Construction Documentation

[Designer1]

Where is a good resource for looking at a good standard rule of thumb for construction documentation?  Ive noticed that the books I have on it, architecture firms ive worked at and interior design firms drawings vary so much.  Ive heard that the AIA has the best standard but when I checked online you have to become a member to get any info on CDs.  Im just trying to see how in alignment I am with a good standard of drawings.  Ive seen such a huge variation its hard to decifer whats a good standard.

 

Thanks!

[NRST8TRKR]

Chad,

 

           I just contacted the permit offices in the area I work in and they provided me a list of their requirement.

Lots if difference from one to another. Thankfully mine are not nearly as bad a some

 

        Have a great week,Ken

 

[joey_martin]

This is a sheet I have used over the years. Was shared with me when I started out on my own. I'm sure I need to updated it again, the Feb update didn't fix some of the code changes. 

MDP Plan_Check_List.pdf

[Kbird1]

2 hours ago, joey_martin said:

This is a sheet I have used over the years. Was shared with me when I started out on my own. I'm sure I need to updated it again, the Feb update didn't fix some of the code changes. 

MDP Plan_Check_List.pdf

 

Thanks Joey , didn't you used to have a nice Layout in the Samples Gallery here ? seems it is no longer available....

 

M. 

[Designer1]

Thanks everyone, I appreciate your help and input.  Yeah being in San Francisco bay area Im sure we have the worst and most tedious expectations for everything.  Nothing simple out here.

[Designer1]

Does anyone have any recommendations for sending cross sections to layout?  When I look at Chiefs many CDs examples the house cross sections seem very minimal like many layers have been turned off.  Im just trying to find out whats the recommended layers to turn off are.....do you want just the interior walls visible or appliances and fixtures visible too? 

 

Any recommendations?

 

Thanks in advance!

[PMMully]

On 5/17/2020 at 5:46 PM, Designer1 said:

Where is a good resource for looking at a good standard rule of thumb for construction documentation?  Ive noticed that the books I have on it, architecture firms ive worked at and interior design firms drawings vary so much.  Ive heard that the AIA has the best standard but when I checked online you have to become a member to get any info on CDs.  Im just trying to see how in alignment I am with a good standard of drawings.  Ive seen such a huge variation its hard to decifer whats a good standard.

 

Thanks!

If I understand your question correctly,... the answer always seems to be "it depends" :-).  Where I am, there are simply none other than the Florida Build Code (now 2020/V7). Every PE I work with have their own style, so I have created layout templates for each of them. I tried a generic layout, based on what I, as a builder thought was best from looking at many plans from many sources.... it did not work out so well. Fortunately, CA has the templating, user libraries, etc, so it is coming together. As the industry matures, I imagine the Building Information Model (BIM) will start to take hold. I understand it is big in Europe. Packages like Revit are sporting it.

 

I have been doing a lot of kitchens lately and using the NKBA dimensions. However, nobody locally seems to care.... around here anyway.

[joey_martin]

7 hours ago, Designer1 said:

Does anyone have any recommendations for sending cross sections to layout?

Many different views on this, probably depends on region and training maybe. 

 

I tend to leave building sections cleaner and refer to more detailed wall section pages and detail pages. An architect I do CDs for prefers more detailed cross sections and less detail pages.

 

BTW...everything here is live. These are all camera view/back-clipped sections labeled and sent to layout with my layer/anno set for details. I think the only "CAD" detail is the typ post & beam detail.

[RodCole]

For general information regarding CAD standards try this out.

 

United States National CAD Standard - V6: Uniform Drawing System Module 1

 

It will give you most of the basic standards I believe you are looking for as far as plan sheet naming and catagory coding goes.

 

The implementation of this is not very consistent, as you appear to have found out for yourself, but it does provide a good basic starting point to work from.

 

Hope this is helpful.

 

[lbuttery]

an old hand advised me when I was starting 

 

don't add anything you don't need to 

the more they have to review the more likely they will find something "wrong"

 

I did plans for a multitude of counties around the USA and they all want something different

so contact them or review their websites and then ask - sometimes they have samples

 

I worked for a multitude of builders and each wanted something different

so ask for samples that they had submitted in the past

 

there is no standard

 

BTW: I had a 100% acceptance rate for the permit sets submitted

 

but none were done in California - thankfully

 

Lew

[Designer1]

Thank you everyone for the replies.  Yeah Im mostly doing this for my own learning.  I have been hired on as senior designer at many different custom homebuilders, arch firms etc over the years but they always promoted me out of the drafting position immediately and put me in a senior designer role.  So ive done the conceptual, color boards, client meetings, submittals, permitting but not the actual full set of construction doc and left that for the junior team members to complete.  Since I have missed this during my experience Im trying to learn all the different aspects of the field. 

 

Yes, Lew California is crazy probably the worst for drawing expectations so Ive heard from several different people.

 

Thanks for the link Rod I will check that out!

 

Patrick, yeah the chief templates and auto dimensioning seem to help me a lot, I love that. Once I get the hang of the drawings I think that template idea you mentioned will be a big time saver.

 

Joey, yeah thats what my sections were looking like with all the interior stuff included.  Chiefs example sections were so minimal I wasnt sure whats the best policy on that.  Your right though having big details pages can sometimes be more confusing then just having the sections have more details already in them.  I think including the details per section vs the details page is something I prefer, it seems less confusing.

 

Do any of you remember chiefs CAD library notes including more types of simple California style foundation notes and details?  Case in point was the simple California slab foundation.  I only see one example of that in the library but includes some foundation blocking that I havent seen used around here.  I thought I remember chiefs library or the simpson strong tie library having more varied details?

[Richard_Morrison]

You might try going to Amazon books and searching under "Architectural Working Drawings". There are a number of classics, like the ones by Wakita, Liebing, Spence, and others. Not cheap, but no professional education is.

[lbuttery]

I recommend buying used books from Amazon or other places

 

buy a prior version to save money

 

if you really like the book then buy the current edition

 

I bought a large library that way

 

Lew

[Designer1]

Thanks for the recommendation Richard and Lew, I will check that out.

[jtcapa1]

Even though this is from the UK, many of the details are useful, including the 3d cut away sections:

Detail Library

[Richard_Morrison]

5 hours ago, jtcapa1 said:

Even though this is from the UK, many of the details are useful, including the 3d cut away sections:

Detail Library

The problem with this library, and frankly, many of the details in Chief Architect's own detail library, is that they assume no shear transfer and no uplift forces. If you put shear blocking between the rafters to account for shear transfer from roof to top plate, for example, you defeat the whole ventilation scheme in the detail. The waterproofing aspects are also a little sketchy. The concern, of course, is that someone who doesn't understand engineering and standard building practice may use these details unwittingly as-is.

 

[Kiwideziner]

Richard remember standard building practice varies greatly around the world. I looked at a couple of the details and at a quick glance they could be used in New Zealand, but I think they would need substantial changes to meet codes as I understand them for you guys.

[Richard_Morrison]

3 hours ago, Kiwideziner said:

Richard remember standard building practice varies greatly around the world. I looked at a couple of the details and at a quick glance they could be used in New Zealand, but I think they would need substantial changes to meet codes as I understand them for you guys.

Of course, they vary. But these details were supposedly developed for a U.S. market. I don't know of any geographic areas that don't have any wind loads, at least, that still would require shear transfer detailing.

[jtcapa1]

As long as you can import the detail and then make those changes, it would save time.  This assumes some level of knowledge of your own market.  You cannot be concerned about what the less experienced user might do with them.   I do love the 3d cut-aways, as I've been putting 3d framing perspectives on my construction documents for years now.

 

What I love about CA is that I can basically put every single stick of framing in any project, manipulate them, colorize them and then create a great 3d framing perspective like this:

My structural engineer now has to spend less time load tracing, since I've not only done it, I've made it easy to see.  I even upload these 3d models to the CA cloud viewer so the engineers can see it in detail.   I honestly spend way too much time completing these 3d models, by including all those great 3d Simpson hangers and fasteners.