×
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

For Review:Engineering Document Submissions
2

For Review:Engineering Document Submissions

For Review:Engineering Document Submissions

(OP)
Dear all,

May I please check with the Engineers in the USA and in Canada, please. I am currently discussing an offer (scope: Process, mech, EIA and equipment for a dryer plant) with a supplier from Canada.

The supplier informed me that he will NOT submit any design calculations to support his design, only a Professional Engineer Stamped Wngineering Drawing. E.g. for a design of a tank (not to ASME), he will provide an endorsed engineering draiwng, but not the calculations to support his design. He informed it is part of his engineering know how and my company does not have access to it, to protect his company's engineering knowledge.

I was like, "Come on, if one goes to Bednar, you can get the design procedures there. I need the calculation to verify your drawing, e.g. weld and thicknesses"

He was like, "Well, I am not going to show another company how to go it. If you wish, you can perform the calculation yourself. I will take out the design package from my offer. You can verify and sign off the calculations yourself".

Is this way Engineers and Companies operate in Canada? (and USA)? I am in Asia now and have worked also in Europe. I have dealt with Clients like Foster Wheeler and Shell as supplier and always provided all calculations. Thanks and regards.

RE: For Review:Engineering Document Submissions

I'm in the US and in my experience this is something that comes up every once in a while.  Just write your specifications to require a copy of the calcs and if your vendor does not want to meet your specs, it is a no bid.  Deliverables are always listed in the contract, so list your requirement and throw out the bids that do not meet them.

Timelord

RE: For Review:Engineering Document Submissions

I agree with Timelord....occasionally you'll see this.

Tell him he probably hasn't invented anything new with his calcs and even offer to sign a confidentiality agreement, but in my thinking if he's not willing to show how he got there, he might have just guessed his way through it.

I ran into a similar situation with an engineer not willing to provide calcs for structural attachment of windows in a high wind area.  Intolerable.

RE: For Review:Engineering Document Submissions

(OP)
Timelord..
It is was clearly specified in the Bid Specification, so imagine my surprise when informed in the meeting.

Ron..
My thoughts exactly, was the design estimated or/ and guessimated?

I have an obligation to ensure safe designs are installed for the plant, not withstanding the Drawings come certified correct by the PE.

RE: For Review:Engineering Document Submissions

It is a past aspect of the engineering community in the US that calculations are a tool that the engineer uses to provide the service that is the value provided to the client.

We had a lengthy discussion of this topic a few years ago (with mixed views).  

Technically, the engineer is correct.  His calculations are NOT his service to you.  Calculations are simply a tool that the engineer uses (like a calculator or PC) to develop an engineering design which is communicated via drawings and specs.  

Realistically, more and more clients in the US are requiring calculations to assist them in reviewing the source of the design results...one example I've seen is out west in California, many cities hire licensed engineers to review all plans and calculations.

I'll see if I can post a link to that previous discussion.

RE: For Review:Engineering Document Submissions

You should have shown them the door right after they told you they would not meet the requirements.  In my book, they were wasting your time even submiting a bid.

Timelord  

RE: For Review:Engineering Document Submissions

This supplier's response is pretty standard for the initial negotiations.
It is reasonable to require the supplier to submit calculations required to show compliance with code. It is not reasonable to require the supplier to provide calculations that support his/her proprietary process.
In a past career with a manufacturer of custom heat recovery equipment, our first reaction would be to not provide any calculations. If pressed, we would offer to supply calculations for seismic design required by local codes.
However, our heat transfer calculations were proprietary and we would not share them outside the company, even with an confidentiality agreement in place.
 

RE: For Review:Engineering Document Submissions

Bad equals typical regarding mechanical package suppliers.  See if the PO commercial terms hold out 10% for the documentation listed in the inquiry and PO.  Press accounting not to pay that 10% until received.  If the package has not been bought, use this as the basis for technically rejecting the supplier.

RE: For Review:Engineering Document Submissions

If he wants your stamp, you need to see the supporting calculations.  If not, then let him walk.  

He either needs to hire a PE as an employee to stamp his project, or, as previously suggested, you need to sign an agreement of non-disclosure.

I had to do such for a proprietary design for a floating dock system for pleasure craft about 25 years ago, but we had to generate the calculations for the system too.  A little different in your case.  

Don't negotiate your liability here.   

Mike McCann
MMC Engineering

RE: For Review:Engineering Document Submissions

msquared48,

Read the original post!!!!  The supplier was proposing to supply stamped drawings, just not the calcs to show how he got there.

Timelord

RE: For Review:Engineering Document Submissions

Timelord:

I know - I read it.  Now... please re-read my post again.

Mike McCann
MMC Engineering

RE: For Review:Engineering Document Submissions

Code1
It's not uncommmon to ask for calculations. I have seen insurance companies, local agencies and even the US goverment ask for them.
I have given clinets the backup for short circuit studies for years. They usually don't kow how to read them but they and their insurance companies feel good.  

RE: For Review:Engineering Document Submissions

Well there is no one rule that fits all.

After all it is a business decision, the vendor knows full well that you have a right to refuse his product and he is willing to take that risk. You make your own decision if you really want that tank!

Supplying a tank is not an engineering service. I don't think you will succeed Sony providing you the calcs and schematic design of a TV set you buy.

Unless you have an ability to review the calcs and then "approve" it AND bear the liability, asking for calcs is in fact asking for liability.

There are places to ask for calcs, for certain things. I know structural engineering is one of them for certain type of projects where a peer review is a requirement and also for the record and sometimes insurance company requires some calcs.

PE stamps are the testimony to the fact that the design meets certain safety criteria applicable, but its only valid where the PE stamp is valid.

So without the knowledge of what was in the spec and what is in the RFP, it is not possible to make conclusions as to who has the right to what.







 

RE: For Review:Engineering Document Submissions

Quote:

PE stamps are the testimony to the fact that the design meets certain safety criteria applicable, but its only valid where the PE stamp is valid.

Not really.  In most US states the PE stamp only confirms two things:
1.  You are a licensed engineer.
2.  You designed, or had responsible charge of the design, of the items in the document you are signing.

My understanding (from many state engineering laws I've read) is that the stamp is not an explicit warranty or certification of safety or proper design.  It only indicates that you have taken responsibility for that design.

The certification of code-compliance or safety is only implicit in the stamp....I'm probably splitting hairs here...sorry.
 

RE: For Review:Engineering Document Submissions

I've seen so much rubber stamping by fellow engineers that I can't blame customers/reviewers for wanting to see calculations.

RE: For Review:Engineering Document Submissions

msquared48,

I reread your post and I still don't get your point.

"If he wants your stamp, you need to see the supporting calculations."

The OP never said anything about stamping anything himself.  He is trying to buy a already stamped set of plans and wants to see the supporting calcs.  The OP doesn't need a PE and and nobody is asking for his stamp, he wants support for the vendors stamp on the vendor supplied drawings which may be a requirement of his customer.  If I pay for stamped drawings, I don't expect to have to pay a second PE to repeat the calcs so I can have a copy to supply up the chain.

"He either needs to hire a PE as an employee to stamp his project, or, as previously suggested, you need to sign an agreement of non-disclosure."

"He" (assumed to refer to the vendor) already has a PE and is willing to supply stamped drawings, just not the supporting calcs.  "You" (assumed to refer to the OP) has not said anything about refusing to sign a non-disclosure.  He is just asking if refusing to supply the supporting calcs is normal business practice in the US. It is NOT in my experience (33 years as a PE).

Timelord
 

RE: For Review:Engineering Document Submissions

Is the bid already awarded?

If no, then he is non-responsive and is disqualified.

If yes, does the contract clearly enforce all of the bid spec requirements?

If yes, then he is in violation of the contract.

RE: For Review:Engineering Document Submissions

In my home state, the Structural Engineer of Record does not usually have to submit calculations with his drawings; however, other disciplines are required to submit calcs, such as HVAC and Civil.  When the Engineer of Record delegates certain engineering functions (such as connection design, pieces/parts, etc.) the delegated engineer is required by state law to submit calculations with enough detail for the EOR to review the design for compliance with the specifications/prime design.

This seem like one of those delegated engineering issues and it is reasonable for the engineer to provide calcs to substantiate the design.  After all, you must rely on the design and sometimes, unfortunately, some engineers will sign and seal anything as long as they don't have to prove it.  Sad but true, as you all know.

RE: For Review:Engineering Document Submissions

JAE:

If someone fraudulently stamps a drawings, it is exactly that a fraud and act punishable by law. PE stamp/sealing does carry a degree of responsibility, the very reason licenses are in place. Misuse of them is criminal offense. If anyone has seen those, they need to report to the licensing board which is also expected as an ethical thing from PEs, and not complain here.

 

RE: For Review:Engineering Document Submissions

rbulsara,

I don't disagree with you that sealing a plan carries responsibility.  The responsibility isn't transmitted to me when I seal it, but rather when I do it.  The sealing isn't my statement that "I guarantee this design".  In many states the seal "says" this:

"I certify that these plans have been prepared by me and that I am a duly licensed engineer in the state of _____"

The seal identifies me as the responsible party, it doesn't make me the responsible party.  

Again, I'm splitting hairs here - just making a point (that probably doesn't really need to be made so I apologize for the time I'm wasting).

 

RE: For Review:Engineering Document Submissions

(OP)
Hi all,

The tank is just the simplest example I explained to the Supplier where the "technical know-how" and value-add is in the open, i.e. any competent engineer can pick up on his/her own. So what is there to be protective/ secretive of?

Of course there are many other process related black box deigns that maybe out of bounds from calculation submissions. And we will respect that.

But a simple mechanical calculation... come on. I can do it with procedures from handbooks/ software calculations.
 

RE: For Review:Engineering Document Submissions

code1,

If that is the case, why don't you just do your own calculations and only challenge his design if you think it is deficient?

Provision of calculations to support a design, unless it is required by law in a given jurisdiction, should be strictly a contractual issue.  If the terms of the bid require it, then a bid is either conforming or not.

RE: For Review:Engineering Document Submissions

As hokie said, either you as an engineer do the calc and design the "product" such as a tank in this example and let the vendor build to that.

Or specify an performance and have the vendor take the responsibility of meeting the performance and than let him hire the engineers, etc.

No vendor or mfr is bound to provide his engineering calcs unless required by law or by a provision in the contract.

I have "asked" for calcs for things like a backup battery sizing for a system whose current requirement varies from vendor to vendor. Even that was part of the "spec" not an after thought.

I have had AHU ask for a load calc to justify service sizing, etc. but that is little different than being part of a shop drawings to a potential buyer.

 

RE: For Review:Engineering Document Submissions

Code1
did you ask for weld records on the tank? welder qualifications? certifications on materials?
If you don't need any of that or calculations why not just put out a spec for some good old boys to build you a tank?
Just say you want a round tank, no holes, shiney metal etc.
If you don't have his calculations can't you say the welds are right? Did he allow for any overpressurization?
If the guy ain't willing to give you the calcs I wouldn't touch the thing.  

RE: For Review:Engineering Document Submissions

BJC...but of course it should be in standard format....

                  Section 000TANK

1.0   General Requirements
      A.  A round tank
      B.  Qualifications:  At least two good ol' boys and a welder.  Big hammer desired but optional.

2.0   Materials
      A.  Shiny Metal, with some dull spots acceptable
      B.  Submittals:  We don't need no stinkin' submittals

3.0   Execution
      A.  Weld the shiny metal together to form a round tank.  Don't forget to close the ends.

It's Saturday...what the hell!

RE: For Review:Engineering Document Submissions

Ron,
Too much time on your hands?

 

RE: For Review:Engineering Document Submissions

JAE...was writing a specification for remediation of damage at a condo and checked in...just couldn't resist.  Who knows...I might even include that one in my spec!  Well...maybe not.

RE: For Review:Engineering Document Submissions

OK - sort of like this one:
SECTION 030052

Beer Specification

1.02 Reference Standards

1.    ASTM B1116-03, Standard Specification for Hops, Barley and other goodies in Beer
2.    ASTM B 1399-04, Obtaining Better than Average Residual Taste
3.    ASTM B 1609-05, Standard Test Method for Enjoying a Cold One
4.    JCI-SF 4, Method of Tests for Bitter Aftertaste in Malt Liquor

2.02 Materials

A.    Barley, Hops, Wheat:
1.    Grow it and harvest in time to get into the beer brewing process.
2.    Do not include any girlie flavors
B.    Water
1.    Drinkable and clean
C.    Other ingredients
1.    As needed

3.01    Execution
A.    When finished brewing, deliver to store for buyer purchase.
B.    Do not break any bottles or dent any cans.
C.    Chill beer as close to freezing as possible.
D.    Do not allow beer to sit in the sun for any extended period of time.
E.    Meet all OSHA safety guidelines when brewing, storing, delivering, selling, drinking, or throwing up the beer.
F.    If beer goes flat, contractor to dispose of in a legal manner, preferably outside of vehicles or buildings.
G.    Do not open beer bottles with teeth unless trained and licensed to do so.
 

RE: For Review:Engineering Document Submissions

JAE...much better than mine...that's worth including in the condo remediation spec!  If you've ever had a condo project, you'll know the need for copious application of beer.

With my extensive testing background, I strive to be good at ASTM B 1609-05.  I think I'll go practice one now...

RE: For Review:Engineering Document Submissions

(OP)
ASTM C 1609-05, Standard Test Method for Flexural Performance of Fiber-Reinforced Concrete (Using Beam With Third-Point Loading)

ASTM B 609/B 609M Standard Specification for Aluminum 1350 Round Wire, Annealed and Intermediate Tempers, for Electrical Purposes

what a difference a "1" and B/ C Makes...
 

RE: For Review:Engineering Document Submissions

code1...if you follow provision 3.01 C. of JAE's specification, then consume quickly, ASTM doesn't matter!

RE: For Review:Engineering Document Submissions

code1 - you are looking at an older version of ASTM.  The newer versions have been changed*




*Just another lame excuse when beer is involved.

 

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