Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

Re: Tilt-Up Wall Submittal Review

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
I presume you designed it for in-place loads.  Those reinforcing shops, and insert layouts, need to be reviewed by you.
Your spec should define that all lifting methods shall be the responsibility of the contractor, and panels shall be designed for lifting forces by a licensed PE and stamped.  "All assumptions and loads shall be clearly noted... yadda yadda"  "Designs shall be submitted to the ENGINEER for record purposes only and will not be reviewed." 
It's a good idea to look at the loads and assumptions, then put it away.  Do not return or mark any copies.
 
JDCoombs

>>> On 12/13/2007 at 8:58 PM, "Rich Lewis" <seaint04(--nospam--at)lewisengineering.com> wrote:

I received a large package of information for a tilt-up wall building I designed.  The submittal was produced by Dayton Superior.  It includes a lot of general information on tilt wall erection and then the insert and bracing details for the wall panels.  I wondering how a submittal like this is typically handled by other engineers.  This is basically a “means and method of construction” submittal.   I didn’t design the lifting procedure, sequence, anchors, bracing, etc. 

 

I don’t think I should “approve” it.  I don’t think I should put a typical shop drawing stamp on it.  I’m considering sending it back with a letter stating I looked at it, I don’t take exception to anything and remind the contractor that they are responsible for means and methods of construction and I take no responsibility for the lifting and placing design.

 

Is that how others handle it, or is should I look at this differently?

 

Thanks.

 

Rich