Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...
Re: Unlicensed firms and engineers[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
- Subject: Re: Unlicensed firms and engineers
- From: Charley Hamilton <chamilto(--nospam--at)uci.edu>
- Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2005 14:31:34 -0700
I do not want to get flamed here but maybe you should reconsider your thinking. If a geotechnical engineer gives you a recommendation and you follow the recommendation then that’s an accepted form a business. If an engineering firm writes a report based on a recommendation and you review the recommendation and agree with the recommendation and stamp it, that’s Illegal? The engineering firm may not have “registered” or “professional” in their name but the calculations are either good or they are not.
Kevin - A potential important distinction exists here. The role of "you" in the first sentence is "you the client". "You the client" may be an engineer, an architect, a contractor, or the owner of the structure under design. The geotech is a licensed engineer whose competence has been demonstrated to meet minimum state standards either through passing the PE or both the PE and GE exams. The geotech is affirming that they are the engineer in responsible charge for the accuracy of the informationand its compliance with relevant regulations. "You" are not reviewing the geotech's work, per se, but rather you have subcontracted to them
the task of determining the appropriate geotechnical data for your project. The role of "you" in the second sentence is "you the engineer". You the engineer are reviewing someone else's work and affirming that you are the engineer in responsible charge for the accuracy of the design and its compliance with the code. According to the way I understand the professional practice acts to be written (at least in CA), you must either prepare those calculations yourself or routinely supervise the individual who is preparing them. This is, IMHO, intended to prevent "lowest bidder" reviews in whichthe reviewer simply stamps the drawings, calcs, etc and affirms they are acceptable without properly investigating the fundamental assumptions being made as part of the calculations. I contrast this with a proper peer review in which a qualified engineering firm reviews the work of another qualified engineering firm to provide an increased level of quality assurance on the design. I also contrast this with subcontracting, in which one engineering firm might hire another to perform specialized design on a particular component (e.g. viscous dampers or base isolators) due to the expertise available in the sub's firm. Who becomes the EOR in that case?
I'm personally unclear on that, although I suspect many firms would work outa contractual arrangement in which the sub stamps the isolator/damper designs and the prime stamps the rest. Just a hunch.
There's nothing wrong with "low-bid" selection, so long as everyone is apprised at the outset of what they are obtaining. Everyone must include the eventual owner of the property so that they can make an informed judgement about the quality of the structure. Do most people buying homes do this? Not that I've talked to. Should they? I certainly think so.This is why, again IMHO, the military can execute low-bid contracts. They establish minimum performance standards to which all designs are subjected, then require the bidders to deliver a functional prototype to demonstrate that the design meets or exceeds the specifications. Then, the selection committee can rule on whether it is cost effective to go with the low bid, or pay more for a higher-performance or higher-quality product.
That also isn't to imply lowest bid is necessarily lowest quality. However,if someone tells me they can make a cheaper house and they bill/pay their staff comparably, then they better have some really impressive economies of scale somewhere if I am to be convinced that the design is of equal quality. For example, if someone asked me which is a better car, a Prius or a Bentley, I would probably ask what features they wanted. A Prius may be a more nifty technological design with hybrid features, but it's really *loud* inside from road noise. Well, my 2002 is anyway. I suspect a Bentley is probably a lot quieter. Which is better transportation? I would argue that if they both convey you to your destination, they are equally qualified transportation.
Of course, I don't know a lot of tall folks who like riding in my back seat! It becomes a question of features and your personal confidence in thequality of the product you are buying. In the case of engineering, the "product" is both a product (design drawings) and several services
(preparation of those drawings and the supporting calculations, and assumption of relevant liability). You have to ask what the licensed professional engineer is providing you that the unlicensed practitioner (important distinction from a legal POV) isn't. Most states have ruled that, for the protection of the public who are generally unfamiliar with the finer points of engineering design, alicense is required to certify that you have demonstrated competence to execute the services I outlined above. Would you advocate using an unlicensed contractor? What if they were half the price? What if a licensed contractor offered to come through and look at all of the construction after it was complete? Personally, I would be as uncomfortabe with such a scenario as I would be with hiring a licensed engineer to stamp calcs and drawings for which they had not provided routine supervision.
Just my $0.02, Charley -- Charles Hamilton, PhD EIT PGR and Lecturer Department of Civil and Phone: 949.824.3752 Environmental Engineering FAX: 949.824.2117 University of California, Irvine Email: chamilto(--nospam--at)uci.edu ******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* *** * 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 ******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********
- RE: Unlicensed firms and engineers
- From: Kevin Polin
- RE: Unlicensed firms and engineers
- Prev by Subject: RE: Unlicensed firms and engineers
- Next by Subject: RE: Unlicensed firms and engineers
- Previous by thread: RE: Unlicensed firms and engineers
- Next by thread: Re: Unlicensed firms and engineers