Masonry wall out of plumb 4

[SteelPE]

I have a project that I am working on that is currently under construction (IBC 2015). The building is a single-story masonry bearing building supporting open-web steel joist and metal decking. Steel erection began last week and today I was told by the steel fabricator (who I work very closely with) that the masonry wall is out of plumb over 120’ of a 300’ long masonry wall. The wall is quite tall 29’ and I have been on the GC from the beginning about proper construction of the perimeter walls.

I don’t know exactly why the wall is out of plumb. I am guessing it wasn’t quite properly braced as during my last site visit, I found a large brace that wasn’t anchored to the deadman. It is in this area that the wall is out of plumb.

How do you go about fixing a masonry wall that is out of plumb? I can’t say that in 20 years I have ever had this happen before.

The out of plumbness is causing joist bearing issues on the wall (which is how this error was picked up).

I am not exactly thrilled at the moment.

 

[Aesur]

@BAretired, I cannot say if their insurance policy would cover it or not as I am not privy to sub contractors or contractors insurance policies and I'm sure they vary significantly in coverage in the industry. I can however see that if the EOR allows the wall to stay as is or gives any inclination of it being ok then his insurance could find themselves dealing with it should it fall. There needs to be a fine line between means and methods and in this case it is my opinion the contractor should pay the EOR to find a fix, even if if it is tear down and replace, but the EOR needs to be careful in how they proceed with recommendations and should consider telling them they need to hire a shoring engineer to determine if shoring is needed.

I have unfortunately seen a CMU wall fall because it wasn't shored/braced before the finished structure was in place, relying on the finished structure (diaphragm) to brace it once everything is built. The contractor didn't brace it, the wall came down, the EOR helped them in finding a solution to reuse some members that were twisted and in doing so opened himself up to a claim against his insurance because the contractor used the new connections, that held the twisted members in place after bending back to the right position, against the EOR claiming the design was bad in the first place. Once a claim starts it get's expensive for the EOR just to fight it typically, usually costing more than the fee for the project even was. Because of seeing this and other claims against engineers in the past I tend to be cautious in how to respond to contractors who are typically out to save money, cut corners and figure out ways to have change orders or make someone else pay for their mistakes. There is something seriously wrong with this industry where the contractors make huge profits and the engineers make little profit yet have to do most of the thinking for the contractors.

 

[r13]

I've little reservation on Aesur's responses on whether building a 29' masonry wall is a typical/common practice or "atypical". If it is occurs quite often, then the typical contractors would have enough knowledge and experience, and be the sole responsible party for the success or fail. However, if it is atypical (not so common), then the construction procedure (care) and qualification of the builder should often be addressed during the bidding process. The engineer could be held partially responsible if the risks are not properly/clearly communicated in the design document.

When bad thing happens, the engineer shall act only through request of the owner, and/or request for corrective action by the contractor, all on papers and be documented. The engineer shall only issue corrective measures, that has no doubt in mind, to restore the failed structure back to the original design without adding extras. Everybody still can elect to sue anybody, but your base is covered through proper documentation of the development.

 

[BAretired]

Aesur,

I was a little taken aback when you expressed surprise that a 29' high by 300' long masonry wall was braced and that in your area, similar walls are routinely unbraced. NCMA have recommended requirements for bracing masonry walls during construction. If the contractor cannot show that NCMA requirements were met or exceeded, he runs the risk of having his insurance claim rejected in the event of collapse due to wind.

I can't say that I agree that the contractor should retain the EOR to find a fix, as that would be a potential conflict of interest. The EOR is likely to find himself in a can of worms if he instructs the contractor on measures to be taken to fix the wall or even if he provides advice on how to fix it. Your recollection of a similar incident where the EOR opted to help the contractor is a case in point.

BA

 

[hokie66]

I am not doubting that it happens, but not bracing a wall that high is grossly negligent. Similar to unbraced trenches in that regard, and both cost lives.

 

[Aesur]

@Retired13 & BAretired, I wanted to clarify that I see walls built that tall all the time in my area of the country without bracing, not that I agree with it. In my earlier post I was saying I was surprised because in my area it's not common to brace it; not that I'm surprised because it isn't needed. I believe masonry walls should be braced when being built. Sorry if my sarcasm caused a little confusion.

Based upon the research I have done, per OSHA if the wall is over 8' (if I recall correctly) off the ground it must be braced. However bracing can be done with 2 methods, one with physical braces, the other by creating zones that cannot be entered and continuously monitoring the wind speed and evacuating the site when the wind gets too high, at least that was my understanding from a quick read.

@BAretired, you make a great point about not hiring the EOR for the fix; however I see all too often that the EOR gets brought in when the contractor messes up and is expected to fix it by the owner and architect, usually for free. It's a tough spot to be in from a client relations standpoint. It is definitely best to get a contract in place before even talking about how to fix it and to get it in writing what happened, why it happened, and who was at fault to try to avoid costly lawsuits.

 

[masonrygeek]

If you really want to know more about bracing masonry walls you need to get a copy of "Standard Practice for Bracing Masonry Walls Under Construction" (Dec. 2012) published by the Mason Contractors Assoc of America (

http://www.masoncontractors.org)

but developed by the masonry industry. It provides the maximum height of unbraced walls, evacuation requirements during certain wind speeds and connection design. It takes all the guess work out of bracing masonry walls during construction. NCMA's technical literature follows the same guidelines. Tbere are also publications about the use of internal bracing where the reinforcing steel is used to temporarily support the wall while the strength increases (

http://imiweb.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/IMIInternalBracingGuide.pdf

and

https://www.structuremag.org/?p=2016).

This is a life safety issue and should be taken seriously. While this is beyond the OP's question, I thought it was important to bring up.

 

[r13]

When bad thing occurs during the life of the constructed structure, the engineer is rarely not affected, and is very unusual not to get involved. Depending the nature of the issue, any advice, opinion, corrective action should be issued/offered with "no cost to the owner" and "holding no harm to.." clauses clearly stated. To me, stay silent is not a good way to avoid liability, which could be assigned by the accuser, or his attorney anyway. Showing care and proper concern usually go a long way.