Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

RE: eng info on dwgs

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
The IBC has no explicit requirement for design data on drawings. (Your
local building official may.)

"Construction Documents" are defined by the IBC as "Written, graphic,
and pictorial documents prepared or assembled for describing the design,
location and physical characteristics of the elements of a project
necessary for obtaining a building permit."

In many cases the building official stamps the calcs and requires that
they be retained on site.  Sounds to me like calcs are part of the
"construction documents", if the contractor and inspector need them on
site.  Specifications certainly are part of "Construction Documents"

Building Officials, please chime in here - where are you requiring the
Section 1603 information to be?

Ed Tornberg
Tornberg Consulting, LLC
503-551-4165

-----Original Message-----
From: Scott, William N. [mailto:William.Scott(--nospam--at)veco.com] 
Sent: Saturday, October 09, 2004 12:34 PM
To: 'seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org'
Subject: RE: eng info on dwgs

Mark,

How do you conform to IBS-2003, Section 1603?

Bill

-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Gilligan [mailto:MarkKGilligan(--nospam--at)compuserve.com]
Sent: Saturday, October 09, 2004 11:25 AM
To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
Subject: RE: eng info on dwgs


Most of the rationales for putting additional information on the
drawings
are based on an attempt to prevent an often poorly defined problem that
will possibly occur some time in the future. These problems are problems
that we have no obligation to prevent and "solving"  them can have
consequences so why do we do it?

Construction documents are intended to give directions to the
Contractor. 
It is my belief that documents are most effective when they try to do
just
one thing.  When you try to accomplish multiple objectives, such as
facilitating future ill defined modifications, then things get  fuzzy. 
When we use construction documents to accomplish multiple objectives, we
spend more time and run the risk that we will increase our liability as
a
result of confusing others.  

If you just tell the contractor to put a certain amount of reinforcing
in a
block wall there is little confusion.  On the other hand if you define
something as a shear wall you might find the Contractor has wrongly used
this information to justify some interpretation you did not intend.  In
addition if there is litigation involving the building this additional
information and any alleged inconsistencies will be used against you if
possible.  Is it worth the grief?

The common practice of placing material properties on the drawings often
results in conflicts with the specifications.  Placing the material
grades
and strengths on the drawings also encourages the contractor to get in
the
habit of looking only on the drawings thus ignoring the additional
provisions in the specifications.  Is it worth the grief?

When you put additional information on the drawings it makes it easier
for
another engineer to modify the building you designed.  On the other hand
if
that information was not on the drawings the Owner might  find it
cheaper
to have you design the modifications.  If you are dealing with somebody
elses design where certain additional information is not in the
construction documents you will probably have to spend more time thus
increasing your total fees.  Why should we spend more time doing
something
that increses our liability exposure while likely having a negative
impact
on future fees?

Thus I believe we should only include information in the construction
documents the Contractor needs to perform the current work.


Mark Gilligan

******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
* 
*   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers 
*   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To 
*   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
*   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
*   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you 
*   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted 
*   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web 
*   site at: http://www.seaint.org 
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ******** 


******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
* 
*   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers 
*   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To 
*   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
*   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
*   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you 
*   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted 
*   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web 
*   site at: http://www.seaint.org 
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ******** 



******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
* 
*   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers 
*   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To 
*   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
*   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
*   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you 
*   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted 
*   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web 
*   site at: http://www.seaint.org 
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********