Structural Engineering: 2009-11-01

Saturday, November 7, 2009

RE: base plate design

Not that this will provide you with any guidance or understanding, but RISA makes RISABase, which will handle biaxial bending, and just about any other load combination you can dream up. We had it when I worked for a previous employer, and it was a nice piece of software, though it was complete overkill for 90% of the base plates we designed. It came in handy, though, when we had unusual loading or geometry. It uses a finite element model to determine stresses. After being somewhat neglected by RISA while they worked on their more significant software, I think it’s been updated to current codes.

-- Joel Adair

SHW Group

Dallas, TX

From: John J. Treff [mailto:jjtreff@hotmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, November 07, 2009 7:14 PM
To: Structural Engineers International
Subject: base plate design

Hello,
Does anyone have an example or a good reference for biaxial base plate design? AISC Design Guide 1 deals only with uniaxial bending. Any references (books, manuals, papers, etc.), suggestions or ideas on how to design biaxially (interaction of some sort or design separately for both axes and then pick the worst case scenario) would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you,

JJ

Hotmail: Trusted email with powerful SPAM protection. Sign up now.

NOTICE:
This e-mail transmission is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above and may contain information that is confidential, privileged, and/or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, disclosure, copying, distribution, or other use of any of the information contained in this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately notify the sender by e-mail at the above address and delete it from your computer system; you should not copy the message or disclose its contents to anyone. The content of the message and or attachments may not reflect the view and opinions of the originating company or any party it is representing.

base plate design

Hotmail: Trusted email with powerful SPAM protection. Sign up now.

Partial Settlement in 35W Bridge Collapse Lawsuits

*Partial Settlement in 35W Bridge Collapse Lawsuits

*Published : Friday, 06 Nov 2009, 1:20 PM CST

MINNEAPOLIS - A partial settlement was announced Friday in the lawsuits
brought against the construction company involved in the Interstate 35W
bridge collapse.

Progressive Contractors Inc. was working on repaving the 35W bridge when
it fell on Aug. 1, 2007, killing 13 people.

Hennepin County Judge Deborah Hedlund, who approved the settlement
Friday, said financial terms wouldn't be released. Chris Messerly, an
attorney for victims, says the families believed the settlement was in
their best interests.. (Read more here:
http://www.myfoxtwincities.com/dpp/news/minnesota/35w-bridge-collapse-pci-lawsuit-settlement-nov-6-2009)

=============================================================

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

FREE Technical webinar provides 1.0 PDH (0.1 CEU)

Please accept this final invitation for our FREE webinar this Thursday.

Over 1,000 engineers have already registered. The knowledge gained from
this webinar is equally applicable to any structural design software.

We will take you through the 2005 AISC specification step by step with some
practical examples. You will learn how to implement the Direct Analysis
Method simply.

By attending, you will earn 1.0 PDH (0.1 CEU).

http://events.cscworld.com/
________________________________
Matthew Newton
CSC Inc
Phone: (877) 710-2053
Fax: (312) 321 6489
Direct: (312) 233 2912
Email: matthew.newton@cscworld.com
Website: www.cscworld.com

Mr.Liaqat

Dear Mr.Liaqat,

My name is Naeem Ghani presently residing in Minneapolis, MN. I am also
Structural Engineer. I was reading your blogs on the list and wanted to add
you to my professional network if that is OK with you.

Thanks,

Naeem Ghani, P.E., LEED AP
Cell: (763)843-3198

On Nov 6 2009, Liaquat Ally Akhand wrote:

>Dear,
>
>I worked with some transition/tapered beam. FP weld is alright, but
>need to ensure that
>the joint is 100% FP. The fit-up should be good with smooth surface,
>root run should be could
>and to be checked, Gouging on other sid after completing welding on
>one side, sufficient scallop should be provided for good accessibility
>and 100% MPI and UT.
>
>Sharp nothces should be ground off.
>
>Regards,
>
>
>On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 1:38 AM, Larry Hauer <lhauer@live.com> wrote:
>> To All,
>>
>> I am working on a project where I need to span the floor beams 52 feet
>> and
>> at about half way thru the span the beam changes from being horzontally
>> level to sloping at 1/8 or 1/4 inch per foot, (going from an interior
>> space
>> to an exterior deck). I assume a full pen weld at this transition will
>> work,
>> but are there concerns I am overlooking?
>>
>> Thanks in Advance,
>>
>> Larry Hauer, S.E.
>>
>> ________________________________
>> Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft's powerful SPAM protection. Sign up
>> now.
>
>******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
>* 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
>******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********
>

Friday, November 6, 2009

Re: wind and drift

Wow,
H/20 blows my mind. I was not aware of any manufacturer that would stoop to
using that, let alone acknowledging the fact. No, I take that back ... I am
not aware of any _reputable_ manufacturer that would allow that limit as the
controlling condition.

Can we name names here?

Allowing h/20 as a design limit switch in software and designing a structure
that theoretically achieves a deflection at h/20 are separate issues.
Regardless of which element of the PEMB has design controlled at this limit,
I will guarantee that there is a connected element that is not properly
stabilized. The designer's focus is too narrow and the software is only
capable of checking what it has been programmed to check. I am not aware of
any manufacturer's software that could adequately handle that design.

Say, any more news about the Dallas Cowboys former practice facility? I saw
the preliminary report ...

Regards
Paul
--
Paul Ransom, P.Eng.
ph 905 639-9628
fax 905 639-3866
ad026@hwcn.org

> From: Jnapd@aol.com

> As Harold indicated all the PEMB projects I have been involved with the
> initial design was for h/20. I explain to the clients that because of the
> h/20 design criteria within 5 years your building will leak water for sure and
> probably air also. I suggest that the deflection lint be change to h/200
> the is happier but the PEMB supplier claims the price has now increased
> $10 -15,000 because of the more restrictive requirement.
>
> Joe Venuti
> Johnson & Nielsen Associates
> Palm Springs, CA

Re: WF Beams with F.P Weld @ Midspan

Dear,

I worked with some transition/tapered beam. FP weld is alright, but
need to ensure that
the joint is 100% FP. The fit-up should be good with smooth surface,
root run should be could
and to be checked, Gouging on other sid after completing welding on
one side, sufficient scallop should be provided for good accessibility
and 100% MPI and UT.

Sharp nothces should be ground off.

Regards,

On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 1:38 AM, Larry Hauer <lhauer@live.com> wrote:
> To All,
>
> I am working on a project where I need to span the floor beams 52 feet and
> at about half way thru the span the beam changes from being horzontally
> level to sloping at 1/8 or 1/4 inch per foot, (going from an interior space
> to an exterior deck). I assume a full pen weld at this transition will work,
> but are there concerns I am overlooking?
>
> Thanks in Advance,
>
> Larry Hauer, S.E.
>
> ________________________________
> Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft's powerful SPAM protection. Sign up
> now.

RE: WF Beams with F.P Weld @ Midspan

Paul and Ralph-

Good points!

Thanks,

Larry

Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2009 11:58:19 -0700
Subject: Re: WF Beams with F.P Weld @ Midspan
From: paul.blomberg@gmail.com
To: seaint@seaint.org

A full pen weld is fairly common and shouldn't be a concern. I normally ask for testing (either UT or mag particle) for the weld.

Of concern might be the deflection anticipated for a 52' steel beam and the camber that is inherit in the beam. A 1/8" per foot slope is small and the camber and live load deflection might make that drainage slope insignificant.

You might consider tapered insulation to develop your slope and field verify actual elevations and slope to drains.

Good luck,

Paul.

Phoenix, AZ

On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 10:38 AM, Larry Hauer <lhauer@live.com> wrote:

To All,

I am working on a project where I need to span the floor beams 52 feet and at about half way thru the span the beam changes from being horzontally level to sloping at 1/8 or 1/4 inch per foot, (going from an interior space to an exterior deck). I assume a full pen weld at this transition will work, but are there concerns I am overlooking?

Thanks in Advance,

Larry Hauer, S.E.

Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft's powerful SPAM protection. Sign up now.

Hotmail: Trusted email with powerful SPAM protection. Sign up now.

Re: WF Beams with F.P Weld @ Midspan

In a message dated 11/6/09 10:58:41 AM, paul.blomberg@gmail.com writes:

A 1/8" per foot slope is small and the camber and live load deflection might make that drainage slope insignificant.

I second that emotion, only changing "might" to "WILL." 1/8" is worthless; 1/4" *may* be adequate; my understanding is/was that the federal standard for their own projects was 1/2". Remember that the slope in a diagonal drain, as at a corner, is likely to be only half that of the main slope.

Ralph

Re: WF Beams with F.P Weld @ Midspan

A full pen weld is fairly common and shouldn't be a concern. I normally ask for testing (either UT or mag particle) for the weld.

You might consider tapered insulation to develop your slope and field verify actual elevations and slope to drains.

Good luck,

Paul.

Phoenix, AZ

On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 10:38 AM, Larry Hauer <lhauer@live.com> wrote:

To All,

I am working on a project where I need to span the floor beams 52 feet and at about half way thru the span the beam changes from being horzontally level to sloping at 1/8 or 1/4 inch per foot, (going from an interior space to an exterior deck). I assume a full pen weld at this transition will work, but are there concerns I am overlooking?

Thanks in Advance,

Larry Hauer, S.E.

Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft's powerful SPAM protection. Sign up now.

Re: Nonstructural - possible iMAC purchase

now you can load windows in iMac either by "boot camp" or "desktop parallel" any one tried for

Windows base engineering programs as AutoCAD etic....

thanks for input

Dave A

----- Original Message -----

From: David L. Fisher

To: seaint@seaint.org

Sent: Friday, November 06, 2009 10:10 AM

Subject: RE: Nonstructural - possible iMAC purchase

Drew:

My wife has a Macbook Pro and she loves it.

David L. Fisher SE PE

Senior Principal

Fisher and Partners

372 West Ontario

Suite 301

Chicago 60654

312.622.0409 (m)

312.573.1701

312.573.1726 (f)

www.fpse.com

-----Original Message-----
From: Drew Morris [mailto:dmorris@bbfm.com]
Sent: Friday, November 06, 2009 12:10 PM
To: SEAINT
Subject: Nonstructural - possible iMAC purchase

I have been thinking of getting an Apple iMAC or mini MAc for home. I know there are a few Macheads out there. Any suggestions? Likes or dislikes?
You can respond privately to me if you wish. TIA

Drew Morris

Re: Nonstructural - possible iMAC purchase

My Daughter got for school last year. She really really loves it.

Farzin S. Rahbar, SE
David C. Weiss Structural Engineer & Associates, Inc.
(818) 227-8040 Ex. 13 Fax: (818) 227-8041

In a message dated 11/6/2009 10:11:14 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, dmorris@bbfm.com writes:

I have been thinking of getting an Apple iMAC or mini MAc for home. I know there are a few Macheads out there. Any suggestions? Likes or dislikes?
You can respond privately to me if you wish. TIA

Drew Morris

Re: pull-out bars

Noy

You are talking about the typical practice like tilt-up wall panels that may or may not be stacked during concrete placement and during erection the slab dowels are pulled up from the surface to between 45 to 90 degrees creating slab dowels. Back construction days when I built 50 -100 projects with panels using this system. You could say it was the standard in the LA /Southern California area.

Still to this day I see it being used all over. Yes a better engineering solution would be to use a screw in dowel such as Richmond came up with in the mid seventies. But getting the contractor to use them was near to impossible. The cost of each assemblage cost and how to hold in place during the pouring process. They were more accepted for cast-in-place walls and slabs where you had a surface to secure them to.

Joe Venuti
Johnson & Nielsen Associates
Palm Springs, CA

In a message dated 11/5/2009 8:34:52 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, hou69noy@yahoo.com writes:

Bob,

I am referring with the re-bending embedded rebar's.

From: Bob Freeman <robert.freeman@idsse.com>
To: seaint@seaint.org
Sent: Friday, November 6, 2009 12:15:22
Subject: pull-out bars

Hi Noy:

Are you referring to a process that a threaded insert could provide? A threaded insert could be threaded to a hooked bar in the wall/column and then after the wall is poured, a beam re-bar could be threaded into the same insert. I would design a corbel to hold the vertical reaction of the beam in the second pour as well.

We have done this successfully on several projects.

If you are re-bending an embedded rebar, the second bend after the first pour would severely weaken the rebar.

Respectfully,

Bob Freeman, AIA, EIT

949-387-8500

From: Noy Tiglao [mailto:hou69noy@yahoo.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 05, 2009 12:42 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: pull-out bars

Is there provision in ACI or any standard/code that allows 'pull-out bars'? i am refering to a reinforcing bar that is bent and embedded in concrete wall/column, and then pull it out to connect/splice the reinforcing bar of a beam or slab. (personally, i do not agree with this approach but some engineering firms allow it) please give me insight. thanks.

Feel safer online. Upgrade to the new, safer Internet Explorer 8 optimized for Yahoo! to put your mind at peace. It's free.
Get IE8 here!

Surf faster.
Internet Explorer 8 optmized for Yahoo! auto launches 2 of your favorite pages everytime you open your browser.Get IE8 here! (It's free)

RE: Nonstructural - possible iMAC purchase

Drew:

My wife has a Macbook Pro and she loves it.

David L. Fisher SE PE

Senior Principal

Fisher and Partners

372 West Ontario

Suite 301

Chicago 60654

312.622.0409 (m)

312.573.1701

312.573.1726 (f)

www.fpse.com

-----Original Message-----
From: Drew Morris [mailto:dmorris@bbfm.com]
Sent: Friday, November 06, 2009 12:10 PM
To: SEAINT
Subject: Nonstructural - possible iMAC purchase

I have been thinking of getting an Apple iMAC or mini MAc for home. I know there are a few Macheads out there. Any suggestions? Likes or dislikes?
You can respond privately to me if you wish. TIA

Drew Morris

Nonstructural - possible iMAC purchase

WF Beams with F.P Weld @ Midspan

To All,

I am working on a project where I need to span the floor beams 52 feet and at about half way thru the span the beam changes from being horzontally level to sloping at 1/8 or 1/4 inch per foot, (going from an interior space to an exterior deck). I assume a full pen weld at this transition will work, but are there concerns I am overlooking?

Thanks in Advance,

Larry Hauer, S.E.

Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft's powerful SPAM protection. Sign up now.

Thursday, November 5, 2009

Re: pull-out bars

Bob,

I am referring with the re-bending embedded rebars.

From: Bob Freeman <robert.freeman@idsse.com>
To: seaint@seaint.org
Sent: Friday, November 6, 2009 12:15:22
Subject: pull-out bars

Hi Noy:

Are you referring to a process that a threaded insert could provide? A threaded insert could be threaded to a hooked bar in the wall/column and then after the wall is poured, a beam re-bar could be threaded into the same insert. I would design a corbel to hold the vertical reaction of the beam in the second pour as well.

We have done this successfully on several projects.

If you are re-bending an embedded rebar, the second bend after the first pour would severely weaken the rebar.

Respectfully,

Bob Freeman, AIA, EIT

949-387-8500

From: Noy Tiglao [mailto:hou69noy@yahoo.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 05, 2009 12:42 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: pull-out bars

Is there provision in ACI or any standard/code that allows 'pull-out bars'? i am refering to a reinforcing bar that is bent and embedded in concrete wall/column, and then pull it out to connect/splice the reinforcing bar of a beam or slab. (personally, i do not agree with this approach but some engineering firms allow it) please give me insight. thanks.

Feel safer online. Upgrade to the new, safer Internet Explorer 8 optimized for Yahoo! to put your mind at peace. It's free.
Get IE8 here!

Surf faster.
Internet Explorer 8 optmized for Yahoo! auto launches 2 of your favorite pages everytime you open your browser.Get IE8 here! (It's free)

Re: pull-out bars

Bob,

Yes. I am agree with you and this is also my point of view, the second bend weaken the rebar. Also, the construction joint is not in acordance with ACI code because joint is at the support's edge where in the maximum shear is located.

From: Bob Freeman <robert.freeman@idsse.com>
To: seaint@seaint.org
Sent: Friday, November 6, 2009 12:15:22
Subject: pull-out bars

Hi Noy:

We have done this successfully on several projects.

If you are re-bending an embedded rebar, the second bend after the first pour would severely weaken the rebar.

Respectfully,

Bob Freeman, AIA, EIT

949-387-8500

From: Noy Tiglao [mailto:hou69noy@yahoo.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 05, 2009 12:42 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: pull-out bars

Feel safer online. Upgrade to the new, safer Internet Explorer 8 optimized for Yahoo! to put your mind at peace. It's free.
Get IE8 here!

Cleaner, Better, Faster - Experience the new Faster Yahoo! Mail today!

Looking for FL P.E.

Hi everybody,

I am looking for Florida registered P.E. with some knowledge of aluminum structures.

It will take probably some finite elements analyses. Nothing standard in this project, it takes some imagination.

Please contact me privately at Jsieszycki@yahoo.com.

Thanks

John Sieszycki, P.E.

Montreal, Canada

From: "Jordan Truesdell, PE" <seaint2@truesdellengineering.com>
To: seaint@seaint.org
Sent: Thu, November 5, 2009 8:07:06 PM
Subject: Re: Limitation of Liability Clauses -- Contracting through Architect

If you were in Virginia, it would be wholly unenforceable, as the state does not recognize limits of liability in contracts for professional services. Naturally, there are groups trying to change this. If I remember my Shinnerer seminars, limiting to fee is also generally unacceptable because the actual risk is far in excess of the fee (i.e.' - it has been termed "unreasonable" by courts in the past).
I still use it in mine (limited to my fee except in the case of gross negligence or intentional misconduct). Sometimes I'll put in a basic value instead, and it becomes part of the negotiation if it's challenged.

Jordan

Michel Blangy wrote:
> My clause stipulates X amount of dollars or the engineer's total fee,
> whichever is lesser. What is the enforceability of this type of clause?
>
> Michel Blangy
>
>
>
>
>
> ******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
> * 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 ******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********
>

******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
* 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: Limitation of Liability Clauses -- Contracting through Architect

If you were in Virginia, it would be wholly unenforceable, as the state
does not recognize limits of liability in contracts for professional
services. Naturally, there are groups trying to change this. If I
remember my Shinnerer seminars, limiting to fee is also generally
unacceptable because the actual risk is far in excess of the fee (i.e.'
- it has been termed "unreasonable" by courts in the past).

I still use it in mine (limited to my fee except in the case of gross
negligence or intentional misconduct). Sometimes I'll put in a basic
value instead, and it becomes part of the negotiation if it's challenged.

Jordan

Michel Blangy wrote:
> My clause stipulates X amount of dollars or the engineer's total fee,
> whichever is lesser. What is the enforceability of this type of clause?
>
> Michel Blangy
>
>
>
>
>
> ******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
> * 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: Contracting through Architect

Jordan:

Thank you. My concern was not, at all, about the payment or money, etc. Here, I could not do a project through an unlicensed person, unless I notify the owner and have a written agreement with him. At least this is what the Board has made us believe. I could not even have a contract with a General Contractor to do engineering without involving the owner.

I agree with you. People can call themselves anything they want, as long as they are not trying to sell themselves as one.

Thank you,

Farzin S. Rahbar, SE
David C. Weiss Structural Engineer & Associates, Inc.
(818) 227-8040 Ex. 13 Fax: (818) 227-8041

In a message dated 11/5/2009 1:04:56 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, seaint2@truesdellengineering.com writes:

(Farzin...this isn't aimed at you, I just chose your post to reply to out of the several with similar sentiment)

That may not be the case everywhere about calling yourself an architect. I'm not certain, but I believe you may call yourself an "Architect" just as freely as you may call yourself an "Engineer" or a "Doctor." You may not (a) offer the public architectural services or (b) call yourself a Registered Architect unless you are licensed to practice architecture.

In Virginia, anyone may design up to 4 unit residential buildings. We contract with designers, RAs, owners and contractors depending on the conditions. We use our own terms, and everything is either due on receipt or net 15 - never pay when paid (though we have several regular customers for whom we don't charge late fees when the client has not paid them...but that's another story). Regardless, with an unlicensed designer we provide a separate structural package which delineates the scope and limitations on every page. We've only been burned once in 7 years on payment from an architect, and in that case we would have been stiffed had we contracted directly with the owner. At least in that case, the architect footed the legal bill to take the owner to court.

Take my advice with a grain of salt - I live in a small town, and everybody knows everybody else. I'm also one of only four or five full time, independent SEs for a pretty big area. We all know each other and we're all friends (professionally, at least) - your projects would get much more difficult if we all decided you were a financial risk to work for.

Jordan

FSRahbar@aol.com wrote:

Michel:

First of all, if he or she is unlicensed, the would not be an architect. may be a designer.

As far as I know, at least in California, a professional engineer may not have a contract with an unlicensed. You must have a written agreement with the owner.

Farzin S. Rahbar, SE
David C. Weiss Structural Engineer & Associates, Inc.
(818) 227-8040 Ex. 13 Fax: (818) 227-8041

******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* *** * 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: Limitation of Liability Clauses -- Contracting through Architect

I limit liability to the amount of my fee & require compensation for
third party claims. IANAL but IMO neither would stand a court test, but
the object is to discourage litigation.

.Michel Blangy wrote:
> My clause stipulates X amount of dollars or the engineer's total fee,
> whichever is lesser. What is the enforceability of this type of clause?
>
> Michel Blangy
>
>
>
>
>
> ******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
> * 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
> ******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********
>
>

Limitation of Liability Clauses -- Contracting through Architect

My clause stipulates X amount of dollars or the engineer's total fee,
whichever is lesser. What is the enforceability of this type of clause?

Michel Blangy

pull-out bars

Hi Noy:

We have done this successfully on several projects.

If you are re-bending an embedded rebar, the second bend after the first pour would severely weaken the rebar.

Respectfully,

Bob Freeman, AIA, EIT

949-387-8500

From: Noy Tiglao [mailto:hou69noy@yahoo.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 05, 2009 12:42 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: pull-out bars

Feel safer online. Upgrade to the new, safer Internet Explorer 8 optimized for Yahoo! to put your mind at peace. It's free.
Get IE8 here!

Re: Contracting through Architect

(Farzin...this isn't aimed at you, I just chose your post to reply to out of the several with similar sentiment)

That may not be the case everywhere about calling yourself an architect. I'm not certain, but I believe you may call yourself an "Architect" just as freely as you may call yourself an "Engineer" or a "Doctor." You may not (a) offer the public architectural services or (b) call yourself a Registered Architect unless you are licensed to practice architecture.

In Virginia, anyone may design up to 4 unit residential buildings. We contract with designers, RAs, owners and contractors depending on the conditions. We use our own terms, and everything is either due on receipt or net 15 - never pay when paid (though we have several regular customers for whom we don't charge late fees when the client has not paid them...but that's another story). Regardless, with an unlicensed designer we provide a separate structural package which delineates the scope and limitations on every page. We've only been burned once in 7 years on payment from an architect, and in that case we would have been stiffed had we contracted directly with the owner. At least in that case, the architect footed the legal bill to take the owner to court.

Take my advice with a grain of salt - I live in a small town, and everybody knows everybody else. I'm also one of only four or five full time, independent SEs for a pretty big area. We all know each other and we're all friends (professionally, at least) - your projects would get much more difficult if we all decided you were a financial risk to work for.

Jordan

FSRahbar@aol.com wrote:

Michel:

First of all, if he or she is unlicensed, the would not be an architect. may be a designer.

As far as I know, at least in California, a professional engineer may not have a contract with an unlicensed. You must have a written agreement with the owner.

Farzin S. Rahbar, SE
David C. Weiss Structural Engineer & Associates, Inc.
(818) 227-8040 Ex. 13 Fax: (818) 227-8041

Re: Contracting through Architect

Michel:

I am not sure what State you are in. You may call the Board and ask them about this.

Farzin S. Rahbar, SE
David C. Weiss Structural Engineer & Associates, Inc.
(818) 227-8040 Ex. 13 Fax: (818) 227-8041

In a message dated 11/5/2009 12:24:31 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, mblangy@satco-inc.com writes:

My primary concern here is not getting paid. It is limitation of liability. BTW, the "designer" I am working with is better at detailing wood framed construction than any engineer or architect I have worked with by far.

Michel

-----Original Message-----
From: Jnapd@aol.com [mailto:Jnapd@aol.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 05, 2009 12:15 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Re: Contracting through Architect

Richard

We always do. I ask for 30% startup fee in all contracts. The problems come when you finish, go through second plan check and all you have done is invoiced the client. If you have not collected at least 80-90% by the time the project is permitted you are in deep do do. That is when you find out the true integrity of your client.

Joe Venuti
Johnson & Nielsen Associates
Palm Springs, CA

In a message dated 11/5/2009 12:01:43 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, RichardC@lbbe.com writes:

Couldn't you require progress payments and bill final well before the project built – so that you can pull you're license if need be?

From: Jnapd@aol.com [mailto:Jnapd@aol.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 05, 2009 2:57 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Re: Contracting through Architect

Being able to collect money. You have no rights to sue, lien or seek judgement if you don't contract with owner.

Joe Venuti
Johnson & Nielsen Associates
Palm Springs, CA

In a message dated 11/5/2009 9:30:55 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, mblangy@satco-inc.com writes:

What are the pros and cons of contracting through an unlicensed architect
and not the project owner on private projects?

Thanks in advance,

Michel Blangy

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

pull-out bars

Feel safer online. Upgrade to the new, safer Internet Explorer 8 optimized for Yahoo! to put your mind at peace. It's free.
Get IE8 here!

RE: Contracting through Architect

Truer words were never spoken.

We have adopted a strict retainer (50% up front if a small job)
And yes, COD.

The retainer is a great concept...not only does it help cash flow,
It's a great litmus test of any client.

If you can't pay me $10,000.00, how can you pay me $100,000.00?

David L. Fisher SE PE
Senior Principal

Fisher and Partners
372 West Ontario
Suite 301
Chicago 60654

312.622.0409 (m)
312.573.1701
312.573.1726 (f)

www.fpse.com

-----Original Message-----
From: Chuck Utzman [mailto:chuckutzman@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 05, 2009 2:22 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Re: Contracting through Architect

With my simple one-man firm I've made things really easy. Only contract
with owners & billing is COD. And around here there is almost always a
final observation letter, so I hold that until final payment. Life's too
short to spent it chasing payment.
Chuck Utzman, P.E.

David L. Fisher wrote:
>
> The dearth is because most archys are terrible about money.
>
> They are afraid to ask the owners for it…and when they get it, they
>
> Keep it.
>
> I have a client that did exactly that…he got paid by the owner
>
> (who was a friend of mine) and I */_knew_/* he got paid.
>
> I confronted the architect about and called me "unprofessional"
>
> David L. Fisher SE PE
>
> Senior Principal
>
> Fisher and Partners
>
> 372 West Ontario
>
> Suite 301
>
> Chicago 60654
>
> 312.622.0409 (m)
>
> 312.573.1701
>
> 312.573.1726 (f)
>
> www.fpse.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> *From:* Rhkratzse@aol.com [mailto:Rhkratzse@aol.com]
> *Sent:* Thursday, November 05, 2009 1:59 PM
> *To:* mblangy@satco-inc.com; seaint@seaint.org
> *Subject:* Re: Contracting through Architect
>
> I would also be somewhat leery, or at least *careful*, when
> contracting with an owner through a "representative." Depending on how
> large a project is, and whether it justifies the overhead of an
> attorney-reviewed specific contract (most of mine don't), and who the
> rep is -- licensed, unlicensed, or just the client's brother who
> happens to be out of work at the moment -- such an arrangement *might*
> be acceptable.
>
> BTW there appears to be a dearth of "pro" comments about contracting
> with an architect. ;)
>
> Ralph
>
> In a message dated 11/5/09 11:40:53 AM, mblangy@satco-inc.com writes:
>
> From PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS ACT (Business and Professions Code §§ 6700
> – 6799)
>
> "The written contract shall be executed by the professional engineer
> and the client,_ or his or her representative,_ prior to the
> professional engineer commencing work,.."
>
> What would constitute a "representative?"
>
> > As far as I know, at least in California, a professional engineer may
> not have a contract with an unlicensed. You must have a written
> agreement with the owner.
>

Re: Contracting through Architect

Michel

On that side you will be labile for everything including the kitchen sink.

Only sign sheets you worked on and if your details are intermixed with Arch details circle yours in red pen and stamp within circle and state "These are the only details that were designed by Me" or something like that.

Joe Venuti
Johnson & Nielsen Associates
Palm Springs, CA

In a message dated 11/5/2009 12:24:28 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, mblangy@satco-inc.com writes:

My primary concern here is not getting paid. It is limitation of liability. BTW, the "designer" I am working with is better at detailing wood framed construction than any engineer or architect I have worked with by far.

Michel

-----Original Message-----
From: Jnapd@aol.com [mailto:Jnapd@aol.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 05, 2009 12:15 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Re: Contracting through Architect

Richard

We always do. I ask for 30% startup fee in all contracts. The problems come when you finish, go through second plan check and all you have done is invoiced the client. If you have not collected at least 80-90% by the time the project is permitted you are in deep do do. That is when you find out the true integrity of your client.

Joe Venuti
Johnson & Nielsen Associates
Palm Springs, CA

In a message dated 11/5/2009 12:01:43 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, RichardC@lbbe.com writes:

Couldn't you require progress payments and bill final well before the project built – so that you can pull you're license if need be?

From: Jnapd@aol.com [mailto:Jnapd@aol.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 05, 2009 2:57 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Re: Contracting through Architect

Being able to collect money. You have no rights to sue, lien or seek judgement if you don't contract with owner.

Joe Venuti
Johnson & Nielsen Associates
Palm Springs, CA

In a message dated 11/5/2009 9:30:55 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, mblangy@satco-inc.com writes:

What are the pros and cons of contracting through an unlicensed architect
and not the project owner on private projects?

Thanks in advance,

Michel Blangy

******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   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: Contracting through Architect

CORRECTION:

My primary concern here is NOT not getting paid. It is limitation of liability. BTW, the "designer" I am working with is better at detailing wood framed construction than any engineer or architect I have worked with by far.

Michel

RE: Contracting through Architect

My primary concern here is not getting paid. It is limitation of liability. BTW, the "designer" I am working with is better at detailing wood framed construction than any engineer or architect I have worked with by far.

Michel

-----Original Message-----
From: Jnapd@aol.com [mailto:Jnapd@aol.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 05, 2009 12:15 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Re: Contracting through Architect

Richard

We always do. I ask for 30% startup fee in all contracts. The problems come when you finish, go through second plan check and all you have done is invoiced the client. If you have not collected at least 80-90% by the time the project is permitted you are in deep do do. That is when you find out the true integrity of your client.

Joe Venuti
Johnson & Nielsen Associates
Palm Springs, CA

In a message dated 11/5/2009 12:01:43 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, RichardC@lbbe.com writes:

Couldn't you require progress payments and bill final well before the project built – so that you can pull you're license if need be?

From: Jnapd@aol.com [mailto:Jnapd@aol.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 05, 2009 2:57 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Re: Contracting through Architect

Being able to collect money. You have no rights to sue, lien or seek judgement if you don't contract with owner.

Joe Venuti
Johnson & Nielsen Associates
Palm Springs, CA

In a message dated 11/5/2009 9:30:55 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, mblangy@satco-inc.com writes:

What are the pros and cons of contracting through an unlicensed architect
and not the project owner on private projects?

Thanks in advance,

Michel Blangy

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