Autodesk Technology Managers Forum
Share your knowledge, ask questions, and engage with fellow CAD/BIM Managers.
cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Structural Engineer Refuses Plans

30 REPLIES 30
Reply
Message 1 of 31
Anonymous
291 Views, 30 Replies

Structural Engineer Refuses Plans

We are having problems with our structural engineer and I thought all of
you may be able to give me a general idea of what is expectable. Any
response will be extremely appreciated. I am hoping to get the largest
possible response to this message so that I can print them and use them to
find a general consistence among others in the field.
We are a residential design firm doing higher end custom homes, (usually
about 3,000 to 5,000 sqft). We have recently adopted the NCS system. We
now currently use NCS title blocks, sheet and file numbering systems,
keynotes, etc. Also, to keep drawing time down and accuracy up I have been
trying to limit information to one place, ("say it once and in the right
place"). Our setup for structural plans along with an explanation follows:

S0-1 General Structural Notes
these are general notes (basically specs), shear wall schedules, header
schedules, and some typical details.

S0-2 Typical Structural Details
just like it says. I am using this in an attempt to cut down on custom
details

S0-1 Foundation Plan
Here we have the foundation plan with detail references to footing
conditions, we are showing posts but are no calling out post sizes.
Additionally there are keynotes explaining special conditions, general
notes, and a key plan

S0-2 Structural Floor Plan
Here we are identifying framed walls with a legend and dimensioning them.
We are also showing shear wall locations, calling out posts, beams, and non
typical header, (I am not calling out standard headers because of the header
schedule on S0-1). Additionally there are keynotes explaining special
conditions, general notes, and a key plan

S0-3 Roof Framing Plan
Here we show a full roof framing plan with every rafter drawn in. We not
direction of span and size and use masked text to identify major members
such as ridge boards, hips, valleys, etc. Additionally there are keynotes
explaining special conditions, general notes, and a key plan

S3-1 Building Sections
Hear we call out braces, ceiling joists, plate heights, etc. Basically
everything that has not been identified in the previous plans.

S5-1 Structural Details

The structural engineer, (as well as a few contractors, and the principal)
has complained about basically everything. They think that the sheet format
"S1-0" etc. is too complicated and would rather just use "1, 2, 3" etc. I
disagree because we typically have about 30 sheets and I like the extra
organization. "They" also don't like using 2 letters for details such as
"A1", they would prefer a, b, c, d, etc. Again as a draftsman and manager
I like the extra organization.

The main problem is however the issue of "Saying it once and in the right
place". The structural engineer wants us to duplicate the information shown
on the plans on the building sections. My problem is that I feel it goes
against industry standards, it will push our drafting time up, and that we
will be opening the door for errors. Plus the fact that since it has
already been noted and detailed on the plans it just feels wasteful.

So, what is everyone else doing? Are you duplicating, and where are you
calling specific information out? Thank you all for you time - it is
appreciated in advance,

Sincerely,
Jonathon Giebeler
David Abbott
Residential, Planning, and Design
30 REPLIES 30
Message 21 of 31
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

Thanks Matt, See I am not alone. It is interesting that you are duplicating
roof pitches. I guess that's not a big problem since it is not incredibly
specific and generally roof pitches don't change too often. By the way how
many draftsmen do you have?

Jonathon



"Matt Stachoni" wrote in message
news:68429us903gjb2tilq438ulbbrrt64u2dv@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 14 Mar 2002 09:23:50 -0800, "Giebeler" wrote:
>
> >Matt,
> > We of course indicate room numbers etc. On the section: the engineer
is
> >asking for roof pitches and roof material , (duplication from
architectural
> >roof plan), member sizes, sheathing, and nailing info, (duplication from
> >structural plans).
>
> I include roof pitches on sections and elevations, and roof material on
the
> elevations (general callouts, though - "Roof Shingles." "Clay Tile," etc).
But
> member sizes and sheathing and nailing info? That goes on the the framing
plan
> and specifications, of course - to attempt to duplicate that onto sections
is
> really asking for trouble.
>
> Sounds like the backseat quarterbacks don't know what in the world they
are
> talking about - or, more likely, are too lazy to flip the pages to find
the
> pertinent information. They're asking you to commit some serious overhead
in
> dumbing down your drawings to their level.
>
> Matt
> mstachoni@comcast.net
> mstachoni@beyerdesign.com
Message 22 of 31
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

I always thought the guy with the check book sets the standards.....!!




"Giebeler" wrote in message
news:7B2B04B4E62D5FAADA14E8F6BDFFD52A@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> We are having problems with our structural engineer and I thought all
of
> you may be able to give me a general idea of what is expectable. Any
> response will be extremely appreciated. I am hoping to get the largest
> possible response to this message so that I can print them and use them to
> find a general consistence among others in the field.
> We are a residential design firm doing higher end custom homes,
(usually
> about 3,000 to 5,000 sqft). We have recently adopted the NCS system. We
> now currently use NCS title blocks, sheet and file numbering systems,
> keynotes, etc. Also, to keep drawing time down and accuracy up I have
been
> trying to limit information to one place, ("say it once and in the right
> place"). Our setup for structural plans along with an explanation
follows:
>
> S0-1 General Structural Notes
> these are general notes (basically specs), shear wall schedules, header
> schedules, and some typical details.
>
> S0-2 Typical Structural Details
> just like it says. I am using this in an attempt to cut down on custom
> details
>
> S0-1 Foundation Plan
> Here we have the foundation plan with detail references to footing
> conditions, we are showing posts but are no calling out post sizes.
> Additionally there are keynotes explaining special conditions, general
> notes, and a key plan
>
> S0-2 Structural Floor Plan
> Here we are identifying framed walls with a legend and dimensioning them.
> We are also showing shear wall locations, calling out posts, beams, and
non
> typical header, (I am not calling out standard headers because of the
header
> schedule on S0-1). Additionally there are keynotes explaining special
> conditions, general notes, and a key plan
>
> S0-3 Roof Framing Plan
> Here we show a full roof framing plan with every rafter drawn in. We not
> direction of span and size and use masked text to identify major members
> such as ridge boards, hips, valleys, etc. Additionally there are keynotes
> explaining special conditions, general notes, and a key plan
>
> S3-1 Building Sections
> Hear we call out braces, ceiling joists, plate heights, etc. Basically
> everything that has not been identified in the previous plans.
>
> S5-1 Structural Details
>
> The structural engineer, (as well as a few contractors, and the principal)
> has complained about basically everything. They think that the sheet
format
> "S1-0" etc. is too complicated and would rather just use "1, 2, 3" etc.
I
> disagree because we typically have about 30 sheets and I like the extra
> organization. "They" also don't like using 2 letters for details such as
> "A1", they would prefer a, b, c, d, etc. Again as a draftsman and
manager
> I like the extra organization.
>
> The main problem is however the issue of "Saying it once and in the right
> place". The structural engineer wants us to duplicate the information
shown
> on the plans on the building sections. My problem is that I feel it goes
> against industry standards, it will push our drafting time up, and that we
> will be opening the door for errors. Plus the fact that since it has
> already been noted and detailed on the plans it just feels wasteful.
>
> So, what is everyone else doing? Are you duplicating, and where are you
> calling specific information out? Thank you all for you time - it is
> appreciated in advance,
>
> Sincerely,
> Jonathon Giebeler
> David Abbott
> Residential, Planning, and Design
>
>
>
>
>
Message 23 of 31
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

Yikes!

Well, we do all kinds of structural drafting. We do plans, we do details. We
even do 3D work from time to time.

We don't duplicate information as it can lead to take-off problems when
contractors do cost-estimates. We will say things like "POST ABOVE" or "POST
BELOW" when we need to indicate something on one level for clarity, but we
won't call out that member's size twice.

You can actually see one drawing from our firm in the 2002 sample folder in
AutoCAD, "MKMPlan.dwg". Do NOT assume, however that when you open it it will
match our standards! (It's been heavily modified with our permission to use
as a tutorial with the CAD Standards extension.)

We tend to put all posts that are located within walls on our Xrefs. We have
job folders for each project and label our Xrefs as XPlan0, XPlan1, XPlan2,
etc. We then Xref in each base sheet into our plotting sheets. We then
rename the Xref within the host drawing as XPlan1-FNDN-ABV or XPlan1-RF-BLW
or XPlan2-FF-ABV, etc. to indicate its relevance to the current level of
framing/structure. Then we change the colors and linetypes of the Xref
layers to indicate walls below as continuous lines and walls/posts above as
hidden. We show posts above as hidden so as to not confuse a king post at
the middle of a beam as a support beam below. (Of course, much of this is
done with in-house brewed lisp.)

Posts shown for girder support or within attics are inserted into the plot
sheets directly, as are othere unique posts that are not shared between plot
sheets.

Hope that helps,

Robert Grandmaison




"Giebeler" wrote in message
news:C4975D92BCEF8F94E8F1A7658A802CEA@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> Robert,
> How does you firm handle duplications? Do you avoid them? Also, what
> drafting does your firm do? If you do all of the structural plans I would
> be very interested to see what organization you have developed for the
> plans. For example, where do you call out posts, beams, post fnd
> connections, post beam connections, headers, (do you use a header schedule
> or manually identify each one). Also, if you do duplicate information
where
> and what is duplicated? Do you duplicate post sizes on the fnd plan and
flr
> plans. What information that has already clearly been identified on the
> plans is duplicated in the sections, details, etc.
> Thank you very much
> Jonathon
>
> "Robert Grandmaison" wrote in message
> news:96CB41789FAE617686F2932198BD8474@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> > I am a CAD Manager for a SE firm. We follow the lead of the Architect
> > insofar as our sheet numbering/sequence goes. We are hired by them as
> their
> > consultant and must defer to their direction in such matters.
> >
> > I've no problem with the NCS.
> >
> > Robert Grandmaison
> >
> >
> > "Giebeler" wrote in message
> > news:7B2B04B4E62D5FAADA14E8F6BDFFD52A@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> > > We are having problems with our structural engineer and I thought
> all
> > of
> > > you may be able to give me a general idea of what is expectable. Any
> > > response will be extremely appreciated. I am hoping to get the
largest
> > > possible response to this message so that I can print them and use
them
> to
> > > find a general consistence among others in the field.
> > > We are a residential design firm doing higher end custom homes,
> > (usually
> > > about 3,000 to 5,000 sqft). We have recently adopted the NCS system.
> We
> > > now currently use NCS title blocks, sheet and file numbering systems,
> > > keynotes, etc. Also, to keep drawing time down and accuracy up I have
> > been
> > > trying to limit information to one place, ("say it once and in the
right
> > > place"). Our setup for structural plans along with an explanation
> > follows:
> > >
> > > S0-1 General Structural Notes
> > > these are general notes (basically specs), shear wall schedules,
header
> > > schedules, and some typical details.
> > >
> > > S0-2 Typical Structural Details
> > > just like it says. I am using this in an attempt to cut down on
custom
> > > details
> > >
> > > S0-1 Foundation Plan
> > > Here we have the foundation plan with detail references to footing
> > > conditions, we are showing posts but are no calling out post sizes.
> > > Additionally there are keynotes explaining special conditions, general
> > > notes, and a key plan
> > >
> > > S0-2 Structural Floor Plan
> > > Here we are identifying framed walls with a legend and dimensioning
> them.
> > > We are also showing shear wall locations, calling out posts, beams,
and
> > non
> > > typical header, (I am not calling out standard headers because of the
> > header
> > > schedule on S0-1). Additionally there are keynotes explaining special
> > > conditions, general notes, and a key plan
> > >
> > > S0-3 Roof Framing Plan
> > > Here we show a full roof framing plan with every rafter drawn in. We
not
> > > direction of span and size and use masked text to identify major
members
> > > such as ridge boards, hips, valleys, etc. Additionally there are
> keynotes
> > > explaining special conditions, general notes, and a key plan
> > >
> > > S3-1 Building Sections
> > > Hear we call out braces, ceiling joists, plate heights, etc. Basically
> > > everything that has not been identified in the previous plans.
> > >
> > > S5-1 Structural Details
> > >
> > > The structural engineer, (as well as a few contractors, and the
> principal)
> > > has complained about basically everything. They think that the sheet
> > format
> > > "S1-0" etc. is too complicated and would rather just use "1, 2, 3"
etc.
> > I
> > > disagree because we typically have about 30 sheets and I like the
extra
> > > organization. "They" also don't like using 2 letters for details such
> as
> > > "A1", they would prefer a, b, c, d, etc. Again as a draftsman and
> > manager
> > > I like the extra organization.
> > >
> > > The main problem is however the issue of "Saying it once and in the
> right
> > > place". The structural engineer wants us to duplicate the information
> > shown
> > > on the plans on the building sections. My problem is that I feel it
> goes
> > > against industry standards, it will push our drafting time up, and
that
> we
> > > will be opening the door for errors. Plus the fact that since it has
> > > already been noted and detailed on the plans it just feels wasteful.
> > >
> > > So, what is everyone else doing? Are you duplicating, and where are
you
> > > calling specific information out? Thank you all for you time - it is
> > > appreciated in advance,
> > >
> > > Sincerely,
> > > Jonathon Giebeler
> > > David Abbott
> > > Residential, Planning, and Design
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
Message 24 of 31
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

We have several "standard" sheets of typical details and boilerplate notes.
It's always been difficult to coordinate these items with different project
types because some engineers and projects want plans first, then details-
some want notes, typical details, planwork, then custom details- some want
notes, typical details, custom details, planwork...So, it's a bit of a
battle at times no matter what the situation is.

We've developed Structural Detail sheets SD1, SD2, SD3, etc. that are
usually starting points for our detail packages. (SD1 is actually our
standard note sheet). And then our planwork on a simple project is S1, S2,
S3...and this gives the engineer the flexibility to place either the
planwork or the notes/details first in a jobset.

But, more often we follow the lead of the architect on the project. For
instance, if they're doing a multi-story building and they have A1.1, A1.2,
A1.3 as a partial first floor plans we will have a corresponding S1.1, S1.2,
S1.3 as ours. We also tend to use S0, S0.1, etc as our note sheets on such
projects.

Cheers,

Robert Grandmaison
Message 25 of 31
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

Sounds like you have a lazy engineer who doesn't want to follow company
standards. Assuming they are company standards, get his boss or your
boss to inform him of the consequences of not following those standards,
and hope the bosses stand behind company policy. Too many times I've
seen companies back down from a stubborn, belligerant engineer who
doesn't want to learn industry standards and ruin all teamwork that used
to exist... eventually the bosses learn that they made the wrong
decision, but by then it's too late..... the good designers, drafters,
etc have moved on, and the the company is actually in trouble!


Arun Shah wrote:
>
> I always thought the guy with the check book sets the standards.....!!
>
> "Giebeler" wrote in message
> news:7B2B04B4E62D5FAADA14E8F6BDFFD52A@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> > We are having problems with our structural engineer and I thought all
> of
> > you may be able to give me a general idea of what is expectable. Any
> > response will be extremely appreciated. I am hoping to get the largest
> > possible response to this message so that I can print them and use them to
> > find a general consistence among others in the field.
> > We are a residential design firm doing higher end custom homes,
> (usually
> > about 3,000 to 5,000 sqft). We have recently adopted the NCS system. We
> > now currently use NCS title blocks, sheet and file numbering systems,
> > keynotes, etc. Also, to keep drawing time down and accuracy up I have
> been
> > trying to limit information to one place, ("say it once and in the right
> > place"). Our setup for structural plans along with an explanation
> follows:
> >
> > S0-1 General Structural Notes
> > these are general notes (basically specs), shear wall schedules, header
> > schedules, and some typical details.
> >
> > S0-2 Typical Structural Details
> > just like it says. I am using this in an attempt to cut down on custom
> > details
> >
> > S0-1 Foundation Plan
> > Here we have the foundation plan with detail references to footing
> > conditions, we are showing posts but are no calling out post sizes.
> > Additionally there are keynotes explaining special conditions, general
> > notes, and a key plan
> >
> > S0-2 Structural Floor Plan
> > Here we are identifying framed walls with a legend and dimensioning them.
> > We are also showing shear wall locations, calling out posts, beams, and
> non
> > typical header, (I am not calling out standard headers because of the
> header
> > schedule on S0-1). Additionally there are keynotes explaining special
> > conditions, general notes, and a key plan
> >
> > S0-3 Roof Framing Plan
> > Here we show a full roof framing plan with every rafter drawn in. We not
> > direction of span and size and use masked text to identify major members
> > such as ridge boards, hips, valleys, etc. Additionally there are keynotes
> > explaining special conditions, general notes, and a key plan
> >
> > S3-1 Building Sections
> > Hear we call out braces, ceiling joists, plate heights, etc. Basically
> > everything that has not been identified in the previous plans.
> >
> > S5-1 Structural Details
> >
> > The structural engineer, (as well as a few contractors, and the principal)
> > has complained about basically everything. They think that the sheet
> format
> > "S1-0" etc. is too complicated and would rather just use "1, 2, 3" etc.
> I
> > disagree because we typically have about 30 sheets and I like the extra
> > organization. "They" also don't like using 2 letters for details such as
> > "A1", they would prefer a, b, c, d, etc. Again as a draftsman and
> manager
> > I like the extra organization.
> >
> > The main problem is however the issue of "Saying it once and in the right
> > place". The structural engineer wants us to duplicate the information
> shown
> > on the plans on the building sections. My problem is that I feel it goes
> > against industry standards, it will push our drafting time up, and that we
> > will be opening the door for errors. Plus the fact that since it has
> > already been noted and detailed on the plans it just feels wasteful.
> >
> > So, what is everyone else doing? Are you duplicating, and where are you
> > calling specific information out? Thank you all for you time - it is
> > appreciated in advance,
> >
> > Sincerely,
> > Jonathon Giebeler
> > David Abbott
> > Residential, Planning, and Design
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >

--
ÐÏ'ࡱá
Message 26 of 31
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

Excellent way to justify the "say it once" approach. Labels & callouts could
even be used to extract attributes for doing takeoffs, which would really
enforce that system. If you state your intentions on the drawing, the contractor
will appreciate the discipline. For the 3D models, I put a note saying that this
is an accurate 3D model and the isometric views can be scaled reliably. Usually
contractors are accustomed to assuming the drawings are not accurate with paper
drawings.

Robert Grandmaison wrote:

> We don't duplicate information as it can lead to take-off problems when
> contractors do cost-estimates.
>
> "Giebeler" wrote:
> > How does you firm handle duplications?
Message 27 of 31
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

Yes, I've begun doing projects in simplified 3D wireframe. Most of the plan
sheets look normal & much of the labelling & symbols are flat. The sections use
xclipped & rotated bits of the model as a screened backgroud or non-printing
tracing aid. It's helpful, I think. If the model is actually based on it, there
is no question contractors will find it helpful to see the "whole picture". The
isometric views are just sort of a bonus & it does take extra work to make them
reasonably presentable compared to the basic level needed to establish grades &
relationships.

Giebeler wrote:

> While I am at it, dose anyone ever use 3D representations to
> clarify plans for the consultants and contractors. I had the far fetched
> idea of including a 3D representation of each plan. It would almost be like
> a key plan or something but in ortho. Like I said that is pretty far
> fetched, but our buildings are quite complicated and what seems clear to us
> is almost impossible for other to see, (mentally).
> Jonathon
Message 28 of 31
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

Another problem with duplicating info is that you have to revise it TWICE or
more if you want to avoid errors. Using Generic callouts like "POST ABOVE"
or "POST BELOW" solve this problem as well.

Robert

"Paul Furman" wrote in message
news:3C92F773.5442FFE5@edgehill.net...
> Excellent way to justify the "say it once" approach. Labels & callouts
could
> even be used to extract attributes for doing takeoffs, which would really
> enforce that system. If you state your intentions on the drawing, the
contractor
> will appreciate the discipline. For the 3D models, I put a note saying
that this
> is an accurate 3D model and the isometric views can be scaled reliably.
Usually
> contractors are accustomed to assuming the drawings are not accurate with
paper
> drawings.
>
> Robert Grandmaison wrote:
>
> > We don't duplicate information as it can lead to take-off problems when
> > contractors do cost-estimates.
> >
> > "Giebeler" wrote:
> > > How does you firm handle duplications?
>
Message 29 of 31
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

I think your response is a little out of line. Arun Shah was simply supporting
Giebeler. Make some rules and expect the consultant to follow them...

HOWEVER, since the engineer may be the only professional of record - the engineer
has every right to want to cover his arse before he'll stamp the plans.



"Phil" wrote in message news:3C9268B5.E1E1494B@yahoo.com...
Sounds like you have a lazy engineer who doesn't want to follow company
standards. Assuming they are company standards, get his boss or your
boss to inform him of the consequences of not following those standards,
and hope the bosses stand behind company policy. Too many times I've
seen companies back down from a stubborn, belligerant engineer who
doesn't want to learn industry standards and ruin all teamwork that used
to exist... eventually the bosses learn that they made the wrong
decision, but by then it's too late..... the good designers, drafters,
etc have moved on, and the the company is actually in trouble!


Arun Shah wrote:
>
> I always thought the guy with the check book sets the standards.....!!
>
> "Giebeler" wrote in message
> news:7B2B04B4E62D5FAADA14E8F6BDFFD52A@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> > We are having problems with our structural engineer and I thought all
> of
> > you may be able to give me a general idea of what is expectable. Any
> > response will be extremely appreciated. I am hoping to get the largest
> > possible response to this message so that I can print them and use them to
> > find a general consistence among others in the field.
> > We are a residential design firm doing higher end custom homes,
> (usually
> > about 3,000 to 5,000 sqft). We have recently adopted the NCS system. We
> > now currently use NCS title blocks, sheet and file numbering systems,
> > keynotes, etc. Also, to keep drawing time down and accuracy up I have
> been
> > trying to limit information to one place, ("say it once and in the right
> > place"). Our setup for structural plans along with an explanation
> follows:
> >
> > S0-1 General Structural Notes
> > these are general notes (basically specs), shear wall schedules, header
> > schedules, and some typical details.
> >
> > S0-2 Typical Structural Details
> > just like it says. I am using this in an attempt to cut down on custom
> > details
> >
> > S0-1 Foundation Plan
> > Here we have the foundation plan with detail references to footing
> > conditions, we are showing posts but are no calling out post sizes.
> > Additionally there are keynotes explaining special conditions, general
> > notes, and a key plan
> >
> > S0-2 Structural Floor Plan
> > Here we are identifying framed walls with a legend and dimensioning them.
> > We are also showing shear wall locations, calling out posts, beams, and
> non
> > typical header, (I am not calling out standard headers because of the
> header
> > schedule on S0-1). Additionally there are keynotes explaining special
> > conditions, general notes, and a key plan
> >
> > S0-3 Roof Framing Plan
> > Here we show a full roof framing plan with every rafter drawn in. We not
> > direction of span and size and use masked text to identify major members
> > such as ridge boards, hips, valleys, etc. Additionally there are keynotes
> > explaining special conditions, general notes, and a key plan
> >
> > S3-1 Building Sections
> > Hear we call out braces, ceiling joists, plate heights, etc. Basically
> > everything that has not been identified in the previous plans.
> >
> > S5-1 Structural Details
> >
> > The structural engineer, (as well as a few contractors, and the principal)
> > has complained about basically everything. They think that the sheet
> format
> > "S1-0" etc. is too complicated and would rather just use "1, 2, 3" etc.
> I
> > disagree because we typically have about 30 sheets and I like the extra
> > organization. "They" also don't like using 2 letters for details such as
> > "A1", they would prefer a, b, c, d, etc. Again as a draftsman and
> manager
> > I like the extra organization.
> >
> > The main problem is however the issue of "Saying it once and in the right
> > place". The structural engineer wants us to duplicate the information
> shown
> > on the plans on the building sections. My problem is that I feel it goes
> > against industry standards, it will push our drafting time up, and that we
> > will be opening the door for errors. Plus the fact that since it has
> > already been noted and detailed on the plans it just feels wasteful.
> >
> > So, what is everyone else doing? Are you duplicating, and where are you
> > calling specific information out? Thank you all for you time - it is
> > appreciated in advance,
> >
> > Sincerely,
> > Jonathon Giebeler
> > David Abbott
> > Residential, Planning, and Design
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >

--
ÐÏ'ࡱá
Message 30 of 31
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

Paul could you post an example for us to look at??
Thanks - Jonathon

"Paul Furman" wrote in message
news:3C92FB41.C8640703@edgehill.net...
> Yes, I've begun doing projects in simplified 3D wireframe. Most of the
plan
> sheets look normal & much of the labelling & symbols are flat. The
sections use
> xclipped & rotated bits of the model as a screened backgroud or
non-printing
> tracing aid. It's helpful, I think. If the model is actually based on it,
there
> is no question contractors will find it helpful to see the "whole
picture". The
> isometric views are just sort of a bonus & it does take extra work to make
them
> reasonably presentable compared to the basic level needed to establish
grades &
> relationships.
>
Message 31 of 31
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

OK, I posted a little backyard study in Customer Files with the title "3D
wireframe". Don't worry about the missing jpg images.

Oops, now I see that may not show what you want. If you look back a couple
months, I posted a much more complex model with a title that was something about
lines not plotting in xrefs. That one shows xreffed xclipped sections & plan
views with labels mixed with 3d views.

Giebeler wrote:

> Paul could you post an example for us to look at??
> Thanks - Jonathon
>
> "Paul Furman" wrote in message
> news:3C92FB41.C8640703@edgehill.net...
> > Yes, I've begun doing projects in simplified 3D wireframe. Most of the
> plan
> > sheets look normal & much of the labelling & symbols are flat. The
> sections use
> > xclipped & rotated bits of the model as a screened backgroud or
> non-printing
> > tracing aid. It's helpful, I think. If the model is actually based on it,
> there
> > is no question contractors will find it helpful to see the "whole
> picture". The
> > isometric views are just sort of a bonus & it does take extra work to make
> them
> > reasonably presentable compared to the basic level needed to establish
> grades &
> > relationships.
> >

Can't find what you're looking for? Ask the community or share your knowledge.

Post to forums  

Administrator Productivity


Autodesk Design & Make Report