RE: AISC Code of Standard Practice[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- To: "'seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org'" <seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org>
- Subject: RE: AISC Code of Standard Practice
- From: Charlie Carter <carter(--nospam--at)aiscmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 22 May 2000 11:14:18 -0500
>... I find it baffling why the Steel Fabricator and hence the
>General Contractor should not be responsible for deviations from the
>Construction Documents. Language in the AISC Code of Standard Practice
>(4.4.1.a), if invoked in project specifications, absolves the Contractor of
>any responsibility for errors or for intentional changes as long as they
>are reflected on the shop drawings irrespective of whether the Architect or
>Engineer may have known of these deviations.
I think the language in Section 4.4.1 (in total) says that approval by the designer means that the fabricator:
has met the designers intent in preparing the shop and erection drawings
can start fabricating using those drawings
retains all responsibility for dimensional accuracy on the shop and erection drawings
retains all responsibility for fit-up in the field
sets the schedule for fabrication necessary to meet the project requirements
This does not protect anyone against an unscrupulous act, such as an intentional deviation or change, but I think this is an exceptional event that should more appropriately be addressed by a fraud case in court anyway. The Code defaults to the historic approvals process that has been used successfully for decades to protect life safety. Otherwise, isn't the fox watching the henhouse (and increasing the potential for fraud cases)?
- Prev by Subject: Re: AISC Code of Standard Practice
- Next by Subject: AISC Supplement ?
- Previous by thread: Re: AISC Code of Standard Practice
- Next by thread: Nascar footbridge collapse