Question for all you Civils out there

[FLBuff PE]

I've just got something stuck up my *** this week, apparently. Sorry for over-reacting. Carry on.

 

[Ble_PE]

I've just got something stuck up my *** this week, apparently. Sorry for over-reacting. Carry on.

Have you been working with PE-ness?

 

[TranspoVA]

I always felt like my ethics class in college should have been titled...100 reasons why shouldn't be a geotechnical engineer...The majority of the case studies were about foundations and poor boring data

 

[Dexman PE]

I'm just getting tired of my work getting shat on, or being viewed as easy or 'just a checkmark on the form' that needs to be taken care of. Guess who they usually come after first when things go wrong?

Never said geotech was easy, or "fill in the blank" type work. It's just been my experience that the geotechs I typically work with provide reports that have ultra-conservative, expensive recommendations and are typically vague and over-generalized. One report I got for a 1/2 acre lot: "The water table will most likely be encountered anywhere between 5 and 30 feet deep. The soils in the site range from gravel to silty clay." What the hell am I going to do with this report (other than post it on the internet and poke fun at it)? I'm not saying YOU do this, it's just my experience...

It reminds me of my days back in college where everyone was ragging on the civils because it was considered the "easy" engineering. "Oh, not smart enough to be a chemical engineer?" No ***-clown, I like building things. And once in a while I like to get outside and see what I designed become something other than a pretty pink liquid in a beaker.

[/rant]

 

[TranspoVA]

I agree with Dexman...geotech reports are super vague and ultra conservative and un-informative and not to mention super boring! ha ha get it...But I will give it to the geotechs in my experience they are the easiest to work with.

 

[csb]

I feel like ***-clown is the word of the week and like we should all scream when someone "says" it.

:wub: for the geotechs...

 

[FLBuff PE]

I've just got something stuck up my *** this week, apparently. Sorry for over-reacting. Carry on.

Have you been working with PE-ness?

I lobbed that one hoping someone would knock it out of the park.

Never said geotech was easy, or "fill in the blank" type work. It's just been my experience that the geotechs I typically work with provide reports that have ultra-conservative, expensive recommendations and are typically vague and over-generalized. One report I got for a 1/2 acre lot: "The water table will most likely be encountered anywhere between 5 and 30 feet deep. The soils in the site range from gravel to silty clay." What the hell am I going to do with this report (other than post it on the internet and poke fun at it)? I'm not saying YOU do this, it's just my experience...
It reminds me of my days back in college where everyone was ragging on the civils because it was considered the "easy" engineering. "Oh, not smart enough to be a chemical engineer?" No ***-clown, I like building things. And once in a while I like to get outside and see what I designed become something other than a pretty pink liquid in a beaker.

[/rant]

I know you didn't. That's just the feeling I get from most of my clients and GCs out here. I would get reamed a new a--hole if I put oput a report like that. I do my best not to be vague, but our reports have become 60% CYA legalease, 40% actual engineering info. I'm getting really frusterated by it. I worked as a land development civil for my first 2 years out of school. Got my degree in environmental, had a lot of chem-e's in my classes, so I've gotten it from all sides.

I agree with Dexman...geotech reports are super vague and ultra conservative and un-informative and not to mention super boring! ha ha get it...But I will give it to the geotechs in my experience they are the easiest to work with.

I can understand that. See above. Wading through the legal stuff can be a PITA. I guess I could write my reports in short story format. "Once upon a time, XYZ, LLC wanted to build a subdivision on expansive soil..." Something along those lines.

BTW, sorry for being the ***-clown of the day.

 

[Capt Worley PE]

I can't believe no one has mentioned the safety aspects of that slick concrete surface. If there isn't some siping cut into it, dude's car is going to slide into the side of the garage.

 

[FLBuff PE]

I can't believe no one has mentioned the safety aspects of that slick concrete surface. If there isn't some siping cut into it, dude's car is going to slide into the side of the garage.

That would damage the foundation. Need a geotech?

 

[Dexman PE]

I can't believe no one has mentioned the safety aspects of that slick concrete surface. If there isn't some siping cut into it, dude's car is going to slide into the side of the garage.

I think it was addressed when the transpo guys chimed in:

Sounds like you need a transportation engineers opinion...I recommend a longitudinal dowel retrofit with polymer coated rebar. a new pcc surface course and obviously high grade silicone filler material...this solution also works well with mudjacking...The real cost question then becomes if you want to use 3000 psi or 5000 psi concrete...obviously due to liability concerns and unknown traffic counts I naturally have to recommend the 5K concrete.

 

[Ble_PE]

I lobbed that one hoping someone would knock it out of the park.

Yea, I usually only hit the lobs.

But in all seriousness, I agree that ya'lls (geotech engineers) hands are tied by legal crap. You've always got to CYA and there are so many unknowns with soil, that it's best to err on the side of caution.

 

[FLBuff PE]

I lobbed that one hoping someone would knock it out of the park.

Yea, I usually only hit the lobs.

But in all seriousness, I agree that ya'lls (geotech engineers) hands are tied by legal crap. You've always got to CYA and there are so many unknowns with soil, that it's best to err on the side of caution.

"We cannot be held liable if MechGuy's 'fix' doesn't work. We give no warranty for our work. It is only valid for about 3 years, and not valid for use by others on other sites.'

 

[MechGuy]

I can't believe no one has mentioned the safety aspects of that slick concrete surface. If there isn't some siping cut into it, dude's car is going to slide into the side of the garage.

That's assuming I actually park a car in my garage, which I haven't been able to do since I moved in because all our crap is piled in there.

 

[MonteBiker]

I'm just getting tired of my work getting shat on, or being viewed as easy or 'just a checkmark on the form' that needs to be taken care of. Guess who they usually come after first when things go wrong?

Never said geotech was easy, or "fill in the blank" type work. It's just been my experience that the geotechs I typically work with provide reports that have ultra-conservative, expensive recommendations and are typically vague and over-generalized. One report I got for a 1/2 acre lot: "The water table will most likely be encountered anywhere between 5 and 30 feet deep. The soils in the site range from gravel to silty clay." What the hell am I going to do with this report (other than post it on the internet and poke fun at it)? I'm not saying YOU do this, it's just my experience...

It reminds me of my days back in college where everyone was ragging on the civils because it was considered the "easy" engineering. "Oh, not smart enough to be a chemical engineer?" No ***-clown, I like building things. And once in a while I like to get outside and see what I designed become something other than a pretty pink liquid in a beaker.

[/rant]

I have never said it was "easy"... I typically refer to it as "voodoo" and have always guessed that there was some sort of animal sacrifice that went along with producing the geotech report.

 

[FLBuff PE]

I have never said it was "easy"... I typically refer to it as "voodoo" and have always guessed that there was some sort of animal sacrifice that went along with producing the geotech report.

Trade secrect. Sorry. :burgerking: :goat:

 

[TranspoVA]

I can't believe no one has mentioned the safety aspects of that slick concrete surface. If there isn't some siping cut into it, dude's car is going to slide into the side of the garage.

I think it was addressed when the transpo guys chimed in:

Sounds like you need a transportation engineers opinion...I recommend a longitudinal dowel retrofit with polymer coated rebar. a new pcc surface course and obviously high grade silicone filler material...this solution also works well with mudjacking...The real cost question then becomes if you want to use 3000 psi or 5000 psi concrete...obviously due to liability concerns and unknown traffic counts I naturally have to recommend the 5K concrete.

Sorry this is a spec issue..."raking" the surface is incidental to constructing a pcc overlay..this allows for drainage and traction

 

[Fluvial]

dude's car is going to slide into the side of the garage.

Wait ... what is Dude doing over there?

Does MechGuy know about this ?? hmy:

 

[Dexman PE]

Are there unauthorized consultant visits to your client Mechguy? We may need to address this in the spec book. We can add it to the scope for pure cost ($6500).

 

[MechGuy]

Wait ... what is Dude doing over there? Does MechGuy know about this ?? hmy:

Its all good... the Dude abides.

 

[Dleg]

I'm surprised JR hasn't chimed in here yet with the possibility that your house might be located over an old spill site, and the driveway separation a troubling symptom of gasoline vapor migration. You may need to temporarily relocate your family, jack the house up, install a vapor barrier, or worse.

Things could start to get really ugly if you have to start working with the enviro engineers.