Why Isn't All Sprinkler Design Done Upfront?

The majority of bid documents for fire sprinkler work is some form of delegated design. A consulting engineer frequently does not provide all of the detail about a system (pipe locations, size, hanging methods, hydraulic calculations, etc).

Why is that?

In other disciplines, the opposite is common. Mechanical Engineers regularly selects a system type and lays out ductwork in a one-line or two-line configuration on a plan before a contractor bids the system. Electrical Engineers commonly size up, calculate and provide power and lighting locations on plan with an overall one-line diagram. Even plumbing often has plans for domestic water feeds and sanitary waste.

Why doesn’t that happen for fire protection?

First, the biggest disclaimer today, I’m not advocating for all design to be upfront. Or even a majority of it.

I do see many applications where a quality FPE consultant can provide a tremendous amount of value to a project. I explored this a bit with The Delegated Design Problem and in A Practical Design Spec Checklist. 

But I would like to start the conversation and get your ideas on why we are where we are today with why designs are not done upfront.

Here is why I think all sprinkler design is not completed upfront, before bid time.

#1 WE DON’T WANT EVERYTHING UPFRONT
Overwhelmingly, the sentiment I hear from sprinkler contractors about ‘full-design’ fire sprinkler drawings is that they wouldn’t want upfront designs for all projects.

Why?

Because in some (or many) cases, sprinkler contractors feel that upfront design either limits their flexibility or is of very poor quality, or both.

A design that doesn’t coordinate with other systems, or ‘leaves coordination’ for the sprinkler contractor, is problematic. It’s difficult to bid and difficult to work with after a project has been awarded.

How much needs to be ‘coordinated later’? How ‘real’ is the design? Is it less efficient than the contractor could have laid it out?

Many who have designed on the contracting side feel that real-world “fit” and doing the sprinkler layout are one in the same. You can’t ‘rough-in’ a layout without thinking about conflicts and making it actually work in the real world.

As an extreme example, I think most could agree that a basic NFPA 13D layout does not need upfront involvement by a consultant. Could they help? Perhaps. Could they provide value? Perhaps. But it does not need a high level of involvement.
 
Now there’s a big counterpoint to this. Just because we don’t want upfront design on all projects doesn’t mean it wouldn’t be beneficial on some projects.

Projects that have very specific needs, unique needs, high-visibility challenges, coordination challenges, or that require a specialized set of expertise could very much benefit from upfront involvement.

Maybe it’s a retrofit in a high profile historic museum. Maybe it’s suppression for an automated storage retrieval system. Maybe it’s a unique storage configuration that is outside the bounds of NFPA 13.

In these types of situations, involvement from a quality FPE consultant can address code concerns and clearly define the scope. It can help mitigate a lot of risk for contractors by doing so and help everyone bid apples-to-apples instead of a wide-open, ill-defined scope.
 
#2 INADEQUATE WORKFORCE (INDIVIDUALS AND COMPANIES)
Perhaps the alternative reason is the lack of expertise in the workforce.

We simply don’t have enough people, nor expertise, to take on every project.

Even if we wanted upfront involvement to a high-level of detail, we as an industry couldn’t pull it off. We don’t have enough bodies, nor enough qualified expertise.

Is it an issue? Absolutely.

Does the lack of people affect how well we advocate for fire protection itself? Absolutely.

Could the construction experience for architects and owners and contractors actually benefit from more and better individuals working upfront on project? Absolutely.

But until we catch up on the quantity of our own workforce, we simply can’t take on more involved work.
 
#3 LOCATION OF THE EXPERTISE
Another reason we don’t perform highly-detailed layout work upfront is the location of where expertise for layout technicians often falls – and that’s in contracting.

Anecdotally I know far more layout technicians in contracting than I do in consulting.

In our survey of nearly 500 industry professionals in 2022, of those who had roles as a designer or layout technician, 68% of them worked for contractors (another 4% were self-employed).

That’s different than other disciplines where there is plenty of design and layout expertise embedded in consulting.
 
#4 DOWNSIDES: COST, INFLEXIBILITY, & SCHEDULE
Involving expertise upfront isn’t free. There’s a cost associated with it.

We mentioned it before and stipulating a full layout upfront also set some parameters in place that can limit the creativity and efficiency of a contractor-provided layout.

Lastly, there’s time needed to do that work upfront. Having a high-degree of involvement may not be a positive impact to overall project schedule.
 
SO CAN WE KILL-OFF UPFRONT INVOLVEMENT?
It sure feels like I’ve put out a hit piece on any upfront involvement in fire sprinkler design.

The question is – does all design need to be done upfront? By an engineer or consultant, or someone other than a contractor?

That answer is no. All design doesn’t need to be upfront. We couldn’t pull it off anyways, but it could also be costly and obstructive for many small or simple project applications.

Is there value to having upfront involvement?

Absolutely - when it’s done well.

Consultants provide tremendous value, all-around, when:

1. They’re able to define a clear scope
2. They find the ‘big red flags’ and address them before they delay projects or cause change orders
3. They provide clean, organized, concise, and easy-to-read documents
4. They coordinate and pre-plan architectural and civil needs
5. They provide helpful direction for contrators via timely RFI responses
6. They spend the time to educate and answer questions for the building owner and architect
7. They provide a check on code and standard compliance
8. They alleviate contractors from having to “do consulting work for free”

Do consultants need to be doing fully-detailed layouts to accomplish this?

Often no, though sometimes it could help.
 
HOW DO WE RESHAPE THE WORK?
In an SFPE Magazine Article in 2022, Thomas Gardner wrote “There is a happy medium between no delegation and full delegation of the fire protection system.”

Count me in that camp.

Many times when the subject of “Delegated Design” gets brought up, we instantly jump to extremes. Either all design should be by the EOR, or no design should ever be by the EOR.

On one hand we have many military projects that specify the Qualified Fire Protection Engineer (QFPE) to be in direct charge of the layout upfront, if they don’t perform it themselves.

On the other hand, we have an ever-growing amount of residential projects in North America that have no FPE or consulting involvement whatsoever.  

Both of these situations are not necessarily at odds.

We can strike the balance between the two, and we can do “Delegated Design” better than what’s being done today.

We can improve the quality of upfront documentation that defines scope and goes out for bid, and at the same time, still provide flexibility for the contractor and an overall lean project delivery.

Part of solving that puzzle is looking realistically about what different approaches mean – how they look – seeing good and bad examples – and moving forward to introduce, educate and advocate on what better “Delegated Design” means in the future.

​For literally the past two decades there has been growing momentum to bring light to the issue. We’re not far from having more resources to define what “better” looks like and how we can easily get there. 

WHAT'S YOUR TAKE?
We had a great dialogue about the problem of Delegated Design before, that's here.

But what's your take on why work isn't provided upfront?

Is it just tradition? Just the way things always have been? 

Is it any of the reasons I've cited?

Why is our delivery method so different from Mechanical, Electrical, Plumbing or Structural? What separates us from other disciplines?

Comment below - would be happy to hear your take.