几何尺寸与公差论坛------致力于产品几何量公差标准GD&T (GDT:ASME)|New GPS(ISO)研究/CAD设计/CAM加工/CMM测量  


返回   几何尺寸与公差论坛------致力于产品几何量公差标准GD&T (GDT:ASME)|New GPS(ISO)研究/CAD设计/CAM加工/CMM测量 » 三维空间:产品设计或CAX软件使用 » CAD设计 » 产品功能分析
用户名
密码
注册 帮助 会员 日历 银行 搜索 今日新帖 标记论坛为已读


回复
 
主题工具 搜索本主题 显示模式
旧 2009-09-16, 05:56 PM   #1
huangyhg
超级版主
 
huangyhg的头像
 
注册日期: 04-03
帖子: 18592
精华: 36
现金: 249466 标准币
资产: 1080358888 标准币
huangyhg 向着好的方向发展
默认 using old plans to rebuild storm damage

using old plans to rebuild storm damage
say you have a two story wood structure (non residential) built in 1990 and it gets the majority of its roof structure torn off in 2008 by a tornado. do you think its allowable to rebuild the structure using the original 1990 plans?
check out our whitepaper library.
if the old plans meet the current codes and you prepared or own the plans yes. otherwise, no.
i'm glad you say that, because that's exactly where i'm heading with the issue.
just want to make sure i'm not going to get punked by some weird rule that allows remedial work.
you may even be required to upgrade the electrical, plumbing or hvac to meet current codes. surprise - surprise
good luck
if it got hit by a tornado with enough force to rip off the roof, i'd make sure the rest of the structure was not compromised, particularly the connections to the foundation.
mike mccann
mmc engineering
ada may play a part if public money is used.
richard a. cornelius, p.e.
ownership of the plans should not be required as long as it meets the codes. it should be submitted for new plan review / permits though.
some jurisdictions allow in-kind repair or replacement as long as the extent of work is below a certain threshold. you would have to check with the jurisdiction to determine their policy.
cvg
if i was the eor for a building that was designed 15 years ago, are you suggesting that the building's owner can use those same plans again without my knowledge or permission?
the client does "own" those plans (unless your contract says otherwise) and they do not "expire" after a certain amount of time. he doesn't need to notify you or ask your permission to "use" them. when you contracted with the owner, your main deliverable is a set of plans that may be used for construction, now or in the future at the owners convenience. see attached ownership clause from a typical contract.
that being said, he must get the proper permits to do any construction or reconstruction. that means he must submit plans, sealed by an engineer that meet the requirements of the building department. many building departments do not require upgrades to current code if you are only repairing damage. some require it based on the cost of construction. of course, that decision is made by the building department and might be on a case by case basis. if the plans examiner notices that the plans or your signature are dated 15 years ago, he may review those plans a little more closely and may require those revisions to comply with more stringent code.
given that the client may want to make modifications to your plans, he can do that also, with or without your knowledge. but that would require the revised plans to be sealed again, either by you or by another engineer.
your best bet to protect yourself is to include language in your contract or on the plans or both that releases you from liability if the client uses those plans in an inappropriate way. such as changing them without involving an engineer or submitting them for permitting many years after they were prepared.
cvg,
that deliverable language you attached certainly is a good and proper contract for the deliverables (any two parties can agree on anythink like this).
however, under most state laws in the us, the deliverable is not the actual service provided for fee, but rather the plans are simply an instrument of service - a communication tool used by the consultant to communicate the design to the intersted parties.
what this all means is, the owner can certainly claim ownership of the plans/specs. but the consultant's design is and always will be a service that cannot be "owned" in the same sense as the plans.
so if the owner then takes those deliverables and uses them for another purpose, another project, etc. without the knowledge of the engineer, the risk of that use is all on the owner - and it is usually wise to state that concept of risk up front or at the very least after the plans go out.
many firms use some sort of language on the plan sheets stating that - such and such design is intended for use on this project only and any subsequent use of the plans is at no risk to the consultant.
__________________
借用达朗贝尔的名言:前进吧,你会得到信心!
[url="http://www.dimcax.com"]几何尺寸与公差标准[/url]
huangyhg离线中   回复时引用此帖
GDT自动化论坛(仅游客可见)
回复


主题工具 搜索本主题
搜索本主题:

高级搜索
显示模式

发帖规则
不可以发表新主题
不可以回复主题
不可以上传附件
不可以编辑您的帖子

vB 代码开启
[IMG]代码开启
HTML代码关闭

相似的主题
主题 主题发起者 论坛 回复 最后发表
structural damage from hurricane katrina huangyhg 产品功能分析 0 2009-09-16 11:04 AM
structural concrete freeze damage huangyhg 产品功能分析 0 2009-09-16 11:02 AM
seismic data on plans for metal buildings huangyhg 产品功能分析 0 2009-09-15 08:40 PM
roofing hail damage huangyhg 产品功能分析 0 2009-09-15 07:32 PM
【转帖】assembly rebuild times yang686526 SolidWorks二次开发 0 2009-04-13 09:05 AM


所有的时间均为北京时间。 现在的时间是 12:01 AM.


于2004年创办,几何尺寸与公差论坛"致力于产品几何量公差标准GD&T | GPS研究/CAD设计/CAM加工/CMM测量"。免责声明:论坛严禁发布色情反动言论及有关违反国家法律法规内容!情节严重者提供其IP,并配合相关部门进行严厉查处,若內容有涉及侵权,请立即联系我们QQ:44671734。注:此论坛须管理员验证方可发帖。
沪ICP备06057009号-2
更多