IBC vs. design build

[boffintech]

I have heard it said that many industry experts agree that the project delivery method known as "design build" is the most profitable for non-residential construction. This makes me wonder why the IBC address doesn't specifically address this delivery method with regard to Chapter 17 Special Inspections. Any ideas?

I am a special inspector. At design-build project that I visit the contractor pretends that the phrase "design-build" is code, no pun intended, for "we can ignore the code whenever we want because this project is design-build". At this particular project the design/build team acts as the project manager is the current owner of the project and my client. They sub some of the trades (speciality stuff) but the prime contractor does the vast majority of the work.

The client has an on-site rep who told me that my deficiency reports although lengthy and accurate may cause him to get fired. He asked if I could "ease up and put some happiness" into the reports. If that's not the kind of pressure that the code sought to eliminate by requiring owners of projects, not contractors, to hire the inspectors I don't know what is.

 

[dik]

I'm a firm believer in the phrase "you get what you pay for". Design build is a technique where the contractor looks after the engineering and architectural features by retaining these disciplines himself. It works well from a cost perspective but there can be a real problem with quality control to the detriment of the end user. Design build has to be carefully executed so that the end user gets his money's worth. The client may not have anyone looking after his best interests.

Dik

 

[Qshake]

In some design build projects the code is actually left up to the designer/builder so as not to pinch off creativity. Hence the actual design build contract can contain a new code that is likely made of many morphed codes.

In most DB situations the contractor is also in charge of quality control/quality assurance. Thus special inspection is his to deal with.

Regards,
Qshake

Eng-Tips Forums:Real Solutions for Real Problems Really Quick.

 

[JAE]

Just a contrary opinion here...I've designed numerous projects with the D/B method and I never experienced any pressure to ignore the code, avoid inspections, etc.

It totally depends upon two things - the quality of the contractor you are teamed with, and your own integrity to follow the codes and do what's right.

I grant that sometimes with the wrong builder or owner there could be pressure put on the engineer to "put some happiness" into the project and ignore the codes, etc.

But I've not found that to be inherent in the D/B method at all.

 

[Ashereng]

Design build is a financial arrangement to execute the project. The code is the code. If you need to take exception to the code, you apply for an exception (complete with engineering package to back up the application).

This on-site rep has a problem - the project is not very good as evident by his agreement with your report. If you ease up, and something fails, did you do your job?

If he is not doing his job as the site rep, hopefully, you will do yours as the inspector and have the deficiencies correct.

"Do not worry about your problems with mathematics, I assure you mine are far greater."
Albert Einstein
Have you read FAQ731-376 to make the best use of Eng-Tips Forums?

 

[BJC]

I agree with JAE. i have done lots of design build. I have never compromised code or safety issues.
The main thing it buys is time. I could issue a foundation drawing with embeds, grounding etc and not wait to issue others drawings in the same package. Similar jobs done the conventional way usually have to wait for defined packages to issue drawings a part of a set.
The other factor is the craftsmen working on the project get a check from the same place you do. If there is a problem you can go to the site verbally agree on a fix and tell them you'll change the drawing or whatever it takes.
Conventional jobs take RFIs and other paper and maby a week to get resolution. IT's about time.

 

[IRstuff]

This a bit of a odd topic for me. Being in Aerospace, almost everything I've worked in development projects on is technically design-build. The only exception is the built-to-print aspect of our production facility.

In aerospace and defense, there are at least 3 things required for ensuring success: a well-written specification, an organization that can execute, and a well-developed design verification.

Our flagship product was developed,effectively as design-build, almost 30 yrs ago and is still being used by the Army.

TTFN

 

[DaveVikingPE]

I experienced a design-build project where the contractor was excavating for footings before any drawings were issued (and checked).

What if they're wrong? is the obvious question.

Or is it?

While I believe in DESIGN. I also know that buildings of a specific type have been built before and there are plenty of contractors with a lot of experience, and not too few of them are engineers (or have lots of engineering experience). So, if a low-rise industrial building is what's to be built, then maybe they do know just how to dig the footings in the right place - without any drawings.

BUT, what if the project needs change? This is expecially prone to happen if the design charette was done "D/B-ish" too. That is, hyper-rapidly and the customer didn't get all of his questions answered/needs addressed. So now the customer is "stuck" with a nebulous idea of what it is he wants that's being put into the ground before any design calcs are run... everything is done on the fly... there's hardly any paper trail as it's all been done verbally. Paper, even electronic paper (e-mail), is kept to a complete minimum.

I think that a successful D/B project requires a customer who knows what he wants and is able to put that in writing combined with the most scrupuluous of Architect-Engineers who's not afraid of charging a premium in exchange for excellent, careful, dilligent work.

 

[IRstuff]

And perhaps, not doing D/B is why most projects overrun, because the customer can't be bothered with figuring out what he wants until metal is cut and concrete is poured.

As I see it, the only distinction between D/B and something else is that the design agency has direct responsibility and control of the build. It's not obvious to me that a design agency wouldn't hire the same contractor that might have gotten the job under other circumstances.

The difference is to not have the customer be the go-between between the design and build, the designer has to resolve all the questions and problems directly. It's real-time and immediate. You don't go back to a designer 6 months later to ask why he did something that he's now forgotten.

Naturally, the customer tends to feel left out and there's less of a need for certain expertise on the customer side, but in the end, D/B works in most of the world. Intel designs and builds their own processors. GM designs and builds their own cars, but subs out some of the work.

If there's to be a solid design, the designer has to be made accountable for the design from start to finish. Likewise, the builder needs to be involved in the design process to ensure a buildable design.

Design for Manufacturability (DFM) has been around for decades. D/B sounds like an incarnation thereof.

TTFN

 

[DRC1]

I have done design build and traditonal contracting for a varity of civil projects. First off nothing ever gets built according to code. Every structure has deviations. Most are minor and to not need to be addressed. Some do. The inspector is not the EOR and should not make engineering descions on his behalf. Sometimes it is unclear how the code should be applied or even if the code is applicable to certian situaions. In design build it is important to have a good comunication system which can quickly resolve questions. Really to answer the orginal question, you need to get the EOR on site with you the PM and the Client Rep to dicuss if the reports are too detailed or sufficent. Maybe the points you are raising should be addressed, or maybe there is enough fluff in the design to handle it. The only way to find out is to talk to the EOR.