# PE stamping house plans



## mcompound

Hello -

I am a ME, recently received my PE. I would like to start doing some foundation design and stamping of house plans on the side. I do not have any experience in it, all of my career has been as a ME. I know it can't be that hard. Can anyone give me any advice on books, software programs, etc. Has anyone else gone this route for a little side income.

Thanks


----------



## Guest

^^^ I agree with Sapper .. you don't want to get your hand caught in the cookie jar. Also, there are numerous states (including mine) that require that you have had certain courses and experience prior to signing/sealing engineering works that come under the building code. The foundation design would certainly fall under that designation.

Approximately 80% of the referrals for disciplinary action for my state's board come from code inspectors reporting inadequate design based on aspects of the building code. So please don't take this as criticism - start off with building code and see if there is someone you can be supervised under who has some experience.

JR


----------



## MA_PE

Further, (in MA anyway) you don't need a PE stamp for one-two family dwellings. They trust the contractors and builders to follow the code guidance. Only unique or non-standard designs would need a stamp.


----------



## Desert Engineer

MA_PE said:


> Further, (in MA anyway) you don't need a PE stamp for one-two family dwellings. They trust the contractors and builders to follow the code guidance. Only unique or non-standard designs would need a stamp.



In CA, everything has to be stamped by a RCE. One could do owner/designer/builder without arch stamp, but it must be reviewed by a RCE or SE. This is a result of hard lessons learned during/after earthquakes (hence the seismic requirements for Civil PE).


----------



## Dleg

As a fellow ME grad (now licensed as an environmental eng.) I would not stamp a foundation or house plan. I agree with Sapper - try to at least get some soils/geotech coursework as well as some good structural training first, before you even consider it.


----------



## Sschell

isn't there something that says "practice within area of competence" or something along those lines... check your local laws!


----------



## Slugger926

sschellhase said:


> isn't there something that says "practice within area of competence" or something along those lines... check your local laws!


Exactly.

A lot of home builders just got in trouble here in Oklahoma because someone rubberstamped some plans, but the soil conditions can change rapidly. Claly soils may have rapid contraction and expansion, and sand soils may support less lbs per sq foot. Desiging foundations and pit walls for digital railroad scales was scary early in my career with no one checking my work.


----------



## kevo_55

Competency aside, make sure you're up to speed with your company's errors &amp; ommisions insurance.

You may not be able to moonlight your seal. :smileyballs:


----------



## MetroRAFB

mcompound said:


> Hello -
> I am a ME, recently received my PE. I would like to start doing some foundation design and stamping of house plans on the side. I do not have any experience in it, all of my career has been as a ME. I know it can't be that hard. Can anyone give me any advice on books, software programs, etc. Has anyone else gone this route for a little side income.
> 
> Thanks



All of the above advice is good, you most definitely want to proceed cautiously. Having said that, I'll say to you "Don't be skeer'd!" I've gone a similar route, but I've worked for the past five years in truss design, which is closely related to residential structural design. Get to know your local codes, and all of the referenced standards, and take your time. It can be done, but you should find someone in your area with more experience than you that's willing to show you the ropes.


----------



## NCST8ENGR

I hold the opinions of those on these boards high because i know we're all looking out for each other - so i'd like to ask a question as well...

I've been drawing house plans for the last 15 years. i actually put myself through school doing house plans. during that time, i've had several engineer's that i would refer people to if the county or situation called for the plans to be stamped...

would you guys think this is sufficient experience - even though the work i did was not as a PE? One of my goals in obtaining the PE was so that i could stamp my own plans and keep that cost in house. I'm an ME by degree, so in order to facilitate greater knowlede i am planning to take a few pdh courses that deal strictly with residential foundation, framing, etc., just so that I would have that "paperwork" to backup what i'm doing... do you guys feel this is adequate? I dont' even mind taking courses at a local university if that would be more widely accepted. i personally feel very comfortable with standard foundations, and building sections, and even before i was a PE (just found out last thursday) - i would calculate loads and put together calc sheets for the engineers that would stamp to make their life/time more efficient...

thanks for any advice.


----------



## NCST8ENGR

oh yeah!! MERRY CHRISTMAS to all... waiting till the kids are in bed to break out the santa stuff and put it together... knew my degree and PE could come in handy for something!


----------



## Dleg

If you believe you are "competent" and your state allows you to certify any work in which you are competent, then it sounds like you might be able to. Ultimately it's you who will know this, not any of us. As long as you have been doing it for a long time for other engineers and know the codes and ins-and-outs of the design process, then I would assume it is fine as long as your state allows it. FWIW my "state" doesn't even require an engineer certificaiton for single-family homes or duplexes (I designed my house myself with the assistance of a non-licensed foreign arhcitect/drafter, who knew all the codes).


----------



## NCST8ENGR

thanks - that is my thinking as well. in some counties if the house is over a certain square footage or dollar amount, then a stamp is required.


----------



## MA_PE

Just my 0.02 but I would think that house plans would need to be stamped by a civil or structural PE. You can probably get away with it if your stamp doesn't specifically say ME on it, but in the event that any civil/structural drawing stamped by you comes into question you'd probably have to do a lot of dancing in front of the board to convince them that you're qualified. The whole point in going through the application/testing process is to demonstrate for the record and to the board that you are competent to practice engineering. Obviously, that competency has only been demonstrated in the discipline that that you applied and tested for. If you start practicing some other discipline then it can be easily construed as practicing without a license.

Say for example, an angry abutter doesn't want a house built next to his. If he wanted to be an a$$hole and found out that an ME had stamped the structural drawings, he might be inclined to bring it to the Board's attention. Once the jig is up you'd be at their mercy. If that is your goal, I'd suggest that you apply for and take a civil/structural test and get license in two disciplines.

FWIW, my degree is ME. I have worked exclusively for a structural consulting firm. Over the years I took steel design courses, concrete courses, soil courses etc. but never got a civil degree. When I took my PE I took the STR1 exam. I would not consider myself competent to practice ME.

Make sure you are well aware of of the regulations and proceed with caution. my 0.02.

good luck


----------



## forelsu

Can I stamp the plans I used to build the house I'm in for the hell of it?


----------



## ODB_PE

Practicing outside your area of expertise is unethical and shouldn't be done, period. Plan-stampers of the residential construction variety give the profession a bad name when their slabs crack and their ceilings sag. Just because it follows the code doesn't mean it will work.


----------



## forelsu

Judge Smails,

Hope you weren't talking to me, because I was joking.

"Ty, what did you shoot today?

Oh, Judge, I don’t keep score.

Then how do you measure yourself with other golfers?

By height. "


----------



## ODB_PE

forelsu said:


> Judge Smails,
> Hope you weren't talking to me, because I was joking.
> 
> "Ty, what did you shoot today?
> 
> Oh, Judge, I don’t keep score.
> 
> Then how do you measure yourself with other golfers?
> 
> By height. "


Sorry about that - I recognized your humor, and my reply was to the topic in general.

"You will get nothing and like it"


----------



## IlPadrino

ol said:


> Practicing outside your area of expertise is unethical and shouldn't be done, period. Plan-stampers of the residential construction variety give the profession a bad name when their slabs crack and their ceilings sag. Just because it follows the code doesn't mean it will work.


Understanding this is a State issue (i.e. it only matters what your State prescribes by law), how are we to understand what "area of expertise" means? I don't buy the logic that you need to retake the PE exam to establish expertise... for the simple reason I don't think the exam has much to do with expertise. I'm sure the NSPE would weigh in with their BER, but short of that, what's a good rule?


----------



## NCST8ENGR

ol said:


> Practicing outside your area of expertise is unethical and shouldn't be done, period. Plan-stampers of the residential construction variety give the profession a bad name when their slabs crack and their ceilings sag. Just because it follows the code doesn't mean it will work.


I understand where you are coming from 'ol deadbeat, I personally would never seal anything that could endanger anyone's life.. Here's what NSPE code of ethics state &amp; a defintion of the word competence...

_"Engineers shall perform services only in the areas of their *competence*. Engineers shall undertake assignments only when qualified by *education or experience *in the specific technical fields involved. Engineers shall not affix their signatures to any plans or documents dealing with subject matter in which they lack *competence*, nor to any plan or document not prepared under their direction and control"_

*Competence* _(American Heritage Dictionary): _"The state or quality of being adequately or well qualified; ability. A specific range of skill, knowledge, or ability."

I ask all then: what would qualify experience or competence. Would someone whom has designed over 500 homes ranging from 1,000 to 10,000 square feet over the past 15 years not qualify enough experience? Would the fact that 97% of these homes required no engineering stamp or review, are soundly built to the building code not qualify as competence?

After looking at several college course outlines for civil degrees it's interesting to note that there is only 30 - 40 different course hours, none of which where specialized in residential framing or foundation design. Infact, in the early semesters, at one college, i found it odd that the civil's were required to take mechancial courses in statics, dynamics, materials, and mechanics of solids... - the foundation and basics of engineering...

So should i complete an undergraduate in civil to be able to stamp house plans?!?


----------



## NCST8ENGR

IlPadrino said:


> Understanding this is a State issue (i.e. it only matters what your State prescribes by law), how are we to understand what "area of expertise" means? I don't buy the logic that you need to retake the PE exam to establish expertise... for the simple reason I don't think the exam has much to do with expertise. I'm sure the NSPE would weigh in with their BER, but short of that, what's a good rule?


I'd like to know a good rule as well.


----------



## MA_PE

NCST8ENGR:



> I ask all then: what would qualify experience or competence. Would someone whom has designed over 500 homes ranging from 1,000 to 10,000 square feet over the past 15 years not qualify enough experience? Would the fact that 97% of these homes required no engineering stamp or review, are soundly built to the building code not qualify as competence?


What was different about the 3% that required and engineering stamp or review? As is evidenced by the number of jurisdictions not requiring a PE stamp for residential construction, you don't necessarily need any engineering education to build things to prescribed codes. Following the industry tables for beams/connections based on typical loads does mean the individual has any idea how those tables were generated (i.e. has any "engineering" competency). There are a lot of builders that have been building things for a long time and they don't fall down. That does not make them engineers or show competency in engineering.



> "Engineers shall perform services only in the areas of their competence. Engineers shall undertake assignments only when qualified by education or experience in the specific technical fields involved. Engineers shall not affix their signatures to any plans or documents dealing with subject matter in which they lack competence, nor to any plan or document not prepared under their direction and control"


Exactly, and as I said before having a stamp in a given discipline means that you have demonstrated to the board that you have enough education and experience in that discipline to be qualified to practice engineering. If you stamp outside of that area without being "qualified" then you run the risk of having to prove "qualifications" if anyone questions what you have stamped.

FYI, I know a guy with a structural stamp that stamped some civil/site drawings for a surveyor friend. Someone who was against the project in general notified the Board that a structural guy had stamped civil drawings. The PE in question had to go before the Board and prove to them that he had experience in surveying and was competent to review and stamp the drawings in question. It was a fairly lengthy process and his PE license was in jeopardy until the Board was satisfied. He eventually was exonerated with no disciplinary action, but was advised not to stamp outside his discipline. Also, the company we work for was not happy about one of its engineers having to defend himself against a claim of rubber stamping/breach of ethics.

Again, go for it if you want to. Stamping drawing means you take professional responsibility/liability for the design. For the most part, the only time anyone really cares who's responsible is when a problem arises.


----------



## MA_PE

> Understanding this is a State issue (i.e. it only matters what your State prescribes by law), how are we to understand what "area of expertise" means? I don't buy the logic that you need to retake the PE exam to establish expertise... for the simple reason I don't think the exam has much to do with expertise. I'm sure the NSPE would weigh in with their BER, but short of that, what's a good rule?


c'mon. There are a number of different PE exams all geared to some topic: Civil (and look at the selection of choices for the afternoon session, Mech (and there are sub-choices here to), Chem, etc. etc. As rational engineers I don't think it's a real reach to assume that a Chemical engineers "area of expertise" would be something related to the Chem Eng field and likely is not machine design.

FWIW: an individual can be legally qualified as an expert at trial without a "PE", but he must first demonstrate to the court he has sufficient education and experience to be considered an "expert".


----------



## ODB_PE

NCST8ENGR said:


> I ask all then: what would qualify experience or competence. Would someone whom has designed over 500 homes ranging from 1,000 to 10,000 square feet over the past 15 years not qualify enough experience? Would the fact that 97% of these homes required no engineering stamp or review, are soundly built to the building code not qualify as competence?
> After looking at several college course outlines for civil degrees it's interesting to note that there is only 30 - 40 different course hours, none of which where specialized in residential framing or foundation design. Infact, in the early semesters, at one college, i found it odd that the civil's were required to take mechancial courses in statics, dynamics, materials, and mechanics of solids... - the foundation and basics of engineering...
> 
> So should i complete an undergraduate in civil to be able to stamp house plans?!?


In your case I would say that you have developed a level of competence in residential home design. I don't have a problem with that at all. I assume you developed it initially under somebody else who presumably knew what they were doing. My main problem goes back to those like the original poster, who admittedly knows nothing about foundation design but reasons that it can't be that hard, so he wants to take it up to add some income after buying the idiot's guide to foundation design or the right software. That's scary. Now, of course nobody's likely to get killed because of a bad foundation, but the I have a problem with that attitude in general. I think that attitude is also responsible for the low pass rates on the civil and structural exams. Too many folks rely on software.

Curiously, why did you find it odd that civils had to take statics, dynamics, materials, etc? I couldn't imagine a program without them.


----------



## NCST8ENGR

[No message]


----------



## NCST8ENGR

ol said:


> In your case I would say that you have developed a level of competence in residential home design. I don't have a problem with that at all. I assume you developed it initially under somebody else who presumably knew what they were doing. My main problem goes back to those like the original poster, who admittedly knows nothing about foundation design but reasons that it can't be that hard, so he wants to take it up to add some income after buying the idiot's guide to foundation design or the right software. That's scary. Now, of course nobody's likely to get killed because of a bad foundation, but the I have a problem with that attitude in general. I think that attitude is also responsible for the low pass rates on the civil and structural exams. Too many folks rely on software.
> Curiously, why did you find it odd that civils had to take statics, dynamics, materials, etc? I couldn't imagine a program without them.


o.d. - on that last statement - i was just being a smart a$$, that comment i made was *uncalled for... *just pointing to the fact we (civil / mechanical) take the same core courses. I also agree - the original poster sounds like he has no experience in it at all - so i see the reason to be a little hard on it..

i mean - I couldn't imagine a Chemical, Computer, Industrial, Fire Protection, Electrical etc., stamping a set of house plans. Just like it would be pretty hard to imagine a ME stamping off on a survey

I think in the "classic" engineering fields there are some overlaps (CE hydraulics is basically ME fluids etc.,) - and as it is - it should be - left to the integrity of the engineer to know what he/she is competent in... I appreciate your candor though and the opinions/feedback. My main focus on adding to the post was to clarify if i indeed needed additional documentation in my back pocket to make doubly sure in the event i was ever questioned.


----------



## IlPadrino

MA_PE said:


> c'mon. There are a number of different PE exams all geared to some topic: Civil (and look at the selection of choices for the afternoon session, Mech (and there are sub-choices here to), Chem, etc. etc. As rational engineers I don't think it's a real reach to assume that a Chemical engineers "area of expertise" would be something related to the Chem Eng field and likely is not machine design.
> FWIW: an individual can be legally qualified as an expert at trial without a "PE", but he must first demonstrate to the court he has sufficient education and experience to be considered an "expert".


In NCST8ENG's case, he's a Mechanical PE and wants to stamp Civil drawings. My point is simply that an exam is hardly a benchmark for expertise. Yeah, I'd agree a Chemical Engineer that's only studied, worked, and tested for Chemical Engineering is certainly not qualified to stamp Structural drawings. But I think it's reasonable for a MechE with significant work experience to claim expertise in some areas of Civil Engineering. Degree and coursework mean almost nothing (in my case, I've never taken a single Civil Engineering course and my degree is in Computer and Systems Engineering). I thought the exam was about "minimum competence". So then it would seem expertise only requires experience.

I wonder why some States don't designate an Engineering discipline and others do. I'd guess all Boards look for discipline-specific experience when approving examinees. Why not take it the extra step if they're worried about areas of expertise?

For me, the bottom line is always this: it doesn't matter what you or I say because as you've pointed out, it's only the State Board that matters.


----------



## Guest

MA_PE said:


> FWIW: an individual can be legally qualified as an expert at trial without a "PE", but he must first demonstrate to the court he has sufficient education and experience to be considered an "expert".


That is very true - I was qualified as an expert witness in two court cases prior to obtaining my professional registration.



IlPadrino said:


> For me, the bottom line is always this: it doesn't matter what you or I say because as you've pointed out, it's only the State Board that matters.


That is very true as well - to the point that it is DOWN RIGHT scary. Especially if you read some of the more recent disciplinary cases.

JR


----------

