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

RE: Engineering compensation

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
I think one statement should be modified slightly...

"To date, most of the country manages to survive very well without
plan-checkers."

While I would not expect a plan-checker or plan review engineer to catch
every problem, I would offer that there are potentially many problems that
could have been caught but have not "reared their ugly head" yet because a
severe enough load case has not occured yet to expose them.

In Michigan, we elimate the "bureaucracy" of having a building code for
schools (in Michigan, schools are only required to meet NFPA fire
codes...no building code requirements).  To date, the schools have managed
to survive fine but then again, that could all change with one severe
loading scenario.

Another "example" would be steel moment connections.  Steel moment
connections in high seismic areas were "managing to survive" just fine
"until" Northridge.

My point is that just because things run smoothly and there are no
apparent problems does not mean that there is nothing wrong.  Who
knows...maybe the whole plan-checker or plan review engineer system should
be something used nation wide.

Scott

On Thu, 3 May 2001, Caldwell, Stan wrote:

> to be a perfect example of needless bureaucracy.  Most of the country
> manages to survive very well without plan-checkers.  Texas is merely part of


* 
*   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers 
*   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To 
*   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
*   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
*   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you 
*   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted 
*   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web 
*   site at: http://www.seaint.org