Setout of structural columns: by architect or engineer?

[Christiaan]

Here's a scenario:

Design-Build contract. Architect has set out building relative to it's surroundings. Engineer has designed the structure to suit. Now the architect's being asked to annotate the plans with north-easting co-ordinates on the structural columns.

Wouldn't that normally be within the engineer's scope of works?

[johnb]

In my experience the structure is built, and set out , from the engineer's drawings but the architect should check that the information complies with his design (for his own and his insurer's peace of mind!).

[CipesDesign]

Hi Christiaan, What about having the surveyor do this??

[Christiaan]

Sure, but isn't it the engineer's job to dimension the structure?

[CipesDesign]

This might differ from place to place, but for me (and everyone I work with) it is the architect/designer's job to provide dimensions. The engineer provides details, beam/ post/ footing/ etc.sizes, connection methods,etc. But I would never want (or trust) and engineer to layout/dimension a building. Usually I provide dimensions to the surveyor who then lays the building out on the site for (or with) the builder...

[mike m oz]

Not normally. Architectural drawings are dimensioned whereas tructural engineer's plans are usually not (its usually the architect who decides where he wants elements, or doesn't want elements).

I wouldn't buy into providing X and Y co-ordinates. Provide a clear and unambiguous datum point that the building is set out from with either a structural grid or clear dimensions to the centrelines of the columns. The rest is the builder's responsibility.

[VectorGeek]

I agree with mike m and Peter here. In our part of the world, the architect (or prime consultant) is responsible for dimensioning the structure. The engineer is responsible for the structural design (i.e. concrete, steel, and wood-frame sizing reinforcing etc.). Ultimately, I would NOT want our consultants to dimension anything anyways as we are responsible for the overall coordination, not them.

We even go to the point of providing contractors with slab plans that show all spot elevations, openings, embeds, curbs, etc. These have to be closely coordinated with the architectural detail package to ensure that everything works in concert.

May be different in the UK though...

V-G

(now a 'journeyman' on the tech board - :-0)

Edited October 26, 2007 by VectorGeek

[jan15]

I agree with Mike M, Peter, and VG, and when I was in the midwest and the northwest I never heard of any architect doing otherwise.

But here on the east coast, I've met architects and structural engineers who assume it's part of the engineer's job to work out the exact geometry of the frame in all 3 dimensions.

[russh]

We provide setting out coordinates and dimensions for all aspects of the job. That way everything is where I want it, not where the engineer thinks it should be. It's the engineer's job to size the structural elements and to make sure it ain't gonna fall down. I've done it that way for 25 years now, and it seems to work, not least for my peace of mind.

[Petri]

Here's a scenario:

Design-Build contract. Architect has set out building relative to it's surroundings. Engineer has designed the structure to suit. Now the architect's being asked to annotate the plans with north-easting co-ordinates on the structural columns.

Wouldn't that normally be within the engineer's scope of works?

1. What's the problem in this kind of annotation? I could - technically - do it in less than a minute. "Prettyfying" (good locations for the tags) takes any amount of time. (There may be a tool for this at VectorDepot.)

2. Surely the surveyor has the software to do it. I don't really quite see the point in doing it, though, as bearings & angles would, I think, be much easier for them. Not necessarily from a single point, so I'd really leave it to them. If they're not worth their salt, the builder/contractor should hire a professional surveying firm instead of the nephew's chum's mate.

3. This kind of coordinate dimensioning should be a part of VW.

[jbrhwy]

Petri all my layouts are done with a robotic total station using point data. You & I are showing our age as bearing & distance layout hasn't be used since the days of the old transit & chain.

[Petri]

OK - I've not had anything to do with this kind of stuff in years!

Anyway: "Coordinate Dimensions: A tool for coordinate dimensioning by Juan Carlos Fabbiani VW 12.0 or higher" at http://www.vectordepot.com/plug-ins/ might do the job.

[islandmon]

3. This kind of coordinate dimensioning should be a part of VW.

Re:Northing&Easting

Vectordepot should still have my plugin for this.

[Petri]

I wonder how many people have created such a plug-in. At least I have! Shows z-coordinate, too. (I think it does. I haven't seen it lately, but it must be somewhere...)

[jbrhwy]

Petri any chance of sharing your plug-in, if it shows z-coordinate? Would like to tru & use it to layout manholes.

Thanks

[Donald Wardlaw]

I'm with those who advocate that the architect lead on layout. Even though engineers are in my view very amazing and special creatures, their natural focus is on a subset of the project objectives. So they can't be expected work with an understanding of how their efforts affect matters outside of their realm. Someone, though, must do that and of the available choices I think the architect is the only one with sufficient vocabulary and knowledge of all the different languages in the project team to do it.

In my work, which is small scale but usually requires serious engineering, I take this even further. I do the structural drawings and I integrate structural features and architectural features in my details. I think separating architectural and structural drawings is not ideal and really only necessary on relatively large projects.

Regards,

Donald

Edited October 28, 2007 by Donald Wardlaw

[jan15]

Agreed. Arch and Struc drawings often show the same detail, with focus on different aspects. The only reason to publish separate details is to establish who's responsible for what aspect, by whose seal is on each drawing.

[Petri]

Petri any chance of sharing your plug-in, if it shows z-coordinate? Would like to tru & use it to layout manholes.

Thanks

Could not find it. Did a quick test object - and found problems!

The object cannot be placed accurately. In fact, it jumps to a location of it's own choosing.

Peculiar. Reading 3D coordinates should not make an object to move on its own volition. Did I abandon the project because of this?

[gScott]

http://www.vectordepot.com/downloads/Picch.zip

[Christiaan]

The thing is when the contractor's on site putting the foundations in they're not referring to the architect's drawings but the engineer's drawings (for a ten storey RC frame building anyway). Sure the architect sets out the building and, of course, we check the engineer's plans and ensure our plans co-ordinate, but this doesn't necessarily mean we dimension the structure within the building.

In fact the engineer has already issued a set of plans dimensioning the structure, which makes it even more odd for the architect to then put co-ordinates (just another form of dimension) on their plans.

With regard to the plugin for annotating co-ordinates Islandmon posted a fix to a problematic plugin at one point, so I'll take another look at it:

http://techboard.nemetschek.net/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=65607

[Petri]

This is country-dependent. Here the dimensioning/set-out is done by the architect. It was the same also in Awstraya.

Anyway - my plug-in works now fine after I fixed some stupid late night programming errors; the VectorDepot object has obviously worked fine all the time.

[Christiaan]

So much choice! Seems there're two or three plugins floating around.

Would be nice if NNA created something with a few more bells and whistles, such as the ability to create columns schedules with co-ordinates.