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 cowski on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
CAD and engineering fee split 5
- Thread starter McSEpllc
- Start date
-
1
- #2
-
1
- Thread starter
- #3
Thanks dik. That is an interesting way of looking at it.
A big grey area when engineering and CAD are separate business entities is liability. First the engineer has to pay for liability insurance, licensing fee and cost of professional development (loss in productive time plus cost of seminars). In regular firms combining engineering and CAD that cost is absorbed by fees for engineering and CAD. Second, who pays what percentage in case of a required repair because of a dimensional problem? Problems due to engineering design mistake are clearly up for the engineer to deal with. The majority of construction problems though are dimensional - what is the responsibility of the CAD technician?
Both of these issues need to be reflected within the fee split.
Eric McDonald, PE
McDonald Structural Engineering, PLLC
A big grey area when engineering and CAD are separate business entities is liability. First the engineer has to pay for liability insurance, licensing fee and cost of professional development (loss in productive time plus cost of seminars). In regular firms combining engineering and CAD that cost is absorbed by fees for engineering and CAD. Second, who pays what percentage in case of a required repair because of a dimensional problem? Problems due to engineering design mistake are clearly up for the engineer to deal with. The majority of construction problems though are dimensional - what is the responsibility of the CAD technician?
Both of these issues need to be reflected within the fee split.
Eric McDonald, PE
McDonald Structural Engineering, PLLC
I have four engineers and one cad tech. We overwhelm the cad tech once in a while and need to pitch in to help get the cad work finished on time, but generally he keeps up with us. Depending on the project, the cad effort is 25% to 50% of the engineering effort.
Guess it depends on the skill and the function of the cad operator. I can give a cad operator a floor plate with an outline of the rebar required and, they are pretty handy at providing rebar layout drawings as well as schedules... and I just fill in the blanks... You should try to get your cad operators to do as much of the work as possible...
Dik
Dik
- Thread starter
- #7
Yes, dik - I believe allowing the CAD Tech to do as much as possible up front is beneficial. The CAD guy I use the most right now is one that I have worked with for 9 years at a previous employer. My previous boss charged his time out at 65$/hr, while other free-lance CAD techs in this area charge only 25 to 35$/hr. He is now a free-lance CAD Tech himself and charges the 65 $/hr or 35% of lump sum projects. On the other hand this guy knows what I expect and does a good job. I want to be fair to him but also to myself.
Eric McDonald, PE
McDonald Structural Engineering, PLLC
Eric McDonald, PE
McDonald Structural Engineering, PLLC
-
1
- #8
DaveAtkins
Structural
I generally assume 2/3 of total hours for engineering, and 1/3 of total hours for drafting. This assumes the CAD person is experienced, and the engineer gives the CAD person reasonably clear red marks (i.e., not a lot of questions like "What is this? What do you mean here?").
Another way of estimating is to assume 8 hours per sheet for a structural set of drawings. This would apply to an "average" building--nothing unusual or complex.
DaveAtkins
Another way of estimating is to assume 8 hours per sheet for a structural set of drawings. This would apply to an "average" building--nothing unusual or complex.
DaveAtkins
McSEpllc, everyone made valid points that the % allocation between engineers and drafters depends on the capability of the drafting team. I believe this assumes an in-house drafting team.
When dealing with drafting subcontractors, instead of cutting your pie first, show them the job scope and let them give you a fee proposal first. Then you can decide whether you want to pay that from your own fee.
When dealing with drafting subcontractors, instead of cutting your pie first, show them the job scope and let them give you a fee proposal first. Then you can decide whether you want to pay that from your own fee.
- Thread starter
- #10
Letting the CAD Tech provide a fee proposal makes sense, whyun. Except in this case the CAD Tech and I worked together in the same office and we both use the same methods to calculate fees - a combined engineering and CAD fee. I actually ask him always what he thinks what the total design fee should be. We don't have a history of split fees though.
Eric McDonald, PE
McDonald Structural Engineering, PLLC
Eric McDonald, PE
McDonald Structural Engineering, PLLC
If you are the engineer of record, doing a typical drafting-engineering fee split within engineering firms will put you at a disadvantage, even if it is 60-40 or even 30-70. You are fully liable for his drafting errors. Don't try to "cheat" the guy but be sure you keep the portion of the total fee consistent with the personal professional liability you have.
It seems that you are not dealing with a subcontracting firm but an individual. You can agree on an hourly rate not to exceed the maximum you are willing to bear.
It seems that you are not dealing with a subcontracting firm but an individual. You can agree on an hourly rate not to exceed the maximum you are willing to bear.
-
1
- #12
Yours truly runs a small structural consulting office and I do all my own cad.
Some cons of doing your own cad: You are not able to bill at an engineering rate all the time. Most cad techs bill out at less than half the rate of even a modestly experienced graduate engineer. Workdays can get pretty long if a bigger project is going out and/or there are last minute changes. Eyestrain can become an issue if one wears both an engineering and cad hat and works too long and too hard. Sometimes cad work can also be aggravating or just boring for an engineering graduate. Not everyone has the interest or aptitude to do cad regularly.
The pros, as I have experienced them, are that the cad time spent on producing the drawings can be shorter because there are fewer cycles of mark-ups to get to a decent finished state. When the designer is also the drafter, completed drawings usually are clearer, particularly when working on something that is complex or unusual.
All that said I think the default standard in my industry , at least for larger offices, is for engineers to do little or no cad. There is such an emphasis on speed and quick production these days that it does make sense to have a dedicated tech staff to do the production work, as long as you have enough work to keep that staff busy and the cashflow to pay them properly. For a smaller firm I think its less clear what is most economical. However there is no doubt that a knowledgable, able cad person is extremely valuable, no matter what size firm.
It is probably a good idea for all engineers to know at least some cad. When I started out thats all I did for the first six months. I learned how to set up and layout drawings and details by executing the penciled sketches of older engineers.
In the future, cad skills for an engineer may become more important because with the advent of BIM and other advances, the transition from structural modeling and design into finished drawings is probably going to become more direct. We will still need to know how to create a finished presentable set of documents, even if the machine does all the heavy lifting. At this point though, I have a hard time designing on the screen and also drafting at the same time. Can't say quite why. Maybe because I spent so many years looking at big pieces of paper rather than a little VDT screen. Tho say- if I could just hook up one of this HD teevee screens, you know, the ones the size of a bed, to my computer.....
Some cons of doing your own cad: You are not able to bill at an engineering rate all the time. Most cad techs bill out at less than half the rate of even a modestly experienced graduate engineer. Workdays can get pretty long if a bigger project is going out and/or there are last minute changes. Eyestrain can become an issue if one wears both an engineering and cad hat and works too long and too hard. Sometimes cad work can also be aggravating or just boring for an engineering graduate. Not everyone has the interest or aptitude to do cad regularly.
The pros, as I have experienced them, are that the cad time spent on producing the drawings can be shorter because there are fewer cycles of mark-ups to get to a decent finished state. When the designer is also the drafter, completed drawings usually are clearer, particularly when working on something that is complex or unusual.
All that said I think the default standard in my industry , at least for larger offices, is for engineers to do little or no cad. There is such an emphasis on speed and quick production these days that it does make sense to have a dedicated tech staff to do the production work, as long as you have enough work to keep that staff busy and the cashflow to pay them properly. For a smaller firm I think its less clear what is most economical. However there is no doubt that a knowledgable, able cad person is extremely valuable, no matter what size firm.
It is probably a good idea for all engineers to know at least some cad. When I started out thats all I did for the first six months. I learned how to set up and layout drawings and details by executing the penciled sketches of older engineers.
In the future, cad skills for an engineer may become more important because with the advent of BIM and other advances, the transition from structural modeling and design into finished drawings is probably going to become more direct. We will still need to know how to create a finished presentable set of documents, even if the machine does all the heavy lifting. At this point though, I have a hard time designing on the screen and also drafting at the same time. Can't say quite why. Maybe because I spent so many years looking at big pieces of paper rather than a little VDT screen. Tho say- if I could just hook up one of this HD teevee screens, you know, the ones the size of a bed, to my computer.....
samdamon - I'd agree with everything you say. Note that the key is whether the engineer can just sit down and "do" the detail in cadd faster (and cheaper) than:
sketching it up
giving it to and explaining it to a tech
the tech drawing it
the engineer checking it and correcting it
the tech fixing it
the engineer checking it again
etc. until it's "right"
sketching it up
giving it to and explaining it to a tech
the tech drawing it
the engineer checking it and correcting it
the tech fixing it
the engineer checking it again
etc. until it's "right"
- Thread starter
- #14
Thanks Everyone for the feedback,
From my previous employment I know that most building structural projects had a split of 65% engineering and 35% CAD by taking the hours it took multiplied by hourly rates of $90 for engineering and $65 for CAD. There are several problems by taking these numbers for gospel:
- For one the liability is entirely on the engineer when the there is separate engineering and CAD entities, while in a joint firm it is carried by both in form of the cost of liability insurance, and lost profit if the firm has to pay for problems in form of paying for repairs and time spent to come to an agreement.
- For another point I am convinced the engineer has more overhead cost. Both entities have cost in form of computer, plotter and CAD program, which are in my mind minor as that cost spreads over several years use. The engineer has regular cost that add up: liability insurance, annual licensing fees (in my case three states), membership fee for engineering associations (in my case five associations), the professional development requirement (which is a cost for attending seminars plus the cost of lost billable hours), the cost of codes and reference materials, and the cost of engineering soft wares.
- Finally, one of the constant problems this particular CAD Tech had in the previous office was he did not have enough work so admittedly had to stretch his hours.
It's not easy! I have a hard time believing that five years of school plus four years of internship plus the liability plus the larger overhead would be reflected in either the $90 / $65 hourly rate or a 65% / 35% fee split.
Eric McDonald, PE
McDonald Structural Engineering, PLLC
From my previous employment I know that most building structural projects had a split of 65% engineering and 35% CAD by taking the hours it took multiplied by hourly rates of $90 for engineering and $65 for CAD. There are several problems by taking these numbers for gospel:
- For one the liability is entirely on the engineer when the there is separate engineering and CAD entities, while in a joint firm it is carried by both in form of the cost of liability insurance, and lost profit if the firm has to pay for problems in form of paying for repairs and time spent to come to an agreement.
- For another point I am convinced the engineer has more overhead cost. Both entities have cost in form of computer, plotter and CAD program, which are in my mind minor as that cost spreads over several years use. The engineer has regular cost that add up: liability insurance, annual licensing fees (in my case three states), membership fee for engineering associations (in my case five associations), the professional development requirement (which is a cost for attending seminars plus the cost of lost billable hours), the cost of codes and reference materials, and the cost of engineering soft wares.
- Finally, one of the constant problems this particular CAD Tech had in the previous office was he did not have enough work so admittedly had to stretch his hours.
It's not easy! I have a hard time believing that five years of school plus four years of internship plus the liability plus the larger overhead would be reflected in either the $90 / $65 hourly rate or a 65% / 35% fee split.
Eric McDonald, PE
McDonald Structural Engineering, PLLC
$65/HR=$135,200 annual salary for a cad operator if busy full time. Seems steep to me. Who finds the work. While friendship is a nice extra in a business relationship it doesn't mean that you have to give away your fee. I recommend that you research the going rate for contract drafting in your market and base what you are willing to pay on that amount taking into account the skills of the person you are working with.
$65 is a billing rate, not a pay rate. It includes overhead. In fact, many of our CAD people bill at closer to $80. This would correspond to a 2.8 or 3.0 markup rate on the actual salary. Smaller firms or contract labor could have lower overheads, perhaps approaching 2.0. Rate also depends upon whether they are redline drafters or experienced designers - CAD does not equal CADD. Some of the better, seasoned designers actually bill out at higher rates than the newbie EIT's and are worth every penny.
- Thread starter
- #17
Yes, the $65 is the billing rate, not pay rate. Other free-lance CAD Technicians charge $25 to $35 in this area, but are not experienced with structural CAD.
cvg: In order to get a relative idea what the $80 represents for experienced CAD personel: What would you expect a licensed principal with 12 years experience would bill out for?
Eric McDonald, PE
McDonald Structural Engineering, PLLC
cvg: In order to get a relative idea what the $80 represents for experienced CAD personel: What would you expect a licensed principal with 12 years experience would bill out for?
Eric McDonald, PE
McDonald Structural Engineering, PLLC
- Thread starter
- #19
-
1
- #20
I assume by "licensed principal" you mean an engineer / officer in the company. Generally this category would have significantly more than 12 years experience. However, a Principal Engineer in my large firm would bill at about $150 per hour (or more) A 12-year experienced, registered engineer would bill out at more like $100 or $110, however this individual would not be a principal or even an associate - just "Engineer" or "Project Engineer".
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Question
- Locked
- Question