plate, or less costly shear tab Steel Bracing Spacing of double angle spacers, stitch plates Verify locations do not conflict with windows, louvers etc Steel Details, Connections Work points defined Weld sizes, lengths, symbols, electrodes, procedures, inspections Bolt sizes, quantity, type (A325N, A325SC, A307), scheduled per beam depth or location Hole types: STD, OVS, short or long slots and orientation of slot Snug tight, fully pretensioned or slip critical; inspection Faying surfaces for SC bolts, no paint Erection sequence, plausibility (shop weld, field bolt) Special detail for W6 and C6 connections w/ 2 bolts Allowance for k fillet, coping, wrench clearance Web stiffeners req'd for steel beams continuous over tops of columns for stability. Web stiffeners req'd for handrail posts at steel beams? If fabricator is to design any connections, then provide performance specification, define which members, provide all loads, define scope and responsibility, require fabricator's seal. Steel Baseplates Plan dimensions, thickness Anchor bolts; length, embedment, projection, threads, min edge distance, minimum of 4 bolts for erection safety (OSHA requirement) L bolts or nut with plate washer Oversized holes OK, std holes, shear key req'd?, embedded studs Weld to column (avoid fillet welds in tension for high seismic loads in critical locations) Grout: "non-shrink", thickness, relief holes for large baseplates Bracing work points defined Open Web Steel Joists Joist bearing elevation 2 1/2" bearing depth compatible with adjacent and parallel steel beam connections Performance specification, design responsibility, seal by fabricator Bridging design by fabricator, connection to building by designer, detail connection Define loads for design, including dead load to be used, equipment, roof screens, snow (Pg vs Pf), snow drift, rain on snow surcharge, live load reduction Define collector loading Specify deflection criteria, vibration Paint (primer/none) 2 1/2" tall hat or tube steel between joist bearings for shear transfer (between metal deck and collector beam), weld size and spacing Bolted connections required at top of column locations (OSHA requirement) Joist girder bottom chord stabilization plate, label "do not weld" Metal Deck Depth, Gauge, Manufacturer, Section properties Galvanized or painted, vented, WWF Welding: Size, type and spacing; ends, edges, sidelaps Direction of span shown Minimum gage thickness of end dam material Reinforcement at openings, Support at column openings Detail connections in load path from diaphragm to vertical shear resisting elements Steel Stairs Performance specification, design responsibility, seal by fabricator Slotted holes at connection to floor slab Steel Bar Grating Galvanized/painted, thickness, size, attachment to framing Span direction, support at large holes Steel Piling See trade association guidelines Cold Formed Steel Gauge, size, section properties, grade Punched webs OK? stiffened flanges Weld lengths, screw size and quantity Bridging (walls and roof/floors) Strap bracing locations, details Expansion Anchors Diameter, Embedment, Min edge distance, spacing Epoxy Anchors Diameter, Embedment, Min edge distance, spacing Use only if non-rated construction and less than 130 degrees F. Wood Wood Notes Plywood (roof, floor, shearwall) thickness, span rating, exposure, finish, T&G, Blocked/unblocked, nailing pattern Equivalent OSB OK? Glue to floor plywood to joist (adhesive AFG-01) Framing material and grade( DF#2, SP #2, SPF #2) for joists, rafters, studs, beams, columns, sills Plates in contact with concrete are Preservative Treated Framing hardware (Simpson, Kant-Sag) note to fill all holes with nails or bolts Nails Common/box, lengths, galvanized if exterior Anchor bolts, through bolts, lag screws (A307) Wood Framing Plans Top of plate or joist bearing elevation Differentiate bearing walls from non-bearing walls Continuous cross ties for roof of concrete tilt-up or CMU wall building Shearwall locations shown Shearwall nailing, sill nailing/bolting, anchor bolts Hold downs dimensioned adequately for concrete workers to locate Hold Down size, bolts, embedment, post size Dimensions are to face of stud UNO Typ door and window headers called out Large diaphragm openings detailed (UBC 94 pg 2-825) [UBC 97 pg 2-279] Wood Details Shrinkage considered Minimum bolt edge and end distance (4d and 7d) No cross grain tension or bending stresses No nails in withdrawal Detail connection load path from diaphragm to vertical shear resisting elements Blocking at 4' oc at walls parallel to joists Continuous 2x6 studs at tall walls Note to "edge nail" shearwall plywood to hold down post Minimum distance of wood above earth, exterior and crawl space (UBC 94 pg 2-829) [UBC 97 pg 2-276] Manufactured Wood Products Floor stiffness, vibration, perceptibility Allowable Fb, E, Wet-use Hanger type, size and nail quantity, web stiffeners Glulam beam camber Adequate nailer thickness for top mounted hangers Prefabricated Wood Trusses Performance specification, design responsibility, seal by fabricator Bridging and connection responsibility Define loads for design, including dead load to be used, equipment, snow (Pg vs Pf), snow drift, rain on snow surcharge, live load reduction Dead load should be realistic for net wind uplift condition Specify deflection criteria, inter-panel deflection Roof slope, ceiling profile Define bearing type, dimensions, and cantilever/overhang dimensions Define "no bearing" partition walls H clips at net wind uplift conditions Show plywood sheathing below valley trusses and below "California Framing" Wood Piling Preservative treated above water table Metal Buildings Wind columns are (or are not) allowed Rebar in slab (hair pins) for outward horz forces at column bases Performance specification, design responsibility, seal by fabricator Architectural Interface Intra-discipline coordination; Architectural, civil, mechanical, electrical etc Partitions: Top of wall: lateral bracing and vertical slotted connection At sloping roofs, do horizontal or large members protrude through ceiling or roof. Parapets secure for wind, window washers Heavy items connected to structure? Brick veneer ties Cladding and Windows Performance specification, design responsibility, seal by fabricator Diagonal brace to top of windows Constructability Can it be built without skyhooks? Sequence of construction Rebar congestion Bolt tightening access Likely locations of construction joints Drawing Production Epilogue Review "follow-up list" Has information been called out in more than one location on the drawings? If so, is it consistent and/or is it necessary to show the item in more than one location. Are all section callouts cut or noted from plans? Do Specifications match drawing notes? Final Review and Plotting Issue date (updated) Stamped "PRELIMINARY, NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION, FOR BID", etc. Revisions ballooned, w/ triangle, dated, revision block description Engineer's seal and signature Heausler Structural Engineers
|
Blake
| Posted on Sunday, January 02, 2005 - 11:36 pm: |
|
Also, I've seen too many cases where the preliminary drawings, so marked as being "NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION/FABRICATION" from a bid package made their way to the shop floor or construction site while the actual construction drawings were filed away back at the construction manager's office. |
Court
| Posted on Monday, January 03, 2005 - 04:47 am: |
|
I just finished building a 138kV/13.8kV ConEd Substation off drawings clearly marked "NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION". Time dictated they be used for construction lest Westchester County be supplied by trailer mounted generators for 9 months. It worked but the local utility paid $$$M through the nose as a result of very poor planning. Court |
Mr_grumpy
| Posted on Monday, January 03, 2005 - 06:27 am: |
|
Is this a particularly American view of Engineers? I find it a trifle blinkered to say that you can only call yourself an engineer if you have a certain piece of paper saying so. How long has this been the case? It must be a recent developement, as unless I'm mistaken, steam locomotives, (which weren't phased out that long ago) were driven by Engineers! Ships have Engineers too. I realise what Blake is saying, that if you've spent the time & money to get qualified in an engineering capacity you might feel agreived that others who haven't can also call themselves engineers, but I don't see how you can disbar people from calling themselves an engineer if engineering what they do, as has historically been the case, qualified or not. I served an apprenticeship & Qualified with City & Guilds Certificates as a Motor Vehicle Engineer in the '70s. I was entitled to join the institute with those qualifications, (don't know if I still am) still a car mechanic though even with ImechE after my name. I still have officially recognised certificates that say I'm an engineer. I know I'm an engineer although I can't put PE after my name. If an animal has four legs, fur, & barks, at you, You generally think it's a dog, whether or not it has a pedigree is something else, but you can't say it's not a dog because it's not pure bred. |
Lornce
| Posted on Monday, January 03, 2005 - 08:08 am: |
|
Grumper, Think you've hit the nail on the head, here: We're dealing with the semantics of regional idiom. In my native England the term "engineer" and "engineering" has broader use than N. America's PE delineation. For example, machining and machine fabrication are referred to as engineering in the UK. Likewise, machine shops are referred to as engineering shops and machinists engineers. Much more latitude in the term and much good historical reason for it, too, as engineers were, more often than not, recruited from the ranks of trade apprentices. Apprentices who showed aptitude for maths etc. were sent off to night school until they qualified as engineers. My father earned engineering qualifications in Britain's aerospace industry after starting off at 16 sweeping a machine shop floor. One of the benefits of socialist state policy? My father, war orphaned from a poor family with no hope of ever going to privately funded university, given the opportunity to advance himself AND become more useful to Britain's aerospace industry. Just a small example of the sort of win win that sound social policy can foster. But I digress.... Lornce |
Reepicheep
| Posted on Monday, January 03, 2005 - 08:54 am: |
|
My grandfather went from a job even worse then that at steel mill to a chemist "engineer" with (as seems to be implied) "an unsound social policy". He had his 50th year with the company anniversary 3 years *before* he retired at age 65. |
Country
| Posted on Monday, January 03, 2005 - 12:23 pm: |
|
Blake, lighten up. you got a broom stuck someplace that needs adjusting. i.e. removal |
Country
| Posted on Monday, January 03, 2005 - 12:23 pm: |
|
ps I mean that in the nicest way. |
Shawn_9r
| Posted on Monday, January 03, 2005 - 01:03 pm: |
|
If you look up the word engineer... I don't see where it says you need to have a degree. http://dict.die.net/engineer/ |
Blake
| Posted on Monday, January 03, 2005 - 04:00 pm: |
|
Don (Country), "Blake, You got a broom stuck someplace that needs adjusting. i.e. removal" How so, considering that I am not an engineer? It is a simple concept really... Just like how trademark infringement dilutes the value of that trademark to its true holder, the widespread unjustified use of the term "engineer" to describes one's vocation dilutes the meaning and value of that term. I agree that saying that you "work in engineering" for company "X" is perfectly fine. The engineering group's secretary works in the engineering department. She is not an engineer. The corporations who are concerned with the integrity of their organisation no longer permit their employees who are not registered professional engineers to entitle themselves as "engineer." New terms being used are "designer", "analyst", along with descriptors like "mechanical", "structural", "electrical" or "integration", etcetera. Not all corporations have adopted this new, more honest convention. They will. Interesting how this same problem does not exist in anyway near the same magnitude in the fields of architecture, medicine, law, or surveying. I don't see it as arrogance to demand that one first meet minimal professional prerequisites in order to publicly represent oneself as an "engineer." Are nurses able to call themselves "doctors"? Can a designer of common single family residential dwellings call himself/herself an "architect"? In each case above,the professional in question may posess many of the applicable qualifications and expert knowledge, but without the proper and complete educational and professional certifications, they are not able to refer to themselves as "architect" or "doctor", are they? The same goes for paralegals calling themselves "lawer" or "attorney". The problem I see is the erosion of value/meaning of the characterization of "engineer". If anyone can call themselves an "engineer", the term has lost any real meaning in a professional capacity. Yes the qualifications for what exactly constitutes an "engineer" has changed and evolved over the years. Like other professional credentials, the qualifications have become more substantial and more rigorous. Barbers used to call themselves physicians; didn't make it wrong then, but it certainly doesn't mean that doing so is acceptable now. The "PE" is the clarifier needed to distinguish one from the other. Maybe the engineering profession should adopt a scheme similar to that of the medical profession where an abbreviated suffix is used to indicate what type of "doctor" one is, medical, dental, ophthalmological, obstetrical, osteopathic, chiropractic,... etc. I can give a darn good massage. I cannot call myself a "massuer." According to popular beliefs, apparently the public demands a much less rigorous professional standard for engineers than we do for massage therapists. I find that troubling. Especially when such a scenario remains just so we don't hurt the feelings of those wanting to refer to themselves professionally as an "engineer." |
Blake
| Posted on Monday, January 03, 2005 - 04:05 pm: |
|
Court, Don't get me started! The amount of waste generated by poor planning, haste, and procrastination is astounding. |
Dsergison
| Posted on Monday, January 03, 2005 - 04:14 pm: |
|
Well, I don't have one. and I am not one. but if I wemt to M.I.T. and got a BSME or EE the would be a degree of mechanical engineer, or electrical engineer. That would suggest to me the the person has passed the rigors of 4 years of school in engineering and as such they are engineers. they are stil not Professional Engineers with the legal stamp of total responsibility. that's what the initials P.E. are for, you get to put them on your card. on your business billboard, etc.... they don't call it a degree in bachelors of science in mechanical designering. I did go to M.I.T. morrison institute of technology. :P I got a associates in mechanical engineering technology. no engineer in that title. I call myself a designer. and when confronted with a blank stare I say "sort of an engineer" I think it's good fair and just to elevate the P.E..... whatever. 4 yr degreed engineers are never going to give up their engineer title. none that I know of anyway. that is here to stay. ---off to get another start sewn to my belly so I can be in the in crowd. :P |
Bomber
| Posted on Monday, January 03, 2005 - 04:21 pm: |
|
The number of professions that are practicing defensive naming practices is alarming, amusing, or both. Many of these professions hang their choice of nomenclature soley on a degree -- some use a series of tests -- still others use both in any event, none of these gates assure much in the way of competance -- the most humorous in my recollection is the professional society that was attempting to move itself and it's members uptown by creating a "Certification Program." The tests bore little relation to real world practices, you could pass the tests after as little (it seems I cannot use the numeral representing the value of five -- I'm sure it is offensive in some society somewhere) hours of study with the appropriate (expensive) study guide, and, best of all, the professional organization offered long-term members a grandfather clause to give em certs regardless of their actual experience (this was based on years of membership soley). (I'm not refering to the project management folks, though they ARE a prime example of a for-profit organization creating it's own profession and demand for t's products at the same time). Ah well -- it's a big deal to some -- that said, I ai'nt gonna make my own trusses to span my 30 foot garage -- I'll also not hire someone with just paper -- I'd rather someone with the demonstrated skill and experiance, if you know what I mean ;-} |
Blake
| Posted on Monday, January 03, 2005 - 04:38 pm: |
|
4 yr degreed engineers are never going to give up their engineer title. none that I know of anyway. that is here to stay. This one did and many of my honest degreed friends have done the same. Your reasoning is not sound as there is no mere graduate of a medical degree program that may refer to themselves as a "doctor", the same is true for graduates of law schools; they must pass the bar before referring to themselves as attorneys. Those who have obtained architecture degrees may not ever refer to themselves as an architect until they have met the requisite standards for BOTH experience and professional licensure. The should be true for an engineer. For some reason the public views engineering as not worthy of the same level of professional integrity/respect. It is wrong, and it is dangerous, and it certainly dilutes the meaning/value of the word. |
2k4xb12
| Posted on Monday, January 03, 2005 - 07:13 pm: |
|
Are nurses able to call themselves "doctors"? No, but they don't cut you open or prescribe drugs either. An engineer can be a draftsman, but a draftsman isn't necessarily an engineer... |
|