Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

Re: Plan Check (was Re: Rigid Wood Diaphragm?)

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Ben -

I got the impression that the displeasure with plan check was
at the occasionally (often?) slap-dash job done by the plan
checker, a la Paul's description of the masonray to diaphragm
anchorage with no masonry present in the design.  I have also,
however, heard people complain about being required to indicate
load paths on their drawings.  I'm not entirely clear on why
this is a problem, although it seems to me that the plan check
engineer ought to be able to figure this out either from detailing
or just reading the plans.

What I have heard called "peer review" sounds more like what
you are describing, Ben.  Few people seem to have problems with
peer review, but somehow plan check gets a bad rap.  Perhaps
the issue is something that we could better address through
specialized training of plan check engineers.  Is any such
required beyond that for a typical PE?  Perhaps a more
standardized method for indicating features on drawings?

Am I wrong about my asserted definitions of peer review and
plan check?


Charles Hamilton, PhD EIT               Faculty Fellow
Department of Civil and                 Phone: 949.824.3752
    Environmental Engineering           FAX:   949.824.2117
University of California, Irvine        Email: chamilto(--nospam--at)

******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   Read list FAQ at:
* * This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers * Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To * subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
* Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at) 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: ******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********