Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

Re: Metal Building Notes and Other Gripes

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
I can only tell you what we do, which might be drastically different from what others will do. Once again, we will design the anchor bolts for shear and tension, which will enable me to specify a size, quantity, and grade of steel. We will also assume a min. compressive strength of the concrete, and note this assumption, which will enable us to design the dimensions of the base plate. But the one thing I cannot do, and this is because we do not design the foundation, is make sure the anchor bolts I sized are "tied in" by some means, enabling them to achieve proper bearing and pullout values. It is my assumption that normally we are not dealing with "post installed bolts" with smaller bearing and pullout capacities. I control the steel design, foundation design is by others. Preliminary column reactions are provided prior to construction, and I suppose if the foundation engineer is having problems of some kind, he will contact us well before any steel is being erected, hopefully that is. 


Ryan Lawton
Modesto, CA



>>> pfeather(--nospam--at)SE-Solutions.net 11/27/02 08:42AM >>>
I have been reading this thread with interest.  I typically will not get
involved in Metal Building Projects, so my comments are form the "outside"
so to speak, and not from any direct experience.

The single item that strikes me in the positions / communications from the
metal building manufacturers is the point that you do not design and are not
responsible for the anchor bolts that attach your buildings to the provided
foundations.  This in my opinion is completely inappropriate.  If you do not
design the anchor bolts, how do you design the base plates?  How can you
separate yourself from the realities of whether or not the anchor bolts are
pre or post installed?  If the end product is going to require
post-installed anchors, the anchor bolt layout and the base plate need to be
compatible with the capacities of post-installed systems, with all the
spacing and embed requirements considered.  How do you know if your design
requirements are even achievable?

It is one thing to provide an anchor bolt requirement with delineated force
requirements to another engineer to enable the appropriate design of the
foundation system.  It is quite another to design in a bubble and absolve
yourself of any responsibility for how your structure is attached.  Even
light pole manufacturers provide specific base plate and anchor bolt
requirements, including size and embedment.

Just my opinion.


Paul Feather PE, SE
pfeather(--nospam--at)SE-Solutions.net 
www.SE-Solutions.net 
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ryan Lawton" <RLawton(--nospam--at)americanbuildings.com>
To: <seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org>
Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2002 2:05 PM
Subject: Re: Metal Building Notes and Other Gripes


> Keith
>
> Although I cannot take credit for these specific notes you referenced, I
can tell you I frequently add similar notes to my plans. Reason being is
simple. A note is a way of documenting who is the responsible party for a
given aspect of the building. Metal buildings have become so diverse in
application and construction materials and what the metal building
manufacture will provide has virtually remained the same, the skeleton
primary and secondary steel. So what then happens is someone like yourself
is hired lets say to design the tilt-up-shear walls, foundation, and act as
the EOR. Since It is not in my scope to  design the shear walls or
foundation, I must make clear by the way of some note that I and my company,
are in no way responsible for ANY item that has not been designed by me, and
is being handled by an outside party that I have no control over. These
notes are designed as an "eye opener" lets say, so one is aware of what I
and the company did and provided, to what somebody else does after they get
the building or incorporation to my design. If God forbid something happens
to this building, I need to have clear documentation in the court of law,
for an average citizen, a jury lets say, of what I am responsible for and
what you are responsible for. Also, there are many items, which need special
attention that I will try to document in a note form for the EOR to
recognize a potential problem. For instance, if we have a non-load bearing,
non shear tilt-wall attaching to a sidewall of my building, there could be a
problem with attachment of the two systems. Or if we go next to an existing
building, I know what seismic separation is required from my building
deflection, but who is responsible for determining the deflection of this
existing building I know nothing about, and ultimately the total seismic
separation required for both buildings. Point is, I can only take the ball
so far, meaning there is a lot going on Im not made fully aware of and I
have to disclaim the responsibility of these items. Ultimatel
> designed parts from all the engineering firms involved with the project,
and it is he who is responsible for the comparability of all these items for
correct combined usage. These notes are not meant to make someones life
hell, but to provide a clear understanding of what everyones responsibility
is and what my scope of work included.
>
> The anchor bolt issue. I can tell you that I am designing the anchor bolts
for shear and tension, but since we do not provide foundation services, we
do not supply ABolts nor design foundations to handle the reactions. For
most cases, the foundation is long been poured before my pieces of the
puzzle are sent to the site.
>
> Hope I helped
>
> Ryan Lawton
> Modesto, CA
>
>
>
>
> >>> kefix(--nospam--at)yahoo.com 11/26/02 07:44AM >>>
> I may be way off base here, and also very hot under the collar.  Please
forgive
> me if it shows.
>
> On a set of metal building shop drawings there are several notes with
which I
> have problems.  One of them reads:
>
> "In case of discrepancies between [Metal Building Manufacturer's]
structural
> steel plans and plans for other trades, [MBM's] shall govern ("Code of
Standard
> Practice for Steel Buildings and Bridges" in the AISC Manual Section
3.3)."
>
> My reading of this does NOT include metal building drawings, since Design
> Drawings are part of the Contracts Documents, which do not include metal
> building drawings.
>
> Most of these notes that anger me are clearly directed at the general
> contractor, but this standard of practice makes it increasingly difficult
to
> work with metal building manufacturers.
>
> Also, I appear to be fighting a losing battle insisting Metal Building
> Manufacturers design and supply anchor bolts.  It does not seem reasonable
to
> push design responsibility for building frame anchorage to another
engineer who
> must then interpret the numerous load combinations and determine those
that
> govern design.
>
> What I would like, if I am FORCED by an architect or design-build
contractor to
> incorporate a metal building into a building design, is to work on the
> foundations only, and ignore the remainder of the building design.  But
when I
> begin thinking this through, it occurs to me that the metal building
> manufacturer might as well do the foundation, too.  Is this the intention
of
> various metal building drawing notes and contracts: create an environment
that
> is hostile to consulting engineers?  For example:
>
> "[MBM] is responsible only for the structural design of the metal building
> system it provides.  [MBM] or [MBM's] Engineer is not the Design
Professional
> or Engineer of Record for the Construction Project.  [MBM] is not
responsible
> for the design of any components or materials not provided by it or their
> interface and connection with the metal building system."
>
> While reasonable on its face, the above note sets up a terrible situation
for
> general contractors and building owners, not to mention structural
engineers.
> Wherease is most projects we can design the building and then follow
> construction progress to verify compliance, metal building drawings and
design
> practice is rapidly moving toward forcing engineers to continue their
design
> work after construction has begun.  If there are any delays, it becomes
the
> design engineers fault (even if the blame is eventually assigned
elsewhere),
> and our reputations are reduced.
>
> So far, I've come away clean, but I'm beginning to shy away from metal
> buildings, despite their presumed cost advantages.
>
> I'm eager to hear what others, including engineers employed by metal
building
> manufacturers, have to say about these and similar issues.
>
> -Keith Fix, PE
> -Little Rock, Arkansas
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
> http://mailplus.yahoo.com 
>
> ******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
> *   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp 
> *
> *   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 
> ******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********
>
> ******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
> *   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
> *
> *   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 
> ******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********
>


******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp 
* 
*   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 
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ******** 

******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
*
*   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
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********