JayStern
Mechanical
- Aug 28, 2003
- 3
Hello,
I have a client that requests all designs submitted to be the minimum required by code. It is first cost that drives their decisions. When working with this client, I find myself having to defend standard design practices (example of what they want: non standard corrosion allowances, lighter schedules on small diameter pipe, fewer weld inspections, etc). Most of our standard piping specifications have to be rewritten in order to be reduced to the minimum required by CFR, API, and ASME. Our standard piping specifications are comparable to those used by large corporations in the petrochemical field in that they exceed the minimum requirements of the relevant codes. Whenever I feel that design considerations are marginal, I document the potential for problems in writing and send the information on the client. When working for this client, I do not have the comfort level that I enjoy with most of my designs. I am sure that if there is a liability problem down the road, I will be in the line of fire. What is the most compelling reason not to design to minimum required by code, but instead, use experience to know when to exceed minimum code requirements? Should this client be dropped because they are more of a liability than an asset?
Jay
I have a client that requests all designs submitted to be the minimum required by code. It is first cost that drives their decisions. When working with this client, I find myself having to defend standard design practices (example of what they want: non standard corrosion allowances, lighter schedules on small diameter pipe, fewer weld inspections, etc). Most of our standard piping specifications have to be rewritten in order to be reduced to the minimum required by CFR, API, and ASME. Our standard piping specifications are comparable to those used by large corporations in the petrochemical field in that they exceed the minimum requirements of the relevant codes. Whenever I feel that design considerations are marginal, I document the potential for problems in writing and send the information on the client. When working for this client, I do not have the comfort level that I enjoy with most of my designs. I am sure that if there is a liability problem down the road, I will be in the line of fire. What is the most compelling reason not to design to minimum required by code, but instead, use experience to know when to exceed minimum code requirements? Should this client be dropped because they are more of a liability than an asset?
Jay