I hired a licensed structural engineer for a renovation project I am working on - to replace a load bearing wall with a beam. The design came back and appears significantly "over-engineered". I asked him about it and he has doubled down on his design. For instance, he designed each support for 15,000lbs factual reaction, but agreed (when I asked) that the load is less than 8,000lbs. his explanation is he wanted to "provide high rigidity within this area". He did not change any footing specs. Likewise, he is calling for a 3 ply LVL board, when a 2 ply would suffice based on the manufacturer tables and via WoodWorks design check. He sent me the WoodWorks design check sheet for the beam and the max analysis/design factor is 0.65 (for live-load).

The design he sent would be the minimal specs to hold up a house twice the width of mine, and I suspect that was his initial calculation and design. He also had a "typo" in the original plan with the width twice the size...

I recognize that over-engineering is way better than under-engineering, but honestly I was hoping for something appropriately sized. His design will cost twice as much for me to build than if it were designed with the minimum but appropriately sized materials.

Oh, and he wanted me to pay for his travel under-the-table in cash...

Edit: I get it. We should just blindly accept an engineers drawings. And asking questions makes it a “difficult client”

Also, just measured the drawing on paper. The house measures 5” wide, beam 1.6” long. Actual size is 25’ house, 16’ beam. That makes either the house twice as wide, or beam half as long in the drawings compared to actual. And he’s telling me it’s correct and was just a typo. And you all are telling me it’s correct. I get it. Apparently only engineers can math.