Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

Re: European Engineering Standards

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

That was certainly an interesting piece you posted.  As an engineer whose had over
10 years of experience on the other side of the counter, I have yet to see a plan
that is totally clean.  Even with the experience of knowing what plan reviewers
are looking for, there is always something that they would see that I had
overlooked.  Having been on both sides of the counter, I count on a thorough peer
review by the enforcing agency if not for anything but peace of mind knowing that
a peer is able to poke and prod at my work and provide critique.

At the very least, I'm certainly glad your calcs were clean....

Gerald Caraig, P.E., C.B.O.

JohnOtt CE wrote:

> Interesting post! I have recently worked on three projects in the EC. The
> approvals that were received on the projects were standard approvals for the
> entire EC. The calculations addressed a standard structure and was submitted
> to an agency in France, checked in France and the approval issued in France
> for the entire EC.
> All of my calculations were done in Mathcad format. Very neat and of course,
> accurate. However, garbage in always yeilds, garbage out. I did not have any
> comments or corrections and the projects were all approved in rather quick
> fashion. It is rather scary to consider that the French officials might have
> simply been clerks and not engineers.
> The company I worked for submitted the plans (done by them and reviewed by me)
> together with my calculations. I never spoke to anyone from France so could
> not really know whether they were engineers or clerks. The calculations were
> done in columnar fashion giving standard American units and also metric units.
> Hard for me to believe that there was not one question, not one remark, not
> one small comment.
> I have only had four other instances of submitting major plans to a local
> jurisdiction in Southern California in my entire career where there were
> absolutely no corrections (Other than sign the application and put the site
> plan on the back of the application). This pushes the number to seven. Now I
> won't sleep too well until I can stop thinking about some French clerk simply
> rubber stamping my work. The implications are not funny. I would rather have a
> rigorous plan checking procedure, rather than what I expect may not have been.
> Then again, the calculations were accurate and so ...... why not?
> John Ott