Structural Specifications

Log Out | Topics | Search Moderators | Register | Edit Profile

Author Message Robin E. Snyder Senior Member Username: robin Post Number: 398 Registered: 08-2004 Posted on Monday, May 07, 2012 - 08:58 pm:    I seem to always be struggling to get Structural specifications for the Structural Engineer. I know there has been some discussion in the past as to whether the specification writer should provide masters for their review (some do it, some don't), but what about when the SE outright says his notes and drawings are sufficient? If there are no special architectural features (ie; decorative concrete, exposed steel etc), are the GSN sufficient? Is it worth the potential liability to insist they review my master if they say their notes have all the information? Nathan Woods, CSI, CCCA, LEED AP Senior Member Username: nwoods Post Number: 447 Registered: 08-2005 Posted on Monday, May 07, 2012 - 09:06 pm:    Good questions that I do not have a definitive answer for, but i can see that I've never had a problem with not having structural steel specs other than the GSN's. I have experienced problems with primer on steel (in relation to fire proofing or exposure), but that can also be rectified with sheet notes and or comments in the relevant fire proofing and paint sections. Erection tolerances and all that are covered pretty well by the ASTM's with one exception: AESS (Architecturally Exposed Structural Steel), including decorative stairs. Actually, the Misc Metal sections have bitten me hard when something is omitted from the "work includes" list, such as roof ladders, equipment screens, gates, etc... but I digress. Before I sign off, I want to stipulate that I am only saying not having structural steel specs has been okay in my 15 years of CA experience on a very wide variety of project types. Concrete, misc metal, AESS steel, steel deck, primers and coatings, etc...are an altogether different matter. Nathan Woods, CSI, CCCA, LEED AP Senior Member Username: nwoods Post Number: 448 Registered: 08-2005 Posted on Monday, May 07, 2012 - 09:07 pm:    I can "say", not see. Paul Gerber Senior Member Username: paulgerber Post Number: 103 Registered: 04-2010 Posted on Monday, May 07, 2012 - 10:59 pm:    Robyn, I doubt that the drawing notes address items such as Reference Standards, Sumbittals, Testing & Inspection, installation procedures, tolerances etc. Sounds like you have a lazy Engineer on your hands. Ask the Architect if their agreement with the SE specifically excludes specification production. If it doesn't then tell the Engineer to do his job! As far as providing specs, there are a couple of engineers that we work with whose specs quite honestly scare me. I usually suggest that we would prefer to use our spec sections for better coordination reasosns and I send them off early in the process to allow them to review and comment. After the first couple of projects, the response I usually get is an enthusiastic "OK!" because I think they realize the specs aren't that great. Ride it like you stole it!!! Doug Frank FCSI, CCS Senior Member Username: doug_frank_ccs Post Number: 293 Registered: 06-2002 Posted on Tuesday, May 08, 2012 - 08:11 am:    Project size and scope certainly have a bearing on this question. However, for a typical multi-story steel or concrete framed structure, a typical Cast-In-Place Concrete spec section provided by a structural engineer will have a page and a half about Submittals and another page and a half about QA and QC Testing. The same is true about a Structural Steel spec section. If complete submittal and testing requirements are not included in the general notes you’re not getting some of the most important stuff. Further, in the concrete section, there are lists of acceptable manufacturers and products for things like under-slab vapor retarders, waterstops, curing and sealing compounds, seven or eight different admixtures, and other related stuff (about three more pages). If you’re not getting all of this typical specification information in the engineer’s general notes, you’re not getting a complete package and your Owner is not getting the benefits of competitive pricing. I have seen projects where the structural general notes take up three full 30 x 42 drawing sheets or even more. Those general notes typically include a bunch of references to other (incorrect) section names and numbers as well. Who hired, and is paying for, the structural engineer? You should certainly not have to modify your project specs to accommodate inadequacies in your consultant’s documents. Doug Frank FCSI, CCS, SCIP Affiliate FKP Architects, Inc. Houston, TX ken hercenberg Senior Member Username: khercenberg Post Number: 223 Registered: 12-2006 Posted on Tuesday, May 08, 2012 - 09:32 am:    Wow, I thought I was having a bad experience just trying to get Statements of Special Inspections from some of my structural engineers. One even has me edit the architectural aspects of their concrete specs, things like formwork for exposed concrete, patching, ff and fl, finishing and even curing. When I'm done, they review it and sign off, rarely if ever changing my edits. Mark Gilligan SE, Senior Member Username: mark_gilligan Post Number: 474 Registered: 10-2007 Posted on Tuesday, May 08, 2012 - 07:11 pm:    In my experience General Notes are not adequate to address the issues on any moderately size project. They will work as long as you are lucky and are not too particular as to what is provided. In addition general notes are typically disorganized and not very thorough. Engineers who insist on only having general notes on moderate size projects typically do not have a good understanding of specifications. Erection tolerances are addressed in the AISC Code of Standard Practice (COSP) which needs to be used carefully unless you want to give away the store. The COSP has a provision that unless you catch problems in the shop drawings the Owner pays for the cost of correcting the problem if found later. I personally find that most of the structural master specifications sections provided by architects scare me. They are either for a totally different scope or work or they are out of date. In many cases these supposedly masters are the specification sections used by their normal consultants. The problem persists because Architects and specification writers do not insist on decent specifications and do not coordinate structural specifications for consistency with Division 01. Architects and specification writers also typically do not coordinate how the structural specifications impact with visual issues and architectural systems. Tom Gilmore, AIA, CCS, CCCA, LEED AP Senior Member Username: tgilmore Post Number: 32 Registered: 04-2007 Posted on Tuesday, May 08, 2012 - 07:15 pm:    Ken, I’d like to work with that structural engineer, if you’d share their name! We like to co-edit the structural sections. Fresh examples in my mind are tolerances and underslab VB for 033000. Since we use SpecLink, and few consultants subscribe, we typically send an all text draft pdf of the sections for their on-screen markups. They often do an incomplete job of it, expecting us to make assumptions we don’t want to make. I’ve considered creating a separate section for architectural issues with concrete, but it would be nice to put the primary responsibility on them once in a while. John Regener, AIA, CCS, CCCA, CSI, SCIP Senior Member Username: john_regener Post Number: 553 Registered: 04-2002 Posted on Tuesday, May 08, 2012 - 07:35 pm:    If structural notes are adequate and structural specs are not needed according to the Structural Engineer of Record, then leave them out and advise the project Architect of Record that you are doing so. The consequences, if indeed negative, will be a "learning experience" and you don't have to get stressed out about it unless you are one of those spec writers who tries to be professional and interdisciplinary. As Nathan Woods points out, there are more than "structural" considerations in structural specifications. Gerard Sanchis Senior Member Username: gerard_sanchis Post Number: 72 Registered: 10-2009 Posted on Tuesday, May 08, 2012 - 07:57 pm:    In the Los Angeles area, the building and safety departments of the various municipalities will not accept specifications in book form so the structural engineers have developed a set of general notes that cover the “structural” portion of the specs to satisfy the AHJ. In addition, the engineers provide us with full 3-part specs. However if the project includes AESS, we will write and supplement the structural steel specs with an AEES section. We also write a concrete finishing section and ask the structural engineer to exclude curing and finishing from the document that he/she prepares; for the most part structural engineers’ documents do a poor job of specifying curing and finishing of concrete. We stay away from cast-in-place architectural concrete and recommend to our clients that they employ an architect or engineer that specializes in this type of work to write those specs. As an aside to the four horsemen, I’m an architect originally from Montréal. Before I left for sunnier skies, I learned most of what I know about specs taking classes given by Construction Specifications Canada. As for Patmos, it was on the way to see Hagia Sofia and the Parthenon (I can now die in peace), including the new museum by Bernard Tschumi built to house the Elgin marbles that England now refuses to give back to Greece.