Charge for Files?
Charge for Files?
(OP)
We get calls from fire protection companies asking us to send them our CAD files. We have had some discussions on whether we should bill them for this service, typically a nominal fee of $200 or so, depending on how many files, etc. Invariably, we get resistance from them when they hear we want to charge a fee.
This leads me to wonder how many others out there are charging fees for drawing files. Do you charge and why or why not?
Thanks.
This leads me to wonder how many others out there are charging fees for drawing files. Do you charge and why or why not?
Thanks.






RE: Charge for Files?
RE: Charge for Files?
I work for an A/E firm so it may be different for strictly engineering companies. Our view is that we give the files to fellow professionals or contractors/suppliers who are on the particular job. If we charge these entities, the fees ultimately come out of the owner's pocket (our client). We include a disclaimer on the drawings about use, property, dimensions, logos, professional stamps, etc. (like they are enforceable). By allowing the use of the CAD files it will also save time for the people we give them to.
RE: Charge for Files?
The idea that they are going to make money, so stick it to them, is counter productive. And, yes, there are engineers that think like that. It translates as "Let's punish this contractor for nothing, then wonder why they bid high on our work in the future". It doesn't take long to figure out which engineers (and which owners) are easy to work with, and which ones are not.
RE: Charge for Files?
RE: Charge for Files?
Does anyone have any comment on the liability issue? Perhaps this is an unnecessary worry?
RE: Charge for Files?
I will sign their waiver. I'll let them remove any title block information they desire. They can and do take off their names and seals. I clean up the drawing to remove unneeded details, layers, etc..
If they want to charge me for the drawing, I tell them to keep their plans and I'll do my own. Then I let the owner know that the engineer is not being cooperative at the owner's expense. Then, I may scan the drawing and trace the needed portions for my drawing. Or, I'll just draw my own with only the neede details.
RE: Charge for Files?
RE: Charge for Files?
RE: Charge for Files?
Too often we have seen our electronic backgrounds under the fire protection or concrete suppliers shop drawings. Even to the point where we have had concrete shop drawings come in with our exact details on them. They didn't even bother to fix typos, just cut and paste.
So if they are going to make money by using our CAD files, we are going to charge them. After all, whatever they copy is time and effort spent on their part not drafting it all from scratch.
That siad, I personally don't think we should ever give anyone our electronics. If someone wants a copy of our drawings, we shoudl send either hard copy or plot files. One of the big downsides in the laziness is the lack of the checking process which comes from a rebar detailer laying out a concrete floor from scratch, etc... Another set of eyes, and a trained mind, can catch things during their shop drawing creation process, which might have been missed, or at least unclear, on the contract drawings.
RE: Charge for Files?
RE: Charge for Files?
More and more clients are asking for CAD files to reduce future drafting services...
RE: Charge for Files?
RE: Charge for Files?
There seems to be a perception that contractors just somehow make money pop out of the air. Every penny a contractor brings in is coming from the owners on different jobs. Any line of action that generally costs contractors money means the owners pay more. Any line of action that saves contractors money will in the long run save the owners money. We do have occasional dealings with engineers that will go out of their way to cost contractors money. As time goes on, the owners they work for begin paying through the nose for any work. We are currently dealing with one such situation, though I hear the engineers in question have lost their contract with the owner.
The same situation exists in regards to the original plan fees for contract documents, liquidated damages for completion, and a number of other issues.
It might be worthwhile to turn this question around. We have consulting engineers who ask us for sample drawings, specifications, etc. Should we charge them $100 a file? (Typical shop drawings are about 25 files). In most cases, they would not be willing to pay. But the cost to us to furnish these details is nominal, and the result of furnishing them is more accurate drawings and a sense of goodwill, so we furnish, and will continue to furnish, drawing files when requested, and at no charge.
RE: Charge for Files?
RE: Charge for Files?
RE: Charge for Files?
RE: Charge for Files?
RE: Charge for Files?
If they want to sell their product, then they absolutely must give out drawings and specs, for free, to the people who are specifiying their product. THere is no way around that. It is a fact.
However, their is no good reason, other than cost, that I should ever give out CAD files to a sub contractor or product supplier. They get hard copy drawings, if they require them.
And don't try to fool anybody that this is costing the contractor money, and hence, also the owner. The contractor is saving money by paying me to draw up his backgrounds, that is why he is willing to pay $50-$100 per file in CAD format. If he was not saving money, he would not pay. Plain and simple. Besides, by the time I get requested for drawings, the contract is already awarded. The contractor has already agreed upon a price to do the job, and is now looking to save every dollar he can. Not for the owner, but for himself. Let me repeat that. NOT FOR THE OWNER.... In a typical design/bid/build, the contrator is not going to give any money left over back to the owner. Next thing I am going to hear we should be doing construction admin work for free, like RFI and shop drawing reviews.
Why should the engineer help the contractor make his profit, the contractor certainly never helps the engineer. Every chance they get, they try for change orders or claim damages. Hell, there are even books published specifically to show contractors how to find and exploit change orders. Not to mention the law firms whose sole purpose is construction claims.
I may sound bitter when it comes to dealing with contractors, but I have seen very little reason not to be bitter. The system puts the largest portion of resposibility, and ultimately blame, on the engineer, but rewards him with the lowest piece of the pie. Hell, even teh real estate agent who sells the building makes more than the engineer who designed it.
RE: Charge for Files?
RE: Charge for Files?
RE: Charge for Files?
Part of the increased cost will be in people actually increasing their bid prices. Part of the cost will be that certain contractors simply won't bid your work anymore. So the average price you pay for work will go up.
I disagree with your assertion that the contractor never helps the engineer. Yes, there are some engineers with a bad attitude that I wouldn't be willing to do much for. And there are some engineers where you just can't tell them anything. But generally contracting (and engineering) requires a certain amount of cooperative spirit among the parties involved, before, during, and after the construction work. And most of the consulting engineers that I deal with are pretty reasonable people.
RE: Charge for Files?
This approach has the added effect of exposing the motive for the subcontractor's request. One who is doing it for the good of the project, it seems to me, will gladly accept. The one who is looking to make a lazy buck, probably won't. At least that's been my experience.
RE: Charge for Files?
If you're not willing to allow sub-contractors to use your CAD drawings you should have it spelled out specifically in your specs so the subs can add in the additional fees associated with the cost of reproducing your drawings and to prevent delays when you later send back their drawings with instructions to redraw them.
Also, you should be prepared to reimburse the sub who points out any errors in your drawings or finds any issues specifically left out. I'm not saying they will, just they have the right to. It's a two way street. If you're going to bill me for using your drawings, don't ask why I send you a bill for designing the connections of your steel or for repairing errors and omissions from your drawings.
Look at it this way. If you asked another engineering firm to review your drawing for errors, do you think they would do it for free? Why should the subs? See where the cooperation breaks down. And then it is the owner who pays. He pays through delays in completion.
I agree the sub should sign a release and should remove any specific data not relavent to his field.(i.e. erection drawings should not have metal stud designations on their drawings) but forcing him to reproduce what has already been done is time consuming and counter productive.
RE: Charge for Files?
The manner and mindset in which design documnets and construction documents are very different in my mind.
Arguably, the concepts and execution of the past where projects came to a full design state, and where then issued for construction with the appropriate time for shop drawings to be produced and reviewed have changed with todays timelines and design methods. However, as an engineer within a construction firm, I wouldn't dream of trying to go around the production of shop drawings by reusing the contract documents in a shop drawing.
In my experience, contract drawings are used to convey the thoughts and general details and requirements of a design. They are not assumed to be a scalable set of plans used for construction, as least not in a commercial construction environment.
There are countless "invisible" errors in herent in a modern rush to print design. Does this mean the design is inadequate, NO! The printed dimensions and associated sections typically convey the requirements needed to execute the design once properly interpreted. Forced dimensions, non orthogonal "parallel lines" and a multitude of other problems can mask errors such that they look excellent on the screen and on paper, but can lead to dimensions errors large enough to affect production when executed.
Not all contractors are trying to steal off your plate or insult your drawings with a review. When an error I find saves my company time, it saves us money, the contractor money, the owner money and the engineer money.
Now if I could bill for the mistakes I have found, or for the good intentions gone wrong with regard to constructability, I would have retired as an intern.
For the most part, I don't really want the electronic drawings. It brings way to much liability into my own office as once that electronic file leaves the engineer, I really can't hold him responsible for differences with his drawings. I suppose a read only version could at least be a benchmark for what was issued, but transferring electronic files for items of a structural or life safety nature is irresponsible in my mind, when the files are used to replace production of proper shop drawings.
As for sharing files for coordination purposes, I am willing to do it as asked my the owner and general contractor, but only with full release and hold harmless agreements. If I pay a full-time draftsman to produce shop drawings, why should I give them away?
There may be fields and areas where the Structural drawings are the final word and no review of constructability is required, but I've not seen it that way.
Additionally, if a subcontractor cannot complete the requirements expected in a typical specification, how did said sub qualify to bid?
Is this a regional thing? I am in the southeast. I expect to create shop drawings on every job we work on.
Any more perspectives?
Daniel
RE: Charge for Files?
I can see how in the layout of a sprinkler system, it would be very convenient to have CAD drawings that had all the structural/ electrical, etc., laid out on them- everything that you either attached to or had to dodge around. If those drawings existed (and assuming they were reasonably complete, coherent, correct, to scale, etc.), then that would bring about the set of circumstances that has been discussed above.
It seems to me that the trend is toward this idea of shared drawings, rather than away from it. At least the CAD companies seem proud of their products that enable a foreman on the jobsite to pull up a detail from a structural drawing. They do have CAD viewers specifically for this purpose.
Here in the last few years, I have worked on a number of bids where all the documentation was given in electronic form. In some cases, it is CAD drawings directly, in other cases, .pdf files. The most recent such case was for the US Navy.
You asked the question, "If I pay a draftsman to produce shop drawings, why should I give them away?" The catch in this case is that the consulting engineer has already been paid by the owner to produce those drawings. Certainly the consultant can pocket more money by charging whatever the market will bear. But is that action in the best interests of the client?
A similar circumstance comes up in the furnishing of soils reports, or working documents for construction. Why not charge the contractor hundreds or thousands of dollars for these, as well? The usual practice is to furnish these items free, or at the cost of reproduction. I think most owners would recognize that whatever overcharges they were to put on those items would simply get added to their project costs in the future.
Let's change the circumstances a bit for comparison. Suppose you are the contractor on a job, you draw up your shop drawings, and hand them over to the consultant. He then tells you, "It will cost you $5,000 for me to review your shop drawings." What's wrong with the picture? The consultant makes money on the deal, plus the owner also pays him to review the same shop drawings. The contractor has already bid and is stuck with his bid, so it doesn't cost the owner anything extra. Yet, it's obvious that there is a problem, and the net result would simply be to drive prices up for any other future clients of that engineer.
RE: Charge for Files?
So yes, that puts the engineer in a bad position.
Getting back to the topic, where we decide to release cad files, we typically do not charge for the services, however, the drawings are released to non-structural trades who in all likelihood could obtain the structural drawings, but often consider our formwork drawings a more current and real set of construction documents.
Often times the attitude and pecieved intent of the contractor asking for the files will dictate whether or not the files are shared. Additionally, the contractual obligations must be met, but I have not read a contract that states electronic files become the property of the owner/contractor.
I certainly don't disagree that good communication and collaboration should be vital goals of any engineering venture, but how far beyond one's contractual obligation should one go to be a team player?
I have worked on jobs where once we released some files, we were hounded about when the next level would be sent, can we go ahead and make a revision a few floors up and so on. AND I have also had general contractors decide we should act as there personal drafting team where that is completely inappropriate. This can be a very grey area and very subjective, but where do you draw the line?
Daniel
RE: Charge for Files?
RE: Charge for Files?
I can see how approaching a job with that attitude, might become a self fufilling prophecy. We prefere to work in an enviroment with a little more mutual respect. And that makes for repeat work for everyone.
JTMcC.
RE: Charge for Files?