Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...
Details[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
- Subject: Details
- From: John Riley <jpriley485(--nospam--at)yahoo.com>
- Date: Sat, 31 Dec 2005 10:34:31 -0800 (PST)
To me, shop drawings are the detailer's interpretation of design documents. Review provides a check on the interpretation and an opportunity for clarifications.
dave lowen <jatech(--nospam--at)kwic.com> wrote:
When designing ?big box? buildings, engineers sometimes (at least in this area of
North America) do not indicate that web stiffeners are required for beams that cantilever over columns. In many cases, stiffeners are not required but the fabricator and detailer have no way of knowing this. Some fabricators and detailers share the view that if you didn?t ?call for it?, they will not ?quote it? and you will not ?get it?. Beam and column stiffeners are a high priced item and can make or break a bid.
In discussion with a local engineer, I find his position on the matter is ?it is the fabricators responsibility to determine if stiffeners are required and supply them, if needed?. His position on this matter is similar to beam/column moment connections; the design of column flange and web stiffeners is also the fabricators responsibility. His thinking is that this area falls under the scope of connection design.
If the engineering drawings provided loads, I would be inclined to agree with this position but most engineers don?t supply them so it is impossible to any calcs. Also, the majority of engineers around here will not provide any loads when asked. I think their insurance providers tell them not to.
In many states, connection design must accompany the contract documents but for those jurisdictions that do not, what are your views? Do you leave these tasks up to the bidder or fabricator?
Regards,Dave LowenV 519 587 5797F 519 587 5138E jatech(--nospam--at)kwic.com
Ring in the New Year with Photo Calendars. Add photos, events, holidays, whatever.
- From: dave lowen
- Prev by Subject: Re: Details
- Next by Subject: RE: Details
- Previous by thread: Re: Details
- Next by thread: RE: Details