Todd, Without getting into specific cases, I have turned in more than 15 on the consulting/specifying side. I have had no negative experiences from this. All complaints are addressed by the state, and they send letters explaining any actions taken or agreed to. I also have a "rubber stamping" problem in my area, and it is not limited to Fire Protection. I am fortunate to have an active Regulating Board here in Missouri. In all cases, the State was not aware there was an alleged problem, until the complaint was filed. They do the investigating, they do the follow up. Our job is to let them know. Todd Williams - FPDC <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Jeff,
You, as a PE on staff with a contractor is very much the exception, rather then the rule, especially in this part of the planet. Off hand, I can only think of one contractor in CT with a PE on staff and that is because it is a family business and the son went to school specifically to do that. As an independent, the only time I am invited back is if there is a significant enough change that someone thinks I need to address it, or it is required for sign-off by the AHJ. Fortunately, most of my clientele are focused on doing the job right so in the installations I have seen I rarely see obvious problems. Just out of curiosity, how many PE's have you 'turned in'? My total is one. Never heard anything back from anyone. Todd At 11:17 PM 4/3/2008, you wrote: >Again, sorry for the late response, I'm away from the office. > > Todd, > > while it was off of my point, let me answer your question > directly, how many times has an installer changed my > drawings? NONE!! Not once without my knowledge and blessing. I > set the standards for my company, our drawings and installations > are completed under my supervision as a licensed engineer, and our > fitters do not make changes without asking first, they know better > than to try. And yes, I do check my company's installations. And > yes, I realize that I am an exception. I am not a consultant for > hire, but rather a full time employee of ONE contractor, beholden > to that contractor only. > > I think you have directed my comments off point. I realize and > agree that there is plenty of blame to go around, from specifying > PE's to Layout techs and installers. Don't get me started on that tangent. > > My comments are specifically directed at those repeated > complaints about unqualified engineers that show up on this forum > from time to time. I understand the frustrations involved, I have > to deal with them myself. Installers and layout techs creating > problems is one thing, but PE's, we're talking about licensed > professionals here. If they're not qualified, they need to be > cited and stopped. Same as doctors and other regulated > professions. No excuses. gather your evidence and turn them > in. My experience has been that it does not take much for most of > them to wake up when the Regulating Board comes calling. > > I realize you were addressing the installations, but Mark did > play the PE card. > >Todd Williams - FPDC wrote: > The complaint here is not about the engineering, but the >installation. We are talking about what is physically in the >building. You're a PE, Jeff; how many times has an installer changed >your drawings? My guess is a lot. I know in my situation, I am rarely >asked to certify an installation once it is complete. I don't hold up >anybody's money and I don't hold up the CO. Then the last eyes for >seeing the job was done right is the AHJ. If it is not caught there, >that's how it remains. The fault may well be with the specifying >engineer (if there is one), but it may lie elsewhere. > > >At 10:07 PM 4/2/2008, you wrote: > >Sorry for the late reply to Mark's comments, I've been travelling all day. > > > > I saw this and felt compelled to repeat my previous thoughts on > > this issue. Mark's comments bring me to a statement that I have > > made on here before, and I will likely again, the next time this comes up. > > > > You cannot just complain about this PE issue. Turn them > > in!! There is no other way. Their regulating Boards can do > > nothing without a complaint, and for that matter thay will NOT even > > know about it, unless WE speak up and do something about it. > > > > Yes, that's right, an engineer telling you to turn in a fellow > > engineer. I will not defend anyone that claims this or anything > > else as an area of expertise when they are not actually qualified. > > > > Turn them in! And don't get fed up if nothing happens right > > away. Their investigations may take a while. > > > > Again, rather than seeing all of these complaints about inept > > specifying engineers, let's all do something different now, or it > > will only get worse. > > > > Gather your facts, file the complaint, and turn them in. > > > > > > Jeff Hewitt, PE, SET, MSFPE (Professional Member) > > Corporate Engineer > > Bi-State Fire Protection Corporation > > St. Charles, MO 63301 > > > >Mark Sornsin wrote: > > When I "look up" at work that is incorrect, I always wonder if there was > >an engineer of record involved on the project. Then I wonder how much > >money they were paid to be the "engineer of record." Then I wonder how > >much time they actually spent on their "performance spec" that included > >no performance criteria outside of references to code. > > > >Obviously, mine is a cynical perspective of my colleagues in the > >engineering world. I certainly understand the reality that there aren't > >enough skilled engineers to be involved on all sprinkler projects. To > >say the typical "performance spec" is criminal may be excessive (maybe > >they couldn't get enough fee to do the project justice...?) But I do > >know that all engineers who rely on their blanket statement about > >systems "meeting code" (but don't have the ability to verify compliance) > >to are teed-up nicely to lose the litigation battle should a fire ever > >occur. As Chris has reminded us, there seem to be an inordinate number > >of screwed up systems out there, so it's really a wonder why more > >engineers aren't brought to task through litigation. Sometime I wonder > >if it is because of the ironic fact that "everyone" knows the mechanical > >engineer is not the expert - it's the sprinkler contractor. So > >engineers are forgotten when problems arise...??? > > > >Don't mean to tangent into another PE-bashing thread, but it just peeves > >me that there are "professionals" getting paid for being lazy fools. > > > >Mark A. Sornsin, PE > >Fire Protection Engineer > >Ulteig Engineers, Inc. > >Fargo, ND > >701.280.8591 > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Chris > >Cahill > >Sent: Wednesday, April 02, 2008 12:29 PM > >To: [email protected] > >Subject: Do you look up? > > > >I imagine, like me, you all (ya'll for some of you) on the very rare > >occasions you are not working look around at sprinkler systems where you > >live, shop and play. > > > > > > > >It's a very rare occasion I don't see something that appears deficient. > >For > >example, in a grocery store the one head on the back side of the main is > >missing over HPS and a mess of piping creating a ceiling without heads > >under > >them, at a Home Depot 190 psi on the wet side of an auxiliary dry valve, > >or > >the local high school with sidewall heads about 15-20' down from the > >peak of > >the very large skylight. This is all in the last two days as an example > >but > >see similar all the time. > > > > > > > >The sad part is I'm not really trying. What if I had the plans and > >calcs, > >how much more would there be? Or really looked at the whole building > >instead of a casual look at where I happen to be? Or the scary part > >what if > >I actually considered the hazard vs. the design? > > > > > > > >I also realize two issues - most times what I see probably won't cause > >the > >system to fail in a fire IF that is the only thing wrong. There is a > >"probably" and an "if " in the last sentence which means there are cases > >that will fail, just not many IMHO. And second we make mistakes too. > > > > > > > >The heads at the peak - just because an AHJ didn't call it a deficiency > >doesn't mean it's OK. Certainly it is possible there is a documented > >and > >proactively approved alternate method out there on this but I strongly > >doubt > >it. Now I'm sure the missing head has a perfectly rational explanation > >of > >how it got like that. The W.O. is there and it must be plugged or the > >system is off. It's not a TI thing long after the original > >construction; > >this is a very new building. Can't rationalize how you get 190 psi by > >accident or approval. > > > > > > > >MN is more regulated than most (but not all) areas. Do you see this > >stuff > >too? What if anything can you really do about it? > > > > > > > >Chris Cahill, P.E. > > > >Fire Protection Engineer > > > >Sentry Fire Protection, Inc. > > > > > > > >763-658-4483 > > > >763-658-4921 fax > > > > > > > >Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > >Mail: P.O. Box 69 > > > >Waverly, MN 55390 > > > > > > > >Location: 4439 Hwy 12 SW > > > >Waverly, MN 55390 > > > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >Sprinklerforum mailing list > >[email protected] > >http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum > > > >To Unsubscribe, send an email > >to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field) > >_______________________________________________ > >Sprinklerforum mailing list > >[email protected] > >http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum > > > >To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field) > > > >_______________________________________________ > >Sprinklerforum mailing list > >[email protected] > >http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum > > > >To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field) > >Todd G. Williams, PE >Fire Protection Design/Consulting >Stonington, Connecticut >www.fpdc.com >860.535.2080 >_______________________________________________ >Sprinklerforum mailing list >[email protected] >http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum > >To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field) > >_______________________________________________ >Sprinklerforum mailing list >[email protected] >http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum > >To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field) Todd G. Williams, PE Fire Protection Design/Consulting Stonington, Connecticut www.fpdc.com 860.535.2080 _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field) _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
