Architectural and Structural Models: Who Models What?

[SandySymianick6744]

Is there a clear cut/ best practice answer when it comes to who models what when it comes to structural elements in an architectural model? I watched the "who models what" AU lesson but didn't get a real definite answer to the question. Should any building component, like walls and floors, that contain a structural part, be divided up so that structural models the structural parts and architecture models only the architectural part (insulation, cladding...). If so, does that mean that the structural model always has to be linked in (to understand the components as wholes and for printing)?

Thank you!!!!

[Jason_S]

I typically break out the structural and architectural this way.  Structural gets all structural steel, floors and roof up to roof deck.  Architectural gets all finish floors (VCT, Wood, Ceramic Tile), Walls and roofing material, Single ply, shingles, insulation and so on (above deck).  For walls we typically get a highlighted drawing from the structural engineer with walls that we need to change its structural usage on.  Once we change the usage they can control the display in their model.  We always have the structural model linked in to our model.

I wouldn't break the walls into parts.  That gets real messy and very hard to work with as the model grows in size.

Hope this helps you. 

[teslaoutsourcingservices]

A Structural model includes 3D models of various types of pure Structural elements like foundation, footings, Structural columns, beams, floor joists, trusses, etc.  

When an Architectural model is generated, some Structural elements’ 3D models such as floor, core walls, etc. are required for developing the Architectural model precisely. Without these Structural models, Architectural models remain incomplete. 

[Jason_S]

---

@teslaoutsourcingservices wrote:
 

When an Architectural model is generated, some Structural elements’ 3D models such as floor, core walls, etc. are required for developing the Architectural model precisely. Without these Structural models, Architectural models remain incomplete. 

---

Good point.  We generate the first run for floors and roofs even structural grids.  Once we get them to a point the structural engineers copy and paste them into their models and take over that part.  Having the structural model linked in will fill those areas and allow for the Architectural model to be complete.

[SandySymianick6744]

Thank you Caddman13 and teslaoutsourcingservices!

From your reply, and some more research, this is what I think I will do:

1. Structural will model and own: columns, beams and all structural steel.

2. Architectural will model and own: all walls, floors and roofs. We will monitor, but not copy, columns, beams and structural steel. We will copy, and possibly monitor, roof and floor trusses.

3. The levels and grids will be copied and monitored by both structural and architectural.

3. I will keep the structural model linked in at all times to see structural elements not modelled in architecture such as columns and beams.

From what you and others have wrote I feel like the ownership of structural floors and roofs is a bit of a grey area. Some recommend dividing these into parts, architectural layers and structural components, and others not. In our case, we do many design changes throughout the whole process and so I believe that we should keep ownership of these for workflow purposes.

Do you have any comments on what I have laid out above? Thank you for your help.

[Jason_S]

---

@SandySymianick6744 wrote:

Thank you Caddman13 and teslaoutsourcingservices!

From your reply, and some more research, this is what I think I will do:

1. Structural will model and own: columns, beams and all structural steel.   Great!!!

2. Architectural will model and own: all walls, floors and roofs. We will monitor, but not copy, columns, beams and structural steel. We will copy, and possibly monitor, roof and floor trusses. I would caution copying roof and floor trusses into the architectural model.  Let that in their model.  If you cut a section and it isn't correct have them change their model and send you an update.  You don't want to duplicate work or have the architectural different than structural.  As for the floors and roofs, you will find a work flow that works for both of you.  I let my engineers own them because they change the direction of the metal deck for the design requirements.  Plus I get the benefit of it showing properly in my sections and I don't have to put it in my model.  Again you will find a work flow that works for you.

3. The levels and grids will be copied and monitored by both structural and architectural.  My suggestion would be to have one model be the master.  Whether that is architectural or structural.  One will follow the other.  You can work this out as the model develops but don't have two masters.  That never works.

3. I will keep the structural model linked in at all times to see structural elements not modelled in architecture such as columns and beams.  Great.

From what you and others have wrote I feel like the ownership of structural floors and roofs is a bit of a grey area. Some recommend dividing these into parts, architectural layers and structural components, and others not. In our case, we do many design changes throughout the whole process and so I believe that we should keep ownership of these for workflow purposes. Again work flow will help you find the best solution that works for you and your engineers.

Do you have any comments on what I have laid out above? Thank you for your help.

---

Sounds like you are on the right track.  I find every project has its own challenges and adjustments, but we all find common ground and best work flows pretty quickly.  Good luck and keep us posted on your findings of works flows.  I am always interested in how other tackle it.

[SandySymianick6744]

I've changed my mind a little since my last reply. This is what I propose to do:

1. Architectural will model and own: columns, beams, structural steel and floors.

2. Architectural will model and own: all walls, finished floors and finished roofs. We will monitor, but not copy, columns, beams, structural steel and floors.

3. The levels and grids will be copied and monitored by both structural and architectural. 

3. I will keep the structural model linked in at all times to see structural elements not modelled in architecture.

From what you and others have wrote I feel like the ownership of structural floors and roofs is a bit of a grey area. Some recommend dividing these into parts, architectural layers and structural components, and others not. In our case, we do many design changes throughout the whole process and although it might not be as easy and flexible for workflow purposes, it might be more logical to give these to structural. If we change the level of the finish, and so the structure, it is generally one overall change and so it is easy to coordinate.

Any comments on this approach? Thank you!!

[SandySymianick6744]

Thank you for your input.

For your comment on note 3. We have a separate grid and levels model that is copied and monitored by all disciplines.

[SandySymianick6744]

I have a typo:

Note 1. should say "Structural" and not "Architectural"!

[conormccartney3897]

Not an Structural Engineer, but i work for them. This is a bit of an oversimplification but, if its a load bearing element, it belongs to structural. So Major walls (at elevator cores, and some others) columns, slabs under finish floors, foundation elements, steel trusses (typically we do not deal with wood), framing elements, etc.

[damo3]

Can i ask what country your all from? i am guessing the states? Project cost? Im in Aus and industry standard mostly is we use the structural model still as reference. We link it in for coordination, but we still model columns, slabs and structural walls. Secondary steel we dont model.
We just cant imagine relying on another consultsnt yet to complete our model. It will happen but we arent there yet. So at sketh design where we typically place columns and structural eng is not yet modelling, do you then delete all your columns when you receive there model? Do you ever place dummy columns to tell the enginerr where you want things?

[conormccartney3897]

From my end (structural), we generally have dummy columns initially, or at least column wrapping to show where the Arch wants them. Then depending on the arch, they may or may not show our stuff as the project progresses, but generally they don't duplicate the structural model.