when I first started, it was Dinasaur skins and charcoal. > Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 12:02:26 -0800> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: > [email protected]> Subject: Re: LAK OF CO-ORDINATION> > > Craig,> > When I first started we drew pictures in the dirt with a stick.> > Personally all I'd like to see is some coordination. Five recent> projects, > all remodels:> > First project; (Fire Detection/Bidding documents for > contractor design> project) Backgrounds are essentially floor plans with some > equipment> drawn in but most of that unlabeled so that you have to guess > whether> something is an architectural feature, equipment on the floor, or> > equipment tall enough to be in the way. The Architect wants detailed> > drawings as to conduit runs on a bidder layout conceptual design.> > Essentially this is the design an undefined system within an partially> > defined space.> > Second project: (Sprinkler/Shop drawings) The A&E provides > a full set> of drawings, water data, detailed drawing of where the mains are > to> run, design criteria, notes as to where auxiliary dry systems are to> be > located to cover unheated turret attics, etc. I need to do detail> layout for > the winning contractor.> > Third project: (Sprinkler/Constructibility study): > I get detailed, in> progress drawings and have to design a system in > sufficient detail to> prove constructibility. The Architect rotates the > ceiling grid 90> degrees after I've laid out heads and piping. I submit a > change order> and get paid.> > Fourth project: (Sprinkler/Contractor design) > Design criteria from A&E> is for contractor to put in a system complying with > applicable rules.> I request full CAD drawings. A&E refuses on grounds of > "intellectual> property" and sends selected (his not mine) pdfs.> > Fifth > project: (Sprinkler/Contractor design)) I get CAD plans but> Architect has > drawn everything on a single layer.> > Grade this as you see fit but I give > initially a D to number one until> they requested detail drawings at which > time they fell to F-. Number> two gets an A for providing the needed > information vis-a-vis the level> of effort they asked from me. Number three > gets a B because the> otherwise C work (asking for a final design before > their own design> was finalized) was saved by the extra credit associated > with paying me> without a fight for their mistake. Number four is a D because > of the> intellectual property BS. This is a remodel. What am I going to do> > with their architectural plan? For that matter what am I going to do> with > any one off building architectural plan? The design cost more> than it > otherwise would because I had to reproduce, rather than clean> up the CAD > drawings. Five gets a B since it was essentially a hand> drawing for > practical purposes but had all the necessary info.> > And finally a sixth > project--Commissioning team. Very large project> that had very few conflicts > that weren't caught and corrected before> they became major battles. An A- > only because it could have gone> smoother with more cooperation from the > owner (who acted as his own> AHJ) and architect who interfered with the > commissioning process far> too often in the name of haste.> > On Tue, Nov 11, > 2008 at 11:22 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> > So if you could have your > say, what would be the desired deliverable from the AE? Would you want to see > a pile of drawings, a CD full of drawings, a walk through of the building via > some 3D magic or what?> >> > 3D cad hasn't been around forever, when I first > started in this business it was ink on mylar and you got copies of everyone > else's drawings to do your coordination. The only computers were on the > Starship Enterprise.> >> >> > Craig L. Prahl, CET> > Fire Protection > Specialist> > Mechanical Department> > CH2MHILL> > Lockwood Greene> > 1500 > International Drive> > PO Box 491, Spartanburg, SC 29304-0491> > Direct - > 864.599.4102> > Fax - 864.599.8439> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > http://www.ch2m.com> >> >> > -----Original Message-----> > From: [EMAIL > PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Thom McMahon> > Sent: > Tuesday, November 11, 2008 1:54 PM> > To: [email protected]> > > Subject: RE: LAK OF CO-ORDINATION> >> > This is typically what we all see. > "Sprinkler shall co-ordinate with all trades" MEANING "If I get here first > you'll have to move even if your drawings are the only ones that give > elevation and distance off walls and column lines"> >> > Remember when we > used to get "Duct Shop Drawings" that had duct sizes, BOD (bottom of duct) > showed where they were off of the structure in feet and inches. Now every > duct guy just installs off the MPE drawings with no elevations or set > distances, just because it's on cad. It leaves you to guess if his fittings > are FOB (Flat on Top) or FOB (Flat on Bottom) Why are there more change > orders? Because the engineering community hasn't increased their Level of > Care, to reflect that their bid drawings are now the shop drawings for the > MPE trades.> >> > Yeah we all hear the 3D will make this change order thing > go away, just like a "Paperless society" Computers and printers have only > made more paper usage easier. When was the last time you bought a printer > that printed fewer pages per min than the one it replaced? More paper + more > CYA, so when in double print it out, in case the computer crashes. 3D can > help with co-ordination, but only to the level of expertise of the person > inputting the data. Usually a IT geek or nerd, not the PE, and rarely anyone > with actual hands on experience of how it really goes together.> >> > Thom > McMahon, SET> > Firetech, Inc.> > 2560 Copper Ridge Dr> > P.O. Box 882136> > > Steamboat Springs, CO 80488> > Tel: 970-879-7952> > Fax: 970-879-7926> >> >> > >> > (sprinkler) can go around us. It's like a 3D retrofit. The only thing > that changes is we spend more design time to come up with the same product.> > > Besides we FP contractors have been doing 3D since the beginning of time, > it's just that the presentation has been 2D.> >> > Ron Fletcher> > Aero > Automatic> > Phoenix, AZ> >> > > _______________________________________________> > Sprinklerforum mailing > list> > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum> > For > Technical Assistance, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> > To > Unsubscribe, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > (Put the word unsubscribe > in the subject field)> > _______________________________________________> > > Sprinklerforum mailing list> > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum> > For > Technical Assistance, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> > To > Unsubscribe, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > (Put the word unsubscribe > in the subject field)> >> > > > -- > Ron Greenman> at home....> > _______________________________________________> Sprinklerforum mailing list> > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum> For Technical > Assistance, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To Unsubscribe, send an > email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject > field)_______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum For Technical Assistance, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
