RobertHale
Structural
- Jan 4, 2007
- 163
First a little background on how I have been addressing the requirements of Chapter 17. I do not know if this is the case in other areas of the US, but here in the southeast US (Georgia specifically), we as structural engineers are typically responsible for producing the documents required by Chapter 17 of the IBC. I have some philosophical objections to this (e.g. EIFS, Smoke Control Systems) but overall I am resigned and willing to do this task. As a side note to these reservations, I think Tennessee's structural association had a pretty good idea of segregating specialties when they released the draft of TNSEA 1-13 Special Inspections Guide for Tennessee. Aside from Tennessee's presumably stalled attempt, the Structural Engineer's Association of Georgia (SEAOG) has done a pretty good job for creating a standard set of forms to use on projects inside the state. (I think the SEAOG forms and schedules are direct derivatives of CASE's forms, but I cannot find all the old forms at the moment).
At the place I currently work, we typically use the SEAOG forms for the statement, the Requirements for Seismic Resistance, and the Requirements for Wind Resistance. We will take the forms and fill out the pertinent structural information: Project Name and Address, the engineer stamping the structural documents as the “Structural Engineer of Record”, SDC, wind speed, and the structural elements of the two requirements forms. We do not take responsibility as the form preparer or as the Registered Design Professional in Responsible Charge. We also take the SEAOG Schedule and fill in the “applicability” column for the structural elements. We produce an administrative specification section we call “Structural Testing/Inspection Agency Services.” My understanding of the company’s policy is to have the Schedule placed immediately after this specification section, but since we just package up the schedule and the statements and ship them off to the architect, we never really have control of that placement. I have worked at firms in the past that generated their own forms to be used, and were willing to stamp the statement as the preparer (I have racked my brain but I cannot remember if they also stepped into the “Design professional in responsible charge). Recently I have been getting requests to place the statement and the schedule on large form factor sheets to match the plans and details, but this is rare.
So with the preceding information stated, here is what I would like to know from the rest of the community:
[ol 1]
[li]Are the majority of the jurisdictions you are working in enforcing the provisions of Chapter 17?[/li]
[li]Are you taking an active role in preparing the statements and schedules if they are enforcing the provisions?[/li]
[li]Do you take the statements from “cradle to final design documents” as it were or do you do something half way like we do?[/li]
[li]Do you use forms generated outside your firm (such as CASE or NCSEA associations) or have you generated in-house forms and schedules?[/li]
[li]Are you taking the role of “Design Professional In Responsible Charge”?[/li]
[li]How do you deal with the requirements for non-structural elements like EIFS?[/li]
[li]How do you typically present or expect to have the statements and schedules presented in the design documents? (I.e. in a project specification manual, in the drawing sheets, stand alone, etc.)[/li]
[/ol]
I would appreciate any details you would like to share about how you deal with Special Inspections and your reasoning about why you deal with Special Inspections the way you do.
At the place I currently work, we typically use the SEAOG forms for the statement, the Requirements for Seismic Resistance, and the Requirements for Wind Resistance. We will take the forms and fill out the pertinent structural information: Project Name and Address, the engineer stamping the structural documents as the “Structural Engineer of Record”, SDC, wind speed, and the structural elements of the two requirements forms. We do not take responsibility as the form preparer or as the Registered Design Professional in Responsible Charge. We also take the SEAOG Schedule and fill in the “applicability” column for the structural elements. We produce an administrative specification section we call “Structural Testing/Inspection Agency Services.” My understanding of the company’s policy is to have the Schedule placed immediately after this specification section, but since we just package up the schedule and the statements and ship them off to the architect, we never really have control of that placement. I have worked at firms in the past that generated their own forms to be used, and were willing to stamp the statement as the preparer (I have racked my brain but I cannot remember if they also stepped into the “Design professional in responsible charge). Recently I have been getting requests to place the statement and the schedule on large form factor sheets to match the plans and details, but this is rare.
So with the preceding information stated, here is what I would like to know from the rest of the community:
[ol 1]
[li]Are the majority of the jurisdictions you are working in enforcing the provisions of Chapter 17?[/li]
[li]Are you taking an active role in preparing the statements and schedules if they are enforcing the provisions?[/li]
[li]Do you take the statements from “cradle to final design documents” as it were or do you do something half way like we do?[/li]
[li]Do you use forms generated outside your firm (such as CASE or NCSEA associations) or have you generated in-house forms and schedules?[/li]
[li]Are you taking the role of “Design Professional In Responsible Charge”?[/li]
[li]How do you deal with the requirements for non-structural elements like EIFS?[/li]
[li]How do you typically present or expect to have the statements and schedules presented in the design documents? (I.e. in a project specification manual, in the drawing sheets, stand alone, etc.)[/li]
[/ol]
I would appreciate any details you would like to share about how you deal with Special Inspections and your reasoning about why you deal with Special Inspections the way you do.
