Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

Re: Incompetent Plan Checker -- Was: Ceiling deflection damage caused by exc...

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Just to put in my 2 cents:
As history has shown, one should not and cannot rely on the plan checker.
I appreciate a good plan check (or should I call it Plan review) with constructive "corrections", however most of the time that is not the case.
What I really hate is receiving a "pre-printed" correction sheet with  items circled by the plan checker. Either he/she is
a) Inexperienced and circles items to broaden his/her  knowledge (on my time and dime) or
b) He/she circles items that are clearly shown on the submitted calculations and/or drawings, or
c)  His/her command of the English language is very poor and circles items on the correction sheet which may have a word or "_expression_" in it that he is looking for.
I believe, that plan corrections should be "clearly" (legibly) hand written or typed by the checker, this way he hopefully can address his real question.
That sad part is that we have to answer to or comment on every "correction".
In regards to "incompetent" I too use this word for licensed engineers to whom structural plan review is farmed out by a Bldg. Dept. and apparently just "rubberstamp" the drawings, ignore the submitted calculations that are full of grave mistakes (to the tune that the structure would even collapse if built as "approved") and use the excuse that they are not being paid enough and that only the EOR is responsible for the drawings and calculations.  "Professionals" like this (checker and EOR) should be reported to the State Board.
Antonio S. Luisoni
Consulting Structural Engineer