Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

Re: Permit Requirement Question

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Robert McGhie wrote:
> ... but isn't asking the truss engineer to
> design the anchors asking him or her to design a part of the building that
> the truss company will not furnish and will be installed by a contractor
> totally beyond their control? 

Sure, but isn't that what I do every day - design and specify items of
construction that I'm not supplying and which will be installed by a contractor
that I don't even know who it will be?

> What happens when the truss designer changes a
> member in your building because of the connection design? 

A truss designer won't change a building member in *my* design.  I might
consider revising *my* design if he/she asks and convinces me it's for the good
of the project, including all the financial aspects that would come into play. 

> The same goes for
> anchor bolts which are dependant upon the concrete strength you select and
> the edge distance your footing design provides. I have always felt that it
> was the responsibility of the engineer for the manufacture of the
> pre-engineered building to insure the anchor bolts had adequate capacity in
> the base plates while it was the responsibility of the engineer of record
> for the building to insure that the anchor bolts had adequate capacity in
> the concrete footing.

A little bit of gray area here, but remember that "The engineer of record is
responsible for the effects of the delegated components upon the [foundation]." 
So I would expect the pre-engineered building engineer to design the anchor
bolts for the concrete strength and edge distance I've shown on my Foundation
Plan.  If embedded shear plates or hairpins are needed then I agree that's my
area of responsibilty.

> Both of these examples provide good reason for the building department to
> require complete plans and calcs and not allow deferred submittals. Deferred
> submittals create planchecking inefficiencies, increase the possibility of
> error and increase the planchecking time, which everyone will then complain
> about.

No argument here from me, but the time required to get the delegated components
designed and ready for permit application could delay that application and
construction by up to 2 months (on average perhaps one month).  'Time is money'
and the inefficiencies of deferred submittals might easily be offset my the lost
income of say a rental unit that can't be rented because it doesn't exist until
2 months in the future.

I want to design the best buildings I can and of the highest quality and I want
them to be constructed to that same high level of quality, and am always looking
for ways to do that that are economical and structurally sound.  That's one of
the great benefits of this ListServer.

Best regards,

Lew Midlam, PE