Implications from One Engineer Having a Different Opinion Compared to Another 1

[mfstructural]

Hey Everyone,
I'm a structural engineer and got my SE about a year and a half ago. I started my own business about a year ago and have been doing some small jobs on the side. My dad owns a construction company so I tap into his network for clients. Recently through my mother in laws friend I was called to a condo building because they had some questions.

It turns out that the condo association and property management company didn't maintain much in the last 20 years. In particular they called me there because their balconies are rusting and they wanted an opinion. They actually wanted me for a second opinion. They had gotten a report from a known firm in the area already. This all started because someone from the condo association hired an engineer to check the balconies and they reported their findings in their report. In short, the report stated the balconies were unsafe to stand on and no one was allowed to be one the balconies. Of course people can do whatever they want. But there were upset so they contacted the building lawyer. The lawyer ended up siding with the engineer and posted a sign in the lobby that no one is allowed on the balconies. They are obviously doing this to cover themselves.

This include two 5 story buildings (92 balconies in total). They consist of two C-channels cantilevering out from the wall. Smaller intermediate channels cantilever out in between the larger end channels. At the ends of the cantilevered channels, another large channel is picked up. A deck sits on the intermediate channels and a concrete deck is poured on top.

All the steel is rusted to different degreees, some really bad some not so bad. In any case, the engineer they hired gave them a set of drawings last week that calls for removing the entire existing balcony except intermediate channels cantilevering from the wall and rebuliding. The rebuilding consists of significantly larger members, like a 6x4 HSS as the header and sides.

There are several issues. It's difficult to replace the existing cantilevered channels. You would have to break the ceiling in the units to attach them...there is not a way to get in there. Additionally, in my opinion this is overkill. The majority of the people in the building are over 65 I'd say and don't have much money. I ended up showing up at the end of a board meeting to get the design drawings (assuming they wanted us to do the construction) but they decided it would be way to expensive to replace framing and railings. they also specified to galvanize the entire balcony, also extrememly expensive.

They are already assessing special assessments for the next 9 years on them!! crazy.

So my question here is what are the implications if I find another engineer or I myself do a design and go against what the other engineer specified? I know that as long as I'm sealing it and have shown that it works it should be ok to do this.
In my opinion, if you remove the concrete and decking (this is necessary because of water infiltration) and sandblast the existing, then repaint and specify that welds need to be a size and it works then you are saving some money and the design still works.

There is more than one way to skin a cat and I think this is a cheaper option that can save these people some money.

Thanks
Mike

 

[IRstuff]

That could be equally or more expensive, one might think. What happens when you sandblast and find there's no there, there? So, after incurring the cost of the sandblasting, they have to do what the other company prescribed anyway?

TTFN
faq731-376

Need help writing a question or understanding a reply? forum1529

 

[mfstructural]

Hey IRStuff, You said "there's no there there" Do you mean weld? If there is no weld there you can't grind out the existing, prep the surface and re-weld? The cost of removing and reinstalling cantilevers may be much more expensive with respect to sandblasting external work. And this was shown by the the bids they got back in July when they started getting into this.

If you don't mean weld, please clarify.

Thanks

 

[zdas04]

A big part of my practice is peer reviews of other Engineer's work. Usually a peer review consists of a list of points where I agree with the original Engineer, a list of neutral points (i.e., I wouldn't do something the way the original Engineer did it, but his way would be expected to provide similar performance at a similar cost), and a list of things I see as deficient. As you might imagine, I spend most of my time on the last list and generally include an alternate design concept (but not alternate designs). Usually the report goes back to the original Engineer and they write another report about what a slug I am. addressing my concerns. Usually, they have a chance to "fix" their design based on my report. Sometimes I'm asked to step in and re-do the design. This is REALLY thin ice. Providing a second Engineering opinion is ethical. Poaching work is not. A couple of times I've passed on the work and recommended a third firm. Once the client fired the first firm outright (they were already not happy when they hired me) and offered me the work. After a lot of soul searching I declined due to "other commitments". I'm pretty sure that if I'd taken the work I'd have been in front of the board on an ethics charge and probably in front of a judge for defamation.

What you've described above reads like poaching work. I can't see where you were engaged to do a peer review, so you really don't have standing in the discussion. There are some jobs that you just walk away from.

David Simpson, PE
MuleShoe Engineering

"Belief" is the acceptance of an hypotheses in the absence of data.
"Prejudice" is having an opinion not supported by the preponderance of the data.
"Knowledge" is only found through the accumulation and analysis of data.
The plural of anecdote is not "data"

 

[hokie66]

Agree with David, especially since this is a condominium project. Can of worms.

 

[IRstuff]

"If you don't mean weld, please clarify."

What I meant was that you had stated that the rust is to varying degree, so there may be balconies where the rusting is so bad that the material is no longer usable for any purpose.

TTFN
faq731-376

Need help writing a question or understanding a reply? forum1529

 

[mfstructural]

Yea, I'm stuck in a bad position I think. I think doing the construction work would be good, but getting into the design here would be problematic. I was called in for a "second opinion" by the family friend. I was extremely hesitant to give any opinion because they already hired an engineer. However, the owner, condo board is not happy with the design and they feel like it's too expensive and want to hire a different engineer to come up with something else. They asked me I told them I'd have to get back to them. If I were starting from scratch as the first engineer, I might be more interested. But it doesn't feel right since they already got a design from someone else.
Although at the firm I worked at before this has happened before where a client was not satisfied with the design and went somewhere else. This usually happened when you were doing work directly for owners not architects, and it didn't happen often.
I politically told them they should go back and talk to the engineer to see if they can modify the design, but they are unwilling.
So it seems the option is to tell them I'm not interested in the engineering and if they get design drawings I'd be interested in bidding construction.

 

[msquared48]

I agree here with David and Hokie too. Condo projects for Architects, Engineers, and Contractors, are notorious for litigation, and unless you have E&O insurance, stay away. All the liability for the design of the deck, and any subsequent damage to the rest of the building, becomes yours with a redesign if it is ever used.

Remember too that the trip put upon you by the owner that the solution of the other engineer is just too expensive, does not mean you have to solve it. "The rescuer becomes the victim" - never forget it. No Mr. Nice Guy here.

Mike McCann
MMC Engineering

 

[JedClampett]

Here's a nice little article discussing condominium work:

http://www.gostructural.com/magazine-article----are_you_kidding_-9423.html

As the others have said, I would run away. You're dealing with multiple elderly clients, with nothing but time on their hands, thinking they can get rich by suing a deep pocketed engineer. They're having meetings, airing grievances, generally stewing in their own bile. If everything goes perfect, you've saved them a little money, but they're still complaining about the money they did spend. And god forbid, if something goes wrong, they're going to be waving that first engineer's report in your face when they're in the courthouse.

 

[mfstructural]

I agree, I was hesitant in the first place. Sounded like a can of worms the minute I got there. Then when I showed up and they were in the middle of the board meeting they were fighting like cats and dogs. I'm going to pass on this one. I can tell them I (my dad's company) am interested in bidding on construction work once they figure out what they want to do and leave it at that.
Thanks everyone

 

[hokie66]

Good decision. Just to add a bit more, in accepting the design work, you would also be placing yourself in a position where you could be accused of conflict of interest.

The other firm has probably taken the right approach, which is that of least uncertainty. Temporary works in terms of scaffolding, site barriers, etc will form a big part of the cost of the work, either way you do it. But doing as much of the work off site, e.g. steel fabrication, galvanizing, possibly precasting the concrete deck sections... this would save time on the project as a whole, and on the temporary elements in particular. Removing some ceiling for installation of the cantilevered members will be a nuisance, but this is what happens when maintenance is neglected.

 

[mfstructural]

I did think about that actually and was going to mention it but wanted to talk about the engineering first. What about firms that do design build? I'm assuming since two separate business entities are doing each, this is why. If you had setup a company and did both and took responsibility for both, would that be a conflict of interest? Was always curious about how this exactly works because there are design-build firms.

In terms of litigation and condo boards I agree. This building has not been maintained in 20 years. This is just the beginning of their special assessments. All the lintels are rusted, no flashing, brick beginning to crack over windows, new roofing required, new carpets. It's crazy. I will avoid living in a condo for the rest of my life if I can based on what I've seen here and these people are on the hook for it.

 

[hokie66]

When design-build first took hold, I thought that conflict of interest was a problem, and I still think that. But my opinion doesn't matter much, and that ship has sailed.

It sounds like this building is a nightmare, and without the resources to fix it. Best not to make it your nightmare.

 

[rowingengineer]

I agree with everyone else here. I don't really have much advice to add, but I like the way David deals with this issue.

http://www.nceng.com.au/

"Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to build bigger and better idiot-proof programs, and the Universe trying to produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the Universe is winning."

 

[Ron]

This is the world I live in. A second opinion is fine...and often necessary for a condo association...just be sure you know what you're doing when you give it. Admittedly you have little experience...only 18 months or so since licensing.

Many engineers, particularly when dealing with condo associations, will lean to a conservative answer. Nothing wrong with that, considering the group you're dealing with. The Association will often make decisions on emotion (it affects their single largest investment in their lives...often their life's savings), not valid technical data.

Cantilevered balconies are commonly a problem and can present a life safety issue...so tread carefully. Anything less than a proper repair could be construed as negligence on your part.

I agree with hokie66 and zdas04....it's tricky but a necessity.

One thing I see as a concern is an ethical battle you are going to face...you are doing engineering that might benefit your dad's business....stay away from that. I have the same opinion of design-build as hokie66. When you are considering remediation on a design-build basis, I don't see how it cannot be a conflict of interest.

 

[zdas04]

The only way that a design-build remediation is not a serious ethical problem is when it is a fixed price job. You give them a hard-dollar bid to design the fix and build it. You are sticking your neck way out spending the effort to do a bid-quality design before you have a contract, but anything else is just too thin on the ice.

David Simpson, PE
MuleShoe Engineering

"Belief" is the acceptance of an hypotheses in the absence of data.
"Prejudice" is having an opinion not supported by the preponderance of the data.
"Knowledge" is only found through the accumulation and analysis of data.
The plural of anecdote is not "data"

 

[hokie66]

David,
I don't see that a fixed price removes the conflict of interest of the designer. The designer is still conflicted between the owner and the builder, I think generally to the owner's detriment. There are a number of contracting devices (e.g. novated contracts where the completion of design and construction is awarded after much of the design is defined) which attempt to overcome these issues, but the results are spotty.

 

[MrHershey]

Talk to you lawyer and think long and hard before you get involved in any condo renovation work. Especially once water intrusion and/or corrosion is involved. You will get sued. Maybe not this time, maybe not next time. But you will get sued. Make sure you understand this and build it into your fees or else you'll end up paying your lawyer more than the entire fee you got for the project.

 

[casseopeia]

Cantilevered balconies are notoriously difficult to waterproof and maintain, hence the problem with rusting. Some municipalities do not allow them anymore.

If you decide to get involved, my suggestion is to do only a single elevation, or a small portion of the building, initially on a case-by-case basis, evaluating and recording the condition of each balcony as you go. From that data, you can project what repair method may work the best. And the data will be useful in defending the decision to go a certain route of restoration and repair. You will also need the data of what is found and what level of repair is required during rehabilitation to take into litigation.

I have found that continued communication with a condominium board is essential, but be prepared for the resident nut job...there is always one.

If you are offended by the things I say, imagine the stuff I hold back.

 

[TomDOT]

Back on the topic of remaining steel - my experience on steel bridges is almost universally that once abrasive blasting has fully removed the rust, there is a lot more repair work (and less steel remaining) than was originally called for in the plans. This is why I frequently carry a small rock hammer in the field, and sometimes use it to demonstrate that there is no steel left under the rust scale by putting the pick end through the web of a girder.