Calling all Consulting Engineers

Status
Not open for further replies.
J

john_axelson

Senior Member
Location
MN
:confused: Question for you....This happens quite often to contractors, but I want the consulting engineers opinion.

I have a project that was bid two weeks ago. The GC has been selected, and the building owner (private bid) has told the GC that the project is about $400,000 over budget. Can you please get some Value Engineering ideas put together?

How do I possibily present VE items without the consulting engineer getting defensive?

Here are a couple of the items:

Engineer specified fully rated breakers - I am offering series rated breakers on the 480V side (this affects 3 breakers) and the cost savings is about $3,200.

Engineer specified (as directed by the architect) decorative lighting without equals (single name spec no allowance provided). Changing 4 fixture types saves the owner $16,000.

Engineer specified shielded Cat 5e cable. Not needed in this facility because it is basically an office building. Offering plenum rated standard Cat 5e cable saves $4,000.

How do I present these options without offending the consulting engineer and attempting to still meet his design intent?
 
Why not just contact the Engineer and tell him that you have been asked for some VE suggestions.

BTW, I would think the Engineer of Record would have to agree to and modify the design documents for changing the Fully Rated Breakers to Series Rated, this is a little more than changing fixtures, conductor types, or devices, of course I could be wrong.

Roger
 
I would get out. Sounds like they are going to nickle and dime you.
Not that its a good thing, but jobs come over budget quite often.
 
As a CE I have always thought is was my job to do whatever would provide the best value for the client. I may prefer fully rated breakers, etc. but if there are other things I could consider that would reduce the cost then that is part of my job too as long as the other methods do not violate codes and standards. I try not to get defensive, HOWEVER, there are many engineers and architects who have large egos and get VERY defensive if someone disagrees with them. Tread lightly and try to be as agreeable as possible. Good Luck
 
I have a bit of a struggle contacting the engineer, because the GC is asking for VE items from two of us and I am concerned that if I tip my hand to the engineer what I am going to propose that he may share that information with the other electrical contractor. The engineer has already "leaked" other information on this project - He told one of the fixture manufacturer's that this job had been narrowed down to 2 bidders from the initial 6, prior to the two of us being informed.

Also, why the preference for fully rated breakers when the breakers are UL listed for series rating and this is an office building? Just wondering because 99% of the commercial jobs I have done in the past 5 years have been series rated breakers.

In what type of construction would you require, not matter what, fully rated (kAIC) breakers?
 
Last edited:
john_axelson said:
:
Engineer specified shielded Cat 5e cable. Not needed in this facility because it is basically an office building. Offering plenum rated standard Cat 5e cable saves $4,000.
Click to expand...

While I agree STP is probable not needed, but why would you suggest a plenum rated cable (CMP) as value when it is a lot more expensive than say UTP CM or even CMR rated?
 
try to work with the engineer or even the owner if you can, to get some of the cost reductions you describe. The lighting fixtures with no substitute tells me that:A the owner wants them. B:the architect wants them C:the engineer wants them.
Find out the root and work with them on substitutions that are available. I have never single lined a lighting spec without an extremely good reason and be able to defend it against others trying to break in on the spec other than I want it. I am not writing the check to buy it so I have to be flexible in my plans to substitutions.

fully versus series rating is a whole different situation. Similar to my always specing TVSS on panels. Experience tells me that it will be a mistake eventually to not have the fully rated panel in case of a problem.

Hope this helps
 
I can?t speak on behalf of other engineers, but I have no objection to hearing comments and suggestions from the EC. I do cringe when I hear the term ?Value Engineering,? and I wish it would just go away. There must be a better way to describe the notion of reducing costs by making different design choices. Most of the time I have been asked to change a design on the basis of VE decisions, the focus has been on initial costs only. Sure, you can save a bundle by buying a cheaper light fixture, but you will spend much more than that bundle, when you replace that piece of garbage a month or two later.

As to your specific suggestions, you will note that you are talking about a $25K savings, when the project is $400K over budget. At this point, the owner should be talking directly to the ?prime design contractor? (i.e., the architect or the engineer, whoever is running the design portion of the project). This is not a problem that a trade (electrical or mechanical or whatever) can solve. The project was over-designed, and needs to be re-designed.
 
The EE is not your client nor should you care about his feelings. Your client is the GC, do as he asks if you want the job. Also don’t give all the money back on VE, you should keep some for headache money and for your VE services.

Take a hard look at the fixture package too, there is usually more money in fat on the fixture package than you will have in profit on the whole job, especially if there is a “no equals note”. That usually means the fixture rep really stuck it to ya hard.

Other VE ideas:
No conduit for phone/data.
No conduit for FA.
Aluminum Bus in gear.
MC if they will allow it in your area.

Calls for VE is a very common practice, and I suspect we will all see much more of it. Sometimes it is owner and budget driven, and other times its just an avenue for the GC to make more money because they don’t pass on all the savings.
 
Last edited:
I think it's amusing the way conversations go. How come it always ends up with the job being "over-designed?" How come it's never "over-bid?" ;)
 
dereckbc said:
While I agree STP is probable not needed, but why would you suggest a plenum rated cable (CMP) as value when it is a lot more expensive than say UTP CM or even CMR rated?
Click to expand...


Because it is a plenum environment.
 
bcorbin said:
I think it's amusing the way conversations go. How come it always ends up with the job being "over-designed?" How come it's never "over-bid?" ;)
Click to expand...


This particular project wasn't overbid (couldn't be :smile: I bid it!)

Just one other clarification, The owner is looking at ALL trades not just M&E - I was told to shoot for 10% of the electrical bid (close to $500,000) for a savings around $50,000. I know they already deleted a wood ceiling for a savings of $25,000 and some tiling for another $20,000. Everybody is being asked to make suggestions.
 
Aluminum feeders could also provide a large cost savings over copper.
 
Others have made good suggestions also. Increased manufacturer competition also lowers prices well. Several of my projects will have just one lighting fixture type with a single manufacturer specified. I have looked for equals and asked lighting reps for suggestions but only this one fixture seems to have the performance or appearance that I want for that space. It can happen. I usually do get defensive about lighting fixtures because I try to provide quality lighting, energy efficiency, and maintenance. Most of the suggestions I get from EC's look terrible and will be a maintenance nightmare.

I rarely specify a 100% breaker. This would only be if I'm avoiding having to increase the panel to a larger ampacity for some reason. Maybe physical size of the panel. I have known another EE that liked to specify them. He always found a need for one or two on a project. IMO it was over used. This breaker might not be needed but it's for the engineer to say.

Are all trades being asked to VE out an equal % or is everyone just looking for fat to trim? I get annoyed when I get asked to reduce the quality of my design because another division went overboard and wasted money. Instead of cutting just from that division the whole project suffers. Or maybe the Owner kept asking for more building then they could afford.

The phrase VE is misused, such as in this case, that's why so many engineers cringe when it's used after bids. An example of actual VE is improving the quality of the windows for improved thermal ratings which can reduce the cooling load in the space. The saving from the reduce HVAC system offsets the increased cost of the improved windows. Then there's operational savings of less AC.

Edit: just read that it was a plenum so I removed my non-plenum cable idea.
 
Last edited:
Do all the other subs have contracts yet?

Roger
 
Mr. Bill said:
The phrase VE is misused, such as in this case, that's why so many engineers cringe when it's used after bids. An example of actual VE is improving the quality of the windows for improved thermal ratings which can reduce the cooling load in the space. The saving from the reduce HVAC system offsets the increased cost of the improved windows. Then there's operational savings of less AC.
Click to expand...
This is a good example of a valuable VE item. Indeed, it's one that would make me happy, not one that would make me cringe. It is also not one that the owners often accept. "Spend money now to save money later" is not a popular notion. That is especially true for a "Core and Shell" project, in which the owner wants the minimums all around.
 
john_axelson said:
Also, why the preference for fully rated breakers when the breakers are UL listed for series rating and this is an office building? Just wondering because 99% of the commercial jobs I have done in the past 5 years have been series rated breakers.

In what type of construction would you require, not matter what, fully rated (kAIC) breakers?
Click to expand...

.......................................................................................................
In response to why fully rated... as opposed to series rated...

There are numerous stipulations to the use of series rated devices, like:
- motor loads are limited to 1% of the series rating.
- UL tested and listed series device combinations must be used.
- PE series listings are approved, but there is criteria associated with that which is cumbersome, like the document stamped by the PE must be available, device must be marked...

So it's safer for an unknowing owner to state "fully rated only" so there's no question as to whether or not he's covered in a fault condition. It certainly adds cost to a job, but it removes doubt and paranoia if its fully rated.

In response to the question of what buildings would require fully rated, I'd say industrial or perhaps heavy commercial, due to the presence of motors. IMO

(...and one more quick edit.. I don't think they're talking about 100% rated breakers, as opposed to 80% rated breakers. I think the discussion is around series rated vs fully rated.)

JM
 
Last edited:
Mr. Bill said:
Others have made good suggestions also. Increased manufacturer competition also lowers prices well. Several of my projects will have just one lighting fixture type with a single manufacturer specified. I have looked for equals and asked lighting reps for suggestions but only this one fixture seems to have the performance or appearance that I want for that space. It can happen. I usually do get defensive about lighting fixtures because I try to provide quality lighting, energy efficiency, and maintenance. Most of the suggestions I get from EC's look terrible and will be a maintenance nightmare.

I rarely specify a 100% breaker. This would only be if I'm avoiding having to increase the panel to a larger ampacity for some reason. Maybe physical size of the panel. I have known another EE that liked to specify them. He always found a need for one or two on a project. IMO it was over used. This breaker might not be needed but it's for the engineer to say.

Are all trades being asked to VE out an equal % or is everyone just looking for fat to trim? I get annoyed when I get asked to reduce the quality of my design because another division went overboard and wasted money. Instead of cutting just from that division the whole project suffers. Or maybe the Owner kept asking for more building then they could afford.

The phrase VE is misused, such as in this case, that's why so many engineers cringe when it's used after bids. An example of actual VE is improving the quality of the windows for improved thermal ratings which can reduce the cooling load in the space. The saving from the reduce HVAC system offsets the increased cost of the improved windows. Then there's operational savings of less AC.

Edit: just read that it was a plenum so I removed my non-plenum cable idea.
Click to expand...


MR. Bill,

I agree...about the VE portion. I suggested a couple of adds to the project that were not even looked at. The engineer had tried to "make" a manual transfer switch (interlocking two breakers) and wanted it as an integral part of the switchgear. I proposed to change it to an automatic transfer switch. (The generator isn't even part of the project yet).

Thanks for the advice guys. I think what it comes down to is that the engineer has to understand that this isn't me critisizing his design, but just that I am being asked for ideas to reduce cost.

FYI, the light fixtures that I am changing will still remain decorative, functional, etc. It is just that the architect wanted compact fluorescent downlights to be rectangular in shape in the corridors - (changing to round of same wattage and ballast characteristics) Architect wanted a certain decorative pendant with modifications - giving same pendnat, but without the "custom modifications", etc. Definitely not trying to mess with quality or energy efficiency.

I just wish that more engineers when single name specifying a product would get a quote from the rep and include that material allowance in their specification. This would eliminate a LOT of game playing later (one rep trying to be the only package, etc.)

Thanks again
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top