Just turned a client away (at his mutual suggestion) who has "been building these things this way for years." Told him that his glulam posts won't resist the lateral wind as currently sized and refused to be swayed by inertia. This is on top of informing him, previously, that a 50% increase in soil bearing capacity is not legit for sizing footings (this is based off of a PE stamped "standard" calculation). As much as I hope the "next" engineer explains the error of his way, I know all too well that some lonely 70+ year old engineer out there might not do his due diligence. What are your thoughts and experiences?
Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!
Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!
-
Congratulations JAE on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
Told a "built it this way for years" client he was wrong 6
- Thread starter Teguci
- Start date
-
1
- #2
Engineers who are willing to compromise their ethics and consider never getting caught is appropriate risk management come in all ages, shapes and sizes. "Plan stampers" also come in all ages, shapes and sizes.
I agree with you and applaud your stance to an ignorant client, but age has nothing to do with such practices. Check your state board's reprimand history....new and old alike are there.
I agree with you and applaud your stance to an ignorant client, but age has nothing to do with such practices. Check your state board's reprimand history....new and old alike are there.
good for you!
would it be too pissy to advice the local planning approval people, in case someone else approves this ?
i have a similar customer, who's "done it this way for years" and thinks i'm an unnecessary evil, 'cause the authorities want detail reports on his projects.
would it be too pissy to advice the local planning approval people, in case someone else approves this ?
i have a similar customer, who's "done it this way for years" and thinks i'm an unnecessary evil, 'cause the authorities want detail reports on his projects.
jstephen,
You may, in fact, be right, but then he should be able to articulate that and not just say, "I've been doing it this way for years". My response to that statement now is quite simply, "Well, maybe they've never actually seen their design load yet.".
Teguci,
I also applaud you. We are the design professionals, not the contractor's monkey. If they have a good way to do something, then I'm all for listening, but at the end of the day we need to be comfortable with the decisions that we make that impact the safety of the public. You just can't compromise on that.
You may, in fact, be right, but then he should be able to articulate that and not just say, "I've been doing it this way for years". My response to that statement now is quite simply, "Well, maybe they've never actually seen their design load yet.".
Teguci,
I also applaud you. We are the design professionals, not the contractor's monkey. If they have a good way to do something, then I'm all for listening, but at the end of the day we need to be comfortable with the decisions that we make that impact the safety of the public. You just can't compromise on that.
-
1
- #6
I am fighting an ongoing battle of this type with regards to timber shoring. The industry over here has been using timber sizes that cannot be justified and I am always hit with that arguement.
This is why engineers exist, to protect clients from their own ignorance.
This is why engineers exist, to protect clients from their own ignorance.
I work on the client side and love to be told I'm wrong. It's happened many times. It's just wonderful when consultants consider my comments and prove that I'm off base. And when I'm not off base, it's also wonderful when a consultant sees and understands what I'm saying. Stick to your guns, but also try to really understand what the client is talking about.
MiketheEngineer
Structural
My responses typically are:
After 20 years of doing it this way - you should know better
Well, you have been doing it wrong for 20 years.
Time to go back to training.
BUT YOU BETTER BE DAMN SURE YOU ARE RIGHT!!!
Because you will be eating a lot of crow and lose any respect you might have had with them. Having grey hair also helps!!
After 20 years of doing it this way - you should know better
Well, you have been doing it wrong for 20 years.
Time to go back to training.
BUT YOU BETTER BE DAMN SURE YOU ARE RIGHT!!!
Because you will be eating a lot of crow and lose any respect you might have had with them. Having grey hair also helps!!
graybeach- you are rare and the type of client we would all want to work with or for...
I was lucky to get exposed to this very early in my career, and my boss taught me how easy it is to say no to these types of guys. Way easier than dealing with their BS. Anyone asking how much you charge for plans or to stamp something is not worth your time, he does not know why he needs you and may never, so why bother. Even if they agree to your fee, these types are usually the hardest to collect from and will be a pain in your butt the entire project, second guessing everything. There is a big difference like you guys have said between "can we do it this way, what do you think?" and taking an argumentative stance.
Doctors don't like patients who come in loaded to the gills with WebMD info, and think they know more than the guy who went to med school and has been practicing 30 years ago. They want their patients to trust in them and heed their advice, and not be stubborn in their own ways...
I have never understood the statement "This is the way I have been doing it for XXX years and..."
So we never want to improve? No new knowledge has been gained in construction in the last 5, 10, 20 years? We have learned from Hurricane Andrew, Loma Prieta, and tons of research and experience...
Does the contractor still use a hammer and hand saw and mix concrete on site by hand? We still using horses? Its completely illogical. Our field is an ever-improving and ever-changing science, and those at the forefront understand that. Its a lot harder to convince your local good ole boy contractor type of this mindset though...
I was lucky to get exposed to this very early in my career, and my boss taught me how easy it is to say no to these types of guys. Way easier than dealing with their BS. Anyone asking how much you charge for plans or to stamp something is not worth your time, he does not know why he needs you and may never, so why bother. Even if they agree to your fee, these types are usually the hardest to collect from and will be a pain in your butt the entire project, second guessing everything. There is a big difference like you guys have said between "can we do it this way, what do you think?" and taking an argumentative stance.
Doctors don't like patients who come in loaded to the gills with WebMD info, and think they know more than the guy who went to med school and has been practicing 30 years ago. They want their patients to trust in them and heed their advice, and not be stubborn in their own ways...
I have never understood the statement "This is the way I have been doing it for XXX years and..."
So we never want to improve? No new knowledge has been gained in construction in the last 5, 10, 20 years? We have learned from Hurricane Andrew, Loma Prieta, and tons of research and experience...
Does the contractor still use a hammer and hand saw and mix concrete on site by hand? We still using horses? Its completely illogical. Our field is an ever-improving and ever-changing science, and those at the forefront understand that. Its a lot harder to convince your local good ole boy contractor type of this mindset though...
msquared48
Structural
Heard it too many times... ![[nosmiley]](/data/assets/smilies/nosmiley.gif "[nosmiley] [nosmiley]")
A lot of building codes have come and gone since Hammurabi.
Mike McCann
MMC Engineering
A lot of building codes have come and gone since Hammurabi.
Mike McCann
MMC Engineering
-
1
- #13
I had this same conversation (on a very cordial basis) with a client not long ago. The structure was a wood framed building with laminated columns. I was convinced that the bearing capacity suggested by the client/contractor were far too high.
We agreed to research the issue. He eventually found justification for the bearing pressure increase. It was by reference in the IBC to an Agricultural Engineers handbook for wood framed buildings. I did not believe it at first, but discussed the issue with the local code office and found that the contractor was in fact correct.
Long story short, I was wrong. The contractor at first did not know why what he was doing was justified, but was able to find it after doing some research.
My lesson learned was to not dismiss anyone, until I have proved to myself that they were wrong.
We agreed to research the issue. He eventually found justification for the bearing pressure increase. It was by reference in the IBC to an Agricultural Engineers handbook for wood framed buildings. I did not believe it at first, but discussed the issue with the local code office and found that the contractor was in fact correct.
Long story short, I was wrong. The contractor at first did not know why what he was doing was justified, but was able to find it after doing some research.
My lesson learned was to not dismiss anyone, until I have proved to myself that they were wrong.
I agree with your stance.
I think your stance is the norm not the exception.
I have had the same position for 50 years.
I do however have distain for your remark "70+ year old engineer out there might not do his due diligence"
I have always don due diligence, oh by the way I am 71 years old
and I have been both a contractor and a structural engineer
I think your stance is the norm not the exception.
I have had the same position for 50 years.
I do however have distain for your remark "70+ year old engineer out there might not do his due diligence"
I have always don due diligence, oh by the way I am 71 years old
and I have been both a contractor and a structural engineer
- Thread starter
- #15
Ron - just picking on older engineers who might not be concerned with a wind event that will only happen every 100 years or so.
RB1957 - I don't think local planning should act as the control. The buck needs to stop with the license. There are times when we need to be sure we are right. Those times usually come with a higher budget.
JStephen - The client may be right, but more likely he has been lucky. I am a pretty creative engineer and I spent some time arguing with myself before telling the client what options he has.
Lion06 - I could make a good monkey too!
csd72 - star for you for fighting. If the codes have too high of a safety factor then fix the codes not your calcs.
frv - Thank you.
graybeach - I am on board with that. You remind me of the Johnson Wax Headquarters load test F L Wright had to perform. I try to approach structural issues academically.
Mike the Engineer - I am working on the grey hair!
a2mfk - I agree we are moving forward. Just got the latest IBC and ASCE 7. Supisingly even bigger!
msquared48 - Hammurabi was a performance designer.
OHIOMatt - Great info (star)! Just went through the ASAE EP 486.1 (the old agricultural handbook) which does allow a 300% increase to the presumptive bearing! If only I had known about this when I was designing spread footings for 2000+Kip loads! OK, kidding aside, the Agricultural handbook applies to the wood design but arguably does not apply to foundation footings. The scoping is clarified at the beginning of Chapter 23 (Wood) and 18 (Foundations). Apparently this is a throwback to the UBC which allowed the 20% increase per foot of depth or width.
RB1957 - I don't think local planning should act as the control. The buck needs to stop with the license. There are times when we need to be sure we are right. Those times usually come with a higher budget.
JStephen - The client may be right, but more likely he has been lucky. I am a pretty creative engineer and I spent some time arguing with myself before telling the client what options he has.
Lion06 - I could make a good monkey too!
csd72 - star for you for fighting. If the codes have too high of a safety factor then fix the codes not your calcs.
frv - Thank you.
graybeach - I am on board with that. You remind me of the Johnson Wax Headquarters load test F L Wright had to perform. I try to approach structural issues academically.
Mike the Engineer - I am working on the grey hair!
a2mfk - I agree we are moving forward. Just got the latest IBC and ASCE 7. Supisingly even bigger!
msquared48 - Hammurabi was a performance designer.
OHIOMatt - Great info (star)! Just went through the ASAE EP 486.1 (the old agricultural handbook) which does allow a 300% increase to the presumptive bearing! If only I had known about this when I was designing spread footings for 2000+Kip loads! OK, kidding aside, the Agricultural handbook applies to the wood design but arguably does not apply to foundation footings. The scoping is clarified at the beginning of Chapter 23 (Wood) and 18 (Foundations). Apparently this is a throwback to the UBC which allowed the 20% increase per foot of depth or width.
- Thread starter
- #16
bylar - knew I'd get flack for it and deserve to. You are obviously not who I was referring to. Even so, I am referring to a licensed engineer with experience, who operates on his own (probably without insurance) and who isn't concerned about an event that isn't likely to occur within the rest of his lifetime. This could be a 30 year old but probably not. Even so, "He who is faithful with little is faithful of much..."
My experience: That it's easy to be embarrassed in situations like this. There are multiple design approaches for many problems, and you might be "seeing" it through the lense of one of the (too?) conservative approaches. If you show the problem to another engineer, he might see deeper into the behavior and say that you're being too conservative. The client might be closer to correct.
That has happened to me before. Not saying you're doing this, because there's not enough info to judge, but just a thought.
-
1
- #18
epitome1170
Structural
Glad you took the high road.
I think a lot of us have been in similar positions. I know I have with a client that I wanted to impress in order to get larger jobs, but I told him an answer he did not like and so he went to another engineer and got the answer he wanted.
I agree with some that there may be some "rationale" that another engineer uses that gives them a comfort feeling for stamping the drawing, but I will not stamp them if *I* do not have that feeling. We have gone through too many tests and too much training to squander the oppurtunities that we have and wasting them by letting a client decide what we feel comfortable with.
I imagine it does not help that I am a young engineer (30) and so look inexperienced to a client because of the lack of gray hairs. However, I have been through my fair share of trials and tribulations and am more than competent. I had hoped that when I got my S.E. that would help to ease worries, but it doesn't. So as a word of encouragement, keep on pushing on and doing what is right... eventually, your clients will notice and realize that you are doing what is best for them as well as yourself.
I think a lot of us have been in similar positions. I know I have with a client that I wanted to impress in order to get larger jobs, but I told him an answer he did not like and so he went to another engineer and got the answer he wanted.
I agree with some that there may be some "rationale" that another engineer uses that gives them a comfort feeling for stamping the drawing, but I will not stamp them if *I* do not have that feeling. We have gone through too many tests and too much training to squander the oppurtunities that we have and wasting them by letting a client decide what we feel comfortable with.
I imagine it does not help that I am a young engineer (30) and so look inexperienced to a client because of the lack of gray hairs. However, I have been through my fair share of trials and tribulations and am more than competent. I had hoped that when I got my S.E. that would help to ease worries, but it doesn't. So as a word of encouragement, keep on pushing on and doing what is right... eventually, your clients will notice and realize that you are doing what is best for them as well as yourself.
paddingtongreen
Structural
Most of the "stamp anything" people I have encountered were not 70 years old, Through a fifty plus year career, I don't remember a single one. Plenty of middle aged and younger ones stamping pre-engineered buildings designs.
Have you actually met one such or are you PO'd at an older guy right now?
Signed, One PO'd 76 year old.
Michael.
Timing has a lot to do with the outcome of a rain dance.
Have you actually met one such or are you PO'd at an older guy right now?
Signed, One PO'd 76 year old.
Michael.
Timing has a lot to do with the outcome of a rain dance.
epitome1170
Structural
Pad-
I think he made a false generalization more to make a point than age discrimination (as he stated previously).
I have met an older engineer though that had no business signing and sealing the documents he did. I have also met some middle aged and young engineers do the same. Likewise I have met very competent engineers that span the age spectrum as well so your generalization is just as derogatory as his.
I think he made a false generalization more to make a point than age discrimination (as he stated previously).
I have met an older engineer though that had no business signing and sealing the documents he did. I have also met some middle aged and young engineers do the same. Likewise I have met very competent engineers that span the age spectrum as well so your generalization is just as derogatory as his.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Question
- Question