In a previous post Michael Bulatovich wrote...
Only the first 'circumstance' is legal in Ontario. Review for code
compliance is not the only type of responsibility that the stamp signifies.
It is also for "responsible control" of the design


Michael is correct when it come to the law in most states in the US. As I
said in another post, that is why I won't stamp drawings prepared by
someone else under any circumstances, unless that person is under contract
to me to to produce the drawings, I.e., a drafting service.

--
Bob Morrison, PE, SE
R L Morrison Engineering Co
Structural & Civil Engineering
Poulsbo WA
bob at rlmorrisonengr dot com

"Pat" wrote in message
ups.com...
I deal with funding all day and therefore whenever I see a regulation
I like to push and probe it a little and see what it really
encompasses. So let me pose a hypothetical. I am not trying to be a
PITA, I'm just curious about that reg because I believe it is an
unobtainable prohibition.

Let's say you are putting an addition on a older building -- all
concrete, steel, asbestos, etc. etc. You have the As Builts but the
original architect is dead and buried. But he did a good job and gave
you great drawings with incredible details.

So you figure you want to punch a few holes through the building,
bring in some mechanicals and a couple of doorways. So you need to be
concerned with the structural elements of the exisiting building -- is
it structurally sound, etc. etc. Plus you'll be doing some rehab over
there so you need to bring portions of that building up to code -- say
new interior walls, new HVAC, new electrical, ADA, and maybe a new
elevator.

Now there's now way your new work is done "stand along" because you're
tying in to an existing building. You need to show certain elements
of that building. So what you are saying is that the law says you
cannot rely at all on the old drawings and then confirm the details,
and check for code compliance as part of stamping plans for the new
building and the reno. Instead, you must go out, take your own
measurements, make your own determinations as to what the materials
are, somehow find buried pipes, etc. so that you can show them on your
plans? That may be the law, but that doesn't make sense. In this
case, relying on the old dead guy will probably give you much better
info than you could find without his plans. Seems like there has be
some discretion there. No? I mean, you have control of your new
design, but you have no control of the design of the building that is
already built but you have to show parts of it on your plans.

You can use the base building info, but it needs to be confirmed to your
satisfaction. It would be incorporated into your own work, and your own
drawings as you *do* the design. The stamp would then take responsibility
for the older work, regardless of whether you put weasel words on those
plans saying it's someone else's fault if the base building drawings are
off.

It's a completely different thing from stamping some one else's design.
--


MichaelB
www.michaelbulatovich.ca

On Mar 26, 10:00 am, Bob Morrison wrote:
In a previous post Michael Bulatovich wrote...

Only the first 'circumstance' is legal in Ontario. Review for code
compliance is not the only type of responsibility that the stamp signifies.
It is also for "responsible control" of the design

Michael is correct when it come to the law in most states in the US. As I
said in another post, that is why I won't stamp drawings prepared by
someone else under any circumstances, unless that person is under contract
to me to to produce the drawings, I.e., a drafting service.

--
Bob Morrison, PE, SE
R L Morrison Engineering Co
Structural & Civil Engineering
Poulsbo WA
bob at rlmorrisonengr dot com


So are shop drawings, sprinkler plans, and such considered to be
produced under your supervision and control? Often they are not
stamped when the leave the shop.

On Mar 26, 10:38 am, "Michael Bulatovich" wrote:
"Pat" wrote in message

ups.com...



I deal with funding all day and therefore whenever I see a regulation
I like to push and probe it a little and see what it really
encompasses. So let me pose a hypothetical. I am not trying to be a
PITA, I'm just curious about that reg because I believe it is an
unobtainable prohibition.

Let's say you are putting an addition on a older building -- all
concrete, steel, asbestos, etc. etc. You have the As Builts but the
original architect is dead and buried. But he did a good job and gave
you great drawings with incredible details.

So you figure you want to punch a few holes through the building,
bring in some mechanicals and a couple of doorways. So you need to be
concerned with the structural elements of the exisiting building -- is
it structurally sound, etc. etc. Plus you'll be doing some rehab over
there so you need to bring portions of that building up to code -- say
new interior walls, new HVAC, new electrical, ADA, and maybe a new
elevator.

Now there's now way your new work is done "stand along" because you're
tying in to an existing building. You need to show certain elements
of that building. So what you are saying is that the law says you
cannot rely at all on the old drawings and then confirm the details,
and check for code compliance as part of stamping plans for the new
building and the reno. Instead, you must go out, take your own
measurements, make your own determinations as to what the materials
are, somehow find buried pipes, etc. so that you can show them on your
plans? That may be the law, but that doesn't make sense. In this
case, relying on the old dead guy will probably give you much better
info than you could find without his plans. Seems like there has be
some discretion there. No? I mean, you have control of your new
design, but you have no control of the design of the building that is
already built but you have to show parts of it on your plans.

You can use the base building info, but it needs to be confirmed to your
satisfaction. It would be incorporated into your own work, and your own
drawings as you *do* the design. The stamp would then take responsibility
for the older work, regardless of whether you put weasel words on those
plans saying it's someone else's fault if the base building drawings are
off.

It's a completely different thing from stamping some one else's design.
--

MichaelBwww.michaelbulatovich.ca

So if you were at an auction and you found the plans for Frank Lloyd
Wright's unknown, unbuilt house -- one that fundamentally defines his
architectural style and that just happens to meet existing building
code -- then you could not build it because you would have to rely on
FLW's design?

On Mar 26, 9:52 am, Bob Morrison wrote:
In a previous post 3D Peruna wrote...

Not misleading, but illegal in most states. "Plan Stamping" or the
reviewing of plans prepared by others is not legal in any of the states
I'm registered in...

Same for me. Documents must be prepared under direct supervision of the
design professional who places his/her seal on the documents.

I don't stamp house plans that I have reviewed unless I redraw them.

--
Bob Morrison, PE, SE
R L Morrison Engineering Co
Structural & Civil Engineering
Poulsbo WA
bob at rlmorrisonengr dot com


I am wondering if this is not an "engineering" or "architectural"
issue but is instead really a copyright issue.

Pat wrote:


I am wondering if this is not an "engineering" or "architectural"
issue but is instead really a copyright issue.

It's a liability issue. If I stamp plans drawn by somebody else, and
there are serious problems, I'm liable for it. I cannot point my finger
at the guy who drew the drawings and say "it's his fault they're
crummy." The stamp legally says "I've designed this and it's right."
In fact, the wording in Minnesota that is required on plans and
specifications is "these documents were prepared by me or under my
direct supervision." They're mine--the liability is mine legally.

As for as-built projects... I can, and do use, the existing drawings
and details. I give them to my consultants, but we also do some field
verification and let the contractor know that we're not responsible to
for the existing building. We're only responsible for the new work,
even if its remodel work.

In a previous post Pat wrote...
I am wondering if this is not an "engineering" or "architectural"
issue but is instead really a copyright issue.


Nope! The law reads that documents bearing your seal MUST [emphasis
added] be prepared under your direct supervision.

This is intended to prevent "selling" of a professional seal when the
proper design work as not been completed.

I have seen it happen -- mechanical engineer stamps a drawing of a
retaining wall. no calcs, no letter, nothing to indicate that the
engineer actually did anything other than "sell" his seal. The engineer
eventually lost his license when it became apparent that he had made a
habit of doing this sort of thing.

--
Bob Morrison, PE, SE
R L Morrison Engineering Co
Structural & Civil Engineering
Poulsbo WA
bob at rlmorrisonengr dot com

In a previous post Pat wrote...
So are shop drawings, sprinkler plans, and such considered to be
produced under your supervision and control? Often they are not
stamped when the leave the shop.


Those types of drawings are usually produced by the installer, not the
design professional (unless the sprinkler guy happens to be an engineer).

I NEVER put my PE stamp on those types of drawings no do I APPROVE those
types of drawings. I have a Shop Drawing "REVIEW" stamp that indicates
that the drawings have been reviewed for GENERAL COMPLIANCE with the
design concept.

I also NEVER leave the design of connection details up to the fabrication
shop. That's what got the engineers who designed the Kansas City Hyatt
Regency walkway into trouble (it collapsed). And, I always review the
shop drawings to make certain that the detailer understood the concept and
has fully implemented the intent of the design.

--
Bob Morrison, PE, SE
R L Morrison Engineering Co
Structural & Civil Engineering
Poulsbo WA
bob at rlmorrisonengr dot com

In a previous post Pat wrote...
So if you were at an auction and you found the plans for Frank Lloyd
Wright's unknown, unbuilt house -- one that fundamentally defines his
architectural style and that just happens to meet existing building
code -- then you could not build it because you would have to rely on
FLW's design?


Doesn't mean you could not build it. The "direct supervision" law just
means that no design professional could put his/her seal on that set of
drawings.

An architect/engineer could completely redraw the drawings under their own
title block/logo and then seal those drawings. Any responsible A/E would
only do so after completely checking the design.

--
Bob Morrison, PE, SE
R L Morrison Engineering Co
Structural & Civil Engineering
Poulsbo WA
bob at rlmorrisonengr dot com

On Mar 26, 11:57 am, Bob Morrison wrote:
In a previous post Pat wrote...

So if you were at an auction and you found the plans for Frank Lloyd
Wright's unknown, unbuilt house -- one that fundamentally defines his
architectural style and that just happens to meet existing building
code -- then you could not build it because you would have to rely on
FLW's design?

Doesn't mean you could not build it. The "direct supervision" law just
means that no design professional could put his/her seal on that set of
drawings.

An architect/engineer could completely redraw the drawings under their own
title block/logo and then seal those drawings. Any responsible A/E would
only do so after completely checking the design.

--
Bob Morrison, PE, SE
R L Morrison Engineering Co
Structural & Civil Engineering
Poulsbo WA
bob at rlmorrisonengr dot com

What a fundimentally stupid law. You can take a set of plans and send
it over to a drafting shop and have them redraw it for you and email
you the file so you can print it, but you cannot "buy" an identical
set of plans where the original drawer emails you the exact same
building. Does that strike you as weird?

On Mar 26, 8:43 am, Bob Morrison wrote:
In a previous post Pat wrote...

I am wondering if this is not an "engineering" or "architectural"
issue but is instead really a copyright issue.

Nope! The law reads that documents bearing your seal MUST [emphasis
added] be prepared under your direct supervision.

This is intended to prevent "selling" of a professional seal when the
proper design work as not been completed.

I have seen it happen -- mechanical engineer stamps a drawing of a
retaining wall. no calcs, no letter, nothing to indicate that the
engineer actually did anything other than "sell" his seal. The engineer
eventually lost his license when it became apparent that he had made a
habit of doing this sort of thing.

--
Bob Morrison, PE, SE
R L Morrison Engineering Co
Structural & Civil Engineering
Poulsbo WA
bob at rlmorrisonengr dot com

I have a Drivers license, Pilots, Life Insurance,
a license to transport nuclear materials
throughout North America, a Fire-arms
acquisition license.
I suppose all of those protect the public.

Though not licensed to do surgery, I'm a
great sliver remover, so heart transplants
are not a problem.
Ken

"Bob Morrison" wrote in message
k.net...
In a previous post Pat wrote...
I am wondering if this is not an "engineering" or "architectural"
issue but is instead really a copyright issue.


Nope! The law reads that documents bearing your seal MUST [emphasis
added] be prepared under your direct supervision.

Quite! And the operative word here is "direct".

On Mar 26, 1:34 pm, "Ken S. Tucker" wrote:

I have {snip}
a license to transport nuclear materials
throughout North America

I find that disturbing on many levels.

R

In a previous post Pat wrote...
What a fundimentally stupid law. You can take a set of plans and send
it over to a drafting shop and have them redraw it for you and email
you the file so you can print it, but you cannot "buy" an identical
set of plans where the original drawer emails you the exact same
building. Does that strike you as weird?


That's not what I said. In the example you cited the originals were drawn
by one person (FLW) and you asked if a now living architect (or engineer)
could seal those drawings and get a permit.

I answered no. Only if the original drawings were redrawn by the
"architect [engineer] of record" are they considered "prepared under the
direct supervision of the design professional."

Of course, if FLW sealed and signed the drawings then you might have an
interesting story to tell and case to argue with a local building
official.

In the example you cite above, you could "buy" the drawings from the
original drawer and that person can even apply his/her seal to those
drawings. Depending on the jurisdiction prints of those electronic
drawings may or may not have to have an original signature singed in ink.

This last has gotten to be a somewhat contentious issue. I generally
argue that if I send you a PDF version of the drawing with my stamp and
signature which was produced in my office then there is no difference
between that and me sending you via snail mail a print of the original
sealed and signed document. In this case I typically apply "print only"
security to the PDF in order to prevent anyone from copying the seal and
signature electronically. Some jurisdictions require an original signature
on every drawing submitted. That's not too bad if there are only 2-3 sets
of 3-4 drawings, but it's not very much fun if the jurisdiction wants 5
sets of 150 sheets. prints of the sealed and signed original should be
sufficient.


--
Bob Morrison, PE, SE
R L Morrison Engineering Co
Structural & Civil Engineering
Poulsbo WA
bob at rlmorrisonengr dot com

On Mar 26, 1:34 pm, "Ken S. Tucker" wrote:

I have {snip}
a license to transport nuclear materials
throughout North America

I find that disturbing on many levels.

R

On Mar 26, 2:46 pm, Bob Morrison wrote:
In a previous post Pat wrote...

What a fundimentally stupid law. You can take a set of plans and send
it over to a drafting shop and have them redraw it for you and email
you the file so you can print it, but you cannot "buy" an identical
set of plans where the original drawer emails you the exact same
building. Does that strike you as weird?

That's not what I said. In the example you cited the originals were drawn
by one person (FLW) and you asked if a now living architect (or engineer)
could seal those drawings and get a permit.

Let's not kid ourselves, FLW's buildings were largely uncomfortable to
live in and the drawings themselves would sell for more than any house
built from them.

I answered no. Only if the original drawings were redrawn by the
"architect [engineer] of record" are they considered "prepared under the
direct supervision of the design professional."

You are speaking theoretically, Bob. In most of the building
departments around here, if the drawings are stamped, the building
department doesn't play cop and investigate who prepared them. That's
not really their function. Their view is that the designer of record
is responsible, and if they're responsible and the building department
isn't, well, hell, that's fine. There was one building department in
a local village that refused to accept drawings prepared by an
engineer, even though that is allowed in NY.

Of course, if FLW sealed and signed the drawings then you might have an
interesting story to tell and case to argue with a local building
official.

Maybe tell the story on Oprah or something, but if the guy is not
currently registered, I don't think it would fly. You may know more
about the technicalities on that front.

In the example you cite above, you could "buy" the drawings from the
original drawer and that person can even apply his/her seal to those
drawings. Depending on the jurisdiction prints of those electronic
drawings may or may not have to have an original signature singed in ink.

This last has gotten to be a somewhat contentious issue. I generally
argue that if I send you a PDF version of the drawing with my stamp and
signature which was produced in my office then there is no difference
between that and me sending you via snail mail a print of the original
sealed and signed document. In this case I typically apply "print only"
security to the PDF in order to prevent anyone from copying the seal and
signature electronically. Some jurisdictions require an original signature
on every drawing submitted. That's not too bad if there are only 2-3 sets
of 3-4 drawings, but it's not very much fun if the jurisdiction wants 5
sets of 150 sheets. prints of the sealed and signed original should be
sufficient.

I don't think Adobe's PDF security is as secure as you may think:
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Adobe/Gallery/
There are a whole host of "password recovery tools" that will strip
the encryption and open up the file to editing.
Send me one of your drawings and I'll show you what I mean. {Pat, you
still have those FLW drawings you told me about last year...? I think
I have a workaround.}

And on another PDF security issue, potentially more damaging for a
much larger group of people:
http://news.com.com/2100-1002_3-6147428.html

R

On Mar 26, 10:36 am, "RicodJour" wrote:
On Mar 26, 1:34 pm, "Ken S. Tucker" wrote:



I have {snip}
a license to transport nuclear materials
throughout North America

I find that disturbing on many levels.
R

Why is that disturbing? I'm licensed to put a radio-
active material in an approved lead (Pb) container,
fasten it as directed and transport it in my personal
protection.

Rico I think you're paranoid, truck drivers ship
1000's of gallons of fuels and chemicals on the
inter-states every day, throughout North America,
do those truckers disturb you too?

That's the problem with you people, somebody
mentions the "N" word, and you turn hysterical
like a sissy.

Nuclear energy is a god sent power source,
it's extremely simple, something like a lb of
Uranium gets me a 1,000,000 tons of coal,
in energy equivalence, (E=mc2).

But you boomers need to get all paranoid over
seat belts, smoking, farting, diet, and Nuclear
energy, but then because you reject N-energy,
you'd rather bribe the Mid-East A-holes and
then go way over there to fight a war, that cost's
like a $trillion.
Add Global Warming into that picture and you're
totally screwed up.

So yes, I think Rico is disturbed on many levels.
No offense intended, I vented frustration too.
Ken

In a previous post RicodJour wrote...
I don't think Adobe's PDF security is as secure as you may think:
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Adobe/Gallery/
There are a whole host of "password recovery tools" that will strip
the encryption and open up the file to editing.
Send me one of your drawings and I'll show you what I mean. {Pat, you
still have those FLW drawings you told me about last year...? I think
I have a workaround.}

And on another PDF security issue, potentially more damaging for a
much larger group of people:
http://news.com.com/2100-1002_3-6147428.html


Rico:

The point of the PDF security is not to prevent fraud, but to make it more
difficult for the average user. Nothing can prevent someone from stealing
your signature and seal. Color copiers make this an all too frequent
occurrence.

--
Bob Morrison, PE, SE
R L Morrison Engineering Co
Structural & Civil Engineering
Poulsbo WA
bob at rlmorrisonengr dot com

Bob Morrison wrote:
In a previous post RicodJour wrote...
I don't think Adobe's PDF security is as secure as you may think:
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Adobe/Gallery/
There are a whole host of "password recovery tools" that will strip
the encryption and open up the file to editing.
Send me one of your drawings and I'll show you what I mean. {Pat, you
still have those FLW drawings you told me about last year...? I think
I have a workaround.}

And on another PDF security issue, potentially more damaging for a
much larger group of people:
http://news.com.com/2100-1002_3-6147428.html


Rico:

The point of the PDF security is not to prevent fraud, but to make it more
difficult for the average user. Nothing can prevent someone from stealing
your signature and seal. Color copiers make this an all too frequent
occurrence.


It also says "I've made an attempt to secure my documents. Clearly,
someone has broken the security and stolen my seal." It's just another
added level of legal protection... something else to help your lawyer
out, if it ever becomes necessary.

And I hate lawyers...

On Mar 26, 3:19 pm, "Ken S. Tucker" wrote:
On Mar 26, 10:36 am, "RicodJour" wrote:

On Mar 26, 1:34 pm, "Ken S. Tucker" wrote:

I have {snip}
a license to transport nuclear materials
throughout North America

I find that disturbing on many levels.
R

Why is that disturbing? I'm licensed to put a radio-
active material in an approved lead (Pb) container,
fasten it as directed and transport it in my personal
protection.

Rico I think you're paranoid, truck drivers ship
1000's of gallons of fuels and chemicals on the
inter-states every day, throughout North America,
do those truckers disturb you too?

That's the problem with you people, somebody
mentions the "N" word, and you turn hysterical
like a sissy.

Nuclear energy is a god sent power source,
it's extremely simple, something like a lb of
Uranium gets me a 1,000,000 tons of coal,
in energy equivalence, (E=mc2).

But you boomers need to get all paranoid over
seat belts, smoking, farting, diet, and Nuclear
energy, but then because you reject N-energy,
you'd rather bribe the Mid-East A-holes and
then go way over there to fight a war, that cost's
like a $trillion.
Add Global Warming into that picture and you're
totally screwed up.

So yes, I think Rico is disturbed on many levels.
No offense intended, I vented frustration too.
Ken

You misunderstood me, Ken. It's not the nuclear thing. It's that
_you_ are free to go anywhere in North America that I find
disturbing! I thought they'd locked you up in that 20x20 and tossed
the key. Now I find out you are not even chained to the building?!
Who _wouldn't_ be disturbed? ~

Nice overreaction, BTW. Guess I found one of them there buttons,
didn't I?

R

"Bob Morrison" wrote in message
k.net...
In a previous post Pat wrote...
So are shop drawings, sprinkler plans, and such considered to be
produced under your supervision and control? Often they are not
stamped when the leave the shop.


Those types of drawings are usually produced by the installer, not the
design professional (unless the sprinkler guy happens to be an engineer).

I NEVER put my PE stamp on those types of drawings no do I APPROVE those
types of drawings. I have a Shop Drawing "REVIEW" stamp that indicates
that the drawings have been reviewed for GENERAL COMPLIANCE with the
design concept.

I also NEVER leave the design of connection details up to the fabrication
shop. That's what got the engineers who designed the Kansas City Hyatt
Regency walkway into trouble (it collapsed). And, I always review the
shop drawings to make certain that the detailer understood the concept and
has fully implemented the intent of the design.

Me2

On Mar 26, 11:55 am, "RicodJour" wrote:
On Mar 26, 3:19 pm, "Ken S. Tucker" wrote:



On Mar 26, 10:36 am, "RicodJour" wrote:

On Mar 26, 1:34 pm, "Ken S. Tucker" wrote:

I have {snip}
a license to transport nuclear materials
throughout North America

I find that disturbing on many levels.
R

Why is that disturbing? I'm licensed to put a radio-
active material in an approved lead (Pb) container,
fasten it as directed and transport it in my personal
protection.

Rico I think you're paranoid, truck drivers ship
1000's of gallons of fuels and chemicals on the
inter-states every day, throughout North America,
do those truckers disturb you too?

That's the problem with you people, somebody
mentions the "N" word, and you turn hysterical
like a sissy.

Nuclear energy is a god sent power source,
it's extremely simple, something like a lb of
Uranium gets me a 1,000,000 tons of coal,
in energy equivalence, (E=mc2).

But you boomers need to get all paranoid over
seat belts, smoking, farting, diet, and Nuclear
energy, but then because you reject N-energy,
you'd rather bribe the Mid-East A-holes and
then go way over there to fight a war, that cost's
like a $trillion.
Add Global Warming into that picture and you're
totally screwed up.

So yes, I think Rico is disturbed on many levels.
No offense intended, I vented frustration too.
Ken

You misunderstood me, Ken. It's not the nuclear thing. It's that
_you_ are free to go anywhere in North America that I find
disturbing!

My wife and I are honored to have many standing
invitations from people who reside in the USA, it
would be a shame if we were unable to socialize
by the fracture of the North American continent.


I thought they'd locked you up in that 20x20 and tossed
the key. Now I find out you are not even chained to the building?!
Who _wouldn't_ be disturbed? ~

This 20x20 works great, we've been in a year.
It's very comfortable for us two, and is accomodatious
for 4.

I'd like to pre-fab it, for practical housing but the problem
I have is how to pre-fab the flat 24x24 roof, that collects rain.
I'm working on that problem.

Nice overreaction, BTW. Guess I found one of them there buttons,
didn't I?

LOL, if your bragging about tickling me
than I will agree, is that what you see?

Smoochy
Ken

On Mar 26, 1:46 pm, Bob Morrison wrote:
In a previous post Pat wrote...

What a fundimentally stupid law. You can take a set of plans and send
it over to a drafting shop and have them redraw it for you and email
you the file so you can print it, but you cannot "buy" an identical
set of plans where the original drawer emails you the exact same
building. Does that strike you as weird?

That's not what I said. In the example you cited the originals were drawn
by one person (FLW) and you asked if a now living architect (or engineer)
could seal those drawings and get a permit.

I answered no. Only if the original drawings were redrawn by the
"architect [engineer] of record" are they considered "prepared under the
direct supervision of the design professional."

Of course, if FLW sealed and signed the drawings then you might have an
interesting story to tell and case to argue with a local building
official.

In the example you cite above, you could "buy" the drawings from the
original drawer and that person can even apply his/her seal to those
drawings. Depending on the jurisdiction prints of those electronic
drawings may or may not have to have an original signature singed in ink.

This last has gotten to be a somewhat contentious issue. I generally
argue that if I send you a PDF version of the drawing with my stamp and
signature which was produced in my office then there is no difference
between that and me sending you via snail mail a print of the original
sealed and signed document. In this case I typically apply "print only"
security to the PDF in order to prevent anyone from copying the seal and
signature electronically. Some jurisdictions require an original signature
on every drawing submitted. That's not too bad if there are only 2-3 sets
of 3-4 drawings, but it's not very much fun if the jurisdiction wants 5
sets of 150 sheets. prints of the sealed and signed original should be
sufficient.

--
Bob Morrison, PE, SE
R L Morrison Engineering Co
Structural & Civil Engineering
Poulsbo WA
bob at rlmorrisonengr dot com

Under Clinton, they passed a law allowing for electronic signatures.
So that's probably legal. But I think that if you sealed a CD, it
might damage it.

On Mar 26, 2:00 pm, "RicodJour" wrote:
On Mar 26, 2:46 pm, Bob Morrison wrote:

In a previous post Pat wrote...

What a fundimentally stupid law. You can take a set of plans and send
it over to a drafting shop and have them redraw it for you and email
you the file so you can print it, but you cannot "buy" an identical
set of plans where the original drawer emails you the exact same
building. Does that strike you as weird?

That's not what I said. In the example you cited the originals were drawn
by one person (FLW) and you asked if a now living architect (or engineer)
could seal those drawings and get a permit.

Let's not kid ourselves, FLW's buildings were largely uncomfortable to
live in and the drawings themselves would sell for more than any house
built from them.

I answered no. Only if the original drawings were redrawn by the
"architect [engineer] of record" are they considered "prepared under the
direct supervision of the design professional."

You are speaking theoretically, Bob. In most of the building
departments around here, if the drawings are stamped, the building
department doesn't play cop and investigate who prepared them. That's
not really their function. Their view is that the designer of record
is responsible, and if they're responsible and the building department
isn't, well, hell, that's fine. There was one building department in
a local village that refused to accept drawings prepared by an
engineer, even though that is allowed in NY.

Of course, if FLW sealed and signed the drawings then you might have an
interesting story to tell and case to argue with a local building
official.

Maybe tell the story on Oprah or something, but if the guy is not
currently registered, I don't think it would fly. You may know more
about the technicalities on that front.



In the example you cite above, you could "buy" the drawings from the
original drawer and that person can even apply his/her seal to those
drawings. Depending on the jurisdiction prints of those electronic
drawings may or may not have to have an original signature singed in ink.

This last has gotten to be a somewhat contentious issue. I generally
argue that if I send you a PDF version of the drawing with my stamp and
signature which was produced in my office then there is no difference
between that and me sending you via snail mail a print of the original
sealed and signed document. In this case I typically apply "print only"
security to the PDF in order to prevent anyone from copying the seal and
signature electronically. Some jurisdictions require an original signature
on every drawing submitted. That's not too bad if there are only 2-3 sets
of 3-4 drawings, but it's not very much fun if the jurisdiction wants 5
sets of 150 sheets. prints of the sealed and signed original should be
sufficient.

I don't think Adobe's PDF security is as secure as you may think:http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Adobe/Gallery/
There are a whole host of "password recovery tools" that will strip
the encryption and open up the file to editing.
Send me one of your drawings and I'll show you what I mean. {Pat, you
still have those FLW drawings you told me about last year...? I think
I have a workaround.}

Yeah, FLW emailed me a set of plans a few years back. I've got it on
my drive somewhere.


And on another PDF security issue, potentially more damaging for a
much larger group of people:http://news.com.com/2100-1002_3-6147428.html

R

In a previous post Pat wrote...
Under Clinton, they passed a law allowing for electronic signatures.
So that's probably legal. But I think that if you sealed a CD, it
might damage it.


It is possible to do so. Stick a paper label on the CD and put your seal
and sig on that.

--
Bob Morrison, PE, SE
R L Morrison Engineering Co
Structural & Civil Engineering
Poulsbo WA
bob at rlmorrisonengr dot com

"Michael Bulatovich" wrote
presumably would throw away 26 years of work for a G-note.)

You canadian spell g-spot funny.

"Michael Bulatovich" wrote
Yes they are. It's the governing body. If I don't comply, I'm out with
Don, only poorer and with less hair.

Hey now, its not so bad being *out* here, in fact its downright nice.
And I don't know where you're getting this idea I ain't poor!
All my ducks are tied up in the hoosier 'venture. heh

"Pat" wrote
So what you are saying is that the law says you
cannot rely at all on the old drawings and then confirm the details,
and check for code compliance as part of stamping plans for the new
building and the reno.

Structurally, I would never rely on *unknown* drawings, and I would never
include someone else's drawing with mine.
The only exception are standard detail sheets like I mentioned before.
I would design the new part and do so so that it was completely independent,
structurally, from the existing building and connect the two only
aesthetically.
You see, just because the existing drawings indicate there is a proper
footing, perimeter beam, etc., where they are supposed to be there is no
guarantee those things were actually installed so thus, my new addition
could fail due a lapse of judgement on my part in that regard.
So, I don't do it.....for any amount of money.
You can't but a good reputation but you can throw one away real cheap.

"Pat" wrote
So if you were at an auction and you found the plans for Frank Lloyd
Wright's unknown, unbuilt house -- one that fundamentally defines his
architectural style and that just happens to meet existing building
code -- then you could not build it because you would have to rely on
FLW's design?

You're taking this stuff way too far.
Me?
I'd simply redraw the damn thing and be done with it, and my version would
be much better anyway, plus, mine would have high ceilings. :-)
The only people that *copy* other peoples stuff are idiots that couldn't do
any better on their own regardless.

"Bob Morrison" wrote
This last has gotten to be a somewhat contentious issue. I generally
argue that if I send you a PDF version of the drawing with my stamp and
signature which was produced in my office then there is no difference
between that and me sending you via snail mail a print of the original
sealed and signed document. In this case I typically apply "print only"
security to the PDF in order to prevent anyone from copying the seal and
signature electronically. Some jurisdictions require an original signature
on every drawing submitted. That's not too bad if there are only 2-3 sets
of 3-4 drawings, but it's not very much fun if the jurisdiction wants 5
sets of 150 sheets. prints of the sealed and signed original should be
sufficient.

In SW FL the authorities require *wet* seals on every single sheet in every
single set.
I know guys that run 3 or 4 sheets under the seal at a time but sign every
one of them.

"RicodJour" wrote
You are speaking theoretically, Bob. In most of the building
departments around here, if the drawings are stamped, the building
department doesn't play cop and investigate who prepared them. That's
not really their function. Their view is that the designer of record
is responsible, and if they're responsible and the building department
isn't, well, hell, that's fine. There was one building department in
a local village that refused to accept drawings prepared by an
engineer, even though that is allowed in NY.

In SW FL the DBPR will pay a bounty to anyone that turns a trick.
Dept of Business and Professional Regulations, in Tallahasse.
They are some nasty SOB's.
I wish something utterly horrible would happen to that building in
mid-morning, mid-week some fine spring day.

"Ken S. Tucker" wrote
I'd like to pre-fab it, for practical housing but the problem
I have is how to pre-fab the flat 24x24 roof, that collects rain.
I'm working on that problem.

Thats easy, build it in (2) 12' x 24' sections.
Each section will be on a reverse 2/12 pitch that looks like a V.
In the middle of the V you put a, ah, damn, whats the name of it?
My mind is a blur at the moment, but there is a PVC drain that separated our
swimming pool from the porch, embedded in the concrete decking, that
diverted all the water that overflowed from the pool.
I'll wake up in the middle of the night remembering the name of that thing.
Anyway, that drain is linear, about 2" wide and has lots of little slots
along its length.
Ahhh...just thought of it, its a Deco-drain.
Here's a pic of about a 12" long piece, I think it comes in 20' lengths.
http://tinyurl.com/2ecwlj

"Pat" wrote in message
ups.com...
On Mar 26, 9:52 am, Bob Morrison wrote:
In a previous post 3D Peruna wrote...

Not misleading, but illegal in most states. "Plan Stamping" or the
reviewing of plans prepared by others is not legal in any of the states
I'm registered in...

Same for me. Documents must be prepared under direct supervision of the
design professional who places his/her seal on the documents.

I don't stamp house plans that I have reviewed unless I redraw them.

--
Bob Morrison, PE, SE
R L Morrison Engineering Co
Structural & Civil Engineering
Poulsbo WA
bob at rlmorrisonengr dot com


I am wondering if this is not an "engineering" or "architectural"
issue but is instead really a copyright issue.

IMHO, for simple residential work, it is a guild and job protection issue.
My father has been a practicing house designer for 50+ years, has houses
built to his design in several states (and plenty of repeat customers that
hunt him down years later), but because some states require that stamp, he
is locked out of them. He tried to move to the CT/MA area a few years ago to
be near the the then-young grandkids, but left in frustration after a year
or so, because it was virtually impossible to do design work when the owner
also had to pay a 'real' architect or engineer as well, to bless the plans.
He moved back to Louisiana, where they are a little more rational. For the
occasional light commercial job that requires a stamp, or where the bank
wants one on a million-dollar mansion, he has local guys with stamps that
know and trust his work, and after a meeting to go over the plans and specs,
put their stamp on it and don't lose any sleep. Nobody has died, and nobody
has been sued, yet. You may call it 'selling the stamp', I call it a
consultation.

There are pros and hacks with and without stamps- the trick is to be able to
tell the difference. I see plenty of commercial work where 'WTF were they
THINKING?' comes to mind. I also see the same with many of the McMansions.
They may meet code, and be engineeringly safe, but they are dysfunctional in
layout, inefficent as hell energy-wise, and just plain ugly.

aem sends...

In a previous post Don wrote...
In SW FL the authorities require *wet* seals on every single sheet in every
single set.
I know guys that run 3 or 4 sheets under the seal at a time but sign every
one of them.


At least we are allowed to produce a facsimile of our seal and put it into
the cad file. Only the signature has to be original.

--
Bob Morrison, PE, SE
R L Morrison Engineering Co
Structural & Civil Engineering
Poulsbo WA
bob at rlmorrisonengr dot com

In a previous post aemeijers wrote...
For the
occasional light commercial job that requires a stamp, or where the bank
wants one on a million-dollar mansion, he has local guys with stamps that
know and trust his work, and after a meeting to go over the plans and specs,
put their stamp on it and don't lose any sleep. Nobody has died, and nobody
has been sued, yet. You may call it 'selling the stamp', I call it a
consultation.



There may be those who engage in that activity, but those who do are most
likely breaking the law.

--
Bob Morrison, PE, SE
R L Morrison Engineering Co
Structural & Civil Engineering
Poulsbo WA
bob at rlmorrisonengr dot com

"RicodJour" wrote in message
oups.com...
On Mar 26, 1:34 pm, "Ken S. Tucker" wrote:

I have {snip}
a license to transport nuclear materials
throughout North America

I find that disturbing on many levels.

Don't get over-heated about it.

Bob Morrison wrote:
In a previous post aemeijers wrote...
For the
occasional light commercial job that requires a stamp, or where the bank
wants one on a million-dollar mansion, he has local guys with stamps that
know and trust his work, and after a meeting to go over the plans and specs,
put their stamp on it and don't lose any sleep. Nobody has died, and nobody
has been sued, yet. You may call it 'selling the stamp', I call it a
consultation.



There may be those who engage in that activity, but those who do are most
likely breaking the law.


Bob, how much analysis of design that wasn't yours would you want to do
before feeling comfortable attesting to it via your seal?

Matt

In a previous post Matt Whiting wrote...
Bob, how much analysis of design that wasn't yours would you want to do
before feeling comfortable attesting to it via your seal?


No documents prepared outside my office receive my PE Stamp with only one
exception. The only documents prepared outside my office to get my PE
Stamp are drawings prepared by a drafting service I hired to help with
drawings.

In no case will I seal someone else's calculations.

--
Bob Morrison, PE, SE
R L Morrison Engineering Co
Structural & Civil Engineering
Poulsbo WA
bob at rlmorrisonengr dot com

Bob Morrison wrote:
In a previous post Matt Whiting wrote...
Bob, how much analysis of design that wasn't yours would you want to do
before feeling comfortable attesting to it via your seal?


No documents prepared outside my office receive my PE Stamp with only one
exception. The only documents prepared outside my office to get my PE
Stamp are drawings prepared by a drafting service I hired to help with
drawings.

In no case will I seal someone else's calculations.


I wouldn't seal someone else's work either as most states require that
the work be completed by you or under your direct control. However, it
seems to me that if someone had a design that was completed by an
engineer who is no longer available (let's say deceased) and needed the
design sealed in order to construct it, it would be legitimate to
analyze the design and perform the critical calculations to ensure the
integrity of the design and then seal it. It sounds like you wouldn't
consider this legitimate. Am I understanding you correctly?

Matt

In a previous post Matt Whiting wrote...

I wouldn't seal someone else's work either as most states require that
the work be completed by you or under your direct control. However, it
seems to me that if someone had a design that was completed by an
engineer who is no longer available (let's say deceased) and needed the
design sealed in order to construct it, it would be legitimate to
analyze the design and perform the critical calculations to ensure the
integrity of the design and then seal it. It sounds like you wouldn't
consider this legitimate. Am I understanding you correctly?


Ah! The deceased engineer (DE) scenario! This presents a special case. I
assume you mean the scenario where the DE dies and his seal has expired.
If he dies before his seal has expired then the calcs should be able to be
used "AS IS".

I think I would have a conversation with the State Licensing Board BEFORE
I went very far with this. Just to see what they might allow and how
tightly they would look at the


--
Bob Morrison, PE, SE
R L Morrison Engineering Co
Structural & Civil Engineering
Poulsbo WA
bob at rlmorrisonengr dot com