An agency that contracts for survey work has a new person in management that is trying to impress by making the survey crews ÛÏmore efficientÛ. He is telling my colleague that it would be easier for him to click on objects in the CAD file to get the layout information rather than use the plans and his method of calculating the positions he is setting out. Both men are licensed surveyors. My colleague feels he is in danger of losing his job because he has a difference of opinion with the manager.
While I do not use the same methods as my colleague I do respect that as a professional he has every right to use whatever method he chooses as long as the work produced is correct. Many times the plans for projects have errors. It is my opinion that the manager is being reckless by assuming that a CAD file would be relied upon for setting out points on projects that cost millions of dollars. I have offered to meet with my colleague and the manager to help explain how that approach is just wrong.
My colleague would effectively become a button pusher if the opinion of the manager prevails. I know the board in my state would have the same opinion as my colleague.
I donÛªt really have a question about what is right and ethical in this situation. Each of us must be willing to take appropriate action and I will defend my colleague against this abuse if necessary. The only CAD file that I would use for setting out would be one that I created.
The problem is very few engineers put out plans that can be laid out from the hard copies alone.
I use CAD for stakeout calculations all the time, but the paper copy of the plans with the signature and seal is the controlling document. You have to constantly check back to the hardcopy of the plans and if there is a discrepancy you go with the plans (but I usually ask about it before anything gets set in stone or concrete).
Laying out based only on the CAD file has bitten me in the a$$ a couple times so I stopped doing it. Lucky for me it was small stuff that wasn't a big deal (which is probably why I didn't double check against the printed version).
All this being said, have you guys found that the way the plans are made now, you almost have to have the CAD file to do the layout? It seems like they don't print enough of the geometric information anymore to do it based solely on the paper plans, at least with civil projects like for curb and stuff....
Better hope their E&O insurance is up to date. I'm like your colleague, I always use stamped approved for construction drawings for calculations for layouts. If there's an error on them you have a legitimate recourse.
I have no problem using the cad file, but as Dan said, you have to confirm that the information matches the printed plans. With the way most designs are being done in recent years, you need cad files because of the lack of information.
Layout from models and CADD files is how things are being done. Rather than just push back, ask him what the new check procedures are. Better yet explain how you intend to check yourselves.
If you approach this as adversaries there will be a winner and a loser, or more likely several losers. Solve the problem as a team...
As with anything to do with surveying (especially construction layout), You should always have one method to layout and another method to check. Both methods are perfectly valid. The check will reveal any difference between the two. When there's a difference, you'll need to determine which is correct - the plan or the cad file. I'd be hesitant to hang my career choices on a presumption that the plan controls. In reality, the correct one will control.
As a surveyor, we are presented with the responsibility to teach others the correct ways and procedures rather than to reach for that EASY button.
Whether they listen or better their ways is their responsibility.
If you have stated your opinion to management at least once, you have started the process.
They have to take it an run with the idea now or bite it when their plan fails.
0.02
A Harris, post: 374020, member: 81 wrote: If you have stated your opinion to management at least once, you have started the process..
We must state our professional opinions (it's a lot of what makes us professionals). With that said- a very simple, black and white, block letter printout innocuously scotch-taped to the wall behind the contractor registration desk at Fort Bragg:
"If it is not formally documented, it never happened."
Simple words driven by hard lessons.
At the state DOT I work for, we will supply our CADD files upon request after the bidding process has closed, and we do NOT guarantee their accuracy/constructability unlike hard copies. Oftentimes there will be addenda in the printed plans which are not reflected in the CADD files, and this has no doubt caused grief amongst contractors more than once. Relying strictly on CADD files for layout is very thin ice in my opinion.
not my real name, post: 373994, member: 8199 wrote: An agency that contracts for survey work has a new person in management that is trying to impress by making the survey crews ÛÏmore efficientÛ. He is telling my colleague that it would be easier for him to click on objects in the CAD file to get the layout information rather than use the plans and his method of calculating the positions he is setting out. Both men are licensed surveyors. My colleague feels he is in danger of losing his job because he has a difference of opinion with the manager.
While I do not use the same methods as my colleague I do respect that as a professional he has every right to use whatever method he chooses as long as the work produced is correct. Many times the plans for projects have errors. It is my opinion that the manager is being reckless by assuming that a CAD file would be relied upon for setting out points on projects that cost millions of dollars. I have offered to meet with my colleague and the manager to help explain how that approach is just wrong.
My colleague would effectively become a button pusher if the opinion of the manager prevails. I know the board in my state would have the same opinion as my colleague.
I donÛªt really have a question about what is right and ethical in this situation. Each of us must be willing to take appropriate action and I will defend my colleague against this abuse if necessary. The only CAD file that I would use for setting out would be one that I created.
"It is my opinion that the manager is being reckless by assuming that a CAD file would be relied upon for setting out points on projects that cost millions of dollars."
I believe that this is done quite frequently, as there is rarely a set of engineering drawings produced today that can be constructed without a CAD file. I can't believe the lack of information on some. The Engineers are probably no longer liable for this, as it id the new "norm," ie. the customary practice.
Since you cannot really lock a CAD file from changes there is no cheap and easy way to confirm the line work is where it belongs.
The manager wants the stakeout crew to work faster and easier, so it is up to him to create any file or CAD he wants, but he is liable for it. If the manager is not a licensed professional and you let him do that would you not be assuming all his liability?
I was offered a quite large project and had been sent a CAD drawing of the project. The line work did not agree with the metes and bounds dimensions and I saw several areas of concerns. I requested the coordinate file, which was not forthcoming. I have zero regrets that I did not do that project. I could have corrected and adjusted but it would have been based on my best guess of what was intended. Even with a coordinate file there still would have been some back and forh, but without it was pure speculation.
Paul in PA
Until they change the standard contract line from, "The project is to be built to the plans and specifications" to "The project is to be built to the plans, specifications and cad files" the manager is wrong in my opinion. I think the day is quickly coming that the latter will be standard. My 2 cents, Jp
Dan Patterson summed it up well.
In my experience the Cad files can be kinda good, very crappy, but sometimes I hear they are "100% correct"... but I never saw any. 🙂
Most Engineers use Cad to draw, sometimes they calculate with it too... not to be trusted, even if produced in house by someone you know and trust. People make mistakes... you are paid to be anal.
Be Anal. (that is a good thing at work, not so much at home)
If the manager persists, do what he says... but caution him and document it well, every step of the way. You may need that in your next job interview to refute a bad recommendation.
NMRN,
As I read this thread again a few more things catch my eye. From the beginning there are assumptions galore.
First, you assign a motive to his policy changes. In nearly every case this sets you up for needless battles. He may be making the change because most modern construction is heading that way.
As we use CADD more, we add in layers of QC that didn't used to be there. We also track drawing updates and bulletins, keeping the master drawing current. How this became 'staking from unchecked CADD with no checks' is beyond me. Scratch that- it probably started with the motive assignment noted above.
While I concur that new contract language is in order, I wonder why that is presented as an obstacle rather than a business tip.
Most of us greyhairs have seen a few changes over the years. Caution has proven a virtue but being a naysayer just to be one has proven a fault. Embrace the change while holding to the idea that everything gets checked until you know it's right...
So you want to assume every surveyor has the latest self checking and cloud linked CAD software that requires tens of thousands in annual fees?
Those firms that do can do it faster, but do not fool yourself that they can do it cheaper.
Paul in PA
Thank you for your replies, everyone.
Bionic Man: While I would certainly like to see the scene you propose, that is not the situation we have here. The CAD files are not to be relied upon.
There is not one person responsible for the manipulation of the CAD data file. As an example some revision may occur where the dimension of a line is edited as text only, leaving the geometry the same.
There is no QC or updates to the CAD files, however nice that may be. The contractors follow the plans (meaning the stamped construction documents with the latest revisions), then the special provisional specifications written into the individual contract and finally a set of standard specifications. If all else fails then it is time to request additional information from the designer. Those are currently the rules.
I make my own model from the construction documents in CAD . That way I can address requests for information based on my own analysis. I would never rely on someone's anonymous CAD file for layout information. Especially when we are constantly running up against errors that need to be thoroughly investigated before proceeding with construction.
We can dream of a day when these models can make our process more efficient. I am not against that, but, today is not that day. I'm not making assumptions here. These are standard procedures that are being violated and otherwise common sense decisions.
not my real name, post: 374092, member: 8199 wrote: Thank you for your replies, everyone.
Bionic Man: While I would certainly like to see the scene you propose, that is not the situation we have here. The CAD files are not to be relied upon.
There is not one person responsible for the manipulation of the CAD data file. As an example some revision may occur where the dimension of a line is edited as text only, leaving the geometry the same.
There is no QC or updates to the CAD files, however nice that may be. The contractors follow the plans (meaning the stamped construction documents with the latest revisions), then the special provisional specifications written into the individual contract and finally a set of standard specifications. If all else fails then it is time to request additional information from the designer. Those are currently the rules.
I make my own model from the construction documents in CAD . That way I can address requests for information based on my own analysis. I would never rely on someone's anonymous CAD file for layout information. Especially when we are constantly running up against errors that need to be thoroughly investigated before proceeding with construction.
We can dream of a day when these models can make our process more efficient. I am not against that, but, today is not that day. I'm not making assumptions here. These are standard procedures that are being violated and otherwise common sense decisions.
I agree about the signed sealed docs controlling and the written spec being followed for clarification and also with sending formal RFIs when you need more info. However, I do also rely on the CAD file for the calcs verifying the results off the plans. Do you request the CAD or just work without it completely? It seems like you'd be reinventing the wheel that way.
I've had cases where I was refused the CAD file and had to go without it, but that's not the norm
Stamped, signed, approved for construction are the controlling documents.
Cadd files, while extremely useful and efficient are a sure fire way to bite you in the pocket.
Key measurments and details should ALWAYS be verified with the approved set.
Not mention E&O might not cover any mistakes made while relying on the Cad file alone.
In my opinion your colleague should use his own judgement when preparing the stakeout map, ultimately any mistakes will fall on his shoulders. Company policy change or not.
You are doing the engineer, the project owner, and yourself a huge disservice when you use the CAD drawings for stakeout.
-
1. The engineer loses when you arenÛªt checking his sealed plans. We all find many errors in the plans ÛÒ this isnÛªt necessarily a problem with that personÛªs engineering ÛÒ there are many sources of error and itÛªs ALWAYS cheaper to find them before construction has begun;
-
2. The project owner loses when these errors are found AFTER construction has begun ÛÒ under/over estimated/ordered materials, work stoppages while design is modified, compromise in design/function to ÛÏkeep things goingÛ, liquidated damages claims, - When you discover these things during construction (which is what happens when you donÛªt create your own model for stakeout) the cost of problems ESCALATE dramatically;
-
3. You lose because: a) either you donÛªt catch the error, it gets built wrong, and you are a candidate for liability OR you catch the error and are holding up construction; b) you are now trying to recompute things as everybody is ready to explode because of the delay and delay expenses are adding up; c) right or wrong you are very near the fan and you know what happens when it hits the fan. At the least your reputation will suffer.
When you have to comp everything up ÛÒ comps will happen earlier in the process ÛÒ youÛªll find mistakes earlier and there will be more opportunity for the engineers to fix them - in a calm environment.
I know that this isnÛªt how most folks are doing it ÛÒ but the cost for the surveyor to comp the job from the sealed plans is MUCH lower than just about any single mistake that is found after construction starts.
This leads us to another common problem ÛÒ most of these jobs are bid jobs so the surveyor who puts money in to comp the plans probably wonÛªt get the job.
I advise engineers (and owners) that they should NOT give out their CAD files for all of the above reasons ÛÒ then everybody who bids on the work will have to comp up the project ÛÒ good for the engineer, good for the owner, and good for the surveyor.
So back to the OP ÛÒ Share this post with the new management person - ask them if you are there to save the project money or cost the project money. They probably don't realize the implications of using the CAD file.
If you can't educate them or you don't have a problem increasing project cost and time ÛÒ keep using them CAD files.
