Thanks! JAE. Read the thread, with Ned,..near a shed. All good points! I'm a calc guy, personally, unless I know I can produce a quick supporting calc or code reference table or Simpson page number to support my drawings. In most of my submittals, calcs are required for the primary structural elements of my structures. Secondary structural elements sometimes receive a little more leeway in plan checks. Here we see the acceptance of drawings with simply the appropriate engineer's stamp sometimes taking care of the bill. Hoards of third party plan check companies, existing solely as such, making as much as, or maybe more than I do to design a building to check it, vary in intensity in their reviews. When spinning and redistributing rigid diaphragms forces in multistory buildings, it's not a bad idea to have someone glancing over your results,"or at least to see if you've done such". This is my theory on plan check reviews,....which I do, myself,...occasionally. I don't spend to much time checking math. I do check to see if major numbers look consistent, like story forces and whether collectors have been designed using the appropriate load combinations. Other than that, I look at the process to see if the major components are there, represented with some leeway as to the order and neatness of the package as we are all different animals with our own "means and methods of engineering". Above all, I do look for ownership for the components of the whole shebang, or at least that everyone got pecked at least once along the pecking order.
In my little PV example, we had a design/build company with engineers on staff, subbing out all engineering but stamping the construction documents as the design build company/contractor. The Wind Tunnel study stamped a letter saying that the project geometries appeared to be compliant to the loads derived in the small scale model used in their study. The structural engineer using the values from the wind tunnel study stamped his anchorage calculation package. The PV racking supplier, claiming all information proprietary finally, after much duress, provided a very simplified/typical FEA analysis by another structural engineer of a similar but not enveloping racking layout covering most of the racking configurations for the project. However, the main members in the FEA model were topped out in allowable capacities and the non-typical arrangements on the project documents appeared to double and triple the tributary load to the same members. Yet, the design/build engineer of record ready to okay and stand behind supplier based upon his warranty for "parts and labor".
In my mind, I see the future finger pointing legal battle of who was responsible for the design of what part of what component using whose design information since so many engineers had their fingers in the pudding on this one. I simply asked the million dollar question,...."Will the real racking system engineer please stand up?" Fine,...we don't need further calcs at this point, however, as a minimum we would like to see your exclusive stamp and notation stating such,...on the drawings, or in letter form to be kept with the job records and/or drawings. If you're sure of your work, calcs or no calcs, you can do this,..yes?
And that's where this story ended. Per slta's post above, in my opinion, either they don't have the engineering data, don't want to pay someone to produce it, or they don't like the results they got back from the man they paid for the results who thus will not stamp the drawings with my little note request.
Thus, I feel calcs are necessary and I'm not completely happy with myself that I've given up the good fight and not asked for even "more hard calcs". Like Jerry McGuire movie line, sort of,..."Show me the Calcs!" Come on people,...charge more for your projects, hey, why not, you can include time for calcs. We'll still lose our budget butt's anyway, but not by as much though. Where's the warranty on public safety? Isn't that what we've all sworn to protect. Parts and Labor? Stepping down now, soapbox relinquished. Have a good weekend. Thanks to JAE and all others who responded.
