Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

Stamping Calculations

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

I can well understand the reason for sealing (wet or original copy) the table 
of contents as this is the place where you *tell* the jurisdiction about all 
of the calculations that you did.  I seal the cover sheet *and* the table of 
contents, and indicate on the table of contents sheet the total number of 
pages ("Total pages: ## plus cover") in the the calculation package.  
Typically the top part of my seal will overlap this statement.  (My aim is 
not too good.)

The fee that contract plan checkers get is miserable.  I don't see how they 
can do even a minimal plan check for what they get let alone look over a set 
of structural calculations.  Contract plan checkers are sometimes also 
"expediters;" i.e., developers will send plans directly to them (and pay 
double or triple the normal fee) to get the plans checked quickly.  IMO, this 
is a conflict of interest if the plans are to be submitted to a jurisdiction 
with whom the plan checker has a contract.  It also make you wonder what 
happens to the plans that are sent by the jurisdiction when the checker is 
receiving a double or triple fee for work sent directly to them.

Unless a residence is a simple box, I have found that there is a tremendous 
amount of structural engineering involved.  It always seems that there is 
*some* condition that needs a lot of attention.

A. Roger Turk, P.E.(Structural)
Tucson, Arizona

Tom Long wrote:

. > I received comments back from a plan checker for a custom house.  The 
. > local building authority sent the plans out to a company that provides a 
. > plan checking service.  I will not mention the building department or the 
. > plan checking company, for reasons, it is in the southern California area.
. > 
. > The house was a type 5 construction and was fairly complicated.  I 
. > provided a very nice set of drawings and calculations, there were some 
. > very critical connections incorporating steel and timber. The structural
. > comments, I received only 2.  One I never heard of and seemed ridicules, 
. > the plan checker wanted me to wet seal and sign the table of contents of 
. > the calculations. I wet stamped and signed the cover of the calculations 
. > and the calculations were bound when they were submitted. The plan 
. > checker seemed to overlook the real structural issues and focused on the 
. > cookbook method of checking drawings and calculations. This really 
. > bothered me at first and then I started to think about if this is the 
. > case, it scares me. These plan checking companies could be overlooking 
. > the structural integrity of a building not looking at the whole picture 
. > but requiring me to stamp and sign the table of contents...?
. > 
. > Has anybody come across this scenario, and/or has there been some new code
. > revision that this is required that I do not know of.
. > 
. > 
. > TDL
. >