Question about sealing
Question about sealing
(OP)
Local press-plate truss company designs glulam beams and other engineered wood beams to be used in their truss packages. They develop the loads and generate a woodworks report analysis for the beams. They then send that report to an engineer and he seals it. This engineer only has the woodworks analysis. He seals it and attaches a letter saying that it is based solely on the data sheets provided that he cannot verify the loading is correct. He has no clue what it's actually being used for and how it's being loaded. He's just sealing that the beam is good for the load used in the analysis. Is this ok?
I see both sides of this.
1.) He doesn't have plans so how can he verify the loading that was used in the analysis.
2.)on the other hand, he's just certifying that the beam can handle the load on the page, he's not sealing that it can work for a particular beam, on a particular job.
I ask this because it seems inherently wrong to me, but I'm seeing this done a lot by many engineers and I have been asked to do just this for a beam order. They want a letter sealed by me that says the beams in the analysis are good for the loads in the analysis. They are fine with me qualifying that I am not able to independently verify the loads.
I see both sides of this.
1.) He doesn't have plans so how can he verify the loading that was used in the analysis.
2.)on the other hand, he's just certifying that the beam can handle the load on the page, he's not sealing that it can work for a particular beam, on a particular job.
I ask this because it seems inherently wrong to me, but I'm seeing this done a lot by many engineers and I have been asked to do just this for a beam order. They want a letter sealed by me that says the beams in the analysis are good for the loads in the analysis. They are fine with me qualifying that I am not able to independently verify the loads.






RE: Question about sealing
I wouldn't do it because how am I fairly compensated for my liability (unless I was an employee at said company)?
In Florida this is spelled out in our Laws and Rules.
RE: Question about sealing
If he is sealing the calcs, he has a responsibility to ensure the design criteria (which includes the loading) for the project is met.
It doesn't sound like the submittal is a very good one. I'd call the engineer that submitted it and ask if he wants you to send them back "returned not reviewed" or send you a set of calcs that is project specific that doesn't require you to select members based on the actual loads, because he doesn't know what the loads are supposed to be. I'd be a little more diplomatic on the phone, but I would get the point across.
RE: Question about sealing
RE: Question about sealing
What good is a letter stating that beam X can support Y plf for a span of Z ft, if you don't have any verification that all of those conditions are met?
It might not be your problem if you're sealing a generic letter, but just for my own edification, who is verifying that the loads on the project don't exceed the loads in the letter? What about point loads? Are the members always simple span or can they be continuous?
I guess I'm failing to see what the benefit of the letter is above and beyond a manufacturer's load table.
RE: Question about sealing
The supplier gets by cheap and the building inspectors generally don't question it. The suppliers feel confident that their in house designers (not engineers)design the beams properly. They flash an engineers seal on a generic letter in front of a building inspector it gets approved and on to the next house.
RE: Question about sealing
RE: Question about sealing
They have since presented me with numerous examples all sealed by engineers at Truss Joist. Company A designs, they send the calc to tuss-joist and they stamp the design with a qualification that the beam size is good for the loads provided in the analysis.
I told them I would not seal it, and my company is about to loose a $30,000 beam order.
RE: Question about sealing
You're company is being offered $30k to seal a letter? Nice.
RE: Question about sealing
RE: Question about sealing
1. If this is a house, does an engineer or architect need to seal anything at all? In many states, residential construction is not required to be designed by a licensed professional. If so, your seal is essentially meaningless in terms of satisfying a requirement to have an EOR over the whole structure. You could then very easily simply review the calculations/designs and seal them with the necessary qualifiers as they suggest.
2. If the structure requires a licensed engineer, and that required EOR is NOT YOU, then you as a beam supplier can simply provide similar sealed calcs/drawings that again claim that the designs are based upon X, Y and Z and the EOR is ultimately responsible for checking the applied loads vs. the actual loads.
3. If the structure doesn't require a licensed engineer, and that EOR doesn't exist...i.e. there is some loosely held assumption out there that your sealing of the beams consitutes some level of responsibility over the structure, then you WOULD have a concern in my view.
RE: Question about sealing
This is the standard way Wood Trusses are sealed. But, Wood Trusses are a fairly involved design. Doing this for a beam, I have to wonder why the building designer didn't design it (I always specified the size and grade for my glulam/LVL/PSL/etc. beams) or at least be willing to seal the beam calcs.
Garth Dreger PE - AZ Phoenix area
As EOR's we should take the responsibility to design our structures to support the components we allow in our design per that industry standards.
RE: Question about sealing
A PE seal on a drawing can be taken to mean different things, which may or may not be spelled out in the state engineering rules. It may be taken to imply conformance with project specifications or with building codes, and if used in a more generic way, you have a problem.
Where I have run into this issue is sealing a standard detail drawing once and for all, which is a perfectly reasonable step. But then a draftsman makes a copy of that drawing, puts it in a set of shop drawings that I know nothing about, and what's the status then?
RE: Question about sealing
I won't stamp it, but their is plenty of evidence to suggest that this is acceptable to do just from the fact that so many do it without issue. Doesn't make it ethically right, but if no one is getting in trouble for this then by whose authority does anyone say this is wrong?
RE: Question about sealing
Keep in mind that your seal and signature only do ONE thing...they certify that YOU were the engineer that designed the item indicated on the plan. Nothing more.
Secondly, as a licensed engineer, you have a duty to protect the public welfare and safety. Given that, I might suggest this note on your sheet:
THE BEAM DESIGN REFLECTED ON THIS SHEET IS FOR SPECIFIC, INDICATED LOADS AND REQUIRED LATERAL BRACING. THE BEAM DESIGN HAS NOT BEEN INTEGRATED INTO A ACTUAL STRUCTURAL SYSTEM. AS SUCH, THE USE OF THIS BEAM IN AN ACTUAL STRUCTURAL SYSTEM SHOULD BE CAREFULLY REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY A LICENSED ENGINEER.
RE: Question about sealing
You don't even know what the beams will be used for, and JAE summed it up in his #2:
2. If the structure requires a licensed engineer, and that required EOR is NOT YOU, then you as a beam supplier can simply provide similar sealed calcs/drawings that again claim that the designs are based upon X, Y and Z and the EOR is ultimately responsible for checking the applied loads vs. the actual loads.
I agree. Like I originally said, this is no different than any other manufacturer produced table or calc. We all use these, do you independently run your own calcs on everything in AISC, for metal stud in LGSEA,Simpson connections, steel joists, etc... No, we rely on standardized tables produced by the MFR.
Now, you are THAT engineer doing the tables. I would be OK doing this, since it sounds like why your company hired you (to be their engineer), but I would insist on a nice box of CYA notes that must be next to my seal of my assumptions (specific loading info, load cases, load factors, deflection, bracing assumptions, bearing conditions, etc.). I would NOT rely on anyone else's calcs, which I know you aren't, I would do my own, and use their calcs as a check for mine.
If this takes a day of your time, for a $30k order I am sure your boss would be OK with that. Do what you need to do as an engineer to ensure that whatever you are signing and sealing is correct and limits your liability. You are keeping yourself and your company out of trouble, which I would remind your boss of the liability his company is incurring if you don't do this the right way.
RE: Question about sealing
Our sales dept. to spite me found an engineering firm willing to seal a letter for $300. Fine with me.
I still feel it's ethically wrong, as I feel strongly that's it is being used to convey something that it is not to a building official or whoever ultimately wants to see the seal.
As many of you have stated whats really the purpose of having a seal on a design chart or generic table. Their is no good purpose that I can think of. It's a guarantee of nothing.
RE: Question about sealing
RE: Question about sealing
RE: Question about sealing
RE: Question about sealing
THE BEAM DESIGNS REFLECTED ON THIS SHEET IS FOR SPECIFIC, INDICATED LOADS AND REQUIRED LATERAL BRACING. THE BEAM DESIGN HAS NOT BEEN INTEGRATED INTO A ACTUAL STRUCTURAL SYSTEM FOR ANY SPECIFIC PROJECT. AS SUCH, THE USE OF THIS BEAM IN AN ACTUAL STRUCTURAL SYSTEM SHOULD BE CAREFULLY REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY A LICENSED ENGINEER.
RE: Question about sealing
With that qualifying language, what EXACTLY is the purpose of the letter with respect to a specific project for which it would be "flashed in front of the building official"?
RE: Question about sealing
I think you made the right decision and the other company is crazy for stamping that type letter for $300. I don't think it is ethically wrong to do it, for the record... I just think there is too much risk involved.
No, it's not plan stamping. Nothing like plan stamping in my opinion. All you would need is a quick beam analysis in your job file to prove it. Plus, you'd be writing the letter. So it is by very definition not plan stamping. Plan stamping, to me, is when someone lays a set of plans in front of you that they drew and you stamp them. Yes, there are some more subtleties to plan stamping, but that's the basic gist of it.
RE: Question about sealing
RE: Question about sealing
For the Simpson example, an engineer is using the Simpson information in their design that will ultimately be sealed by the design engineer.
The letter being provided is, by your own admission, allowing designers to pick off beams with no oversight or stamping. You also said that flashing an engineer's seal in front of a building official usually gets their concerns off the table, but the seal is not for that specific project. I think it's a disengenuous use of a seal to do that. Maybe if the person flashing the letter with the seal said something along the lines of, "...., but the engineer who sealed this letter did not design the beam for this specific project. A non-licensed designer with our company designed this beam".
I know my first question would be then why the hell are you showing me this letter if the engineer didn't design the beam for this specific project.
RE: Question about sealing
RE: Question about sealing
RE: Question about sealing
That's true. So why would they be flashing a seal in front of a building official other than to misrepresent the use of said seal?
RE: Question about sealing
If this is being compared to a Simpson catalog - would anyone ever get questioned about a joist hanger and whip out a Simpson catalog? No, you would pull out the drawings and (whether sealed or not) show the building official the relevant information.
Even if a seal isn't required, drawings would be, right?
Also, in comparing this situation to trusses. I haven't done a ton of jobs that included wood trusses, but all of the truss jobs I've been involved in we've had calcs submitted with the job-specific loading, spans, spacing, wind loads, deflection criteria, etc.. signed and sealed by a Professional Engineer.
RE: Question about sealing
These are for houses, and their are no plans, other than a floorplan and elevation. The spans and loads came from the builder verbally to the truss supplier. They generated a beam design with their software and basically want us as the beam manufacturer to seal that per the loads they used that the beam size is good and more importantly that the minimum bearing info is correct. I didn't seal it, but as I mentioned someone else did for us. Either way the info about it being a house or a commercial job, plans or not, E.O.R. or not are all irrelevant because the info we are supplied is the same regardless and they want a seal on it.
Either it's ok to seal with a qualification similar to this or not.
THE BEAM DESIGNS REFLECTED ON THIS SHEET IS FOR SPECIFIC, INDICATED LOADS AND REQUIRED LATERAL BRACING. THE BEAM DESIGN HAS NOT BEEN INTEGRATED INTO A ACTUAL STRUCTURAL SYSTEM. AS SUCH, THE USE OF THIS BEAM IN AN ACTUAL STRUCTURAL SYSTEM SHOULD BE CAREFULLY REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY A LICENSED ENGINEER.
RE: Question about sealing
$300... Some engineers are sure good at math, but not good at risk management or business.
Brad
RE: Question about sealing
to give piece of mind to the technician and his company or to misrepresent that the beams have been engineered specifically for a project to whoever will inquire. Their are several beams for more than just one house in the order.
RE: Question about sealing
Used incorrectly - they will all kill you or someone else??
RE: Question about sealing
I designed repair of of a building with plate-connected wood truss and glulam spans up to 77 feet which never saw an engineer. But based on the design loads used, they would not have worked for the building use. They were designed for residential instead of 100 psf+ live for commercial (and 1-1/2" normalweight concrete topping.) Also bracing was inadequate, since it was not specified by the truss designer/supplier, and the contractor was inexperienced.
Nothing wrong with sealing it as a component, and obviously you are not going to seal anything without doing the calcs. The items will be "certified" to a certain load, but not for a particular use, just like buying a Simpson tie.
RE: Question about sealing
I personally see it as no different then any other pre-engineered component, as others have stated. How this letter gets used is out of your control, and if done the way SWS described with that language attached, to me it is OK and legal. Is it a good business decision and worth the exposure for 300 clams? Hell no! You did the right thing by saying no.
If you graduated in 2006 then you are pretty young, I am just a little bit older, and throughout your career you will see lots of engineers, contractors, and architects doing things that are questionable. If someone really crosses the line, turn them in. But pick your battles on this other stuff. Sounds like you got a good set of ethics and balls enough to tell your company no. Good for you!
What really bothers me about this whole discussion is it seems there are MANY areas of the country where you can build a pretty good-sized and complicated structure without an engineer doing the design. That is what I would like to see changed...
RE: Question about sealing
Brad
RE: Question about sealing
Generally in Florida plan reviewers are not engineers or architects and I have had very few comments made on my drawings in my entire 13 year career. I like to think it is because I am just that awesome, but the only thing they seem to pick on is if you missed something really obvious like calling out an importance factor or Exposure Category. Unfortunately, there is a large reliance in my experience on the seal. If its there, they trust that you did your job.
I guess my point was you can have strong codes, you can have good inspection enforcement, but if the plan review is weak, there are unscrupulous A and Es out there who will sell out their seal.... To the lowest bidder too...
But requiring signed and sealed plans would at least be a good start. I'd be curious as to what states you guys have experience in where you can build houses without sealed plans?
RE: Question about sealing
RE: Question about sealing
Only the larger urban areas are code enforced. So about 85% of the state is NOT covered and you can build just about anything - and I have seen it done.
Many of the building officials are not PE's or Architects - one "tony" city even hired an outside firm to do the reviews - but they have no engineers or architects on staff. I challenged that and I think that finally got changed. If you challenge anything - you are on the "black list" One city used to charge an "extra" $25 if you didn't pick the I-beam sizes - they would do it for you.
Each locality can and does adopt and modify the code (which ever one they pick) as they see fit. They all add their two cents worth. Some are using IBC 2009 and one still accepts BOCA 99 I think. One small town mandated 2 layers of 1/2'' drywall on all interior walls for the longest time!! Recently - I was working with 4 or 5 different "codes" within a 100 mile radius. Now I think it down to only 3!!!
If things are slow - permits take forever and get nit picked to death. When business is good, drawings on toilet paper seem to suffice.
When any complaints are made to the state - they just shake their heads and collect their salaries.
Just had to rant and rave - sorry.
RE: Question about sealing