I practice in an area where there a few native sites being developed. Most sites are covered with a decent thickness of non-engineered fill ranging from practically trash to soils that require an experienced eye to discern whether it is made ground or not. Since such materials are "undocumented" unless available records indicate otherwise, we require complete removal (over-excavation and replacement) within the influence zone under footings and slabs. This is of course when shallow foundations are specified and the cost to remove the fill is more economic than deep foundations or in-situ ground improvement. Regardless of the number of borings or tests pits that have been done during the site investigation phase (and logs included in the bid documents), the company I work for elects to bid such projects as lump sum unless the client requires otherwise. This requires the contractor to inherit more risk and interpret the subsurface data to estimate a volume of artificial fill to base his bid. I'm just curious to know what people's thoughts on this are and if there are better ways of doing it. I've had a few instances now where contractors don't seem to realize that the undocumented fill had to be removed, even though it states it in the bid drawings and specifications. Most of these projects are for public clients who are required by law to accept the lowest bid.
Red Flag Submitted
Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts. The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.
Reply To This Thread
Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.
This 22-page report from Instrumental identifies the most common production defect types discovered in 2020, showcases trends from 2019 to 2020, and provides insights on how to prevent potential downtime in 2021. Unlike other methods, Instrumental drives correlations between a variety of data sources to help engineers find and fix root causes. Download Now
Several of the tooling and casting requirements of a part can be addressed at the design stage. If these requirements are not addressed at the design stage, lot of time is spent in design iteration when the design reaches the die caster. These design issues lead to increase in time and cost of production leading to delay in time to market and reduced profits for the organization. Download Now
The benefits of cost and time savings using effective collaborative mechanisms at the right time have been highlighted in this white paper. DFMPro, CAMWorks and eDrawings together improve collaboration. Download Now
Assembly level constraints need to be satisfied before the design can move downstream. This white paper will go through the various assembly level issues, which need to be tackled by various organizations on a regular basis. Download Now