Fired

sounds like they were looking for something to complain about.. depending on the requirements, either way would work with proper equipment.

> Well, we got fired from a job because were weren't using the proper methods to stake out a building. We were staking the main corners and then setting the lines from those corners. According to the contractor, we should have just resected a new setup in the middle of the site, then radial sprayed all the corners in.

and then set up on the corners and checked them and the diagonals.:-D

Now you have something to be thankful for tomorrow.

You're no longer working for a Survey Nazi......

> Now you have something to be thankful for tomorrow.
>
> You're no longer working for a Survey Nazi......

Agreed. If he wants to dictate exactly what you do and how, then the result is on him. Have him sign responsibility for wherever the stakes were set, since you are only working as his laborer. Ask him if you should run check distances, or is he happy with wherever the stakes fell.

Hopefully you have other work, because that is not the client you want.

On VERY strange buildings, I've employed the "free sectioning" method with excellent results, but only after I've checked, checked, and checked again. In fact, when using that method, I stake out, then move my setup and retie all of the points again checking X,Y,&Z and never more than 0.015' out.

For normal buildings, it's faster like you say. I did have a contractor ask one time why we were doing it in that manner (setting the corners, checking diagonals, etc.). He said all the other surveyors did it radially. I then politely explained that I needed a record of what I was doing and I had no use for a 1 million dollar building that was at this location. He never questioned HOW I did what I did again.

Sounds like they were looking for a reason to get another "buddy firm" in there. This smells like a brother-in-law deal.

Get your last check and don't look back.

Sue him.

The kicker to all of this is they, and their new surveyor, don't understand the plans. This building is being laid out 2" too wide and too long. But, what the hell do we know.

Just thinking that it may be time for contact with the big boss.
They usually understand the concept of Quality Control.

Or maybe you could go to the site and offer to show the know-it-all construction dude how your procedure is better than his. Do the stakeout his way and then set up on one corner, sight the other and let him see the "straight line" points in between. You may have to write off some time, but still keep the job and strengthen your relationship with the client.

spilled milk

I just had one where the job was a boundary survey to split a 2 acre lot. There was lots of control around and I used GPS and all went well. When I finished up the guy (builder/owner) wanted me to stake his house, since it was at an oddball angle on the new parcel and kind of wierd shaped and he wasn't comfortable doing it himself. Even though it was early and I did have the time I just said "..sure I'll be back tomorrow.."

But he wanted me to do it then to save the travel time expense. I then had to explain that I didn't have my robot with me because I didn't know he wanted me to stake his house. And I wouldn't stake any building with GPS. Establish control, yes. But never the building itself.

Then that whole explanation ensued for about 20 minutes and I think he fully understood, in spite of that deer in the headlights look. But it was still awkward.

Many surveyors have shown that radial layout can be as accurate as your on-line method. Radial layout is typically faster because it requires fewer set-ups. Ultimately speed and accuracy is of the essence for General Contractors.

I would encourage you to look at this as an opportunity to improve your radial layout SOPs.

> ... because were weren't using the proper methods to stake out a building.

Well, needless to say, I am very, VERY disappointed in you Tommy. When staking out a building, one should ALWAYS use the proper method. Not using the proper method when staking out a building can lead to deleterious consequences including but not limited to unexpected firing.

Stephen

The contractor should be concerned about cost and results, not methods. Was he arguing that your cost was too high because of a slower method? That your results weren't good enough? Or he just didn't like your face?

I hope you took your stakes with you when you left the site!

Tommy-

In over 50 years I have yet to set out any structure radially except for 'engineering' level approximate corners for grading purposes or when absolutely necessary due to topography.

"Check as you go" when laying out on grid lines, particularly for steel column or caisson work usually introduces sufficient redundancy that will please your conscience and your liability carrier.

So it's not to be a luddite, but to be a prudent practitioner.

Ask He Who Thinks He Knows Best why you are there to do the lay out.

If HWTHKB could do it so well, why are you there, to be the 'fall guy' ?

Also, there are many occasions where you can set additional control that is governed by stable topography such as concrete abutments/sidewalks, window edges and ledges by using grid line offsets that is impossible for verification using radial coordinates.

That is why on many occasions in retracing an old fence line one should try to get the most reasonable longest straightest line for the boundary using common sense as some poor soul will be be following your monumentation that may not be intact when she/he is reconstructing your work.

Cheers

Derek

PS-

I'd be interested to learn the methodologies young Scott Zelenak is using for setting control for the project he is working on

Come on-
You know what the real story is, don't you

The builder was talking with someone on the project that knows JackWagon Surveying, who can do the whole project for 1/2 the cost,((I can just hear the conversation go something like)) 'because the methods and procedures this guy is using is slow and inaccurate'

Field Checks!

Radial stakeout certainly can be as accurate as setting on the corners and staking by direct measure from the corners, but the latter method has built in field checks.

Too many surveyors who employ radial stakeout do not then take the time to perform proper field checks, or perhaps perform only a few random checks. This is otherwise known as "Spray & Pray".

There are several ways you can check your stakeout if you stake radially. However you do it, you had best be thorough. Typical sitework is not as critical as building staking. A horizontal tenth or two one way or the other on most SS, storm, water, or ever curb can often go unnoticed. Not so on a building. It had better fit together much better.

I will typically radial stake 2 to 4 corners and then move my setup to one of the corners, check another control point, and set my offsets and check diagonals directly from the corners. It doesn't take much longer than doing the checks one should do if completely staking radially.

Tommy, if the contractor is stupid enough to dictate staking method (your area of expertise, not his), and then fire you for not adhering to his demands that you use a less reliable method, he may have done you a favor in the long run.

It would be a just reward if he had to pay to tear out and rebuild a portion of foundation, or pay for redesign because the new radial guy staked a wall out of place.

Sue him? On what grounds?

> Come on-
> You know what the real story is, don't you
>
> The builder was talking with someone on the project that knows JackWagon Surveying, who can do the whole project for 1/2 the cost,((I can just hear the conversation go something like)) 'because the methods and procedures this guy is using is slow and inaccurate'

It was an hourly job. We were out there every time he called and we did not work without him being present. They replaced us with a company that has to drive 2 hours to get to the site. It took us 15 minutes to get there.