Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

RE: Re: Plan check submittals and shop drawings

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
I have worked on projects all over the US and world for firms based in the
Midwest and in the Mountain states.  And I have worked as a detailer in my
distant past.  

It is not all that difficult for the EOR to develop a standards sheet
linking a connection detail to a load that appears on the plans.  The EOR
will not cover every connection, nor will he do the connections as the
fabricator wants, but if the loads are posted, the detailer can propose
alternatives.  The fabricator will want connections that work with his shop.
Example: If he wants to use a beam line most efficiently, he may want to
avoid welded shear tabs.

Also speaking as a former iron worker, the proposed OSHA Subpart R is a good
thing.  Some of the fabricators, detailers, and erectors are already using
it.   I would hope that structural engineers look at it as an opportunity to
help figure out how to build what they have designed.

Harold Sprague, P.E.
The Neenan Company
2620 E. Prospect Ave..

-----Original Message-----
From: rlewis(--nospam--at) [mailto:rlewis(--nospam--at)]
Sent: Monday, October 12, 1998 9:54 AM
To: seaint(--nospam--at)
Subject: Re: Re: Plan check submittals and shop drawings

seaint(--nospam--at),Internet writes:
     I was always taught that plans should be complete and shop drawings are
for a fabricators use in fabrication but maybe i am missing something and it
is done differently East of California ( not meant as an insult ). I can't
imagine my office issuing plans that do not show how many bolts to use in a
     I would like to know what others think. If the EOR insists on just
a connection load and leaving the connection design up to me as the
fabricator's engineer, is this common ( include your location please ).

Yes, connection design is typically done different east of the CA border.  I
have practiced (actually it was real, not just practice :o) ) in the
north-east and in TX.  Typically I have not had to do significant seismic
design.  Consequently most beam to column connections just shear
 Since these can be pulled right out of an AISC book we do not detail the
connection.  There are two ways of giving the design load for the
 One is to give the reaction of the actual beam.  The other is to state that
all connections shall be designed for one half the shear value given in the
AISC Uniform load tables found in the manual.  My preference is to give the
actual design values so that economy in connections can be achieved. 
However, this is only for shear connections.  All other types of connections
, such as bracing, moment connections used for lateral support, etc, need to
be detailed on the dwgs. in some fashion.

One reason for allowing the fabricator to design the connections is that it
allows them to use their most economical method of fabrication, whether it
welding or bolting.  It makes the bidding more competitive.  I do verify the
capacity of all connections when I review shop dwgs. to ensure they are
sufficient for the design load.

I do recall reading in the SEAOC Blue Book this weekend about the
requirements for all connections to be detailed on the dwgs.  For simple
shear connections this would make a lot of busy work.


Richard Lewis, P.E.
Missionary TECH Team

The service mission like-minded Christian organizations
may turn to for technical assistance and know-how.