Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

Re: Plated Wood Truss Responsibilities

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Jordan-
Is that a new marketing technique?   [ROTFL] 
 
Bill Cain, S.E.
Berkeley CA
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Jordan Truesdell, PE <seaint1(--nospam--at)truesdellengineering.com>
To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
Sent: Thu, 25 May 2006 13:54:14 -0400
Subject: Re: Plated Wood Truss Responsibilities

I started a reply thinking you had done the new design, and that it involved proper bracing. Rereading your post has made me think I misread your original. So here's my second-reading take: The engineer who seals the repair should be the best qualified to inspect the work, at least for wood construction. If the truss company provided a repair, they should verify that their repair was performed properly. Of course, there is no reason that an independent engineer couldn't review the documents and inspect the work. If the concern is over the design of supplemental web or chord bracing, all bets are off...which brings me to what I was going to reply with: 
 
As I understand it, truss manufacturers are responsible for (1) design of members in the trusses (2) the proper design and application of plates and (3) the delivery of the trusses to the site. Part (1) assumes that they are to be provided with infinitely stiff, perfect pinned connections at the bracing points of their choosing and specification. They take almost no responsibility for loads (that is to be supplied by the POR), nor do they take responsibility for the installation or design of any bracing in the system. This allows them almost perfect shielding from liability for all but total ignorance of the loading conditions. 
 
I recently consulted on a project (where I was not the EOR, nor was there one - it was an architect only job) - where I knew that the architect could not properly design the bracing, but that I would not be hired to do so after the documents were sealed and gone. I recommended that the design of bracing be added to the specifications so that it would be done properly by someone - presumably hired by the truss fabricator, as normally happens in just about every other material supply/fabrication condition (steel, concrete, etc.). 
 
The truss fabricator, a very large organization, flatly refused to do the work. Not just refused, but claimed that according to TPI it was legally forbidden for them to do so. As a result, I will be charging more than my original consulting fee to design the bracing now. 
 
Jordan 
 
 
******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* *** 
* 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 ******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********