In another thread, I was talking to “Haole27” about something else, and brought up the subject of truss designers. I was basically going to ask him if he thought they should be licensed, and then decided to start a separate thread about it.
Currenty anyone who can sucessfully shove a mouse around and click on things can design trusses with a minumum of training. Most guys that do this have just finished high school, and have no construction experience or engineering training. Our company starts them out at $7.50 an hour – Just about what they can make flipping burgers at McDonald’s. Turnover is pretty high, due to the low pay.
I think it would give the industry some more credibility if the designers had some minimum requirements of some sort. We make engineering decisions all the time, and no one generally reviews the work.
Anybody wanna bite on this one?
Being blond is definitely a different state of mind. I can’t really put my finger on it, but the artifice of being blond has some incredible sort of sexual connotation. [Madonna]
Replies
Licensing has many connotations
legal reponsibility (which may be there anyway)
limiting access to work (jobs) How do you become licensed?
Creating a situation where compition may not become viable
would your employer pay for continuing training?
bobl Volo Non Voleo Joe's cheat sheet
"legal reponsibility (which may be there anyway)"
Hadn't thought about that one. Right now, I'm covered by the company's liability insurance. I wonder - If I was licensed - Would I have to carry my own insurance? Good point.
"limiting access to work (jobs) How do you become licensed?"
How we could be licensed is also up for debate. Not sure what you mean about "limiting access to work (jobs)".
"Creating a situation where compition may not become viable"
Again, I'm not sure what you mean there.
"would your employer pay for continuing training?"
Guess that would be up to the employer. Just like any other company, some do, and some don't.
Big doesn't necessarily mean better. Sunflowers aren't better than violets.
>> Not sure what you mean about "limiting access to work (jobs)".
Most licensing programs sooner or later end up imposing requirements that at least give the appearance of being designed to limit the number of people getting licenses rather than being designed to improve the quality of the service provided by license holders. General education requirements are an example, and one of my pet peeves. If a person has the talent and ambition to get through med school, why require him to complete a bachelor's degree before he can get into med school. Similarly, if a person can demonstrate the ability to solve complex engineering problems, why require an engineering degree to get a PE certificate?
Whatever their actual intent, to the extent that these extraneous requirements succeed in limiting the number of license holders in these various fields, they limit the competition between license holders, and, if you believe in supply and demand curves, they raise the price that the general public has to pay for these services, without any corresponding rise in the quantity or quality of the services rendered.
With the possible exception of driver's licenses, I believe governments should get out of the licensing business. I certainly don't believe they should be adding new categories of licenses. If the best truss designers feel their trade has a bad reputation, let them form a professional organization, call it the American Association of Truss Designers, set standards for the training / testing that should be required to design trusses, and issue a certificate to anyone who meets the standards. If the truss companies find that they can't get any premium for trusses designed by the certified designers, they'll quit offering more to hire one of them, and the market will have demonstrated unambiguously that licensing of truss designers was not necessary.
Suppose, on the other hand, that insurance companies and building officials discover that trusses by AATD designers are better, statistically speaking, than trusses by non-members. They start requiring AATD designed trusses, then you've achieved the advantages of licensing without getting the government involved. But then suppose the AATD looks around one day and discovers that there are too many truss designers competing for too few design jobs and decides to require a PhD in physics to get a certificate (of course grandfathering in all the current certified designers). Immediately the number of new certificates goes down and in a few years the certified designers can command a salary more in keeping with their doctorates.
Now with a government licensing program, all the guys who could be entirely competent truss designers but don't have the money or the time or the patience or whatever to go to college for 8 years before they can start designing trusses would be stuck. But if the AATD is a private and voluntary organization, then the guys that are excluded by the arbitrary requirements can band together and form the National Associating of Truss Designers and create a set of requirements that certifies truss designers at least as good as the AATD, but allows an 8th grade dropout to get a certificate if he can demonstrate his ability to design trusses. Soon builders start noticing that trusses by NATD designers are 20% cheaper than trusses designed by AATD designers. They lobby the insurance companies and building officials, who decide to allow trusses by designers from either group, and the market price of truss designers falls back down to something closer to the equilibrium price set by the supply of competent designers and the demand for designers.
And that's what we mean when we express a concern about licensing being used as a barrier to entry.
Hey Dunc - Could you explain it in a bit more detail ???................(-:
You raise a lot of interesting points - Some I hadn't thought of. I wasn't necessarilly thinking about a government requirement, but maybe a requirement in the next revision of the NDS, or something like that.
You said: "....if a person can demonstrate the ability to solve complex engineering problems, why require an engineering degree to get a PE certificate? " But who decides if he can solve complex problems? Without a test or licensing, I don't see how there can be a determination of a person's skills.
On the "supply and demand" thingy - There is already a severe shortage of truss designers nationwide. And yet they don't command premium salaries in most locations. (That's probably why there's a shortage) For instance - I've been doing this for 18 years, but make $5 less an hour than a union carpenter in this area.
No way do I believe truss manufacturers are going to pay a premium for designers that belong to a trade association. Nor do I think the general public will pay a premium for it. But still, the idea of a trade organization might be worth some thought. There might be other benifits to it.
I doubt insurance companies would ever find that trusses designed in a specific way would perform better. They don't make any sort of determination now as to how well a building is built. ie: If you build a high quality 28 X 28 garage next to my crappy 28 X 28 garage, the insurance company will charge us the same insurance premiums and pay us both the same amout in case of a loss.
In your last paragraph, you mentioned "8 years of college". I never meant anything like that, just maybe a one week course and a test, or something along those lines.
Would like to discuss this some more, but I gotta go play Santa shortly.
Thatnks for sharing your thoughts............The secret of success is knowing whom to blame for your failures.
they got to have a PE stamp in my state too.
As start of an aside many fo the building codes started with the requirements of insurance companies. I believe that is how UL and NEC got started.
And I don't know the details, but I have heard that in Texas or at least in parts of Texas that the insurance companies do inspections of new house before they will cover them. There they are concentrating on the roof connections for hurricane resistance.
If the insurance companies where starting to see that there was a significant losses caused by bad truss that they would start working on their own inspections or add it to the building code laws.
OK, let me comb out some of the details and try again. :)
If the government (any government, national, state or local) were to license truss designers like it does doctors and lawyers, eventually someone would succeed in adding a license requirement that had little or nothing to do with the skills and competence of the licensed designers and everything to do with reducing the number of licensed designers. It wouldn't have to be an education requirement, it could be anything at all.
Whatever the requirement was, and whatever its original intent was, if its actual effect were to exclude otherwise qualified individual from becoming licensed truss designers, AND it didn't make the truss designs any better, then you would have a case of licensing being used illegitimately as a barrier to entry into the trade. The trick would be showing in court that the new requirement had not improved the truss designs.
>> But who decides if he can solve complex problems? Without a test or licensing, I don't
>> see how there can be a determination of a person's skills.
I didn't say anything against tests for PE's. A test is exactly how you demonstrate the ability to solve complex engineering problems. What I was trying to say is, if a guy can pass the PE test, give him the ticket, with or without the degree. I suspect the degree requirement for a PE is a scam, designed solely to reduce the number of PE's in the marketplace.
One of the reasons for my sour attitude about education requirements is that I work in software (or did, back when I had a job), a field where the demand is so high that at least until recently, you didn't even need a degree to get a good job, much less a certificate. I've worked with self taught programmers, degreed programmers, and advanced degreed programmers. In my experience, the predictive value of the degree is exactly zero. 10 years ago, before everybody had a home computer, I could get a better idea of a person's interest in or committment to programming by asking if he had a computer at home than by examining his credentials.
Most of the other points you questioned were fanciful details and obvious exaggerations I made up to demonstrate that I don't know anything about the truss industry, insurance companies, building code bodies, etc. I don't see any of it that was crucial to the point I was trying to make, but feel free to ask again if there's anything that needs to be clarified.
Unc Dunc wrote too much for me....but he probably said the same...
licensed by who..and how? Maybe certified with some testing would be better,
Here in Pa.....there's no contractor licensing...and the last proposal for liscensing...was simply a money making deal for the state.
No testing..no nothing..just send in the check..and you are licensed.
That type of licensing...I'm against. At least have a minimum qualification test to pass first..then let them collect the check!
I want something out of it......I know I know more about construction the most of my competition....let me prove it if I gotta pay. Make it worth my while to limit my competition.
I see comparisons for you. You have the knowledge...could probably easily pass the basic tests while lots of the competition would fail....making you more valuable.....
So if licensing is to be invloved........at least let's make it have some value to those that choose to learn their profession. That type of licensing...should raise the income level of those that are qualified.
JeffBuck Construction Pittsburgh,PA
Fine Carpentery.....While U Waite
First off - I never meant to say that the government should do the licensing. I was thinking more about it being specified in ANSI-TPI or something like that.
Actually, Illinois requires the seal of a STRUCTURAL engineer on every truss that's built - A PE isn't good enough. But there's virtually no enforcement of it, so the law might as well not exist.
I'm also not in favor of requiring a college degree - Just a short course, and a proficiency test.
You might appreciate the humor of a friend of mine. He once told me that "Four years of college just proves you're trainable". I also question the value of a college degree, but most of the country seems to think it's important.
Another point - My idea wasn't to exclude anyone from being allowed to be a truss designer, or raise my salary. My hope was that licensing would raise the standards of professionalism in the industry. Wouldn't bother me if I made more money, but that was never my intent. (I actually didn't even think about it until it was brought up in this thread)
--------------------------
Honestly, I'm kinda surprised by the responses. I figured you guys would be split about 50-50 on licensing. But not one of you have thought it was a good idea. Guess I'l have to go back to the drawing board, and dream up another crackpot scheme..................(-:
A side note to Jeff Buck - I would NEVER be in favor of a "send in the check and get a license" type of program. And you're correct in saying that the term "certified" might be better than "licensed".
It takes months do devolop a good customer, but only seconds to lose one. The good news is that we'll be out of them in no time.
time was, a PE was a PE.. and they could practise in any area of engineering they felt competent to do... but that changed.. and the Boards of Professional Review ( whatever they're called in your respective states ).. started enforcing PE's to practise only in their fields of competency..
so your statement about a STRUCTURAL engineer would be redundant in RI.. and in fact, if a non-structural PE stamped a truss plan in RI, they would bring him up on charges and revoke his license...
i know two PE's that happened to... one for practising in the wetlands area when his field was structural...
so, if you ask a PE in RI to review something, he/she will only do it if they feel it is within their area of certification... or they will do it at their own perilMike Smith Rhode Island : Design / Build / Repair / Restore
Actually, they changed the requirement in Illinois from a PE to a structural engineer without any real reason. There weren't actually any structural engineers in the truss engineering industry at the time. Guess someone in the government just thought a structural engineer sounded better, since you use trusses in a structure.
So everybody had to scramble around and try to get structural certifications or find structural engineers to work in the truss industry.
Cost everybody a lot of headaches and money, but did no one any good. And no amount of lobbying before the legislature seems to be able to change it. That which does not kill me only postpones the inevitable.
>from a PE to a structural engineer without any real reason
Perhaps I'm reading this wrong, and if so, correct me. A PE can come from many different directions. Where I once worked, people with a Chem E degree could test for a PE. Or an Industrial E could test for it. Or an EE or ME could test for it. I wouldn't want any of these evaluating the structures I design, nor determining the rebar pattern for the staircase I'm building. I'd guess that you wouldn't a Chem E signing off on your trusses, either. To me, it seems that only a licensed structural engineer should be qualified to analyze the appropriateness of a new truss design or whatever. Doesn't mean I think only engineers should design trusses. But I agree with Mike that they should be reviewed by engineers.
I would have to confess that I don't know every last detail of this, or completely understand what the difference between a PE and a structural engineer is.
The PEs I've dealt with went through engineering school. They were hired out of college so they could do their apprenticeships (Is that the right word?)in the truss industry. Eventually, they went through the testing and got their seals in Illinois, as well as other states (See post 25427.31 that Haole27 wrote)
Tthere were no structural engineers in the truss industry at that time, as far as I know. Then the Illinois legislature came along and said they couldn't seal truss designs in Illinois anymore. No warning or explanation. Don't even know who pushed it through. Just know it caused a lot of grief. They took away the people who were trained to do the job, and said someone else who didn't have the same training had to do it.
Might be worth pointing out that engineering school doesn't teach you everything you need to know to work in the truss industry. I suspect EVERY industry that employs engineers requires some hands-on experience before they can be effective in their jobs.Cheops' Law: Nothing EVER gets built on schedule or within budget.
agreed, like every profession I know, it takes several years to "get it", thats why the the PE requires a 5 year training period before taking
its like picking a surgeon, when you need a ACL repaired for instance, you want the doc who has done it 500 times , mostly succesfully, not the rook who has assisted in 3 and done 4 by themself, unless you have a HMO and then you are thankful for an MD period! haha
are you sure that the "structural engineers" req imposed by Ill is not an PE who has passed the specific structural version of the PE? this how it is being done in most states now
in other words the structural engineer is a PE who has taken the specialized test, this is to keep nonqualified engineers from stamping designs outside their area of expertise
this started around 1982, when a chem eng designed a bridge that collapsed, since then the PE exam has mutated into various sub-specialties
>> I never meant to say that the government should do the licensing.
I misunderstood you then. In my mind, license means government. If you're talking about truss designers organizing to recognize and certify their best qualified members, I have no objection. As long as there is no government enforcement of their desired monopoly (and no quasi-governmental enforcement, like maiming their competitors), fine with me.
I don't see any need for it, if truss failures are as rare as you say in another message, but I can't see it doing any harm, either.
kid's just out of school who can push a mouse around ... I would have said "who can barely push a mouse around ...
You're not wrong. I'm in Australia and work for one of the State Transport agencies. Our problem is outsourced CAD road design, the minimum design requirements are coded into the program, and the "mouse pushers" just select whatever takes their fancy, usually the minimum requirement in each case. Now 1 minimum out of three criteria is quite OK, and two is just acceptable, but when you get all three - let's just say that the road designers trained on pencil and paper know better and only ever do it where there is no other choice. What's worse, I've seen design verifiers look at the three minimum criteria and accept - they see that the detail is OK but miss the bad news presented by the whole.
As for truss design, at some stage a company will sell a CAD add-on that allows any idiot with a mouse to design a truss and to print out the certification ready for the engineer's signature. The engineer will sign without any understanding of the design because TRUST TRUSS ver 3.12.3 "doesn't allow designs that are not in accordance with the code" (yes, my other leg plays jingle bells). IMNSHO the "real" solution is customer education - the customer is always right BUT the customer must understand what they are buying - most don't and worse most don't care. To return to the road example -- it's black, it's wide enough for two vehicles, it's got a white line up the middle, yep it's a road, I'll accept it. To bad it falls apart after the first winter.
Of course, it maybe that at the end of the day, the ultimate customer is the insurance company who writes the public liability policy for the truss supplier or insures the building. If they will accept TRUST TRUSS ver 3.12.3 as gospel, then there is no hope.
Ian
PS In my day job I'm one of those evil "shiny arse" civil engineers for years ago I couldn't spel engineear, now I are one!
Edited 12/7/2002 8:30:32 AM ET by ian
"at some stage a company will sell a CAD add-on that allows any idiot with a mouse to design a truss"
I don't really think that's the case. The design methodology is increadibly complex - It isn't done with "pin joint modelling" anymore, like they teach in statics classes. And they seem to change the design methodology and/or lumber values frequently enough that keeping up would be phenomenally expensive. So I don't really look for that to happen.Luck can't last a lifetime, unless you die young.
Boss,do you have any figures(%) on actual truss failures? From what I have seen, most collaspes of trusses occur durring the erection phase, i.e. impproper bracing, handling, fastening, etc. Somewhere I have got a video from a truss siminar that addresses these recurring problems.
IMHO a certifcation process in many area of construction is needed. As others have said, liability issues are the drivers.
Dave
Actually, I've never heard of a truss failure. Every time there's been a truss collapse, it's been because the truses weren't braced properly, as you mentioned.
A long time ago (Back in the WebX days) I did a post on truss bracing. Maybe I ought to do another one.
It's not a popular subject, though. Most contractors seem to think talking about truss erection bracing is a personal attack on their skills. Change is as constant as the restless sea.
The road design packages have tables and tables of values that the mouse pusher selects values from. For example and not necessarily in this order: 1 start with a 3-D terrain model (usually for a long narrow strip) 2 select the design speed, 3 select the minimum and maximum curve radii4 select the minimum and maximum cross fall5 select number of lanes in each direction of travel6 select a value for lane width ...n get machine to draw a horizontal and vertical alignment using terrain model n+1 get machine to estimate costRepeat till client happy with cost estimate
The business of changing methodology and/or values frequently is no different to a software publisher who frequently changes (upgrades??) their program in order to generate a new lot of licience fees. The truss design changes, if they add any value at all are probably more related to changes in the availability of timber species of particular stress grades or dimensions or more likely better understanding of how the connectors transfer stresses between truss members. They are unlikely to materially change the design solution. Unlike steel, timber comes in a limited number of standard cross sections, so changing the design methodology is unlikely to make a big difference in the economy of a truss design. Although the engineering efficient design might call for 1.9x3.8s, you'll continue to use 2x4s, 'cause it'll cost too much to resize them.
i still can't spel ingineear and I are one
I think thats the best post you have ever written that I have read . Good job !
Tim Mooney
Didn't read everything here, but truss and span design is not all that difficult. Its been "formula(d)" for a long time--same with beam design. Just my opinion, but even the contractor should have a pretty good understanding of what is needed to accept or reject a design.
I did some work on a restaurant earlier this year. Funky roof design, but the trusees were of 2x4, 16"oc and way over loaded with airconditioners, air cleaners and heat exchangers. Each side of the building had the equivalent of a couple of small cars up on 2x4's. Both the architect and builder should have known better. The current problems are what would be expected.
Don
"truss and span design is not all that difficult. Its been "formula(d)" for a long time"
That's not at all true. As I said earlier, trusses are no longer designed by the old "pin joint modelling" that is taught in statics/engineering classes. The formulas are much, much more complex. The truss industry as it stands today could not exist if it were not for computers. Virtually NOTHING is hand-calced anymore. Same for span charts - They just aren't used. (Except maybe for floor trusses)
The restaurant situation you mention is something that requires common sense, which can't be written into a design program. Designing trusses for HVAC loads is common. Sounds like these units were put up as an afterthought?Children and the simple-hearted are nearer to God than most of us.
your logic is slightly flawed and inconsistent here, you are a proponent of skipping engineering school entirely and proceeding directly to the PE exam but you are not proposing skipping medical school (only the bachelors req)? why not propose skipping med school also?
(btw, there are several med school programs that integrate the 4 year degree with the 4 year med school, it takes 5 years total for an md)
btw, i have taken the PE (and passed) and it is the hardest test I have ever taken! i dont think one out or a hundred thousand people could pass it without the concepts learned at engineering school. there are too many laymen out there who think "engineering" is strictly truss design or hvac design or auto repair or whatever they have come into contact with, the truth is engineering is much more vast and complex than this and the PE test reflects this reality. by all means go to a good technical bookstore or university bookstore and read the sample PE tests from years past
here are the minimum reqs for taking the PE in most states:
engineering degree from an ABET accredited school
professional recommendations from 5 people, 3 of them PEs
five years of professional experience
pass part I of the FE (fundamentals of engineering) exam formerly called the EIT (engineer in training) exam
You got that right! Strenght of materials, thermo dynamics, Engineering pyshics, etc, etc, etc as core courses.
The rules in Connecticut at the time I took it were quite convoluted, and required anywhere from 4 years acceptable experience (with ABET) to 20 years (with no degree). I've seen other states require 12 years, but count a 4-year ABET degree as 8 years. Acceptable experience involves steadily increasing degrees of responsibility in design under the direct supervision of another PE, which usually doesn't count specifying, technical writing, and such. As far as I know, all 50 states now use the same exams given simultaneously on the same 2 weekends each year (spring, fall). The 8-hour EIT or IE may be taken during senior year if in ABET school, but the 8-hour Principles and Practice part (what's usually called the PE exam) has the experience requirement more or less cast in stone. Sometimes advanced degrees shave a little time off the experience requirement (a scary thought, but that's another issue). Currently, the National Society of Professional Engineers (NSPE) is trying to convince states to change the exam from technical design and analysis to legal, ethics, etc. Their stated goal in this move is to increase the number of registered engineers (thereby swelling the pool of possible members of NSPE). I know the New Jersey society (NJSPE) officially opposes this, but that's what's happening. Oh, yeah. Licensed Land Surveyors have somewhat similar requirements, covered by the same state agencies. Most applications for PE have a section on LLS. Some states even allow PE and LLS on the same seal, for those so qualified.
As far a licensure or registration of truss designers, perhaps if a licensed truss designer was permitted to stamp truss designs instead of an engineer, the value of such an individual to his/her employer would increase (no need to pay an engineer). A PE is usually expressly prohibited from sealing the work of others unless it's performed under their direct supervision, or some other such language (which varies by state), which is supposed to prevent seal-for-hire situations, but I see it going on every now and then, mostly by retired PE's cashing in. So, if these folks are sealing work that they aren't involved in, based upon sketchy info (loading, building details, other parameters mentioned earlier on), then the integrity of the truss design is in the hands of the truss designer anyway (how's the PE going to catch anything?), so why not have qualified truss people so certifying also, or instead? Well, it sounded good at the moment.Be seeing you...
>> your logic is slightly flawed and inconsistent here, you are a proponent of skipping engineering
>> school entirely and proceeding directly to the PE exam but you are not proposing skipping
>> medical school (only the bachelors req)? why not propose skipping med school also?
Because I was addressing a slightly different point in the two cases. In the PE case, my point was that engineering school is not the only way and may not be the most efficient way for an aspiring PE to acquire the engineering knowledge, so why not just omit the degree requirement and depend on the recommendations, the experience, and the test to weed out the unqualified?
At least in the PE case, the requirement for an engineering degree has some plausible relevance to becoming a PE. In the medical case, I was making the point that the med schools don't even pretend that the required bachelor's degree has anything to do with making better doctors. You can take basket weaving and creative tattooing and meet the requirement. Most pre-meds I have known were busily taking classes they thought would help them get into med school, or help them when they got there, but there's no requirement that they do so. Which suggests at least the possibility that requiring a bachelor's degree is not intended to make better doctors, but to reduce the number of doctors.
I also suspect that it would be much, much more difficult to design a test to qualify an aspiring MD who had skipped med school.
As it happens, I do favor skipping med school, and the yet to be created test, and licensing for doctors. Make it a fraud to misrepresent your qualifications, and let anybody who wants to practice medicine, subject only to the fraud and malpractice laws.
please indulge me for a moment to sidetrack this conversation. Is there really such a thing as a structural eng.? In the back of my somewhat hazy mind I thought there were just cival engs. who somewhat specialized in structural problems. Is there really a P E designation for structural? Or is it just cival. Seems like there is a big diffrence between a building and a roadbed.
Clue me in
tim , here's the breakdown from the PE site.. as to fields of specialization
Home Exams Principles and Practice (PE/PLS)<!-- -->
View Image
View ImageIf you have passed the FE or FLS, complete our brief survey, and you'll be entered in a monthly drawing for a $50 NCEES coupon!
•
Study materials
•
PE and PLS pass ratesDesign standards:
•
Structural
•
TransportationPrinciples and Practice exams:
•
PE Agricultural
•
PE Architectural
•
PE Chemical
•
PE Civil
•
PE Control Systems
•
PE Electrical and Computer
•
PE Environmental
•
PE Fire Protection
•
PE Industrial
•
PE Manufacturing
•
PE Mechanical
•
PE Metallurgical
•
PE Mining and Mineral
•
PE Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering
•
PE Nuclear
•
PE Petroleum
•
PE Structural I
•
PE Structural II
•
PLS
•
Exam registration
•
Exam scoring
•
Exam schedule
•
Fundamentals exams
•
Licensure for engineers
•
Licensure for land surveyors
Summary — Below are answers to commonly asked questions regarding the Principles and Practice (PE/PLS) exams:
•
Why take a Principles and Practice (PE/PLS) exam?
•
Who is eligible to take a Principles and Practice exam?
•
What material is covered in the exams?
•
What is the format of the exams?
•
What can I bring to the exam room?
•
After I pass a Principles and Practice exam, what's next?
•
How do the Principles and Practice exams differ from the Fundamentals exams?Why take a Principles and Practice (PE or PLS) exam?If you are pursuing a professional license, you must take and pass one or more of the Principles and Practice examinations:
•
Engineering licensure candidates: take a Principles and Practice of Engineering (PE) exam and any required state-specific exam(s). PE exam disciplines are listed below.
•
In jursidictions that license structural engineers SEPARATELY from professional engineers, structural engineering licensure candidates must take one or more of the following exams: PE Civil, PE Structural I, PE Structural II, and/or any required state-specific exam(s).
•
Land surveying licensure candidates: take the Principles and Practice of Land Surveying (PLS) exam and any required state-specific exam(s).Guidelines vary greatly for each jurisdiction. Please check with your licensing board or review jurisdiction licensing requirements.To register for an exam, contact your licensing board or go to Exam Registration.Who is eligible to take a Principles and Practice exam?Rules vary greatly for each state/jurisdiction, so please contact your licensing board or go to Exam Registration for details.At a minimum, licensing boards require that you either pass, or be waived of, a Fundamentals exam before taking a Principles and Practice exam:• Before taking the PE, you must have passed, or be waived of, the FE.• Before taking the PLS, you must have passed, or be waived of, the FLS.Licensure candidates usually obtain at least 4 years of experience (deemed acceptable to their licensing boards) before taking the PE or PLS.What material is covered in the Principles and Practice exams?The Principles and Practice exams test academic knowledge and knowledge gained in engineering or land surveying practice. The PE and PLS exams cover a comprehensive range of subjects in engineering and land surveying, respectively.See the detailed specifications for the Principles and Practice exams:
•
PE Agricultural
•
PE Architectural
•
PE Chemical
•
PE Civil
•
PE Control Systems
•
PE Electrical and Computer
•
PE Environmental
•
PE Fire Protection
•
PE Industrial
•
PE Manufacturing
•
PE Mechanical
•
PE Metallurgical
•
PE Mining and Mineral
•
PE Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering
•
PE Nuclear
•
PE Petroleum
•
PE Structural I
•
PE Structural II
•
PLSnote the little note that says in some jurisdictions you have to take either Civil, Structural I, or Structural II
Mike Smith Rhode Island : Design / Build / Repair / Restore
Edited 12/7/2002 8:07:26 PM ET by Mike Smith
" Is there really such a thing as a structural eng.?"
Can't tell you the specifics, and I don't know what the requirements are for the different types of engineers. But I can tell you fer certain that our truss drawings come back with the words "Structural Engineer" on them. (I'll even fax you a drawing if ya like)
Maybe one of the engineers here will know and explain the difference.If electricity comes from electrons... does that mean that morality comes from morons?
So much to say, where do I start?
I don't know of a single medical school which requires a degree for entry. I didn't have a bachelor's degree when I was accepted to med school ( in 1990). Realistically, however, most applicants do have degrees. All medical schools have certain core requirements for entry (so much English, so many biology courses, general and organic chemistry, psychology and/or sociology, etc.). The purpose of these requirements vary, from providing the necessary background to be able to succeed in courses in medical school (such as Biochem) to just showing the ability to assimilate a large amount of material in a very short period of time. There is also a requirement of a minimum number of college hours, usually 90. Although it is true that once you fulfill the core requirements the rest of the hours can be made up by any type of course, the idea that one could enter med school with only "basket weaving" and similar courses is ludicrous. You have to remember that it is extremely competitive, with many people applying for each spot available. The courses you have taken are exactly what is used to compare one candidate with another. That is why the vast number of students have degrees, not because it is required but because they are competing against others with degrees.
The problem with thinking that the marketplace can determine who is a competent practitioner has to do with the impact on society of someone who is incompetent. If Joe Blow down the street decides to perform surgery, the people he injures may then be disabled and rely on SSI or a similar system for support. We are paying for that, not just Joe Blow. If Joe Blow (and a thousand like him) gives out antibiotics for every cold, who is it that pays when we develop bacteria that are resistant to everything we have to offer?
This same could hold true for truss designers. I think that society has a legitimate right to try to protect its citizens from incompetence. The structure we have chosen is licensure, and although it might be misused to limit competition, I don't think that is its primary purpose.
Civil Engineering has become specialized and most states are offering Structural PE licenses. The test is more difficult and as a result, practicing structural engineers opt for the "regular" Civil PE because highway curve and open-channel flow problems are so easy. California has required structural engineers to take an additional 4-hour exam to sign and seal structural designs and a 4-hour exam for seismic design for several years now. The first year that the structural/seismic test was offered, it was a combined 8-hour test and the pass rate was 8%. California takes its engineering a lot more seriously than the rest of the states, for obvious reasons.
One thing I have to recommend here. When you hire a licensed engineer, always check that the PE registration is actually active and up to date. You can do this at the web site of the state licensing agency. There are many engineers that do not pay their fee every three years. Many NY agencies require photocopies of the current registration for proof of licensure because of this problem....that's not a mistake, it's rustic
"California has required structural engineers to take an additional 4-hour exam to sign and seal structural designs and a 4-hour exam for seismic design for several years now. The first year that the structural/seismic test was offered, it was a combined 8-hour test and the pass rate was 8%. California takes its engineering a lot more seriously than the rest of the states, for obvious reasons"
Excuse me , but isnt California the first state that might have to go bankrupt? Or is every thing I read about them losing hundreds of people every day to the other states bull ? They are causing people to leave over their regulations such as what you just said about a four hour test that only 8% pass . Yup , sounds just like them alright! Then of course the people are charged thousands of dollars for those good services that that are rendered against them. How have they got by doing stuff like this with out a revolt ?
Tim Mooney
Tim, you don't have to live in CA to be licensed by CA. The Structural Engineers I use are licensed in something like 33 states. A CA license is held in the highest regard. One engineer didn't have a license in the state where the project was. I mentioned to the permit officer that he had a CA license. He said, oh, heck, we'll accept that, because no one has tougher standards than they do.
Society has a stong interest in having buildings that don't fall down. I'm relieved by tough standards for certain fields. It doesn't guarantee safety, but it increases my confidence.
Edited 12/8/2002 8:15:09 AM ET by Cloud Hidden
I wasnt mouthing the result .
An 8%pass rate on any school system in Arkansas would be out of business . Why? Because the people wouldnt want it . It doesnt seem to make any difference in California whether they like it or not . Thats why we are getting a bunch of them moving in here. There is one sales person here that makes her living selling to people from California alone , and she doesnt handle all of them. Theres something bad wrong out there , is what I was really saying.
Tim Mooney
I, like you, Am not in favor of more government intervention in our lives. However, that said, I was also tpught that the pupose of government was to provide for a society, that which they could no longer provide for themselves. That is a round about way of saying that when a family, tribe, city or state gets so big, some one has to lookout for the interst of the whole. We can't all get rid of our own garbage or provide addiquate sanitary waste disposal for ourselves, thus we have government intervention to regulate the issues. Some of these regulation are intrusive to individuals, but in the interest of public health and safety become the standard by which we choose to live. Self regulation only works when the group is small and self policing.
I believe that this whole issue of truss design license has not reach the level of a public safety issue yet. When or if it does, self regulation should be where it starts,.
Dave
>There must be something wrong out there
Taxes. Cost of living. Barbara Streisand. Ron Teti. Take your pick! Ha ha ha.
>> ... the people he injures may then be disabled and rely on SSI or
>> a similar system for support.
Yeah, that's the same argument people use for requiring motorcycle helmets, and I don't buy it. If society doesn't want to pay SSI for people disabled by incompetent surgeons or by bashing their unprotected heads on the pavement, then it should just quit paying, not use the payments as an excuse to try and run other people's lives.
This argument would also have a lot more force if medical malpractice under the current licensing arrangement were as rare as Boss says truss failures are.
>> I don't know of a single medical school which requires a degree for entry.
>> ...
>> All medical schools have certain core requirements for entry ...
Sounds like a distinction without a difference to me.
>> I didn't have a bachelor's degree when I was accepted to med school (in 1990).
So? Most college applicants don't have a high school diploma when they're accepted to college, either, but the colleges anticipate that they will by the time they actually enter college.
>> ... might be misused to limit competition, I don't think that is its primary purpose.
I don't think that's its primary purpose, either, and never said I did. What I said is that government licensure can easily be used to limit competition in a way that is much harder to do with private certification, and that most licensed trades and professions have probably given in to the temptation. In my opinion, requiring license applicants to take college courses to learn skills or knowledge that can be learned in other ways is clear evidence that a licensed trade or profession is trying to limit competition.
Edited 12/8/2002 3:52:46 AM ET by Uncle Dunc
Yeah, that's the same argument people use for requiring motorcycle helmets, and I don't buy it. If society doesn't want to pay SSI for people disabled by incompetent surgeons or by bashing their unprotected heads on the pavement, then it should just quit paying, not use the payments as an excuse to try and run other people's lives.
There's a difference: with motorcycle helmets a person makes a simple, personal decision whether to wear one or not. With the non-licensed doc, the decision is far more complex and, without licensing, there would be no effective way to make an informed decision, aside, perhaps, from other government programs - e.g., laws regarding prescriptions and who can prescribe drugs.
And I think you're right, anyone who wants to ride a bicycle, motorcycle or other mechanized device without seat belts (or rides in a car without putting on a seat belt) should be denied all public assistance should they incur head injuries of the type a helmet or seat belt would prevent or lessen the impact of. And, if there are any children seriously injured, I just hope they retain enough consciousness to feel the guilt they should bear while the rest of us support that child for however long it takes. "Live free or die," indeed.
Sometimes there is a fine line between choices made; other times there is a clear bright light between common sense and it's opposite.
Or, are there any studies that support the idea that not wearing a helmet is overall safer?
Strengthening the gene pool is about the only argument in favor of shunning helmets.
________________________________________________
"I may have said the same thing before... But my explanation, I am sure, will always be different." Oscar Wilde
Edited 12/8/2002 4:17:20 AM ET by Bob Walker
>> ... there would be no effective way to make an informed decision ...
Sure there would. Let the AMA certify doctors. Then when it became clear that they were setting the standards artificially high to limit the number of doctors and raise their fees, a competing medical certification board could start up which certify all qualified applicants, thereby raising the number of practicing doctors and forcing the fees back down. The government has no monopoly on the knowledge and/or wisdom it takes to evaluate and certify doctors. Why should it have a monopoly on certifying them?
Sure there would. Let the AMA certify doctors. Then when it became clear that they were setting the standards artificially high to limit the number of doctors and raise their fees, a competing medical certification board could start up which certify all qualified applicants, thereby raising the number of practicing doctors and forcing the fees back down. The government has no monopoly on the knowledge and/or wisdom it takes to evaluate and certify doctors. Why should it have a monopoly on certifying them?
So, is there going to be a law that says: to practice medicine you have to be certified by the AMA. And then, when the AMA gets out of hand, another law passed naming the new certfying trade association?
That is basically what PA has done with home inspector licensing and it's a joke - except it didn't name the trade association - it says that an inspection report, which is required, can only be issued by an inspector who belongs to a national HI trade association which meets specified criteria, so a shady hustler type in PA started a new "national association" to meet the law and meet the requirements.
Why should the government incur the costs of testing and licensing?
First, licensing is intended to protect everyone living in the jurisdiction, directly of incorrectly.
Why should the state have a monopoly on certifying doctors? Because as soon as you put it in the public sector you get a race to the bottom, a la PA.
Second, trade licensing is often (usually?) self-funding. I know that was a basic requirement when I started work with a group on an HI licensing bill in OH.
>> ... a law that says: to practice medicine you have to be certified by the AMA?
No. There would be no law that said anything at all about being certified to practice medicine. There would be a law against taking money from patients by claiming to have certifications you didn't have, and a law against intentionally or negligently injuring your patients, and that's it.
That's not at all what happened in PA. You say the state requires an inspection report and defines who can produce one. I say the state has no business doing either one. The only people who should be deciding whether or not to get an inspection are the ones who will be living in the house, and the only people who should be concerned about the inspector's qualifications are the people who are paying for the reports. Period.
That's not at all what happened in PA. You say the state requires an inspection report and defines who can produce one. I say the state has no business doing either one. The only people who should be deciding whether or not to get an inspection are the ones who will be living in the house,
I was unclear in one particular. I should have started: "If someone elects to get a home inspection ...."
and the only people who should be concerned about the inspector's qualifications are the people who are paying for the reports. Period.
And do you have any practical suggestions as to how they should go about chosing a home inspector?
Maybe use membership in a trade association that tests its applicants?
A "trade association" was started in response to the PA strictly to enable inspectors to meet the states qualifications.
It has an on-line test. No security controls - you sign up take the test (or have it taken for you) and, if you pass, send your $$.
How hard is the test? My 15 year old daughter who has no interest in construction whatsoever took it and almost passed. If I had given her 3 answers she would have passed and could provide "sanctioned" home inspedction reports in PA.
So, again, how would you advise someone on how to pick a home inspector?
Edited 12/8/2002 8:28:55 PM ET by Bob Walker
>> And do you have any practical suggestions as to how they should go about chosing
>> a home inspector?
Not really. How do you choose an expert in any other field? Is it any easier to pick the right person in a licensed profession than in any other field?
Knowing that all home inspectors in Pennsylvania are certified by state approved associations only provides false assurance for home buyers. I don't see how taking away that false assurance could make anything worse. And judging by the record of other licensed trades and professions, it's not clear to me that state licensing for home inspectors would be a net improvement.
From what I've read about the field, mostly here at Breaktime, it looks like the demand for really rigorous inspections, at the cost of the extra time that would take, is approximately zero. If people don't want to pay for any more than pretend inspections, why do anything that would raise the price without necessarily improving the inspections?
Do you know what ER docs and nurses call motorcycle riders both with and without helmets? Organ Donors!
I think we should repeal ALL helmet laws, this will only increase the organs available for us when ours fail!
We should encourage Jackass movie sequels for the same reason...
gee, UD, you just sound argumentative ..
when i hire a PE, i want to know that his plans and testimony will stand up in our society....my guess is that 90% of the materials they prepare for me, i could do myself without a lot of the delay... BUT
then i take it to a Planning Board... or a Coastal Resources review... or a building inspector...and , since my brother -in-law is not the governor... or the speaker of the house.. they , naturally want to know that their back is covered if tehy rely on MY expert's plans..
the turf wars separated the Land Surveyors from the PE's, and the problem of defining expertise within the engineering disciplines seems to have been resolved..
now, i want a stamped plan.. i check the credentials.. because the time and money i can waste is more precious to me than the fee i have to pay to the PEMike Smith Rhode Island : Design / Build / Repair / Restore
>> I don't know of a single medical school which requires a degree for entry. >> ... >> All medical schools have certain core requirements for entry ...
Sounds like a distinction without a difference to me.
The difference is that, as stated in my original post, there is a rationale for the prerequisite requirements, and not just for the purpose of limiting the number of doctors. It's the same as when a college requires you to have taken beginning calculus prior to advanced calculus, by experience we know that the beginning knowledge is necessary to be successful in the class. My first semester in medical school consisted of 33 semester hours of courses, and the schools have to have a way of determining who is able to handle that kind of load.
>> I didn't have a bachelor's degree when I was accepted to med school (in 1990).
So? Most college applicants don't have a high school diploma when they're accepted to college, either, but the colleges anticipate that they will by the time they actually enter college.
I don't think you understood, I entered med school without a bachelor degree, there is not a requirement for one, and I never earned one. What you are talking about is being accepted to college with the understanding that the high school diploma diploma will be earned. If you don't graduate high school, you lose your acceptance to college. You're talking apples and oranges.
>> ... there is a rationale for the prerequisite requirements ...
I admit was mistaken about med schools requiring a degree, but I maintain that there is little practical difference between requiring a degree and requiring 90 hours our of a specific menu of courses. There is a rationale, barely, for requiring entering medical students to know that material. I can see no rationale at all for requiring the knowledge to be gained from college courses. There is always some other way to learn anything.
But even the rationale for requiring the knowledge is not very compelling. A brutally libertarian medical school would admit anybody who could pay the tuition and fees, and the students would be responsible for their own preparation. If they didn't know enough to keep up in class, they would have wasted their money. If they could keep up, either because they had taken the prerequisite courses, or equivalent self directed study, or because of mystical intuition, they could become doctors.
>> I don't think you understood, I entered med school without a bachelor degree ...
The reason I didn't understand is that you didn't say that. From the way you phrased it, "... when I was accepted to med school ...", I inferred that your situation was exactly parallel to the HS senior.
Not to disagree with your basic premises, but some medical schools do admit kids straigh out of colledge. UMKC is one, but it is really an integrated pre-med/med program.
I don't care if they're licensed or not, since RI requires all truss orders have PE approved truss plans, with the truss order, to be submitted to the building inspector....
so whenever I get trusses, there is someone just like you doing the fabrication plan, and a PE reviewing and stamping the plan... I can't see why any building inspector , in this day and age, would accept anything less...
most of the , I do the preliminary truss design and then give it to our truss mfr. for review and changes.. then they quote, I accept.. and it goes into production
Mike Smith Rhode Island : Design / Build / Repair / Restore
yes, that is my understanding as well
Keep in mind that not all places are like RI. In Illinois (And I'd venture to say most states) there is no such requirement.
No one reviews 99.9% of the truss and/or beam designs I do. Even if they do review them, that's no guarantee that they'll get the correct info.
For instance - If I design a house full of trusses, and send them out to an engineer - He has no idea if I've used the correct loading for the area. Some counties around here have different loading requirements.
And if the engineer doesn't see a layout (Or "Truss Placement Plan) he may have no idea whether the trusses are designed correctly for that particular building. If I had my life to live over again, I'd be a plumber. [Albert Einstein]
all of the information the PE needs to review the application is reviewed.. including the loading and the wind load it is designed for in terms of uplift...i doubt that any East or West Coast state will have anything different.. certainly not California.. or the Carolinas, or Florida..
nope... dollars to donuts... sooner , rather than later.. all of your truss plans will have to be stampedMike Smith Rhode Island : Design / Build / Repair / Restore
You may be right. But I'm not sure that will help, unless ALL the info the engineer needs is presented to them.
When we send stuff down for review, I've virtually NEVER seen a situation where the engineer wants to see the blueprints. (I can remember once in the past 18 years) So what good does it do to have a sealed layout if it may or may not be correct? No guarantee that it will be input correctly.
Also - I've never seen an engineer ask where the trusses are going. They just assume that whatever is sent to them is correct.
I don't doubt that we're heading in that direction, as you said. I just don't know that it will do any good.Blood is red, cyanosis is blue. Some people are dead; wish one was you.
boss.. if the engineer doesn't get the info.. he won't certify the solution..
lemme ask you .. what info do you get so you can design the truss?
exactly !.... that's the info the PE gets too
hey, i know trusses are designed by guys sitting at computers , who usually don't have an engineering degree... and 99% of the time they come up with a great solution and a great truss..
but I'm not going to use a truss without a PE stamp.. and my building inspector isn't going to accept them without one... not if he values his job..
now that was under the old CABO code.. the new UBC code is even more stringent interms of loading & wind design.... so...
hell, there are cities in RI where I can't replace a window, if the RO width changes ,
without a PE approved plan for the header.... even though the header requirements are all spelled out in the codeMike Smith Rhode Island : Design / Build / Repair / Restore
I think your point is that the PE should get all the info. My point is that they generally don't get all the info. C'est la vie, c'est la guerre, c'est un pomme de terre. That's life, that's war, that's a potato.
"I think it would give the industry some more credibility if the designers had some minimum requirements of some sort. We make engineering decisions all the time, and no one generally reviews the work."
What lack of credibility do you see now?
And none of the problems that I have seen mention about truss, would be fixed having the designer certified. Things like deliver, cost, and reading the builders mind.
I have not seen many people mentioning structural problems with trusses.
"What lack of credibility do you see now? "
Good question. Maybe I'm looking at it more from a personal standpoint. It seems to me that I have no credibility with some builders because I have no degree. If I tell them what kind of beam they need in a specific situation, and they don't agree, they frequently point out that I'm not an engineer. Technically, they're right. Since I'm not an engineer, the opinion of a carpenter who's "always done it that way" is just as valid as mine.
"I have not seen many people mentioning structural problems with trusses. "
That's true. When I think about quality in truss design, I think more about the quality of the designs themselves. ie: Not using 11' panels, even though the computer says they work. And overplating for handling on larger trusses. Stuff like that.
Good question. Maybe I'm looking at it more from a personal standpoint. It seems to me that I have no credibility with some builders because I have no degree. If I tell them what kind of beam they need in a specific situation, and they don't agree, they frequently point out that I'm not an engineer. Technically, they're right. Since I'm not an engineer, the opinion of a carpenter who's "always done it that way" is just as valid as mine
Ask the Builders what degree they hold? I doubt youll find many with degrees pertaining to the Engineering side of construction.
BH,
I think many of the same issues show up in your line of work and mine; the main differences being that HI's work directly with consumers mostly and we operate as generalists in a number of areas whereas you work as a specialist in one, complex area.
And all or at least most of the arguments made here are equally applicable to both.
In the HI world, my view is (not surprisingly?) that, all things considered, licensing makes sense to protect consumers. In the states that don't require appropriate review of truss plans by an appropriately licensed engineer, I think it would make sense too.
When I practiced law, some work was done by paralegals, and for awhile I had a secretary who was better at legal analysis than some of the attorney's I knew (and she was early 20's with "just" high school and secretarial school degrees!) I always reviewed what they prepared, though.
And btw, one of the specific functions of licensing is to keep people out of the profession, but based on qualifications - not qualified - no ticket.
On the issue what education does, can do or proves: I have a lot myself, so I have a bias, perhaps.
My experience is that having various degrees doesn't prove someone is smart or good, and not having degrees doesn't prove someone isn't.
I think a degree merely shifts the expectations: I expect someone with advanced degrees to be more likely to have critical thinking and analysis skills, I don't have that same degree of expectation for someone who doesn't. BUT there are a lot of people out there that don't fit those expectations so that anyone who draws conclusions based on amount of education or degrees or where those degrees are from isn't thinking too clearly.
Should state licensing require degrees, or just proof of capacity?
If just proof of capacity, how will that be established? It would be very expensive for the states to create tests and what not, and who wants to pay for that?
Let the schools and universities do that and let the people seeking the degree pay for those costs themselves. I think that is the most efficient and sensible allocation of those costs. (Is that a conservative or liberal view?)
________________________________________________
"I may have said the same thing before... But my explanation, I am sure, will always be different." Oscar Wilde
Bob , I dont think I have ever fired one your way or you me , but its time for me to indulge.
Same subject as Boss is talking about ;
I was reading qualifications for HI testing in Arkansas . I believe to the best of my memory engineers were exempt from the test. [at least for one ]
Licensed building contractors started at square one along with say an eighteen year old out of high school. [only for example]
Remodeling contractors were in the same boat .
Why shouldnt building contractors that were licensed per a state test be allowed to take a HI test after study of the book instead of requireing 8 days full time training on site and so many houses training . [25 ?]
In your opinion , would you say that HI training would beat a licensed contractors eyes of structure for example when he was a kid just out of HI school?
I also noticed that a home inspector cant be sued . I had a problem when I read that . Doesnt seem to me they have their feet to the fire any where I can see. Where a builder is very liable.
Tim Mooney
Tim,
I haven't looked at the Ark law so don't have any comment at this point. I'll try to take a look at it.
Hey I like that "can't be sued" part! Puts us right up there with HMO's! I doubt if that what it says though.________________________________________________
"I may have said the same thing before... But my explanation, I am sure, will always be different." Oscar Wilde
Home Inspectors CAN and DO get sued all of the time! From some nonsense items that the furnace dies two years after the buyer moves in to more serious problems such as termites, wood rot, structural issues, etc that the HI should have detected.
Thats why the smart ones carry Errors/Omissions insurance, similar to what Arch/Engs carry...
Tim:
Why shouldnt building contractors that were licensed per a state test be allowed to take a HI test after study of the book instead of requireing 8 days full time training on site and so many houses training . [25 ?]
In your opinion , would you say that HI training would beat a licensed contractors eyes of structure for example when he was a kid just out of HI school?
I don't agree with the standards set in that law, I think you make some good points.
OTOH, I don't think that licensed contractors, remodelers. architects or engineers should get a pass; home inspecting is a different business and involves different skills and to a significant degree, a different knowledge base.
Remodeling contractors are, in my opinion, the most qualified of those groups to be doing home inspections "right out of the box." Doing inspections requires a knowledge of both how things work and why and when they don't.
Also, there are procedures to doing home inspections, and it is important to know what to do and what not; there are also reporting requirements.
Neither of those things are necessarily within the existing knowledge base of other trades and require some degree of training.
I do agree with you that some credit should be given for other professional competencies, though.
I also noticed that a home inspector cant be sued .
I can't find that provision in the Ark law.
Edited 12/7/2002 8:47:26 PM ET by Bob Walker
I could be cross switched in my thinking about appraisers . Only an opinion , and if you prove them wrong in court by as much as 25 percent , you can have his or her fee back as settlement.That is in Arkansas, so for all practical purposes , they cant be sued. Be silly to sue for 250.00, and theres another reason.
Thanks for looking it up . I see where you found the ones exempted. I think it would be a fair deal if no one was exempt . But to give who they did a pass?
Tim Mooney
Boss,
I designed the trusses for my timber frame myself. My approach was what would look nice and sturdy.. HHHhhmmmmm. that looks nice.
grabbed a couple of manuals and figured out what the minimum was. then multiplied times ten and added my age plus a safety factor of 500% and then added a little more.
OK the average house is built with an eye towards profit and costs. I didn't approach it that way. Should I be licensed?
Yo Frenchy -
What you're talking about is way beyond this discussion. I was thinking more about people who do it for a living - where the trusses are installed on someone else's house.
Whether or not home owners should be allowed to do as they please on their own house is a whole separate topic.
Also - Using big members in itself doesn't necessarally make a truss (Or any structure) stronger. I like to use this analogy: A truss - Like a chain - Is only as strong as it's weakest link. The weakest link in a truss is generally the connections. I suspect (But don't know) that the same is true for timber frames.
Glad ta see ya added yer age - That should be a comfortable safety factor.....................(-:I intend to live forever. So far, so good.
While it is true that the use of large cross sectional members in and of itself do not form a truss, most timberframes do use truss design. I wonder who supervises the design of those? I mean how many professional timber truss designers can make a living in the United states? Where would one get a degree in that field?
I know how very hard it was to find good engineering data on the subject that would satisfy a building inspector. A hundred years ago such information was fairly common knowledge. (and at that time there were very few regulations) yet few buildings collasped shortly after construction.
I guess my point is that while regulation serves a purpose, few people would attempt such things without either a basic understanding or close supervison.
Tim, That 8% rate has gone up as CA realized the initial version of the test was a bit overboard. A PE in CA is held in high regard as is a PE in Europe. The main problem with the PE status in most of America, is the American Society of Civil Engineer's lack of real leadership and the National Society of Professional Engineer's lack of actual status. In Canada, only Professional Engineers can use the title Engineer. Boiler room workers and audio technicians are not "Engineers" like they call themselves in the States....that's not a mistake, it's rustic
"While it is true that the use of large cross sectional members in and of itself do not form a truss, most timberframes do use truss design."
I never said timber frames weren't trusses - I said that using big members doesn't necessarilly mean it's strong.
For instance - I had a customer who bought pole barn trusses all the time. They always asked me to increase the chord sizes to make the trusses stronger. After a while, I got them convinced that they were wasting money. The trusses were designed for the same PSF loading regardless of their member sizes. If they wanted them stronger, they had to increase the PSF loading, not the chord sizes.
Not picking on you or timber frames, just trying to make a point.
".....yet few buildings collasped shortly after construction."
I'm not sure that's really significant. Structural collapse doesn't concern me as much as long term building performance. MY Dad's barn was built around 1908. While it's never collapsed, there are many broken and sagging timbers. And it's needed a great deal of repair. (It's still pretty cool, though - 60 X 80 and about 30' tall)
"regulation serves a purpose, few people would attempt such things without either a basic understanding or close supervison. "
Around here they would, and do frequently. I've seen some pretty horrible attempts at home made trusses. And I'm going to a Christmas party Wednesday night at a home-designed timber frame home.The editor is always write.
Boss,
You are correct in that sooner or later somebody will do something horrible (usually in the name of saving money).
Regarding your dad's barn, Just as a point of interest, with the knowledge you have. In hindsight, what would you have done differant if you could have been foreman on the job back in 1908?
The rules are,
1. You need to keep reasonably close to the original budget and purpose.
2. The technique, equipment needs to have been available in 1908
When I discuss my project with others, most of the discussion has to do with putting them in my mindset and goals. (and yes I'm a stubborn german) but I do carefully listen and would certainly incorporate anything that would add life and durability. Farmers and others who make do with very little on tiny budgets tend to have the same independance of spirit.
Hard to say what I would have done differently back in 1908. But I think they had a poorly concieved design. ie: some of the roof supports sit right in the middle of horizontal members which span about 18'. They should have used more supports, or larger horizontal pieces.
All in all, it was quite an achievement for back then. It was the biggest barn in the county at that point in time. (Or so we're told)
BTW - I'm a stubborn german too. And ya don't have to tell ME about farmers and independent spirits......................(-:The only way of discovering the limits of the possible is to venture a little way past them into the impossible.
B.H....Weakest link in a truss is usually the connection". I've hand cut probably 30 roofs in my career and I've allways wondered about nailing 16s or todays12s to keep them together. In the past if there was even a slight doubt with trusses gang nailers (truss fasteners) not looking right I would hand nail 6cc through the plate (angled). If you could give us some info on the plates history or for that matter the the invention of these and the fastening schedule or nail positionin the plates I'll pass it on to the guys onthe crews and we would be gratful
The history of the truss plate isn't something I know a great deal about. I tried searching the web, but got no responses.
I do know that trusses were initially made using plywood gussets. Then someone Got the idea of making the metal things. I think that there are 2 different people who claim that they invented the nail plate.
If you're getting trusses with the nail plates not pressed in well, I'd suggest contacting the manufacturer rather than adding nails. If there's a problem, they need to know about it. And they should be the ones to come up with the specific fix for that truss.
In general, if you can slip a dime behind the truss plate, it isn't pressed in well enough.
Of course - You could buy trusses from us instead of that place in Virden, and then you'd never have problems again....................(-:The greatest lesson in life is to know that even fools are right sometimes. [Winston Churchill]
B.H. .............Thanks for the reply , maybe we could get the engineers back in here to tell us how all those little spikes that go only a small distance into the wood gaurentee the wood stays together . Most plate seperation i've been involved with comes from handling , roll off, manual installitation ( handing them up) or not being cabled off to the boom truck properly when lifted of the ground. "buying truss'es" , when John sold the company I came in to get a bid on truss'es and was told the company did not sell to priviate individuals , not being very good with anger management I said "no sh't , I'll go orded them from Menards, they said thats who we sell them to under contract." it's not a big deal to me anymore I'm backing out of the business to the semi- retired status and I will be in contact with you in person in the future because of your contact here and I will recommend you personaly.
Old John was quite a character, wasn't he? I went on a cruise with him once where he got drunk and took a leak off the side of the boat. Almost ended up working there, back before John bought the place.
The fact that Rehkemper doesn't sell direct makes some guys mad, I know. But the fact that the place in Virden sells to everybody used to cause me a great deal of headaches when I worked there. One day we could sell to anybody with a checkbook. The next day the owner would go ballistic because we sold a job direct to someone and made a lumberyard mad. It was like he had PMS or something, and he had wild mood swings. We never knew what we were supposed to do from one day to the next.
So have you been dealing with them, or Accubuild? (Doesn't matter, really - Just curious) Had any dealings with Steve S. from the place in Virden?
It's kinda odd to me that you seem to know exactly who I am, but I have no clue who you are. Hope you aren't an axe murderer or something, or at least don't know where I live................(-:Common sense is instinct. Enough of it is genius. [George Bernard Shaw]