Engineer or Special Inspector

[jar546]

Would you be OK with a special inspector signing off on this, OR would this need to be addressed by the engineer? Looks like the plate was not in the right place for the bar joists.

I vote for the engineer, how about you?

 

[ICE]

If this is the same job as the form blowout and the funky CMU work, I would bet that when it's all said and done the address on the building will be upside down and backwards.

These folks should have an engineer on site while they are working. Oh, that's one engineer for each trade.

 

[mtlogcabin]

As long as the used Gorilla Glue as an adhesive it should be fine.

 

[Mark K]

If the construction documents are clear and the inspectors are qualified there is no need for the engineer to act as an inspector.

I fear that there is confusion about the role of the project engineer. The engineer should visit the project early on to get a sense as to the quality of the work and the contractor's understanding of the project and to answer any questions the Contractor may have but there should be no expectation that the engineer will inspect all of the work. It is not appropriate for the building department to assign an inspection obligation to the engineer of record.

If the inspector finds that the construction does not comply with the construction documents and if the Contractor can't or doesn't want to correct the problem without changes to the CD's then the engineer needs to get involved.

 

[ICE]

If the construction documents are clear and the inspectors are qualified there is no need for the engineer to act as an inspector.

I fear that there is confusion about the role of the project engineer. The engineer should visit the project early on to get a sense as to the quality of the work and the contractor's understanding of the project and to answer any questions the Contractor may have but there should be no expectation that the engineer will inspect all of the work. It is not appropriate for the building department to assign an inspection obligation to the engineer of record.

If the inspector finds that the construction does not comply with the construction documents and if the Contractor can't or doesn't want to correct the problem without changes to the CD's then the engineer needs to get involved.

Clearly the contractor needs someone with authority to stop the absurd mistakes before they happen. A special inspector documents the absurd mistake and then watches it happen. Not that I would suggest that‘s a role for your flavor of engineering.

 

[Mark K]

While the Owner can stop the work this seldom happens because when the problem is brought to the attention of the contractor the problem is typically addressed.

In general the engineer does not have the authority to stop work. After notifying the contractor the engineer notifies the Owners representative. If changes to the construction documents are needed to resolve the non-compliance the engineer will be involved in designing the fix.

When an inspector reports a non compliance the contractor is on notice that if he ignores the problem he will be responsible for the cost of correcting it. Thus a contractor that continues to do non-conforming work or covers such work up is not very smart.

The building department can issue a stop work order.

 

[ICE]

In general the engineer does not have the authority to stop work. After notifying the contractor the engineer notifies the Owners representative. I

It would require an engineer that’s not averse to getting his hands dirty.

 

[Msradell]

It would require an engineer that’s not averse to getting his hands dirty.

Very true and it seems like fewer and fewer of them are willing to do that. In addition few of them are now in them to do Designs, all they do is copy and paste from previous drawings.

 

[Mark K]

It would require an engineer that’s not averse to getting his hands dirty

It would also require a stupid engineer. The engineer's contract does not give him the authority to stop work. If the engineer attempted to stop work on his own authority the Contractor would charge the Owner for the costs associated with stopping work. The Owner would expect the engineer to pay the costs.

 

[jar546]

While the Owner can stop the work this seldom happens because when the problem is brought to the attention of the contractor the problem is typically addressed.

In general the engineer does not have the authority to stop work. After notifying the contractor the engineer notifies the Owners representative. If changes to the construction documents are needed to resolve the non-compliance the engineer will be involved in designing the fix.

When an inspector reports a non compliance the contractor is on notice that if he ignores the problem he will be responsible for the cost of correcting it. Thus a contractor that continues to do non-conforming work or covers such work up is not very smart.

The building department can issue a stop work order.

I think that just maybe you are under the assumption that every building owner has a representative that competent in construction and building codes and is often on the job site. While this is true on some projects, it is not true on all projects. I would love to have an owner's rep who is well-versed in construction on the job site. I think having an owner's rep certainly carries some weight since they control the flow of money. On another note, I have been known to contact the engineer directly whenever I had issues with a contractor. That seems to get the contractor's attention too. There are times when you don't want to shut a job down and affect the lives of all of the workers, so a call to the engineer and/or owner always seems to do the trick.

A stop work order is a last-ditch effort to gain compliance.

 

[Mark K]

Communication is always a good strategy.

The Architect is typically the interface between either the inspectors or the contractor and the owner, but does not have unlimited authority to speak for the owner. Also with rare exceptions a representative of the architect is not on the job site all the time. Do not expect this reality to change.

I have been involved with enough projects not to have unrealistic expectations. An engineer engaged with construction administration cannot be naïve and must learn how to play hardball when needed.

I believe that inspectors should have an understanding of the nature of the contracts involving the architect, the engineer, and the contractor.

An interesting book that gives you some insight to the contractor's perspective is "Contractor's Guide to Change Orders" by Civitello. Know thy adversary.

 

[Mark K]

When a jurisdiction tries to require the engineer perform inspections they are regulating the practice of engineering, an authority they do not have.

There are a number of reasons why the engineer designing a project can and will not be special the special inspector.

The engineer who designed the project knows the project better than any outside special inspector. Thus there is no reason why a jurisdiction should say that the engineer cannot be a special inspector.

An engineer is expected to know his limits and not practice outside his area of expertise. This is one reason why most engineer have no business inspecting welds.

If an engineer regularly performed inspections he would find his insurance premiums to be higher or he might find that he could not purchase insurance. This could mean that he could not work for clients that require he have insurance.

In many engineering offices the chief engineer, often the owner of the firm, is the engineer of record for all of the projects even though the project engineer who designed the project is properly licensed. So by requiring the EOR perform the inspections you would be req

Since special inspectors need to be on site when the contractor is performing his work this would mean that the architect or engineer would not have control over when he could be in his office. This would create problems when the EOR's office was far from the construction site. For example the engineer gets a call that the next morning at 7AM 300 miles away the contractor needs a special inspector at the job site.

 

[mtlogcabin]

With the ability to send photos and videos it is quicker to go directly to the DP with the problem and get an okay within 15 to 20 minutes versus leaving the problem to the contractor to follow through and get an answer.
I call it good customer service when we try to keep the job going by getting quick answers directly from the person who designed that portion of the job that has the problem.

 

[SCBO1]

Would you be OK with a special inspector signing off on this, OR would this need to be addressed by the engineer? Looks like the plate was not in the right place for the bar joists.

I vote for the engineer, how about you?

Engineer needs to be involved and most likely has been provide a report from the GC provided by the special inspector.

A special inspector hired and approved by the AHJ would be provided with plans to view and the install would need to match the plans so the project complies.

If the special inspector determines that the install does not comply it usually comes back as a deviation or discrepancy.

At that point if the Building Official was receiving the SI reports could chime in and ask it the Engineer of record has been made aware of the issue and request a correction.

Special inspector is just that a Inspector knowledgeable in a special field.

You probably have a certified welder involved too?

 

[Paul Sweet]

A third-party special inspector inspects to verify whether the work complies with the contract documents and should send copies of inspection reports to the A/E. A special inspector does not have authority to accept work that doesn't comply with the contract documents. He should highlight the discrepancy on his report.

The A/E is responsible for reading these reports and either stating that the discrepancy is within tolerance, directing the contractor to submit a proposed correction for A/E approval, or designing a correction and directing the contractor to do the correction.

BTW, either somebody didn't do a good job of reviewing the shop drawings, or the fabricator didn't follow them.

 

[steveray]

SI only approves to the approved drawings.....If it is not approved.....well....

 

[jj1289]

EOR must review and sign off. SI do not have the qualifications or authority to sign off on this "repair"

 

[Tim Mailloux]

on most of my larger projects that have a special inspector the special inspector and the structural engineer of record are one in the same.

 

[ICE]

A special inspector hired and approved by the AHJ

In California, the owner hires the SI from a list of AHJ approved SI. Inspectors can un-hire the SI.

You probably have a certified welder involved too?

Certified by LA City if working in LA County.

A special inspector does not have authority to accept work

A SI never "accepts" work. The jurisdiction's inspector accepts work.

special inspector and the structural engineer of record are one in the same.

Never seen that. In my experience, engineers are not competent inspectors. The structural observation reports created by engineers are mostly window dressing.

 

[SCBO1]

A special inspector hired and approved by the AHJ

In California, the owner hires the SI from a list of AHJ approved

Yes, the SI is hired by the owner and we have a AHJ approved list and general idea who does this type work in our area.

 

[ICE]

AHJ approved list

LA County held interviews by a panel of three County employees. Usually two inspectors and one engineer/manager. I hated doing it. It came down to a performance that determined his/her/them working in LA County or not. We were provided a list of questions and answers. I went off script. About 80% passed.

The interview duty came once a year. I had to drive to HQ. Entertain people I hardly knew. Listen to the arcane questions that caused the applicant to search one book of a stack of books. Then vote yay or nay. The biggest mistake they could make would be a quick wrong answer. Rather they not know but able to find it.

I always posed a scenario type inquiry. Such as: You are called out to a residential job to witness epoxy anchors at wall plates due to a correction written by the local inspector that states, "Place anchors per plan". The plan set is vague enough that someone not familiar with construction would easily miss a few anchors. In the course of this task you notice missing anchor bolts to one degree or another. What do you do?

Answers ranged from I point out the missing anchors to I wasn't there to supervise the work. Guess which is the correct answer.

When I interviewed for the inspector position for LA County PW/BS not one code question was asked. I wondered about that and one of the panel members told me that they wouldn’t know what to ask.

 

[Yankee Chronicler]

If you read Chapter 17 carefully, you will find that "special inspector" means two different things. One is the entity that is in overall charge of the special inspections program -- the special inspection coordinator. The underlying intent of the code and the engineering professions when special inspections were first added to the codes was (and remains) that this should -- preferably -- be the engineer-of-record.

But the special inspectors (plural) who perform the specified tests such as soil compaction, concrete slump and air entrainment, weld tests, etc., are not the engineer-of-record himself, but technicians certified in the respective specialties, such as ACI certification for testing concrete or AWS certification for a welding inspector.

As has been commented, special inspectors (the field technicians) have NO authority to accept anything that doesn't fully comply with the approved construction documents. In fact, they are required by the code. IBC 1704,2,4 says:

Reports shall indicate that work inspected
or tested was or was not completed in conformance to
approved construction documents. Discrepancies shall be
brought to the immediate attention of the contractor for correction.
If they are not corrected, the discrepancies shall be
brought to the attention of the building official and to the registered
design professional in responsible charge prior to the
completion of that phase of the work.

 

[Tim Mailloux]

Never seen that. In my experience, engineers are not competent inspectors. The structural observation reports created by engineers are mostly window dressing.

what I have seen in my neck of the woods is that the owner hires a licensed testing agency that actually performs the inspections. The special inspector is usually the structural engineer of record hired under an additional service whom establishes the testing and inspection requirements for the testing agency to follow.

 

[Yankee Chronicler]

what I have seen in my neck of the woods is that the owner hires a licensed testing agency that actually performs the inspections. The special inspector is usually the structural engineer of record hired under an additional service whom establishes the testing and inspection requirements for the testing agency to follow.

That's the problem -- there are two meanings to "special inspector." If you really dig down, each technician doing a particular series of tests (soil compaction, concrete properties, welding) is a "special inspector." But the person running the special inspections program is also referred to in the code as "special inspector," and elsewhere as the "special inspections coordinator." I prefer to think of it as "Special Inspector" (capitalized) and "special inspectors" (lower case).

I'm a licensed architect as well as a building official, and I was when special inspections were first being discussed for inclusion in the building codes. It came about as a result of several rather spectacular collapses around the country. I was initially opposed to letting the engineer of record have anything to do with special inspections, because I thought of it as a way to allow them to cover up their mistakes. After discussing it with respected members of my state's professional engineering society, I reversed my thinking. Their point was that (1) nobody knows the design better than the guy who designed it; and (2) it's their professional liability that's on the line, so they don't have any incentive to cover up mistakes. If anything, they would want and mistakes to be identified so they can be corrected during construction.

If you read through the CASE (Council of American Structural Engineers) white paper on special inspections, it is predicated on the concept that the engineer-of-record should be the Special Inspector, and hiring someone else to fill that role should be the exception rather than the rule.

Also keep in mind that special inspections is different from structural observations, which are also addressed in chapter 17 of the IBC.