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

RE: Standard Practice

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Stan,

Just to wrap it up ...

A record of the calcs is a benefit to find out the truth ... Bad for the defendant only if the calcs show they did something wrong, but possibly good if it shows code compliance as an example.

I was only using your name as a tool, I am certain by your past post, that Halff associates has clients beating down the door trying to win you over to work on their projects :)

But for the less established firm or one in a competition with two bad firms along with a client who only cares about cost, the shortcuts could take place without submittal..

Now I'm done you can have the last word if you want ....

-gerard
SF, CA

>>> scaldwell(--nospam--at)halff.com 06/14/01 02:50PM >>>
Gerard wrote:

According to the "Building Big" television program, LeMessieur stated that
he was being interviewed by a college student who was told by his college
professor that the columns on the Citicorp Bldg. were "In the wrong place"
(not at the corners). This prompted LeMessieur to go back to his calcs after
thinking about what the student told him along with his knowledge that the
brace connections had been changed from welded connections to bolted
connections. Then he discovered the weakness.

Thank you, Gerard.  You have just confirmed what I wrote earlier on this
subject, but I was relying entirely on my memory (always a dangerous
practice).

Back to the argument, my point is that requiring submittal of calculations
has two benefits,

1) is the record of the calculations is on file with the city and/or client
- just in case.
 
If you are a possible future defendant, that is NOT a benefit!

2) It places all engineers on a somewhat level playing field in that they
are required to show what they checked (i.e. a minimum standard is
established). This prevents Stan Caldwell's competitors of beating his price
on a similar project because they decide to do only half the number of
calculations as Stan's firm because they are trying to save money. Stan does
a thorough design with In-House calcs, his competitor does half the number
and uses "judgement" to get the job finished cheaper or faster. If no
outside body looks at the calculation package, it's each engineering firms
responsibility to police itself. This does little for public safety in my
opinion and the client may be getting gouged.
 
Sorry Gerard, but I don't often compete on the basis of price and whenever I
do, I usually find that my price is uncompetitive.  That's okay.  Engineers
that compete on the basis of price typically do so because they have no
feasible alternative.  It's nearly impossible to accumulate wealth that way.
I prefer to sell based on value, and then to retire fat and happy.
 
I'm through on this one ....
 
Me too, I hope ....

Stan




* 
*   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