Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!
Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!
-
Congratulations TugboatEng on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
AISC Certification
- Thread starter delt
- Start date
delt,
It is of great importance to have the AISC Certification. To obtain the certification your company have to go through an audit. Please, visit the following website to obtain specific information about the program.
If you have further inquiries, let me know.
nepe
It is of great importance to have the AISC Certification. To obtain the certification your company have to go through an audit. Please, visit the following website to obtain specific information about the program.
If you have further inquiries, let me know.
nepe
delt:
Many fabricators complain about an additional certification. But think about a designer who is not a registered professional who wants to design a building, or a welder who wants to weld that building without any qualification, or a contractor who is not licensed to build that same structure. These are extreme examples. But, you get what you pay for.
If you inquire about the quality system or method of quality verification from an uncertified AISC or ICBO ES fabricator (now IAS), you get a blank look or "What's that?" If you were to ask this fabricator how the welds or materials are traceable to the welders, testing, etc. you will probably get that same blank look.
The bulk of my work in the last few years doing QA/verification inspection involved fabricators who were not qualified for the projects they took on. Code and project requirements were ignored or overlooked (usually ignored), welding personnel or procedures were not qualified, testing was not performed, members did not fit, the wrong materials were used, etc. The list is endless. They all typically have the same excuse, "We've been doing it that way for years."
Recently one of my friends who works in the project management profession had to check out a fabricator who took on a job and screwed it up - BAD. Un-approved CJP splices were made in critical locations of the trusses that were not specified on the approved drawings, the welders and procedures were not qualified, etc. They were given a chance to redeem thmeselves by qualifying WPS's/personnel after the fact - and still failed miserably.
I keep a photo archive of poor workmanship and materials of structural steel, aluminum and stainless steel that was not fabricated or erected per code or spec. There are hundreds of photos which I use during presentations to building officials and professional organizations. Some of these are mind boggling how they ever got the job in the first place. Almost all of these were performed by unqualifed fabricators. The sad part is they all want to be compensated via RFI's, "value enginering" and change orders for their mistakes.
Specifying an AISC/IAS (or local jursdiction) certification is not asking too much, it's getting a structure built the way it was intended by the designer and per code with traceability of the workmanship and materials if needed at a later date.
Many fabricators complain about an additional certification. But think about a designer who is not a registered professional who wants to design a building, or a welder who wants to weld that building without any qualification, or a contractor who is not licensed to build that same structure. These are extreme examples. But, you get what you pay for.
If you inquire about the quality system or method of quality verification from an uncertified AISC or ICBO ES fabricator (now IAS), you get a blank look or "What's that?" If you were to ask this fabricator how the welds or materials are traceable to the welders, testing, etc. you will probably get that same blank look.
The bulk of my work in the last few years doing QA/verification inspection involved fabricators who were not qualified for the projects they took on. Code and project requirements were ignored or overlooked (usually ignored), welding personnel or procedures were not qualified, testing was not performed, members did not fit, the wrong materials were used, etc. The list is endless. They all typically have the same excuse, "We've been doing it that way for years."
Recently one of my friends who works in the project management profession had to check out a fabricator who took on a job and screwed it up - BAD. Un-approved CJP splices were made in critical locations of the trusses that were not specified on the approved drawings, the welders and procedures were not qualified, etc. They were given a chance to redeem thmeselves by qualifying WPS's/personnel after the fact - and still failed miserably.
I keep a photo archive of poor workmanship and materials of structural steel, aluminum and stainless steel that was not fabricated or erected per code or spec. There are hundreds of photos which I use during presentations to building officials and professional organizations. Some of these are mind boggling how they ever got the job in the first place. Almost all of these were performed by unqualifed fabricators. The sad part is they all want to be compensated via RFI's, "value enginering" and change orders for their mistakes.
Specifying an AISC/IAS (or local jursdiction) certification is not asking too much, it's getting a structure built the way it was intended by the designer and per code with traceability of the workmanship and materials if needed at a later date.
CWIC - I agree that the AISC certification is a great part of any significant project. But I would also add that there are many smaller projects where this kind of certification is fine, but not warranted economically.
Many small projects, with standard steel connections and details, where the loads and spans do not present a significant issue, are hurt by requiring the certification for the fact that many fabricators cannot afford to be certified. This limits the number of bidders and costs the owner money for no substantial reason.
By limiting the number of bidders on a small project, and requiring only larger fabricators with the certification, you are spending money on a "Cadillac" when a "Chevy" would do.
I've talked to a fabricator who is certified and he outlined the costs and management issues that are required. These do add significantly to the expense of doing business. They cannot be competitive on jobs where the certification is not required so this shows you that there is a cost issue here.
Again...don't get me wrong... I would wish that all fabricators get certified...its just not feasible to expect it on smaller projects.
Many small projects, with standard steel connections and details, where the loads and spans do not present a significant issue, are hurt by requiring the certification for the fact that many fabricators cannot afford to be certified. This limits the number of bidders and costs the owner money for no substantial reason.
By limiting the number of bidders on a small project, and requiring only larger fabricators with the certification, you are spending money on a "Cadillac" when a "Chevy" would do.
I've talked to a fabricator who is certified and he outlined the costs and management issues that are required. These do add significantly to the expense of doing business. They cannot be competitive on jobs where the certification is not required so this shows you that there is a cost issue here.
Again...don't get me wrong... I would wish that all fabricators get certified...its just not feasible to expect it on smaller projects.
JAE:
No harm - no foul. A good response for delt as well. I concur with your reply also, particularly regarding the cost of a project. This should have been mentioned before I lambasted the fabrication community at large. My comments were not blancket accusations but facts obtained through projects I have been involved with over the years.
The projects I mentioned previously were not small, but quite substantial. I am also well aware of the costs involved to attain major certification or approval as I am a former consulant to ICBO ES (IAS). I develope quality control plans (QCP's) for local jursdiction certifications (e.g.: COLA), AISC & ICBO ES for the fabrication/erection industries. This often involves training of the QC staff which can be hard on the pocket book if they are not prepared for the initial assessments and subsequent audits.
Many of my clients fabricator-wise range from small (<10 personnel) to medium (<100 personnel) to large (>200 bodies). A few of the medium and small guys went for these certs. in the last few years and found out later it was more than they needed, nor was it cost effective and turned out to be something to hang on the wall.
I am also an firm believer of the Caddy/Chevy philosophy. I have been "coaxed" to attain certification/approval to perform QC audits for some of the afore mentioned orgs., but it is simply not within my budjet for this particular service I provide. If it were my sole source of income, maybe.
I usually do my QA inspections for the EOR, design-build firms and agencies which already have QC approvals to do so. I simply contract to these labs. A few times for several building officials/jurisdictions as well. I never encourage a certification that will not be advantageous to an entity who will gain nothing more than a very expensive piece of paper.
I guess only delt can determine this requirement based on the scope of his/her project and the level of quality required. Again, a good reply.
No harm - no foul. A good response for delt as well. I concur with your reply also, particularly regarding the cost of a project. This should have been mentioned before I lambasted the fabrication community at large. My comments were not blancket accusations but facts obtained through projects I have been involved with over the years.
The projects I mentioned previously were not small, but quite substantial. I am also well aware of the costs involved to attain major certification or approval as I am a former consulant to ICBO ES (IAS). I develope quality control plans (QCP's) for local jursdiction certifications (e.g.: COLA), AISC & ICBO ES for the fabrication/erection industries. This often involves training of the QC staff which can be hard on the pocket book if they are not prepared for the initial assessments and subsequent audits.
Many of my clients fabricator-wise range from small (<10 personnel) to medium (<100 personnel) to large (>200 bodies). A few of the medium and small guys went for these certs. in the last few years and found out later it was more than they needed, nor was it cost effective and turned out to be something to hang on the wall.
I am also an firm believer of the Caddy/Chevy philosophy. I have been "coaxed" to attain certification/approval to perform QC audits for some of the afore mentioned orgs., but it is simply not within my budjet for this particular service I provide. If it were my sole source of income, maybe.
I usually do my QA inspections for the EOR, design-build firms and agencies which already have QC approvals to do so. I simply contract to these labs. A few times for several building officials/jurisdictions as well. I never encourage a certification that will not be advantageous to an entity who will gain nothing more than a very expensive piece of paper.
I guess only delt can determine this requirement based on the scope of his/her project and the level of quality required. Again, a good reply.
All Welded Steel Bridges welded to AWS D1.5 - 2002 require that the shop be AISC certified in Major Steel Bridges with Fracture Critical Endorsement.
It is an expensive process and time consuming to obtain AISC certification, but I would never give a job to a non-certified shop, even if it cost me more. The liability for the specifying engineer or the EOR is too high to go with a non-certified company.
(I am the AISC Certification Contact person at my employer a bridge design/build firm, so my commments are a little tainted.)
It is an expensive process and time consuming to obtain AISC certification, but I would never give a job to a non-certified shop, even if it cost me more. The liability for the specifying engineer or the EOR is too high to go with a non-certified company.
(I am the AISC Certification Contact person at my employer a bridge design/build firm, so my commments are a little tainted.)
Rich:
The AWS only recently (last year) required AISC approvals for bridge fabricators in section 1.4 (noted by underlining).
Not all bridge members require the FCE (endorsement) as noted in Section 12.2. When a FCP is specified the endorsement does become a requirement.
Also note many bridge components may be fabricated in accordance with AWS D1.1. I have several clients who do not have an AISC approval, but fabricate many bridge components such as pipe and cable restrainers, piles, drainage, etc. (ancillary products) and have done so for years.
Just an FYI, don't shoot the messenger.
Again, only delt knows for sure...
The AWS only recently (last year) required AISC approvals for bridge fabricators in section 1.4 (noted by underlining).
Not all bridge members require the FCE (endorsement) as noted in Section 12.2. When a FCP is specified the endorsement does become a requirement.
Also note many bridge components may be fabricated in accordance with AWS D1.1. I have several clients who do not have an AISC approval, but fabricate many bridge components such as pipe and cable restrainers, piles, drainage, etc. (ancillary products) and have done so for years.
Just an FYI, don't shoot the messenger.
Again, only delt knows for sure...
Let me tell you about my latest case with fabricator who was not AISC certified:
1. His shop drawings stunk
2. He did not comply with slip critical joints painting wise
3. He drew bracing without paying any attention to the centerlines and work points.
4. He installed DTIs improperly
All of the above is enough to scare any structural engineer. You know why, because they will come to you to get them out of the jam. All I can say please insist on AISC certified fabricators. All fabricators are not the same, but this last one sure makes a powerful argument for AISC certification.
1. His shop drawings stunk
2. He did not comply with slip critical joints painting wise
3. He drew bracing without paying any attention to the centerlines and work points.
4. He installed DTIs improperly
All of the above is enough to scare any structural engineer. You know why, because they will come to you to get them out of the jam. All I can say please insist on AISC certified fabricators. All fabricators are not the same, but this last one sure makes a powerful argument for AISC certification.
Lutfi:
That's it? You got off easy... (Just kidding here.) Interesting reply.
I have been directly & indirectly involved with AISC, ICBO ES (IAS), ASME, ISO (QC system only for ISO) and jurisdictional certifications. Something I did not mention previously, there are many excellent fabricators out there who do an EXCELLENT job, all the time, everytime. There are also approved, certified fabricators who who can't seem to get anything right, even after several attempts. Some of these willfully ignore project and code requirements. Again, this is not a blanket statement.
Specifying an AISC or any type of approval is dependant on the certification/approval program, the rules and regulations of the program, the program directors and the auditor. I have witnessed AISC audits with several of my clients and not only did the auditor miss required check points, the ones they did address were incorrectly interpreted or applied. Recently monitored an audit (non-AISC) where the auditor was quoting incorrectly from the code & did not even have a copy of the fabricators QCP during the audit (how could he/she perform the audit without this document?)
This trade really does require an individual with experience in the trade and this same remark was made by one of the building officials during my last presentation. I know this is going to sting a little here, but some of these certification program directors do not believe you need to have experience in this trade and I whole-heartedly disagree with that mind-set. I mentioned previously I've had building officials request I monitor approved fabricators due to major screw-ups on the job. The shop drawings were some of the worst I have ever seen. I use these photo's for the "This is how not to do this" examples.
On the other hand, one (1) of my clients does not have any certification at all. The quality of the work, traceability, procedure/personnel qualifications, are excellent. They take it upon themselves to test welds they feel may be suspect (at their cost), qualify welders for each application and more. They build architectural structures all over the world and often have special inspectors present during fabrication. What they do need is a written QCP stating what they do to maintain quality and corrective action procedures. Another client works in the dirt with a canopy, the workmanship at this faciltiy would make you cry, it is excellent. I use their photos for my "This is how it's done" examples.
As you can tell, this is a subject dear to my heart. I have been in the welding industry for almost 30 years now in a variety of sectors (aerospace, structural, pressure vessels, etc.) IMHO, the scope and complexity of the project is what should determine the fabricator requirements. This is noted by JAE and which I do agree with.
That's it? You got off easy... (Just kidding here.) Interesting reply.
I have been directly & indirectly involved with AISC, ICBO ES (IAS), ASME, ISO (QC system only for ISO) and jurisdictional certifications. Something I did not mention previously, there are many excellent fabricators out there who do an EXCELLENT job, all the time, everytime. There are also approved, certified fabricators who who can't seem to get anything right, even after several attempts. Some of these willfully ignore project and code requirements. Again, this is not a blanket statement.
Specifying an AISC or any type of approval is dependant on the certification/approval program, the rules and regulations of the program, the program directors and the auditor. I have witnessed AISC audits with several of my clients and not only did the auditor miss required check points, the ones they did address were incorrectly interpreted or applied. Recently monitored an audit (non-AISC) where the auditor was quoting incorrectly from the code & did not even have a copy of the fabricators QCP during the audit (how could he/she perform the audit without this document?)
This trade really does require an individual with experience in the trade and this same remark was made by one of the building officials during my last presentation. I know this is going to sting a little here, but some of these certification program directors do not believe you need to have experience in this trade and I whole-heartedly disagree with that mind-set. I mentioned previously I've had building officials request I monitor approved fabricators due to major screw-ups on the job. The shop drawings were some of the worst I have ever seen. I use these photo's for the "This is how not to do this" examples.
On the other hand, one (1) of my clients does not have any certification at all. The quality of the work, traceability, procedure/personnel qualifications, are excellent. They take it upon themselves to test welds they feel may be suspect (at their cost), qualify welders for each application and more. They build architectural structures all over the world and often have special inspectors present during fabrication. What they do need is a written QCP stating what they do to maintain quality and corrective action procedures. Another client works in the dirt with a canopy, the workmanship at this faciltiy would make you cry, it is excellent. I use their photos for my "This is how it's done" examples.
As you can tell, this is a subject dear to my heart. I have been in the welding industry for almost 30 years now in a variety of sectors (aerospace, structural, pressure vessels, etc.) IMHO, the scope and complexity of the project is what should determine the fabricator requirements. This is noted by JAE and which I do agree with.
If you must deal with the Uniform Building code for this project, then UBC Chapter 17 requires that your structural steel fabrication have either special inspection or be done in an approved shop.
It is up to your local building department what they will accept as an "approved shop". Ingeneral most building department officals will accept AISC certification as meeting this requirement.
Talk to your local building code officials.
It is up to your local building department what they will accept as an "approved shop". Ingeneral most building department officals will accept AISC certification as meeting this requirement.
Talk to your local building code officials.
- Status
Similar threads
- Question
