Engineer/Installer etiquette

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ive never seen a set of electrical engineering documents that called out the size of the LB fitting with respect to the bend. If the engineer DID call it out then it would be his fault, if he didn't then thats an installation issue. Either way, a change order could be warrented.

What Planet are you living on?:)

If the "engineer DID call it out" then there is NO change to the documents, thus no change order.

If the engineer did NOT call it out then it is the installers responsibility to install it according to the NEC, so no change order again.
 

__dan

Senior Member
The best change orders are the ones necessary to meet code (Civitello).

If it's on the drawing it's on the drawing. If it's in the specs, the specs take precedence over the drawings. If it's found in neither place, it will be what is standard in the industry, which is 3/4" bodies with 3/4" conduit. Not interested in boilerplate like perform to the satisfaction of the engineer. I am interested in the information upfront.

If the guy has a license and stamp on the drawing, he can draw something that does not meet code and be responsible for it. The legal contract requires delivery of a 3/4" raceway system, 3/4" with some 1 1/2" is not specified.

If the guy's drawing has no stamp and no license on it, statutes may require the PE supervision making it an illegal document and very non enforceable. Really throws the whole contract into a grey or worse area. Depending on the state, the PE supervision may be in the licensing statutes and carry criminal penalties like 6 months in jail. Seperately, look in the Public Safety statutes and you may see requirement for PE stamped drawings by use group type. The public safety statutes are a different animal from licensing, state police and attorney general enforcement, not a civil matter.

If it were me I would not be looking for an LB hanging in the air for pull point, I would go for a beam clamp and box without thinking too much about it. I would automatically go for the LB if I was turning and passing through a wall.

If you throw the guy enough regular work, I'm sure he will help you CYA. If you do a job phase 1, phase 2, phase 3 with three different low bidders and they know you will not or cannot pay for good changes, you should expect to get what you agreed to pay for.
 
The best change orders are the ones necessary to meet code (Civitello).

If it's on the drawing it's on the drawing. If it's in the specs, the specs take precedence over the drawings. If it's found in neither place, it will be what is standard in the industry, which is 3/4" bodies with 3/4" conduit. Not interested in boilerplate like perform to the satisfaction of the engineer. I am interested in the information upfront.

I despise and loath change orders with a passion and I always state it so during bid walkthrough. Any change order that is not the result of a previous 'hold' due to missing information or adding to the job, means that I failed to do my job.

Specs do not take precedence over drawings, they are equal part of the Contract documentation. Conflict should be resolved at the time of bid. If the Contractor did NOT highlight the discrepancy, he agreed to install EITHER, whichever is the correct one. When conduit size is referenced it does not automatically define the size of fittings. There are various circumstances, rules in the Code and installation instructions for materials to be installed within those conduits that requires that the conduit bodies are SIZED to those rules. It is the installer's responsibility to 'harmonize' those rules and install the optimum system.

If the guy has a license and stamp on the drawing, he can draw something that does not meet code and be responsible for it. The legal contract requires delivery of a 3/4" raceway system, 3/4" with some 1 1/2" is not specified.

If the guy's drawing has no stamp and no license on it, statutes may require the PE supervision making it an illegal document and very non enforceable. Really throws the whole contract into a grey or worse area. Depending on the state, the PE supervision may be in the licensing statutes and carry criminal penalties like 6 months in jail. Seperately, look in the Public Safety statutes and you may see requirement for PE stamped drawings by use group type. The public safety statutes are a different animal from licensing, state police and attorney general enforcement, not a civil matter.

If it were me I would not be looking for an LB hanging in the air for pull point, I would go for a beam clamp and box without thinking too much about it. I would automatically go for the LB if I was turning and passing through a wall.

If you throw the guy enough regular work, I'm sure he will help you CYA. If you do a job phase 1, phase 2, phase 3 with three different low bidders and they know you will not or cannot pay for good changes, you should expect to get what you agreed to pay for.

A PE does have the authority to require the installation differing from the Code and the Code does make some provisions for it. It is a right seldom used though. The AHJ(normaly) does not have the necessary technical background to challenge for example the calculated conductor temperature rise that is within the perview of the PE instead of using the tables.
 

kingpb

Senior Member
Location
SE USA as far as you can go
Occupation
Engineer, Registered
Say I have specified a 3/4" conduit, correctly sized, to fit some power or control cables. The conduit is sized properly for field bends and straight runs however if the electrician needs to use an LB fitting, the minimum bend radius of the cables is too large for a standard 3/4" LB fitting.

Electrical Contractor would be required to use a larger sized LB fitting, say 1.5" and bushing reducers to make it work.

Whose task would you say this is, the Engineers' to initially have specified large LB fittings if req'd or the electricians' to wire per NEC.

Note: Wiring and raceway were called out to be 'field to route'.

IMO, because the EC is to "field route", means it's his choice on how he gets it from point A to point B. We all know there is more than one way to route conduit, so did the larger fitting become required because of the way the EC decided to route the conduit? Was the larger fitting avoidable if routed a different way? Is the EC going to give back money because he found a shorter way, using less material?

Without reading your specs and seeing your drawings, I would have to say that in general, this should be a non-issue. I venture to guess the EC drastically underbid the project, and is looking for any means possible to recover his losses.
I agree with Charlie's earlier post/position.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top