VE vs Common Sense

[bradlelf]

I got into it with a construction manager last week at a project meeting regarding his "value engineering" decisions; I want to get some CMs to weigh in on this.

Here is the situation. I designed a land development project which includes roughly 15 underground stormwater facilities. Most of these facilities include multiple cleanouts and observation wells, but to the naked eye they would just appear as cleanouts on the surface. Since the cleanout are within paved parking lots my plans and specs called for traffic bearing frames, caps and a concrete collar below the wearing course of the pavement.

The design intent here is two fold. The first is to use the rigid slab (concrete) to spread the force away from the vertical pipe; and two, to have a buffer between the HMA and the plastic pipe.

Now, this CM is telling the client that the traffic bearing components are not needed and that he will just "place extra asphalt around the pipe." The best part here is that this guy is also a PE ... incredible.

Look, this is not my first rodeo. I understand the game that CMs play to justify their fees to the client. I crafted a polite but very strongly worded email to the project team explaining the issues with his plan.

This is my problem with "Value Engineering" (VE) ... there is no engineering involved. As an engineer my projects are designed to the minimum standards I feel comfortable with. My design intent and advocacy for my client should not be shopped around after the fact which results in a lower quality/more risk situation. This is another example of penny-wise and dollar foolish.

Rant over.

Any thoughts from Construction Manager PEs?

 

[ptatohed]

brad, sorry to be off-topic but is your avatar "Poindexter on the violin"?

 

[bradlelf]

Why yes it is ... changed it from the Megamind image. That scene came up randomly at work q few days ago and we had to watch the youtube clip for a good laugh.

 

[Dexman PE PMP]

The key to value engineering is to provide an equavalent product (quality, durability, etc) at a cheaper price. If the contractor can prove that his proposed final product will provide the same (or better) overall goal, then I believe he has that right. Most contracts allow for the practice of value engineering, and many of which actually provide incentives (i.e. contractor can keep a percentage of the savings).

On the project I'm working on now, we have several dozen examples of value engineering. The biggest of which is the change of wall types. The original construction drawings include walls to be Cast-in-Place (CIP), but these walls cost ~$90/sf. The contractor has shown that they can substitute several of these walls with a cheaper MSE design (~$55/sf), and still provide the same service life as the original CIP design.

The key with value engineering for a design engineer is to not "fall in love" with a design. Yes, your design may be the best possible design in YOUR eyes, but contractors have a lot of experience building what we design and can do so with means, methods, and materials that we may not think of or be familiar with.

 

[bradlelf]

Equalivalent is the key word. In this case the cm option is not.

 

[bradlelf]

Dex,

I respect your opinion on this but in all honesty I strive very hard to make sure that I have the most economical solution for my clients needs ... factoring in short term cost and long term maintenance/repair cost.

The CMs typically only look at the short term construction cost; justifying their fees to the owners by saying "look how much I saved you on this."

Am I rigid on every aspect of the project ... absolutely not. Your example of wall material type is a great example. At the end of the day I could care less whether the wall is modular block, concrete, boulder, piled, etc; as long as if function correctly and safely. I typically get these types of request from contractors, no problem there. I have contractor ask about substituting Sch40 for SDR 35, depending on the situation I may let that slide.

I view the this particular issue, the reinforcement of the vertical cleanout, as a safety & maintenance issue. If you specified reinforce concrete ... would it be ok for the CM to say that either the WWM or rebar wasn't needed in his opinion, so he wasn't going to install it?

 

[Dexman PE PMP]

The important aspect for value engineering we try to include in the process includes a meeting with the contractor, owner, and designer. At this point the entire package can be laid out, and each side can provide their information and challenges they foresee with both their own as well as the others' proposal.

Knowing the full story behind what the contractor is doing/thinking is critical when analyzing their proposal.

 

[wilheldp_PE]

In your situation, bradlef, I would let the customer and CM know that if the proposed VE changes are made that the CM will have to design and stamp the drawings. Make sure that your license isn't associated with something that you didn't design and that you don't think is a safe design. Maybe if the customer sees that you refuse to endorse the change that it might not be worth the reduction in price.

 

[Dexman PE PMP]

^^^ Agreed.

With our wall type VE's, we make the contractor submit signed/sealed shop drawings for what they built as well as signed asbuilts.