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

RE: E-Files and Clients....

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Exactly Jim, sharing of the plans and layout is totally fine in my book,
it's the details. Plans are fairly unique to a building, the details can
easily be misused/abused by someone unethical or thinks they are turnkey
types of things.

It is commonplace for architects to share their plan files with all
consultants. Especially important for buildings with curvatures.
However, I don't see the need for someone to ask for their cad details
showing the letter sizes and paint color for handicap parking stalls.
Nor should we be giving away eccentric brace frame connection details to
some client who would have no idea that taking away or thinning a few
stiffeners because their contractor told them so is okay.

I look at plans prepared by other firms a lot. I get ideas from their
presentation and learn what works and what doesn't in presentation. I'm
not advocating re-inventing the wheel either, but when you create the
detail yourself (or borrow some ideas from someone else) the actual
process of re-drawing to your own standards gives you a certain
understanding of what is important in the connection/detail.

In residential, we have to be more cautious because not only do we
compete for very low fees, but others can easily take your details,
throw them together and "appear" to produce a comparable set of thorough
drawings.

I am very thorough in my drawings and sometimes I feel that I "scare"
contractors when they get 9 sheets of drawings for a single story home.
I'm just being thorough, but I have gotten the "I know how to do all
this, I don't need your details to tell me how to build the obvious"
comments a few times.

-gm

-----Original Message-----
From: James Getaz [mailto:jamesgetaz3(--nospam--at)msn.com]
Sent: Sunday, May 29, 2005 6:30 AM
To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
Subject: RE: E-Files and Clients....

Greetings,
    I'd like to give two examples where the architect's sharing his
..dwgs
aided the project. Both were on plans which were not rectilinear. There
are
more and more of them these days just because they can be done by
computers.
    1. A stadium grid layout was correct on our plans (we'd laid it out
by
the time we got the .dwg from the A/E). We overlaid their on ours and
they
matched. The GC and surveyor misunderstood a angle and laid it out wrong
in
the field. By the time it was caught, there were footings that had to be

redone. Our part was not held up and we were able to meet our part of
the
schedule.
   2. A building that followed a hillside was laid out carefully and
called
out well on the architect's drawings, but a schedule that should have
matched that layout did not. Again, when we got the got the .dwgs and
overlaid them on ours, they matched. So the schedule was incorrect. This

would have been caught with the right question during submittal, but it
was
resolved earlier (always good for maintaining schedule) and actually led
to
a very good working relationship with the architect. Which is also good
for
maintaining schedule and the entire project.
  If you've been burned, I do not blame you for protecting your work.
But
good can also come from sharing. And you will note that both these
examples
mostly involve architect's grid plans, not engineer's details.
  Jim Getaz
  Precast Engineer



******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   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 
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********