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]
Maybe I misunderstood the situation. I thought this was about having the
truss supplier review field modifications for adequacy, not reviewing to
confirm correct installation.

I make money doing field reviews for owner/contractor and prefer that
the component manufacturers don't come to the site for "free".

On the other hand, I have had component manufacturers pay me to observe
conditions when their product is claimed to be deficient. I become their
legal veil, so to speak.


> From: "Gary Hodgson & Associates" <ghodgson(--nospam--at)>

> responsibility of the building designer.  The truss people may want to
> hide from the responsibility of what goes on in the field
> but they have to ensure that their product is installed in accordance
> with the design and that may entail going out to the field.
> Another trade that does this are pre-cast panel suppliers who will go
> out to ensure that these are properly installed.
> Gary
> Paul Ransom wrote:
> >> From: "Gary Hodgson & Associates" <ghodgson(--nospam--at)>
> >> To: <seaint(--nospam--at)>
> >> Subject: Re: Plated Wood Truss Responsibilities

> >> I would take issue with that.  Up here, I know of no law forbidding the
> >> truss manufacturer from designing bracing.
> >>
> >> Sounds like something cooked up by the TPI to cover their collective butts.

> >> On 25 May 2006 at 13:54, Jordan Truesdell, PE wrote:

> >>> 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.

> >
> > They have to be careful about the scope of work that they accept. If
> > they step over the line from manufacturer to engineering consultant,
> > their legal position changes and they may not have the proper conditions
> > in place to provide that service (e.g. licenses, insurance, etc.). This
> > includes reviewing remedial work (e.g. somebody else's design) that does
> > not conform to their original design.

R. Paul Ransom, P. Eng.
Burlington, Ontario, Canada
<mailto:ado26(--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: 
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********