PE Stamped Rebar Shops

[dcarr82775]

A contractor we work with has a project where the Gov't requires the steel reinforcing shop drawings to be prepared and stamped by a P.E. I have never seen such a requirement and it seems pointless (yes I know the Gov't requires all sorts of pointless things).

I am willing to review the shops and write/stamp a letter saying as much, but am not comfortable stamping reinforcing shop drawings saying they were prepared under my supervision (they were not). I am having trouble defining what stamping rebar shops would even really mean (liability and real world wise).

Has anyone else run into this?

 

[hokie66]

The requirement is not for a PE to stamp the drawings, it is for the drawings to be "prepared and stamped by a PE". So you can't stamp them. The contractor needs to hire a PE to do the drawings.

Not sure about now, but in my first design office job, we often did reinforcing steel shop drawings, for our jobs and for jobs designed by others.

 

[MiketheEngineer]

In most states if you do a complete review and are happy with the results you can indeed stamp them.

BUT - bottom line - you are also now responsible for them!!

 

[JAE]

dcarr,

You cannot - in most states - apply your seal and signature to an engineering document that you did not have direct supervision over. The use of a seal/signature in most states simply states that you were the engineer that prepared the sealed plans. That is all a seal does.

In this case, the government is asking for a "stamped by PE" set of shop drawings - which could possibly mean they want you to apply your standard shop drawing stamp to it - that you reviewed it for conformance and acceptability to the contract documents....not your PE seal/signature. You might check to see if this is the case.

If they insist that you seal/sign the shop drawings I would tell them that you cannot lawfully do so and explain why. Then you could write a signed/sealed letter stating that you have reviewed them, corrected any inconsistencies in the shop plans, and returned for fabrication.

All of the above here is consistent with AISC Code of Standard Practice (see section 4.4).

I would also balk at signing/sealing shop drawings because this not only is a feeble (and illegal) attempt to use my seal but also might imply that you are now responsible for the dimensional fit-up of the steel (which you are not per AISC COSP 4.4).

 

[dcarr82775]

To be clear, I understand what stamping a drawing entails (the contractor asked me for a review, but the specs use the word 'prepared' which set off my alarms). The drawings were not prepared under my supervision, so unless they pay me to start from scratch I will not be stamping them.

I suppose my original post was more of an intellectual exercise as to why on earth would someone require rebar shop drawings to be stamped by a P.E.. To me it serves no purpose.

 

[Ron]

dcarr82775..."prepared" by does not necessarily mean prepared by you or your staff. I often work from drawings that were drawn by a draftsman not on my staff, I review them, make necessary changes, they are corrected and we go on.

The test is whether you have CONTROL over the content of the drawings, not who prepares the drawings. If you have complete review and revision capability on the drawings, then you have established your "responsible charge" criteria.

 

[graybeach]

If you do end up stamping the drawings, you might want to add notes that say the drawing is based on the rebar layout provided in the engineer's design drawing. Say the engineer's design drawing shows #9 at 12", and the loads are such that #11 at 12" are required. You should not be responsible for this. If there is a design drawing that show the required rebar, it is questionable why a PE seal would even be required on a rebar shop drawing. I would advise the contractor to take exception to this requirement.

 

[bdlc2k]

dcarr82775

If you are to sign and seal them, you should review the design and make any changes you feel are necessary. If you are not given this option and/or the shop wants you to sign off as is, you should consider walking away from the job.

 

[dcarr82775]

We agreed I wouldn't be stamping anything. I will review as I would any other set of rebar shops, then pass them along to the actual engineer to review. I also got a liability waiver from the client.

 

[Teguci]

I will second Ron's response. However, how do you structurally check a rebar shop drawing? There are no engineering decisions to be made in the production of rebar shops.

As I go through the NSPE definition of Responsible Charge

http://www.nspe.org/IssuesandAdvocacy/TakeAction/PositionStatements/ps_resp_chrg.html

I could say that stamping the rebar shops is eqivalent to stamping a blank sheet of paper. ie there are no engineering decision or actions being taken on either and all of the NSPEs requirements are therefore met. Of course a lot of CYA notes would be applied to the shops but in effect, our gov is handing you free money.

 

[Qshake]

I have seen requirements change over the years where some agencies do require shop drawings to be sealed by a PE. I've always taken this to be a matter of quality that the agency was trying to address and not a matter of life safety.

Regards,
Qshake

Eng-Tips Forums:Real Solutions for Real Problems Really Quick.

 

[TXStructural]

I would imagine the concern is in the process of turning engineering drawings into production/fabrication shops. A rebar detailer will make numerous decisions, based on the construction document. Much to the chagrin of many detailers, CD's often note something along the lines of "lap lengths shall comply with ACI 318-08". It is not possible for the detailer to determine which factors are appropriate for depth of cover, tension or compression, etc. For instance, when a design requires continuous bar in excess of the available material (60 feet), the detailer will lap bars. The purpose of having an engineer preparing shops is to avoid incorrect decisions, but proper CD's provide all the required information, such as default lap length values.

 

[keenaseng]

Slightly off the issue of 'stamping' reo drawings (and maybe more directed only to Australian engineers) - why is it NOT common practice in Australia to review conventional formed slab reinforcement schedules/shop drawings? We review structural steel shop drawings, post-tension shop drawings, precast concrete drawings etc, but not normally the reo shop drawings?
The main answer I have had to date is that you 'pick up any mistakes during your site inspection of the reo' - This is true, but I would prefer to pick up those missing bottom beam bars before they have tied the top slab reo (and I'm sure the steel fixers would prefer that too!)
Obviously engineer's inspections are still required to ensure the reo is laid in accordance with the shop drawings, but in my opinion reviewing the shop drawings is an extra step that reduces the risk of site errors.

 

[TXStructural]

I reviewed a set of reinforcing shops for a job I designed, finding that they had reversed the top and bottom bars for the pier-supported grade beams, such that the top bars were spliced at ends and the bottom bars spliced at midspan. Errors do happen, and it is common practice in the States for the designer to review shops.

 

[hokie66]

keenaseng,
It is not common practice in Australia to produce reinforcement shop drawings...they just work off schedules. I was surprised by this when I first came to Australia, but the schedulers and bar setters are skilled in this system, and it usually works. I don't think the need for on site inspection is changed, because errors can be made with either system.