ECN Electrical Forum - Discussion Forums for Electricians, Inspectors and Related Professionals
ECN Shout Chat
ShoutChat
Recent Posts
Increasing demand factors in residential
by gfretwell - 03/28/24 12:43 AM
Portable generator question
by Steve Miller - 03/19/24 08:50 PM
Do we need grounding?
by NORCAL - 03/19/24 05:11 PM
240V only in a home and NEC?
by dsk - 03/19/24 06:33 AM
Cordless Tools: The Obvious Question
by renosteinke - 03/14/24 08:05 PM
New in the Gallery:
This is a new one
This is a new one
by timmp, September 24
Few pics I found
Few pics I found
by timmp, August 15
Who's Online Now
1 members (CoolWill), 250 guests, and 13 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
Page 2 of 3 1 2 3
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 348
I
ITO Offline OP
Member
Schedules change, and if you dont have a PM to monitor and document these changes, you could find yourself getting screwed by this "fair" document.


101° Rx = + /_\
Latest Estimating Cost Guides & Software:
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 348
I
ITO Offline OP
Member
My personal favorite is the “three week look ahead schedule”. How this works is you are on a job that is supposed to run 6+ months and there is some schedule “slippage” and the project is basically way far behind.

Now anyone that has ever been on a big job understands that the contractors that cause slippage are generally the same contractors who finish up their work LONG before the project is complete, and leave the electrician who is generally one of the last contractors on the job “responsible for holding up the whole job”.

Example, the civil contractors delay moving the spoils off the project until they have another job that needs fill; meanwhile you are having to work around huge piles of spoils for your underground driving your costs through the roof, as concrete guys cant even start. By the time the slab is pored and the tilt wall goes up, you are 6 weeks behind schedule and cant even go in the building until the steel is up and the roof is on but the fire protection contractor can because he can put his pipe in before the building is dried in, which means you work around his existing pipe on top of being behind schedule the day you finally get access to the dried in building.

So here you are 6 weeks behind and you have not really even started yet, and along comes the smart-ass GC PM with a simple fix, in the form of a short goal informal schedule to help you get caught up. You see if they produce an updated complete schedule reflecting the actual job conditions, you have an opportunity to bill for impact, but with the informal “three week look ahead” it’s a bit harder to prove impact, even though it would require you to man up a 100 men for 3 days to follow it.

That’s all a GC really needs, is 1000 electricians for one day to get caught up and all.

What you cant find 1000 electricians for one day, well then they pull the “we will just hire some other guy to finish it for you, at your expense” bull...

Just for the record anytime a GC has EVER called me and asked me to finish someone else work, I tell them to go get forked.

(Webmaster: small edit to maintain PG Rating)

[This message has been edited by Webmaster (edited 12-04-2006).]


101° Rx = + /_\
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 47
N
Member
Speaking from the POV someone who used to be on the engineering/drafting side and just switched roles and started my apprentice ship I can make a few observations

1) Charging for CAD Backgrounds - A lot of time and overhead goes into creating the backgrounds. Anyone doing the work should have access to the drawings - absolutely. But only the physical drawings. Why should the engineer/achitect give away his product for someone to turn a profit.

I do agree that many AE's "sell their stamp" and let real crap get out there.

Too many times though - by the time the job starts construction. The AE has been beat up on by the Customer and the GC that they can be really unresponsive.

Many times the same stuff that the GC does to aggravate the indivdual trades - aggravated the AE before the project got off the ground.
Nickel/diming and the whole "do we really need this" or "can't we just do it this way" etc etc.

"Stuff" roles downhill....

Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 348
I
ITO Offline OP
Member
How providing your asbuilts in cad turning a profit?

I would much rather give them my red lined job set then pay to have them drafted in CAD.

For the record it does not cost anything to email CAD backgrounds, while printing a clean set for hand markup does.


101° Rx = + /_\
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 47
N
Member
That I understand, IF the Arch/Engr is the one demanding the As-Builts in AutoCAD - Then they should provide the backgrounds.

However, If it is the GC demanding the As-builts in AutoCAD (and trying to cut-out the Arch/Engr) then I can see charging for backgrounds.

I would disagree that it is free to email CAD files. The Arch/Engr usually has to go through some extensive "cleaning up" of the backgrounds to make them ready for backgrounds.

Depending on their CAD sophistication the drawings can have some embedded proprietary CAD routines/Blocks that the Arch/Egr would not want getting out.

Also, Many CAD backgrounds are just that, backgrounds - with the individual systems (Sprinkler, electric, etc) drafted on top of them in AutoCAD.

Any times that I have been involved in a situation that required CAD backgrounds being sent to third-parties - the per drawing charge always ended up covering the time CAD drafter/designer spent handling phone calls, emails etc from the third-party about the files/drawings.

Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 348
I
ITO Offline OP
Member
I have 9 years experience drafting in AutoCAD, and am more than proficient. It takes all of 2 minutes to do a “pack and go” of a background while it takes 4 minutes to plot it on a HP1050C. After having done many design build, design assist and many as-builts, I have a high degree of certainty that cost wise, $250 a page charged to the contractor is a rip off, especially when they write it in their own specs you will require them for closeout and especially since they have already been paid to produce them for the owner.

Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain… I respectfully disagree about any proprietary routines and blocks being kept a secrete, that is R14 mentality and it just does not apply to as-builts, especially since a save as block, or DWF file also only takes about 2 minutes to run, and all clean up was done pre DD 90% issue.

Don’t mean to come across as snarky, I have just been there on done it on the design/engineer side and once you look behind the curtain it aint all that magical anymore, and any designer/CADD operator that cant whip out backgrounds for as-builts needs a CADD refresher course and should brush up on how to tell more believable stories.

Just my 2 cents, not trying to flame anyone, but I have a lot of bad energy from being ripped off in the past for this very issue, and in one particular case these backgrounds cost me $7,000, when all they did was copy the directory to a CD…proprietary routines and all.



[This message has been edited by ITO (edited 12-04-2006).]


101° Rx = + /_\
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,391
I
Moderator
ITO first I should make clear I do not run any company, I am an employee

That said I agree with much of what you say and while I don't see the office end of things I do see the issues in the field.

As far as $7000 for your backgrounds I wonder if you should provide an alternate price to the owner. One price showing the purchase of $7000 backgrounds and one without.

It strikes me that the owner of the project may not be impressed with a $7000 charge for services he already paid the designer for.

Just a thought....

Bob


Bob Badger
Construction & Maintenance Electrician
Massachusetts
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 47
N
Member
ITO

All very good points - and I do agree.

I did not see in the original post that the Arch/Engr is requiring the As-Builts be submitted in CAD in their spec.

If thats the case then I agree that the per page fee is a rip-off - and I whole heartedly agree with Iwires approach.

I can accept being "flamed" when they are well versed and articulate in the subject as you seem to be.

I guess I am just surprised that an A/E would want As-Builts in CAD. It just seems to me that it would create double work for them.

Back to the original topic -

I cannot tell you how many meetings I have been involved with where all the client wants to pay for is a "typical" or "boiler plate" design.

It puts undue pressure and additional scope on the subsequent trades.

It puts a good engineer in an uncomfortable spot and allows a incompetant engineer to hit a home run and keep putting out crap.

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,429
L
LK Offline
Member
Quote "I cannot tell you how many meetings I have been involved with where all the client wants to pay for is a "typical" or "boiler plate" design.

It puts undue pressure and additional scope on the subsequent trades.

It puts a good engineer in an uncomfortable spot and allows a incompetant engineer to hit a home run and keep putting out crap."

You hit the nail on the head, Pushing off design details, is in my opinion very un-professional.

Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 348
I
ITO Offline OP
Member
There are plans, specs, and a contract based on a hard bid. If the plans say that closeout documents must be provide electronically, then you put money in for CAD work and leave it at that. If the Engineer wants to later charge for the back grounds there is little recourse other than to pay them. Considering they can hold up your retainage, it is akin to black mail.

Now here is the real kicker: It is standard practice to GIVE these backgrounds to the Mechanical, Fire Protection, and Fire Alarm contractors for shop drawings.

I have a list of repeat offenders on my wall for future bids and I often itemize this charge on our proposals if I know the owner will see it; for the rest I put this little caveat on our proposals:

Excluded: Fees from architect and or engineer to obtain CAD files if As-Builts and or shop drawings are required in electronic format.


101° Rx = + /_\
Page 2 of 3 1 2 3

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5