×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

Charge for Files?
11

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.  

RE: Charge for Files?

If the fire protection firms are going to use your files for their purposes (and read this as: to make money for themselves) I'd charge them and $200 is low!  Why else would they need your files except to help themselves - if so, then they pay.  If it were your client who requested the drawings and you had a good relationship with him and foresaw more work, I'd probably give it to him.

RE: Charge for Files?

The company I work for also gets asked for CAD 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?

2
I'd charge them your cost, basically.  I can't imagine it costing $200 to put files on a disk or email them.

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?

(OP)
As is the case in many arenas, it's not what it costs, but what it's worth.  

RE: Charge for Files?

If you charge for the files, you are increasing your liability as to their correctness and accuracy?  We don't charge at all, and send them out with the use at your own risk disclaimer, etc.

Does anyone have any comment on the liability issue?  Perhaps this is an unnecessary worry?

RE: Charge for Files?

2
I ask for CAD files from engineers very frequently.  I usually get them at no cost.  BUT, usually I am making my design submission to the same engineer from whom I get the files and who will be reviewing and approving my design.  I tell them that it will be easier for them to check my design if we are both working off the same base plan.

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?

Most specs that I have seen require subcontractors to produce their own shop drawings.  The price for the contractor to generate these drwgs has already came out of the owners pocket when the sub bid the job, they are just trying to save a buck.  However, when I am hit with such request, I create an adobe format and let them have it, or I ask what happened to their for construction set they were issued.  This usually ends the inquiry.  I would not bill them for fear of liability or other contractural issues.

RE: Charge for Files?

I give CAD files out when requested. For Steel and Concrete and any other structurally important shop drawings I specifically say in my notes they can not use them for their drawings. I reject shop drawings that are reprints or marked up copies of structural drawings. Especially for steel drawings, having an experienced fabricator redraw from scratch is a great way to catch mistakes. If they just copied, mistakes would be copied through.

RE: Charge for Files?

3
We are a E firm only, doing MEP work.  Our philosophy is that we will give free electronic CAD (dwg) files to the architect.  We will give free electronic plot files to a contractor.  If a contractor wants CAD files, we charge them $50 per file.  This applies equally to the contractor, all the subs, and any trades or product suppliers.  

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?

Our engineering firm has requests often for CAD drawings. We will send electronic files if the waiver has been signed and payment has been agreed upon. Our minimum is $100 per file with a $500 minimum. If a contractor or sub-contractor is using our backgrounds for their drawings, there is no reason not to charge them for that use.

RE: Charge for Files?

Never give CAD drawings in raw format. PDF the drawings to a well known client only when future work will be generated. $200 charge is very low for your "professional" service.

More and more clients are asking for CAD files to reduce future drafting services...

RE: Charge for Files?

Just want to make myself clear - as I read it the fire protection company (FPC) is NOT a contractor - he does not need the plans for the work he is doing which the engineering is also partaking.  I read it that the FPC wants the files so that they have the ins and outs of the building they are going to protect.  So, they are into making money for themselves - they are selling services and want information for free - no way.  If the building owner who was/is a client asks for the drawings, then, as I indicated, I would probably give them to him or nominal charge depending on how good - or potentially good - he may be as a client.  I have never "stuck" a fellow professional for information.  Many a time, I dug out an old report, xeroxed it and sent it off to the client of 10 years earlier with my compliments.

RE: Charge for Files?

I don't do fire protection work, but would assume the fire protection contractor is laying out piping and sprinklers, and finds it convenient to overlay these on existing (and hopefully, accurate) drawings, rather than start drawing structures from scratch.  Furnishing the drawing files for that purpose will problably get you a more accurate layout in less time.  IE, it is advantageous to the owner.

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?

Well said, JStephen.  Engineers and architects love for specialty subs, manufacturers, and suppliers to provide free information to them but want too be paid when they have to give out information or CAD files.  It should work both ways.

RE: Charge for Files?

Agree, JStephen; if the FPC is laying sprinklers, etc. for the owner (the engineer's client) it is to the Engineer's best interest, too, to let him have the plans (but why not through the owner?).  My take was that the FPC was/is not a contractor but is like a fire protection manager in an ongoing situation.  If that is not the case, I agree with  your point.
and hope you all enjoyed your turkey!  

RE: Charge for Files?

There is a difference (however slight) between releasing CAD files and receiving samples or other information from a supplier, specialty sub.  The CAD files pertain to a particular job.  Samples that are supplied (except for those made especially for a particular job) is supplied (usually) in pursuit of a sale or for the completion of a sale.

RE: Charge for Files?

I agree.  There is a difference between CAD files provided to contractors and other information provided to engineers and architect.  However, the similarity it that provision of either saves someone a lot of time and money.  Engineers and architects like for contractors and suppliers to tell them how to address problems and to give them specifications, procedures, and product information.  It saves them time and money and frequently makes them look a lot smarter than they really are.  One hand washes the other.  Give out the CAD files - for free, as long as it takes minimal time.  All of the perceived risks can be handled with written relaeses.

RE: Charge for Files?

I can't believe what I am hearing from some of you.  You can't expect people to believe that there is no difference between an engineer's custom designed and created drawings for a specific project, and the cut sheets and CAD drawings that a product supplier would provide.

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?

Giving an architect or engineer product literature or specifications is no guarantee that a particular product will be ultimately chosen. Usually there is a provision for the allowance of an "or equal."  I stand by my previous posting.

RE: Charge for Files?

I do a little work for small contractors in the area who build residential dwellings I sell them the first copy on paper with a disk any other info they need I give them, but they are specific as to what they need so they only get the certain layerthat they need.  (most of the contractors don't have autocad)

RE: Charge for Files?

Structuresguy, have you ever worked with the same contractor twice?  If not, that should tell you something.  But if so, you can bet that owner #2 paid for whatever out-of-the-ordinary expenses that the contractor encounted in dealing with you on the first go-around.  No, the contractor won't pay back what you save him on drawings on that one building.  But he will for sure know to include that cost (plus some profit) every time he deals with you thereafter.  If you are finding yourself in constant disputes over change orders or other issues, then you can bet that the contractors are making allowances for that kind of thing the next time they deal with you as well.

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?

(OP)
If you truly want to help the owner, copy the client (in our case, usually the architect) and the general contractor to supply a proposed credit to the owner for providing electronic files to the subcontractor, minus the nominal fee for preparing them.  The owner gets his money, the engineer gets compensated, and the subcontractor gets a more accurate final product for the same cost.  

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?

2
Elaborating on JStephen's response.
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?

This is a disturbing discussion, if not alarming.

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?

Daniel, I think the perspective here obviously changes depending on the kind and nature of the drawings that are typically done.  In my field, contract or design drawings are seldom of use in preparation of shop drawings.  The only time I've requested CAD files from consultants was to create site plans in our shop drawings- which are included "for information only".  But in those cases, the consultants didn't make a big deal out of it, it was just a matter of getting hold of the right draftsman to email the file over.  I didn't have to sign any waiver, just explained what I needed the thing for.

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?

The charging of the fee to review shop drawings "should" be a violation of any reasonable contract and is contrary to the understood principles of the industry, at least the principles I know and have always seen in print.

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?

My company charges $50 per file for electronic transfer, which I find doesn't cover the cost it takes to complete the transfer.  We use MicroStation and reference files, and these have to be compiled and converted to AutoCad before we make the transfer.  

RE: Charge for Files?

structuresguy says-"why should the engineer help the contractor make his profit, the contractor certainly never helps the engineer"

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?

First of all, Producing shop drawngs is typically not a direct expense for contractors (it is for designers because it is billable)it is an administrative expense that goes to overhead. Typically by providing the cadd drawings all you are doing is allowing some 35 year old designer to actually spend a little extra time on the weekend with his family. The contractor doesn't pay any more or less overhead, the designer simply has more time to focus on his work rather than repeating what sombody already else did. JStephen brings up an interesting point about other reports. One of the reasons these reports are provided is that if a contractor request information that the owner or his consultants have, and he is not provided with the information and later is impacted by not having this information, he will have a claim against the owner. PDF files do not provide the same information as cadd files. I don't think there has been this specific case yet, but I am sure it won't be long. Finally if the designer bills the owner for the cost of developing the drawings, and then the engineer charges significantly more than the cost of reproduction, isn't that akin to double billing, and if the contractor pays significantly more than just the cost of reproduction, has he bought any rights to those drawings?

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources