Structural Engineer Refuses Plans

[Anonymous]

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

[Anonymous]

"Giebeler" wrote in message
news:7B2B04B4E62D5FAADA14E8F6BDFFD52A@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...

> We are having problems with our structural engineer......
>
> 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.

You have to consider what the plans are for, and who
has to read them. Better structure and organization
can actually confuse some of the construction types
that read these documents.

> 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.

You're thinking like a programmer. Replication of things like
notes is done to make sure that the person reading the plan
sees them in every place where they may have relevance. Yes,
it seems wasteful, but it may be necessary when you take into
consideration who must read the documents.

Construction documents are created by A/E's but they must be
intepreted by people who may not understand all of the industry
standards and conventions, or who may easily overlook something
because it is not made as obvious as it can be.

> So, what is everyone else doing?

It really depends on the size of the project. On a large
hospital or something like that with hundreds of details,
simple numbering schemes obviously do not work. But in
smaller or residential work, they often do, and in fact, are
preferred. Unfortunately, that is in contradition to what a
'standard' means, and I think that you need to take these
standards with a grain of salt.

If they're designed to accomodate very large projects,
then it's almost certain that they will impose needless
complexity and be more of a burden on smaller ones.

[Anonymous]

We've experimented with keynotes & I find those hard to work with on the
computer as well as missing the ease of reading unfamiliar plans when there are
only numbers.

7
14
6

Huh??????


I'd like an automated keynote system that lets you use a number & a couple
words. The few words would be automated to avoid errors & the legend could spell
things out in more detail or reference a detail on another sheet.:

6 -Wall

7 -Wall w/ rail

Legend
5 Low stone wall (3/L-2.1)
6 Low stone wall at upslope condition (3/L-2.2)
7 High stucco wall (3/L-2.3) with guardrail (5/L-2.4)
14 Iron Guardrail (5/L-2.4)


Now we do a big detail callout bubble that includes the detail number & page
with a couple words naming the item & it's real klunky & hard to fit on the
page.

1 Low Concrete Wall
L2.1 With Iron Rail


We use a sheet numbering system like you desrcribe. A simple thing to do which
isn't hardly different but reads more intuitive is to use a decimal instead of a
hyphen:

L-0 Survey
L-0.1 Demolition

L-1.1 Layout
L-1.2 Grading

L-2.1 Details
L-2.2 Details
L-2.3 Details

PS this is for landscape architectural work also doing custom homes. A simpler
sheet numbering system would be inadequate. You never know when another sheet
needs to be added inside each series. A matchlined project requiring two pages
looks like this:

L-1.1a Layout
L-1.1b Layout
L-1.2a Grading
L-1.2b Grading

[Anonymous]

May I suggest flexibility? The items you mention are fairly small & as long
as you drawings are consistant shouldn't make much difference.

It sounds like your firm does very complete structural drawings. Is it
correct that the consulting engineer designs & the architect is drafting the
structure? If so, your engineer probably feels more liability exposure and
is 'drawing the line in the sand' on duplicate noting. He's just trying to
make sure these complex structures are understood by the contractor.

Take care,
Dennis McNeal, AIA
Autodesk
Building Industry Division
"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
>
>
>
>
>

[Anonymous]

I attempt at the only note it once philosophy, but it's not practical
overall. Some things need to be duplicated to make a good set of usable
documents. Besides, residential contractors are not always very good at
reading plans to start with.
As far as doing what the structural engineer asks, you have no choice but to
follow his redmarks. I'm assuming your firm does not have an architect on
board, therefore there is more risk for a structural engineer being the only
professional working on the job. Do what he says or find another engineer
more to your liking.
Sheet numbering doesn't matter as long as everything is readible and
organized.
Mark Bottemiller

"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
>
>
>
>
>

[Anonymous]

Paul that is an interesting idea about keynotes. It would make them more
intuitive. I noticed that you are using standard sheet formats, but only
one number for details. Did you find that the NCS grid system for labeling
details was not effective?
-Jonathon

"Paul Furman" wrote in message
news:3C904F56.3E37219A@edgehill.net...
> We've experimented with keynotes & I find those hard to work with on the
> computer as well as missing the ease of reading unfamiliar plans when
there are
> only numbers.
>
> 7
> 14
> 6
>
> Huh??????
>
>
> I'd like an automated keynote system that lets you use a number & a couple
> words. The few words would be automated to avoid errors & the legend could
spell
> things out in more detail or reference a detail on another sheet.:
>
> 6 -Wall
>
> 7 -Wall w/ rail
>
> Legend
> 5 Low stone wall (3/L-2.1)
> 6 Low stone wall at upslope condition (3/L-2.2)
> 7 High stucco wall (3/L-2.3) with guardrail (5/L-2.4)
> 14 Iron Guardrail (5/L-2.4)
>
>
> Now we do a big detail callout bubble that includes the detail number &
page
> with a couple words naming the item & it's real klunky & hard to fit on
the
> page.
>
> 1 Low Concrete Wall
> L2.1 With Iron Rail
>
>
> We use a sheet numbering system like you desrcribe. A simple thing to do
which
> isn't hardly different but reads more intuitive is to use a decimal
instead of a
> hyphen:
>
> L-0 Survey
> L-0.1 Demolition
>
> L-1.1 Layout
> L-1.2 Grading
>
> L-2.1 Details
> L-2.2 Details
> L-2.3 Details
>
> PS this is for landscape architectural work also doing custom homes. A
simpler
> sheet numbering system would be inadequate. You never know when another
sheet
> needs to be added inside each series. A matchlined project requiring two
pages
> looks like this:
>
> L-1.1a Layout
> L-1.1b Layout
> L-1.2a Grading
> L-1.2b Grading
>
>

[Anonymous]

Dennis,

> It sounds like your firm does very complete structural drawings. Is it
> correct that the consulting engineer designs & the architect is drafting
the
> structure?

That is correct we do all of the drafting since it is residential.

If so, your engineer probably feels more liability exposure and
> is 'drawing the line in the sand' on duplicate noting. He's just trying to
> make sure these complex structures are understood by the contractor.

I can understand that, but how much duplication is really necessary? It
just seems pointless to me. As duplication increases time increases and
then I have the principal asking why the draftsmen take so long to finish
these plans. One of the major problems I face is that he (the principal)
has always drawn by hand and has a hard time understanding the limitations
of CAD. Also, we used to duplicate information about three times (sections,
floor plans, foundation plan), but when changes are made and there are
multiple draftsmen working on the project errors seem almost guaranteed.
Thank you for your comments
Jonathon

[Anonymous]

If something shows up more than once on other drawings such as drawing
notes, then do what we do and have only one set of drawing notes and attach
them as an xref where ever you need them. This way, if a note changes, it
only changes in one location.

Dave Alexander

"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
>
>
>
>
>

[Anonymous]

Do you use key notes to identify the items, or are they just general notes.
I like the idea, but I can foresee complaints about some notes not applying
to everything on a particular plan.
Jonathon

"Dave Alexander" wrote in message
news:AB825A234E1D54773556EA4936945598@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> If something shows up more than once on other drawings such as drawing
> notes, then do what we do and have only one set of drawing notes and
attach
> them as an xref where ever you need them. This way, if a note changes, it
> only changes in one location.
>
> Dave Alexander
>
> "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
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>

[Anonymous]

One of the major problems I face is that he (the principal) has
always drawn by hand and has a hard time understanding the limitations of
CAD

What limitations are you speaking of ?

drew

"Giebeler" wrote in message
news:9A6FE488DABE9BA6385A1FB26632F5A0@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> Dennis,
>
> > It sounds like your firm does very complete structural drawings. Is it
> > correct that the consulting engineer designs & the architect is drafting
> the
> > structure?
>
> That is correct we do all of the drafting since it is residential.
>
> If so, your engineer probably feels more liability exposure and
> > is 'drawing the line in the sand' on duplicate noting. He's just trying
to
> > make sure these complex structures are understood by the contractor.
>
> I can understand that, but how much duplication is really necessary? It
> just seems pointless to me. As duplication increases time increases and
> then I have the principal asking why the draftsmen take so long to finish
> these plans. One of the major problems I face is that he (the principal)
> has always drawn by hand and has a hard time understanding the limitations
> of CAD. Also, we used to duplicate information about three times
(sections,
> floor plans, foundation plan), but when changes are made and there are
> multiple draftsmen working on the project errors seem almost guaranteed.
> Thank you for your comments
> Jonathon
>
>

[Anonymous]

I think that you have a typo in how you described this - you list two
different sheets S0-1. And that, to some extent, shows why some people
prefer simple sequential numbering of sheets. With sequential numbers,
there is no "wrong Number" while with a systematic numbering scheme, it is
possible for a sheet to have the "wrong number"

However in large sets (beyond what I would expect to see in a 5,000 SF home)
a system such as you describe can be very helpful for finding the right
sheet. The trick is to find a system that is appropriate to the most common
size work you do, and adaptable to to both the largest and smallest jobs
yoou have. I do think that if you are going to use systematic numbering,
you should do it on all jobs. It is just simpler, I believe to use the
system all the time, or none of the time.

And, if I understood your system, (and interpretted the typo correctly), I
think it is probably a reasonable system for the work you are doing.

I have noticed, incidentally, that Architectural firms frequently use
systems to number their sheets, while consulting engineers generally do
not - at least with the size project that I mostly work on - 15 - 25,000 SF
restaurants.

As far as duplication of notes, some duplication is almost unavoidable. My
own rule of thumb is that if a drafter needs the note to understand what
he's drawing, the guy in the field is certainly going to need the note to
understand what he's looking at. But, that doesn't mean you need to repet
everything. Label things, and refer back to the plan for more info. That
should address your engineers concerns (which are valid) at least in part.




"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
>
>
>
>
>

[Anonymous]

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
>
>
>
>
>

[Anonymous]

CAD drawings have strengths in organization and accuracy. Hand drawings
have strengths in intuitiveness and directness. You can make CAD drawings
"look" anyway you want, with shading line types etc., the only question is
what amount of time are you willing to spend. Because our principal is one
of those artistic types I have spent a lot of time fine tuning the
appearance of our plans with line types, patterns, and fonts. There is a
lot you can do, but sometimes you have to be honest and explain the
limitations.
Think about it, to write a note or even just to copy it will always
require a number of steps or commands in a CAD environment. If you are
drawing by hand you just write - that is what I mean by intuitive. If you
want to write a note you just start writing. Do you want to write that note
on an angle? Just do it - no command. Do you want to condense it break it
up so it fits etc. Just do it - no command. What if you want to shade an
area to give it a visual depth, (I have seen some beautiful and clear hand
drawn roof framing plans).
You can put a lot of custom information on a hand drawing quickly. The
benefit of CAD is that the information is reusable and not concrete, you can
copy it and edit it at any time, but for simple notes and symbols hand
drawing is faster and more intuitive. That is one reason keynotes, blocks,
etc are better in CAD.
Finally, perhaps the biggest disadvantage to working in CAD is that you
viewing size is so limited. With hand drawings you can see everything at
once and quickly, directly, move from place to place. You don't zoom in and
zoom out.




"Andrew" wrote in message
news:3E8214FBE8AB496C2FF913409CFFFA95@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> One of the major problems I face is that he (the principal) has
> always drawn by hand and has a hard time understanding the limitations of
> CAD
>
> What limitations are you speaking of ?
>
> drew
>
> "Giebeler" wrote in message
> news:9A6FE488DABE9BA6385A1FB26632F5A0@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> > Dennis,
> >
> > > It sounds like your firm does very complete structural drawings. Is it
> > > correct that the consulting engineer designs & the architect is
drafting
> > the
> > > structure?
> >
> > That is correct we do all of the drafting since it is residential.
> >
> > If so, your engineer probably feels more liability exposure and
> > > is 'drawing the line in the sand' on duplicate noting. He's just
trying
> to
> > > make sure these complex structures are understood by the contractor.
> >
> > I can understand that, but how much duplication is really necessary? It
> > just seems pointless to me. As duplication increases time increases and
> > then I have the principal asking why the draftsmen take so long to
finish
> > these plans. One of the major problems I face is that he (the
principal)
> > has always drawn by hand and has a hard time understanding the
limitations
> > of CAD. Also, we used to duplicate information about three times
> (sections,
> > floor plans, foundation plan), but when changes are made and there are
> > multiple draftsmen working on the project errors seem almost guaranteed.
> > Thank you for your comments
> > Jonathon
> >
> >
>
>

[Anonymous]

Yes, that was a typo. The plan sheets read S1-1, S1-2, etc. I appreciate
all of the comments. It has been extremely frustrating to satisfy all
members involved. One of the major problems has been the inconsistency. We
have had contractor who went out of their way to call us and tell us how
good our plans are, but we have had other contractors who were just confused
by them. The same thing has been true with engineers. I worked with a
civil engineer on a specialized job who never complained once. This
structural engineer just has a had time understanding what is going on. We
have to call him on the phone and explain which sections he needs to look at
etc.
From the posts I can see that I must need to give a little bit. It
would be nice to "say it only once," but that method is not as excepted as I
thought it was. 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


"Charles Prettyman" wrote in message
news:5559A39B5963D6F4070583DE961C3A45@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> I think that you have a typo in how you described this - you list two
> different sheets S0-1. And that, to some extent, shows why some people
> prefer simple sequential numbering of sheets. With sequential numbers,
> there is no "wrong Number" while with a systematic numbering scheme, it is
> possible for a sheet to have the "wrong number"
>
> However in large sets (beyond what I would expect to see in a 5,000 SF
home)
> a system such as you describe can be very helpful for finding the right
> sheet. The trick is to find a system that is appropriate to the most
common
> size work you do, and adaptable to to both the largest and smallest jobs
> yoou have. I do think that if you are going to use systematic numbering,
> you should do it on all jobs. It is just simpler, I believe to use the
> system all the time, or none of the time.
>
> And, if I understood your system, (and interpretted the typo correctly), I
> think it is probably a reasonable system for the work you are doing.
>
> I have noticed, incidentally, that Architectural firms frequently use
> systems to number their sheets, while consulting engineers generally do
> not - at least with the size project that I mostly work on - 15 - 25,000
SF
> restaurants.
>
> As far as duplication of notes, some duplication is almost unavoidable.
My
> own rule of thumb is that if a drafter needs the note to understand what
> he's drawing, the guy in the field is certainly going to need the note to
> understand what he's looking at. But, that doesn't mean you need to repet
> everything. Label things, and refer back to the plan for more info. That
> should address your engineers concerns (which are valid) at least in part.
>
>
>
>
> "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
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>

[Anonymous]

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
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>

[Anonymous]

On Wed, 13 Mar 2002 20:21:37 -0800, "Tony Tanzillo"
dot com> wrote:

>You have to consider what the plans are for, and who
>has to read them. Better structure and organization
>can actually confuse some of the construction types
>that read these documents.

While that's true, it's finally the contractor's job the read and interpret the
drawings and specs to create the building. Getting nit-picky over documentation
conventions is not appropriate, IF the docs are cohesive in and of themselves
and are referenced properly. If things are consistent throughout the set, there
is no valid argument to be made from the contractor's side to how things are
documented from the designer side. They simply have to read the drawings and do
the work - that's their job.

>> 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.

I wonder what information from the plan is being requested on the building
sections, aside from room numbers - which should be in the sections anyway. Any
dimensional information would say "see plan" if approriate, and would not be
duplicated because of the potential for error. The structural engineer should
KNOW this.

>> 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.
>
>You're thinking like a programmer. Replication of things like
>notes is done to make sure that the person reading the plan
>sees them in every place where they may have relevance. Yes,
>it seems wasteful, but it may be necessary when you take into
>consideration who must read the documents.

Trying to second-guess the intelligence of the person reasing the drawings is a
sure recipe for disaster. Design firms do single-instance notes for a VERY good
reason. It cuts down on drafting time, it DRASTICALLY cuts down on revision
time, and absolutely cuts out much of the potential for costly errors due to
updating many details that say the same thing. On large scale projects that I've
worked on, it was insisted by project managers that the textual information be
as compact as required to get the intent across. Lots of "See detail 1/A3.14"
type notes.

However, it it generally accepted to put as much info on the same sheet as
necessary - so the contractor doesn't have to chase to a detail three sheets
over to get the require info. Thus, you may have some duplication, but it's
sheet to sheet, not detail to detail.

Over-notating drawings is a huge problem area for most design firms, because
it's so easy to copy from one detail to the next. But when changes come down the
company is hit with a hugs edit and reference checking cost.

>Construction documents are created by A/E's but they must be
>intepreted by people who may not understand all of the industry
>standards and conventions, or who may easily overlook something
>because it is not made as obvious as it can be.

People reading construction docs who do not understand industry standards are
called clients, and they're not the ones with hammers in their hands. And the
contractor's responsibility is to get things right. Omissions or errors due to a
lack of properly reading the drawings and specs falls on the contractor, not the
architect or designer. If the designer fails to notate completely, that's one
thing. But the solution is not to over-annotate the drawings because some nitwit
has to chase the information down on another detail.

Matt
mstachoni@comcast.net
mstachoni@beyerdesign.com

[Anonymous]

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). On the structural floor plan he wants us to call out
every header size, (this duplicates his own header schedule), It is
standards to call out non typical sizes, (hence the note "Unless Noted
Otherwise"), but calling out everything??? On the roof framing plan he want
all beam sizes. This is fine with me, but we moved our beam callouts to the
structural floor plan especially for him in the first place because he could
not understand what was happening at the roof level. By the way my feeling
is that beams that are in line with the walls and framed at that time should
be called out on the structural floor plan; whereas, only ridge beams and
purlins that actually have to do with the roof framing would be called out
on the roof framing plans.
Thanks for all of the help people. I know this issue is not specifically
related to CAD, but I have better idea now.
Jonathon

P.S.
As far as duplication goes I don't have a problem with identifying items
with generic notes such as "Roofing Material" or "Wood Beam", but I have
been trying to stay away from specifics because of the error possibility.
Further more, I have created general sheet notes for every type of sheet we
do that lead the reader to the correct sheet for the information. Examples:
See Architectural Roof plan for roof pitch, See sheet G0-2 for insulation
requirements, See Structural plans for all structural member sizes, ***and
on the sections: See structural plans for member sizes not indicated here.




"Matt Stachoni" wrote in message
news:dqk19uol2d39t7erm5kh26gmpq8q23u86b@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 13 Mar 2002 20:21:37 -0800, "Tony Tanzillo"
caddzone
> dot com> wrote:
>
> >You have to consider what the plans are for, and who
> >has to read them. Better structure and organization
> >can actually confuse some of the construction types
> >that read these documents.
>
> While that's true, it's finally the contractor's job the read and
interpret the
> drawings and specs to create the building. Getting nit-picky over
documentation
> conventions is not appropriate, IF the docs are cohesive in and of
themselves
> and are referenced properly. If things are consistent throughout the set,
there
> is no valid argument to be made from the contractor's side to how things
are
> documented from the designer side. They simply have to read the drawings
and do
> the work - that's their job.
>
> >> 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.
>
> I wonder what information from the plan is being requested on the building
> sections, aside from room numbers - which should be in the sections
anyway. Any
> dimensional information would say "see plan" if approriate, and would not
be
> duplicated because of the potential for error. The structural engineer
should
> KNOW this.
>
> >> 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.
> >
> >You're thinking like a programmer. Replication of things like
> >notes is done to make sure that the person reading the plan
> >sees them in every place where they may have relevance. Yes,
> >it seems wasteful, but it may be necessary when you take into
> >consideration who must read the documents.
>
> Trying to second-guess the intelligence of the person reasing the drawings
is a
> sure recipe for disaster. Design firms do single-instance notes for a VERY
good
> reason. It cuts down on drafting time, it DRASTICALLY cuts down on
revision
> time, and absolutely cuts out much of the potential for costly errors due
to
> updating many details that say the same thing. On large scale projects
that I've
> worked on, it was insisted by project managers that the textual
information be
> as compact as required to get the intent across. Lots of "See detail
1/A3.14"
> type notes.
>
> However, it it generally accepted to put as much info on the same sheet as
> necessary - so the contractor doesn't have to chase to a detail three
sheets
> over to get the require info. Thus, you may have some duplication, but
it's
> sheet to sheet, not detail to detail.
>
> Over-notating drawings is a huge problem area for most design firms,
because
> it's so easy to copy from one detail to the next. But when changes come
down the
> company is hit with a hugs edit and reference checking cost.
>
> >Construction documents are created by A/E's but they must be
> >intepreted by people who may not understand all of the industry
> >standards and conventions, or who may easily overlook something
> >because it is not made as obvious as it can be.
>
> People reading construction docs who do not understand industry standards
are
> called clients, and they're not the ones with hammers in their hands. And
the
> contractor's responsibility is to get things right. Omissions or errors
due to a
> lack of properly reading the drawings and specs falls on the contractor,
not the
> architect or designer. If the designer fails to notate completely, that's
one
> thing. But the solution is not to over-annotate the drawings because some
nitwit
> has to chase the information down on another detail.
>
> Matt
> mstachoni@comcast.net
> mstachoni@beyerdesign.com

[Anonymous]

Here is a link which has guidelines for structural drawings in Ontario.
http://www.peo.on.ca/offering/strucwork_in_buildings.htm

We usually number all drawings beginning with 'S'. If it's just a small job
with 3 or 4 sheets we would just number them S1, S2 etc.

Larger jobs are pretty much done in the way suggested in the original
posting.

If framing plans have enough room for all the details then we would put them
on the plans. If there are too many details, or if there is not enough room
we would put them on seperate section sheets.

Column sizes go on the column schedules. If they are not centred on
gridlines the offset will be dimensioned on plan.
Duplication of notes is a big no no.
Duplication of notes and dimensions from another disciplines drawings is a
huge no no.
Even if something is structurally significant, like the size and location of
a slab opening, it's been dimensioned by someone else.
Also, don't draw sections that are adequately described on plan.

IMHO if you are the ones paying the engineers then, to some extent, you have
the right to tell him the standards you want and expect.

Graeme

[Anonymous]

Our "Drawing Notes - Apply Where Indicated [note graphic]" are applied to
specific items. We don't use general notes. Not all notes apply to every
drawing they show on but it is easier to use and maintain one set of drawing
notes individule sheet notes (the old manual way) and run the risk of mixing
up the note numbers ( note 5 on drawing 1 sayes the same as note 8 on
drawing 2). You can use xclip on multiple copies of the same xref attachment
to edit the notes that show on a specific drawing but we feel it is more
trouble than it is worth. When we issue a 8.5 by 11 detail sheet of a full
plan, we xclip the drawing notes to reflect what notes show on the detail
sheet mainly because we don't have enough room for the full notes. We do
xclip the drawing notes on the big sheets but only to break them up into
sections that we can move around to fit a particular layout.

Dave Alexander


"Giebeler" wrote in message
news:052817310249D5929B64B2CFEDC0B2D5@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> Do you use key notes to identify the items, or are they just general
notes.
> I like the idea, but I can foresee complaints about some notes not
applying
> to everything on a particular plan.
> Jonathon
>
> "Dave Alexander" wrote in message
> news:AB825A234E1D54773556EA4936945598@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> > If something shows up more than once on other drawings such as drawing
> > notes, then do what we do and have only one set of drawing notes and
> attach
> > them as an xref where ever you need them. This way, if a note changes,
it
> > only changes in one location.
> >
> > Dave Alexander
> >

>

[Anonymous]

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