IBC vs. design build
IBC vs. design build
(OP)
I have heard it said that many industry experts agree that the project delivery method known as "design build" is the most profitable for non-residential construction. This makes me wonder why the IBC address doesn't specifically address this delivery method with regard to Chapter 17 Special Inspections. Any ideas?
I am a special inspector. At design-build project that I visit the contractor pretends that the phrase "design-build" is code, no pun intended, for "we can ignore the code whenever we want because this project is design-build". At this particular project the design/build team acts as the project manager is the current owner of the project and my client. They sub some of the trades (speciality stuff) but the prime contractor does the vast majority of the work.
The client has an on-site rep who told me that my deficiency reports although lengthy and accurate may cause him to get fired. He asked if I could "ease up and put some happiness" into the reports. If that's not the kind of pressure that the code sought to eliminate by requiring owners of projects, not contractors, to hire the inspectors I don't know what is.
I am a special inspector. At design-build project that I visit the contractor pretends that the phrase "design-build" is code, no pun intended, for "we can ignore the code whenever we want because this project is design-build". At this particular project the design/build team acts as the project manager is the current owner of the project and my client. They sub some of the trades (speciality stuff) but the prime contractor does the vast majority of the work.
The client has an on-site rep who told me that my deficiency reports although lengthy and accurate may cause him to get fired. He asked if I could "ease up and put some happiness" into the reports. If that's not the kind of pressure that the code sought to eliminate by requiring owners of projects, not contractors, to hire the inspectors I don't know what is.





RE: IBC vs. design build
Dik
RE: IBC vs. design build
In most DB situations the contractor is also in charge of quality control/quality assurance. Thus special inspection is his to deal with.
Regards,

Qshake
Eng-Tips Forums:Real Solutions for Real Problems Really Quick.
RE: IBC vs. design build
It totally depends upon two things - the quality of the contractor you are teamed with, and your own integrity to follow the codes and do what's right.
I grant that sometimes with the wrong builder or owner there could be pressure put on the engineer to "put some happiness" into the project and ignore the codes, etc.
But I've not found that to be inherent in the D/B method at all.
RE: IBC vs. design build
This on-site rep has a problem - the project is not very good as evident by his agreement with your report. If you ease up, and something fails, did you do your job?
If he is not doing his job as the site rep, hopefully, you will do yours as the inspector and have the deficiencies correct.
"Do not worry about your problems with mathematics, I assure you mine are far greater."
Albert Einstein
Have you read FAQ731-376 to make the best use of Eng-Tips Forums?
RE: IBC vs. design build
The main thing it buys is time. I could issue a foundation drawing with embeds, grounding etc and not wait to issue others drawings in the same package. Similar jobs done the conventional way usually have to wait for defined packages to issue drawings a part of a set.
The other factor is the craftsmen working on the project get a check from the same place you do. If there is a problem you can go to the site verbally agree on a fix and tell them you'll change the drawing or whatever it takes.
Conventional jobs take RFIs and other paper and maby a week to get resolution. IT's about time.
RE: IBC vs. design build
In aerospace and defense, there are at least 3 things required for ensuring success: a well-written specification, an organization that can execute, and a well-developed design verification.
Our flagship product was developed,effectively as design-build, almost 30 yrs ago and is still being used by the Army.
TTFN
RE: IBC vs. design build
What if they're wrong? is the obvious question.
Or is it?
While I believe in DESIGN. I also know that buildings of a specific type have been built before and there are plenty of contractors with a lot of experience, and not too few of them are engineers (or have lots of engineering experience). So, if a low-rise industrial building is what's to be built, then maybe they do know just how to dig the footings in the right place - without any drawings.
BUT, what if the project needs change? This is expecially prone to happen if the design charette was done "D/B-ish" too. That is, hyper-rapidly and the customer didn't get all of his questions answered/needs addressed. So now the customer is "stuck" with a nebulous idea of what it is he wants that's being put into the ground before any design calcs are run... everything is done on the fly... there's hardly any paper trail as it's all been done verbally. Paper, even electronic paper (e-mail), is kept to a complete minimum.
I think that a successful D/B project requires a customer who knows what he wants and is able to put that in writing combined with the most scrupuluous of Architect-Engineers who's not afraid of charging a premium in exchange for excellent, careful, dilligent work.
RE: IBC vs. design build
As I see it, the only distinction between D/B and something else is that the design agency has direct responsibility and control of the build. It's not obvious to me that a design agency wouldn't hire the same contractor that might have gotten the job under other circumstances.
The difference is to not have the customer be the go-between between the design and build, the designer has to resolve all the questions and problems directly. It's real-time and immediate. You don't go back to a designer 6 months later to ask why he did something that he's now forgotten.
Naturally, the customer tends to feel left out and there's less of a need for certain expertise on the customer side, but in the end, D/B works in most of the world. Intel designs and builds their own processors. GM designs and builds their own cars, but subs out some of the work.
If there's to be a solid design, the designer has to be made accountable for the design from start to finish. Likewise, the builder needs to be involved in the design process to ensure a buildable design.
Design for Manufacturability (DFM) has been around for decades. D/B sounds like an incarnation thereof.
TTFN
RE: IBC vs. design build