Structural Engineering: 2007-05-13

Saturday, May 19, 2007

Re: Parking Garage Occupancy Category

Daniel,
Is there a reason for the Occupancy Category III? We were designing a
parking structure for a hospital which also housed a generator on the ground
floor. When the Building Official understood that the generator was to
provide emergency power to the hospital, we had to design the structure to
the hospital's Category. When the hospital understood the increase in price
due to the increase in seismic forces, they moved the generator somewhere
else. I guess that was cheaper. You are doing the right thing: explain; but
if your owner understands what he is doing and is willing to pay for it,
that's his choice.
Sorry this does not answer your direct question,
Jim Getaz
WInchester, Virginia

******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
* 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@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

******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********

RE: Retaining wall extremes

I drive by an extreme retaining wall every day on the 405 here in Los Angeles, around the Westchester/West LA area. Caltrans built about a 30 or 40 foot high wall a few years ago, (if I recall, it was a shotcrete wall). Now I see that they are apparently adding some significant retrofit reinforcing to it.

Anyone know what happened?

-----Original Message-----
From: Ganesh Thia [mailto:gastrtr@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, May 18, 2007 4:44 AM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Re: Retaining wall extremes

Dear All,

Can you please share some experiences in the EXTREMES of design of cantilever or gravity retaining walls that you may have desiged...especially with respect to geometry

(height, shear keys) and any soil or loading conditions...

Thanks in advance

Ganesh

Re: SAP SHELL DESIGN

On May 19, 2007, at 6:22 AM, hossein mardanlo wrote:

> I am using SAP2000 ver10.0.7. It has capabilty of introducing
> reinforcement cover and layers in Area propertiy definition
> section, but there is no DESIGN menu for shells. Any suggestions?

Yow! You really are in trouble. Looks like you have to learn some
applied mechanics in addition to rolling mill design.

Christopher Wright P.E. |"They couldn't hit an elephant at
chrisw@skypoint.com | this distance" (last words of Gen.
.......................................| John Sedgwick, Spotsylvania
1864)
http://www.skypoint.com/~chrisw/

******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********

Re: Steel factory

On May 19, 2007, at 6:21 AM, hossein mardanlo wrote:

> Has anybody any kind of free downloadable source about design of
> steel profiles production plants (hot and cold rolling), including
> mechanical and structural drawings and probably design guides?
Requests like this are really unprofessional.

First, only a fool attempts to sell a design job he can't perform.
Eventually your client will find you out and realize you can't be
trusted. End of infant engineering practice.

Second, it's highly unethical to copy someone else's work and pass
off as your own, which is either proprietary to the engineer or the
owner. In effect you'd be exchanging stolen information, which
presents a real dilemma--neither of you can trust the assurances of
another thief.

Third, you have no guarantee that any 'free' information you get is
even worth that much, since you don't know enough about the work to
do it yourself or judge its quality or suitability. Rolling mills are
extremely complex projects. Material handling requirements alone for
both raw material and product are demanding in the extreme if the
plant is to be productive. The machinery is expensive, complex and
dangerous if mishandled. Making sure the plant is both productive and
safe is no job for someone like yourself, who apparently doesn't even
know how to begin.

Finally, on the off chance that you're asking out of intellectual
curiosity about the processing requirements, do a Google search on
the topics of interest. I got 1.4 million hits when I tried--that
should be enough to satisfy the daylights out of anyone's curiosity.

******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********

SAP SHELL DESIGN

I am using SAP2000 ver10.0.7. It has capabilty of introducing reinforcement cover and layers in Area propertiy definition section, but there is no DESIGN menu for shells. Any suggestions?

Thanks,

Hossein Mardanlo

Steel factory

Hi,

Has anybody any kind of free downloadable source about design of steel profiles production plants (hot and cold rolling), including mechanical and structural drawings and probably design guides?

Thanks,

Hossein Mardanlo

Friday, May 18, 2007

Re: Seminars

Just get Seismic Design Handbook by Farzad Naeim (sp?) . Great reference for seismic design in general, has a good comparison of UBC and IBC (albeit 2001 IBC, but not that the new one is that much different).

I think you'll find that the IBC transition isn't going to be a big deal. Concepts are basically the same, a few equations being different here and there slightly.

-g

On 5/18/07, Dennis Wish <dennis.wish@verizon.net> wrote:

Friday, May 18, 2007

Who does ICC really market seminars to? Recently I have received numerous e-mails for seminars in different cities being conducted for the 2006 IBC by Professor S.K. Ghosh, SE, PhD. While I admire the man for making his life understanding and passing on knowledge, I find it impossible to attend a seminar that he will be speaking at because of the total cost and the ramifications on the workload that gets pushed off.

One of you may refresh my memory as I deleted the advertisement for a new web cast or Online seminar covering the changes in the 2006 IBC by Prof. Ghosh. As I recalled, the cost of the online learning was still several hundred dollars. This upsets me as ICC has many online educational courses for non-members that can be had for about $70.00 each. Why must the cost for a necessary education in the changes and intent of the upcoming code in California require a course that is priced outside my budget or even prices as though it were a live seminar that we can attend? This defeats the purpose of raising money for the creation of such seminars by hitting the masses at a lower price. You can always make more selling to more for less (sorry if this sounds like an ad for Wal-Mart). The goal should be to help us get it right and educate us at a price that is easy to bear. Two or Three hundred dollars is an insult that seems to force down small offices in favor of larger firms and municipalities. How many engineers in India and China can afford to spend a few hundred dollars out of their income to attend the web cast or is there a discount as there is for drugs set by the economic ability of the country's engineers to afford?

Maybe it is not offered internationally (but how can this be since it is an International Code)?

I think our profession has to rethink its greed and get it down to a point that each of can tolerate. I'll go with the example book by ICC for $69 or so.

Sincerely,

Dennis

Dennis S. Wish, PE

California Professional Engineer

Structural Engineering Consultant

C-41250 (Exp. 3/31/09)

dennis.wish@verizon.net

http://structuralist.spaces.live.com

This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by telephone and return the original message to us at the above e-mail. Thank you.

--
-gm

RE: Backing bar in RBS steel moment connection

Thanks Bart. I guess what I don't get is why the stresses are not equal in each flange.

-----Original Message-----
From: bart@nbse.com [mailto:bart@nbse.com]
Sent: Friday, May 18, 2007 2:41 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: RE: Backing bar in RBS steel moment connection

For one thing, the bottom flange backing bar is located at the most extreme location as fas as stress, at the top flange it is not.

AISC 358 mandates this as well. There is a rather extensive commentary in AISC 341 which may have more information. Both are free at the AISC web site, last time I checked.

Additionally they found many problems stemming from the Northridge earthquake (parking structures being another one, which may be one reason they may have mandated I=1.25 for large structures, different subject) But there has been an inordinate amount of research done in this area. There is a Structural Engineer from the Bay area who spoke for AISC at the steel frame seminars that had been going around the country (whose name I don't recall) who was very bright, and can speak to this issue at great length. (He was also very adept at answering a lot of design questions) There are many engineers as well, who are on the SAC committee, for FEMA 350 etc, who can speak at great length about this issue as well.

I know recently AISC printed the prequalified RBS connection, someone may know of a link to that diagram.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michel Blangy"
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: RE: Backing bar in RBS steel moment connection
Date: Fri, 18 May 2007 12:00:04 -0700

As usual excuse my ignorance, but why only the bot. flange?

MB

-----Original Message-----
From: bart@nbse.com [mailto:bart@nbse.com]
Sent: Friday, May 18, 2007 11:47 AM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: RE: Backing bar in RBS steel moment connection

At the beam bottom flange, the backing shall be removed.

At the top flange, removing the backing is optional. (continuous attachment to the column with a fillet weld is required)

My opinion is that leaving backing bars in place is a poor idea, however, it is often cost prohibitive to remove them, backgouge and backweld with a reinforcing fillet.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Gautam Manandhar"
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: RE: Backing bar in RBS steel moment connection
Date: Mon, 7 May 2007 14:55:31 -0700

List members:

In a RBS steel moment connection, the expected plastic hinge is at the reduced beam section. How important is it to remove the backing bar at the beam-column connection? I am aware that in the pre-Northridge, fracture initiated at the bottom CJP joint. Is anyone aware of tests done with the backing bar in place.

Gautam

Bart Needham, SE Principal, nbse associates, inc. Office 206-780-6822 Office 805-452-8152 Fax 206-780-6683 Fax 208-693-3667 Mobile 206-300-2346 Office locations: 629 State Street #230 Santa Barbara, CA 93101 205 Fairview Lane Suite 100 Paso Robles, CA 93446 365 Ericksen Ave. NE Suite 328 Bainbridge Island, WA 98110 Mail and Deliveries: 321 High School Rd. NE Suite D-3 PMB 216 Bainbridge Island, WA 98110
Bart Needham, SE Principal, nbse associates, inc. Office 206-780-6822 Office 805-452-8152 Fax    206-780-6683 Fax    208-693-3667 Mobile 206-300-2346  Office locations: 629 State Street #230 Santa Barbara, CA  93101  205 Fairview Lane Suite 100 Paso Robles, CA  93446  365 Ericksen Ave. NE Suite 328 Bainbridge Island, WA  98110  Mail and Deliveries: 321 High School Rd. NE Suite D-3 PMB 216 Bainbridge Island, WA  98110 

RE: Backing bar in RBS steel moment connection

For one thing, the bottom flange backing bar is located at the most extreme location as fas as stress, at the top flange it is not.

AISC 358 mandates this as well. There is a rather extensive commentary in AISC 341 which may have more information. Both are free at the AISC web site, last time I checked.

Additionally they found many problems stemming from the Northridge earthquake (parking structures being another one, which may be one reason they may have mandated I=1.25 for large structures, different subject) But there has been an inordinate amount of research done in this area. There is a Structural Engineer from the Bay area who spoke for AISC at the steel frame seminars that had been going around the country (whose name I don't recall) who was very bright, and can speak to this issue at great length. (He was also very adept at answering a lot of design questions) There are many engineers as well, who are on the SAC committee, for FEMA 350 etc, who can speak at great length about this issue as well.

I know recently AISC printed the prequalified RBS connection, someone may know of a link to that diagram.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Michel Blangy"
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: RE: Backing bar in RBS steel moment connection
Date: Fri, 18 May 2007 12:00:04 -0700

As usual excuse my ignorance, but why only the bot. flange?

MB

-----Original Message-----
From: bart@nbse.com [mailto:bart@nbse.com]
Sent: Friday, May 18, 2007 11:47 AM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: RE: Backing bar in RBS steel moment connection

At the beam bottom flange, the backing shall be removed.

At the top flange, removing the backing is optional. (continuous attachment to the column with a fillet weld is required)

My opinion is that leaving backing bars in place is a poor idea, however, it is often cost prohibitive to remove them, backgouge and backweld with a reinforcing fillet.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Gautam Manandhar"
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: RE: Backing bar in RBS steel moment connection
Date: Mon, 7 May 2007 14:55:31 -0700

List members:

In a RBS steel moment connection, the expected plastic hinge is at the reduced beam section. How important is it to remove the backing bar at the beam-column connection? I am aware that in the pre-Northridge, fracture initiated at the bottom CJP joint. Is anyone aware of tests done with the backing bar in place.

Gautam

Bart Needham, SE Principal, nbse associates, inc. Office 206-780-6822 Office 805-452-8152 Fax 206-780-6683 Fax 208-693-3667 Mobile 206-300-2346 Office locations: 629 State Street #230 Santa Barbara, CA 93101 205 Fairview Lane Suite 100 Paso Robles, CA 93446 365 Ericksen Ave. NE Suite 328 Bainbridge Island, WA 98110 Mail and Deliveries: 321 High School Rd. NE Suite D-3 PMB 216 Bainbridge Island, WA 98110

Bart Needham, SE Principal, nbse associates, inc. Office 206-780-6822 Office 805-452-8152 Fax    206-780-6683 Fax    208-693-3667 Mobile 206-300-2346  Office locations: 629 State Street #230 Santa Barbara, CA  93101  205 Fairview Lane Suite 100 Paso Robles, CA  93446  365 Ericksen Ave. NE Suite 328 Bainbridge Island, WA  98110  Mail and Deliveries: 321 High School Rd. NE Suite D-3 PMB 216 Bainbridge Island, WA  98110

Re: Santa Barbara/Montecito

Adjebli@wmconnect.com wrote:
> Hello, I am registred in Colorado only, and interested to do the work
> if I find some body to stamp it in Califorina
> Ahcene Djebli, Ph.D, PE (Colorado) # 40211
What you are proposing sounds like plan stamping.

******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********

Re: Santa Barbara/Montecito

Hello, I am registred in Colorado only, and interested to do the work if I find some body to stamp it in Califorina
Ahcene Djebli, Ph.D, PE (Colorado) # 40211

RE: Seminars

Hi, Dennis.

Just be happy that California does not require continuing education. Paying for 15 PDH's per year can be onerous for a small/home office. Now that I work for someone else it is not as bad. But I would have to spend $1000 / year if it weren't for committee activities. Of course, there is always pdh.org where you can do it for about $30-$40 per pdh. But there you may end up taking some fairly tangential classes due to lack of variety. Of course, you can also take the same courses over every two years assuming the reporting period is two years. <g>

Mark E. Deardorff, S.E.

Structural Engineer

3434 4th Ave

San Diego, CA 92103

P 619.299.5550

F 619.299.9934

mdeardorff@burkett-wong.com

From: Dennis Wish [mailto:dennis.wish@verizon.net]
Sent: Friday, May 18, 2007 1:52 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Seminars

Friday, May 18, 2007

Who does ICC really market seminars to? Recently I have received numerous e-mails for seminars in different cities being conducted for the 2006 IBC by Professor S.K. Ghosh, SE, PhD. While I admire the man for making his life understanding and passing on knowledge, I find it impossible to attend a seminar that he will be speaking at because of the total cost and the ramifications on the workload that gets pushed off.

One of you may refresh my memory as I deleted the advertisement for a new web cast or Online seminar covering the changes in the 2006 IBC by Prof. Ghosh. As I recalled, the cost of the online learning was still several hundred dollars. This upsets me as ICC has many online educational courses for non-members that can be had for about $70.00 each. Why must the cost for a necessary education in the changes and intent of the upcoming code in California require a course that is priced outside my budget or even prices as though it were a live seminar that we can attend? This defeats the purpose of raising money for the creation of such seminars by hitting the masses at a lower price. You can always make more selling to more for less (sorry if this sounds like an ad for Wal-Mart). The goal should be to help us get it right and educate us at a price that is easy to bear. Two or Three hundred dollars is an insult that seems to force down small offices in favor of larger firms and municipalities. How many engineers in India and China can afford to spend a few hundred dollars out of their income to attend the web cast or is there a discount as there is for drugs set by the economic ability of the country’s engineers to afford?

Maybe it is not offered internationally (but how can this be since it is an International Code)?

I think our profession has to rethink its greed and get it down to a point that each of can tolerate. I’ll go with the example book by ICC for $69 or so.

Sincerely,

Dennis

Dennis S. Wish, PE

California Professional Engineer

Structural Engineering Consultant

C-41250 (Exp. 3/31/09)

dennis.wish@verizon.net

http://structuralist.spaces.live.com

This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by telephone and return the original message to us at the above e-mail. Thank you.

Seminars

Friday, May 18, 2007

Who does ICC really market seminars to? Recently I have received numerous e-mails for seminars in different cities being conducted for the 2006 IBC by Professor S.K. Ghosh, SE, PhD. While I admire the man for making his life understanding and passing on knowledge, I find it impossible to attend a seminar that he will be speaking at because of the total cost and the ramifications on the workload that gets pushed off.

One of you may refresh my memory as I deleted the advertisement for a new web cast or Online seminar covering the changes in the 2006 IBC by Prof. Ghosh. As I recalled, the cost of the online learning was still several hundred dollars. This upsets me as ICC has many online educational courses for non-members that can be had for about $70.00 each. Why must the cost for a necessary education in the changes and intent of the upcoming code in California require a course that is priced outside my budget or even prices as though it were a live seminar that we can attend? This defeats the purpose of raising money for the creation of such seminars by hitting the masses at a lower price. You can always make more selling to more for less (sorry if this sounds like an ad for Wal-Mart). The goal should be to help us get it right and educate us at a price that is easy to bear. Two or Three hundred dollars is an insult that seems to force down small offices in favor of larger firms and municipalities. How many engineers in India and China can afford to spend a few hundred dollars out of their income to attend the web cast or is there a discount as there is for drugs set by the economic ability of the country’s engineers to afford?

Maybe it is not offered internationally (but how can this be since it is an International Code)?

I think our profession has to rethink its greed and get it down to a point that each of can tolerate. I’ll go with the example book by ICC for $69 or so.

Sincerely,

Dennis

Dennis S. Wish, PE

California Professional Engineer

Structural Engineering Consultant

C-41250 (Exp. 3/31/09)

dennis.wish@verizon.net

http://structuralist.spaces.live.com

This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by telephone and return the original message to us at the above e-mail. Thank you.

RE: Backing bar in RBS steel moment connection

As usual excuse my ignorance, but why only the bot. flange?

-----Original Message-----
From: bart@nbse.com [mailto:bart@nbse.com]
Sent: Friday, May 18, 2007 11:47 AM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: RE: Backing bar in RBS steel moment connection

At the beam bottom flange, the backing shall be removed.

At the top flange, removing the backing is optional. (continuous attachment to the column with a fillet weld is required)

My opinion is that leaving backing bars in place is a poor idea, however, it is often cost prohibitive to remove them, backgouge and backweld with a reinforcing fillet.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Gautam Manandhar"
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: RE: Backing bar in RBS steel moment connection
Date: Mon, 7 May 2007 14:55:31 -0700

List members:

In a RBS steel moment connection, the expected plastic hinge is at the reduced beam section. How important is it to remove the backing bar at the beam-column connection? I am aware that in the pre-Northridge, fracture initiated at the bottom CJP joint. Is anyone aware of tests done with the backing bar in place.

Gautam
Bart Needham, SE Principal, nbse associates, inc. Office 206-780-6822 Office 805-452-8152 Fax    206-780-6683 Fax    208-693-3667 Mobile 206-300-2346  Office locations: 629 State Street #230 Santa Barbara, CA  93101  205 Fairview Lane Suite 100 Paso Robles, CA  93446  365 Ericksen Ave. NE Suite 328 Bainbridge Island, WA  98110  Mail and Deliveries: 321 High School Rd. NE Suite D-3 PMB 216 Bainbridge Island, WA  98110 

Parking Garage Occupancy Category

List,

My firm is part of a design-build team for a parking structure. The RFP states that the structure is in Occupancy Category III under the 2003 IBC, which results in a seismic importance factor of 1.25. We feel strongly that this is based on an incorrect interpretation of the clause "buildings and other structures where more than 300 people congregate in one area." Indeed, this clause has been changed in the 2006 IBC to more accurately reflect the intent of the provision.

We have assembled documentation showing the provision's intent, including John Henry's article in the November issue of Structural Engineer (http://www.gostructural.com/article.asp?id=1359), but we are hoping to find some resource that states "Parking garages are not required to be Occupancy Category III." Any help in finding this would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks,
Daniel Popp

RE: Backing bar in RBS steel moment connection

At the beam bottom flange, the backing shall be removed.

At the top flange, removing the backing is optional. (continuous attachment to the column with a fillet weld is required)

My opinion is that leaving backing bars in place is a poor idea, however, it is often cost prohibitive to remove them, backgouge and backweld with a reinforcing fillet.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Gautam Manandhar"
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: RE: Backing bar in RBS steel moment connection
Date: Mon, 7 May 2007 14:55:31 -0700

List members:

In a RBS steel moment connection, the expected plastic hinge is at the reduced beam section. How important is it to remove the backing bar at the beam-column connection? I am aware that in the pre-Northridge, fracture initiated at the bottom CJP joint. Is anyone aware of tests done with the backing bar in place.

Gautam

Bart Needham, SE Principal, nbse associates, inc. Office 206-780-6822 Office 805-452-8152 Fax    206-780-6683 Fax    208-693-3667 Mobile 206-300-2346  Office locations: 629 State Street #230 Santa Barbara, CA  93101  205 Fairview Lane Suite 100 Paso Robles, CA  93446  365 Ericksen Ave. NE Suite 328 Bainbridge Island, WA  98110  Mail and Deliveries: 321 High School Rd. NE Suite D-3 PMB 216 Bainbridge Island, WA  98110

Santa Barbara/Montecito

List:

I am looking for a structural engineer to do some structural work on a single

Family home in the SB/Montecito area.

Casey (on this list) started the project, he is moving on to other things.

The client is a longstanding one of mine and always pays her bills.

Salut,

David L. Fisher SE PE

Senior Director

Cape Cod Grand Cayman Holdings Ltd. - Cayman

Fisher+Partners Structural Engineers Ltd. - Cayman

372 West Ontario Chicago 60610

75 Fort Street Georgetown Grand Cayman BWI

319 A Street Boston 02210

312.573.1701

312.573.1726 facsimile

312.622.0409 mobile

www.ccgch.com

www.fpse.com

Re: Any VA engineers out there...

But for those cases, there is always "Two buck Chuck!"

Bill Cain SE

Berkeley CA

-----Original Message-----
From: dfisher@fpse.com
To: seaint@seaint.org
Sent: Fri, 18 May 2007 10:47 AM
Subject: RE: Any VA engineers out there...

Only if your clients PAY, Ralph!

If they don't, then you REALLY do need the wine!

David L. Fisher SE PE

Senior Director

Cape Cod Grand Cayman Holdings Ltd. - Cayman

Fisher+Partners Structural Engineers Ltd. - Cayman

372 West Ontario Chicago 60610

75 Fort Street Georgetown Grand Cayman BWI

319 A Street Boston 02210

312.573.1701

312.573.1726 facsimile

312.622.0409 mobile

www.ccgch.com

www.fpse.com

From: Rhkratzse@aol.com [mailto:Rhkratzse@aol.com]
Sent: Friday, May 18, 2007 12:47 PM
To: dfisher@fpse.com; seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Re: Any VA engineers out there...

Fortunately, a nice stamp enables purchase of more than one nice bottle of wine. :)

Ralph

In a message dated 5/18/07 10:39:03 AM, dfisher@fpse.com writes:

Hey...
$15.00 is almost a nice bottle of wine!

**************************************
See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com.

RE: Any VA engineers out there...

$15 for half a case???

I'm hanging out in the wrong circles!!!!

David L. Fisher SE PE
Senior Director

Cape Cod Grand Cayman Holdings Ltd. - Cayman
Fisher+Partners Structural Engineers Ltd. - Cayman
372 West Ontario Chicago 60610
75 Fort Street Georgetown Grand Cayman BWI
319 A Street Boston 02210

312.573.1701
312.573.1726 facsimile
312.622.0409 mobile

www.ccgch.com
www.fpse.com

-----Original Message-----
From: Jordan Truesdell, PE [mailto:seaint1@truesdellengineering.com]
Sent: Friday, May 18, 2007 12:55 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Re: Any VA engineers out there...

That's half a case of beer - and let me just say that the state better
not be messin' with my beer money!

And here on this coast we don't have to put the exp. dates on our
stamps. This is the same one I've had since I registered. Yeah, that's
it - it's got sentimental value.

Jordan

> Hey...
>
> $15.00 is almost a nice bottle of wine!
>
>
>
> David L. Fisher SE PE
> Senior Director
>
> Cape Cod Grand Cayman Holdings Ltd. - Cayman
> Fisher+Partners Structural Engineers Ltd. - Cayman
> 372 West Ontario Chicago 60610
> 75 Fort Street Georgetown Grand Cayman BWI
> 319 A Street Boston 02210
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Topete [mailto:dtopete@gfdseng.com]
> Sent: Friday, May 18, 2007 12:20 PM
> To: seaint@seaint.org
> Subject: RE: Any VA engineers out there...
>
> C'mon, Jordan... You can't drop $15 at Office Depot for a rubber stamp w/
a
> blank expiration date line on it?
>
> David A. Topete, SE
>

******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********

Re: Any VA engineers out there...

That's half a case of beer - and let me just say that the state better
not be messin' with my beer money!

And here on this coast we don't have to put the exp. dates on our
stamps. This is the same one I've had since I registered. Yeah, that's
it - it's got sentimental value.

Jordan

> Hey...
>
> $15.00 is almost a nice bottle of wine!
>
>
>
> David L. Fisher SE PE
> Senior Director
>
> Cape Cod Grand Cayman Holdings Ltd. - Cayman
> Fisher+Partners Structural Engineers Ltd. - Cayman
> 372 West Ontario Chicago 60610
> 75 Fort Street Georgetown Grand Cayman BWI
> 319 A Street Boston 02210
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Topete [mailto:dtopete@gfdseng.com]
> Sent: Friday, May 18, 2007 12:20 PM
> To: seaint@seaint.org
> Subject: RE: Any VA engineers out there...
>
> C'mon, Jordan... You can't drop $15 at Office Depot for a rubber stamp w/ a
> blank expiration date line on it?
>
> David A. Topete, SE
>

******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********

RE: Any VA engineers out there...

Nice little dinner with the wife.... or, a lifetime of usage from a rubber
stamp??? As in golf, life is risk/reward...

David A. Topete, SE

-----Original Message-----
From: David Fisher [mailto:dfisher@fpse.com]
Sent: Friday, May 18, 2007 10:35 AM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: RE: Any VA engineers out there...

Hey...

$15.00 is almost a nice bottle of wine!

David L. Fisher SE PE
Senior Director

Cape Cod Grand Cayman Holdings Ltd. - Cayman
Fisher+Partners Structural Engineers Ltd. - Cayman
372 West Ontario Chicago 60610
75 Fort Street Georgetown Grand Cayman BWI
319 A Street Boston 02210

312.573.1701
312.573.1726 facsimile
312.622.0409 mobile

www.ccgch.com
www.fpse.com

-----Original Message-----
From: David Topete [mailto:dtopete@gfdseng.com]
Sent: Friday, May 18, 2007 12:20 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: RE: Any VA engineers out there...

C'mon, Jordan... You can't drop $15 at Office Depot for a rubber stamp w/ a
blank expiration date line on it?

David A. Topete, SE

-----Original Message-----
From: Jordan Truesdell, PE [mailto:seaint1@truesdellengineering.com]
Sent: Friday, May 18, 2007 9:36 AM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Any VA engineers out there...

...who have actually ordered new seals based on the "change" to the VA
DPOR sample seals that say "Lic. No. XXXXXX" instead of the old "No.
XXXXXX"? I hate to sound cheap, but it seems like such a waste for the
half dozen times I actually use a rubber stamp in a year.

--
Jordan

******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********

RE: Any VA engineers out there...

Only if your clients PAY, Ralph!

If they don’t, then you REALLY do need the wine!

David L. Fisher SE PE

Senior Director

Cape Cod Grand Cayman Holdings Ltd. - Cayman

Fisher+Partners Structural Engineers Ltd. - Cayman

372 West Ontario Chicago 60610

75 Fort Street Georgetown Grand Cayman BWI

319 A Street Boston 02210

312.573.1701

312.573.1726 facsimile

312.622.0409 mobile

www.ccgch.com

www.fpse.com

From: Rhkratzse@aol.com [mailto:Rhkratzse@aol.com]
Sent: Friday, May 18, 2007 12:47 PM
To: dfisher@fpse.com; seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Re: Any VA engineers out there...

Fortunately, a nice stamp enables purchase of more than one nice bottle of wine. :)

Ralph

In a message dated 5/18/07 10:39:03 AM, dfisher@fpse.com writes:

Hey...
$15.00 is almost a nice bottle of wine!

**************************************
See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

Re: Any VA engineers out there...

Fortunately, a nice stamp enables purchase of more than one nice bottle of wine. :)

Ralph

In a message dated 5/18/07 10:39:03 AM, dfisher@fpse.com writes:

Hey...
$15.00 is almost a nice bottle of wine!

**************************************
See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

RE: Any VA engineers out there...

Hey...

$15.00 is almost a nice bottle of wine!

David L. Fisher SE PE
Senior Director

Cape Cod Grand Cayman Holdings Ltd. - Cayman
Fisher+Partners Structural Engineers Ltd. - Cayman
372 West Ontario Chicago 60610
75 Fort Street Georgetown Grand Cayman BWI
319 A Street Boston 02210

312.573.1701
312.573.1726 facsimile
312.622.0409 mobile

www.ccgch.com
www.fpse.com

-----Original Message-----
From: David Topete [mailto:dtopete@gfdseng.com]
Sent: Friday, May 18, 2007 12:20 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: RE: Any VA engineers out there...

C'mon, Jordan... You can't drop $15 at Office Depot for a rubber stamp w/ a
blank expiration date line on it?

David A. Topete, SE

-----Original Message-----
From: Jordan Truesdell, PE [mailto:seaint1@truesdellengineering.com]
Sent: Friday, May 18, 2007 9:36 AM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Any VA engineers out there...

--
Jordan

******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********

RE: Any VA engineers out there...

C'mon, Jordan... You can't drop $15 at Office Depot for a rubber stamp w/ a
blank expiration date line on it?

David A. Topete, SE

-----Original Message-----
From: Jordan Truesdell, PE [mailto:seaint1@truesdellengineering.com]
Sent: Friday, May 18, 2007 9:36 AM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Any VA engineers out there...

--
Jordan

******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********