Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...
Fwd: Re: building code minimums for wood frame[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- To: addseaoc(--nospam--at)euken.com
- Subject: Fwd: Re: building code minimums for wood frame
- From: rlewis(--nospam--at)techteam.org (Richard Lewis)
- Date: 30 Jul 1997 14:47:05 GMT
tarek wrote: > > I have always thought that the lack of a standard of engineering is > THE biggest problem we have.A few years back ( 1991?)I was elated when > seosc started discussions to come up with a standard of care for different > types of buildings.however that died quickly .I dont think any reputable > engineer is > afraid of competetion, however when you lose work to that guy that > charged the $500. for the calc and sketch you get mad. now mind you that > guy will make more money than any one on this net, reason being > he will calc 3 or 4 beams and the rest are similar plus two shear > walls and the rest o.k by inspection, red marks a floor plan, he attaches > his circa 1980's typical standard sheets and 4 hours later he got 500 > bucks. > so you see it is not the chevy or the benz it is rather the field > that is not level. > > Tarek Mokhtar > consulting engineer( 1.2 on the cynical scale ) > When I originally posed the question, I wasn't trying to propose more government regulations or fee fixing. I do think that some regulations can be improved. Arizona has much more stringent regulations than California with regards to who can do what. For example, in every other state where I've applied for reciprocity, I've had to get two licenses: Civil and Structural. In Arizona, I have "only" a Structural license. That's because I've never done anything Civil in my life!!! In AZ, Architects do Architecture, Structural Engineeers do Structural Engineering and Civil Engineers do Civil Engineering. This is a state where they only have seismic zone 2B! Now, in California, we have zones 3 and 4, over 30 million people, billions and billions of dollars of property improvements and a significant amount of construction potential near fault zones. But, you can get a Civil degree, get two years of experience (I think that's changing to 4), and you can stamp and sign plans for just about anything short of schools, hospitals and buildings over 160 feet in height. In the free market vein, I agree with a lot of what Lynn Howard said. The only problem is that we are forced into building a Cadillac when a new code regulation comes out that complicates the analysis. How much time has it added to our wood framed projects when NDS changed the CF factors for different sizes of lumber? Even putting a steel frame around a garage door opening has become a pain. These issues (and many, many more) drive up design time even if all we are trying to do is to apply due diligence; not build a caddy. I think that it would be very productive if someone (like SEAOC) would publish a guideline showing how much time is reasonable to perform or that should be spent to apply an adequate level of due diligence. That should provide us with our lower limit when we are dropping our fees to get work. That way, when we are presented with a project to match another bid of $500 for a single story "calc and sketch", we can confidently respond with something like "I'm sorry, but, even with a discounted hourly rate, I cannot apply the due diligence as recommended by the Structural Engineers Association".. or something like that. It would also be interesting to see more constructive suggestions along with the complaining. There appears to be enough interest in this topic for all of us to participate in some informal surveys. I'm not trying to set any rules here(to: Dennis Mc.), but if the format was conducive to an informal survey, then I believe someone can collect the ayes/nays to particular topics and relay them to the appropriate organization(s). For example, I believe the Structural Engineers Association can/should do more to improve the practicing engineer's business practice. This would include (but not limited to) tighten the B&P code as to who can practice structural engineering, provide seminars on business and legal issues and consider some public awareness campaigns to educate the public about the importance of the role of a structural engineer on a construction project. Are there any ayes or nays out there? Regards, Bill Allen --- Internet Message Header Follows --- Received: from server1.seaoc.org (bqe.com [18.104.22.168]) by host1.texramp.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id KAA12486 for <rlewis(--nospam--at)techteam.org>; Sun, 2 Mar 1997 10:05:52 -0600 (CST) Received: from darius.concentric.net by server1.seaoc.org (NTList 3.02.10) id ta005167; Sun, 2 Mar 1997 08:02:18 -0800 Received: from newman.concentric.net (newman.concentric.net [22.214.171.124]) by darius.concentric.net (8.8.5/(97/02/12 3.22)) id KAA10991; Sun, 2 Mar 1997 10:59:37 -0500 (EST) [1-800-745-2747 The Concentric Network] Errors-To: <ballense(--nospam--at)concentric.net> Received: from BAllen (61027d0004la.concentric.net [126.96.36.199]) by newman.concentric.net (8.8.5) id KAA03179; Sun, 2 Mar 1997 10:59:35 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <3319A3B9.4EA3(--nospam--at)concentric.net> Date: Sun, 02 Mar 1997 07:58:49 -0800 From: Bill Allen <ballense(--nospam--at)concentric.net> Reply-To: seaoc(--nospam--at)seaoc.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: seaoc(--nospam--at)seaoc.org Subject: Re: building code minimums for wood frame References: <email@example.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Error-To: seaoc-ad(--nospam--at)seaoc.org X-Loop: seaoc(--nospam--at)seaoc.org X-Info: [SEAOC] Owner: seaoc-ad(--nospam--at)seaoc.org X-POP3-Rcpt: seaoc-ad(--nospam--at)seaoc.org X-Sender: seaoc-ad(--nospam--at)seaoc.org Precedence: list X-ListMember: rlewis(--nospam--at)techteam.org [seaoc(--nospam--at)seaoc.org] __________________________________________________ Richard Lewis, P.E. Missionary TECH Team rlewis(--nospam--at)techteam.org The service mission like-minded Christian organizations may turn to for technical assistance and know-how.
- Prev by Subject: Fwd: Re: building code minimums for wood frame
- Next by Subject: Fwd: Re: building code minimums for wood frame
- Previous by thread: Fwd: Re: building code minimums for wood frame
- Next by thread: Fwd: Re: building code minimums for wood frame