Is Architect Responsible For Shop Drawing Dimensions

©2020, Ontario Clan of Architects (OAA). Management of the Project articles may be reproduced and distributed, with appropriate credit included, for not-commercial use just. Commercial utilize requires prior written permission from the OAA. The OAA reserves all other rights.

Preface

The preparation and review of store drawings is an important function of the structure process. Items for which shop drawings submittals are required must be identified in the specifications, and a complete list of required submittals reviewed at the project pre-structure meeting. The process is a critical checkpoint to ensure that components which are manufactured off-site run into the design intent of the construction documents, and accost any site conditions which may vary from those conditions shown on or anticipated by the structure documents. The shop drawing review procedure is also an opportunity to confirm that the project requirements have been clearly relayed to and understood past the trades and fabricators in club to ensure that the correct product is provided.

ane What shop drawings should show and the purpose of reviewing them is described below.

1.1 Detailing design and fabrication specific to a product

Shop drawings may particular aspects of design and fabrication that are specific to a product, and exterior of the consultant's expertise. Review of store drawings for these items is an opportunity for the consultant to appraise the fully adult design of those elements that are indicated schematically on the contract documents, to determine that they meet the blueprint intent and that they interface passably with site conditions and other building elements.

For example, the construction documents for a edifice clad in precast panels volition indicate the fasteners cast into the precast in a schematic fashion, as it is the responsibleness of the precast console supplier to engineer and item the fasteners. The shop drawings will prove this item in particular allowing the structural consultant (for the edifice) to ostend that the fastener interfaces as expected with the building structure and allowing the consultant to confirm that the associates is compatible with the proposed method of achieving air and h2o tightness.

In a 2d instance, the construction documents for a building clad in curtainwall volition betoken mullion back up points where deflection is to exist accommodated by slip joints. The engineer for the curtain wall supplier will more fully detail these joints, as he will have a detailed knowledge of their own curtainwall system's components, and will ultimately have responsibility for those details. The consultant is able to decide that the blueprint conditions accept been understood and addressed by the curtainwall supplier, through the shop cartoon review process.

1.2 Documenting and detailing variations of similar components

Variations of a component are oft described in the structure documents with annotations such every bit "SIM", OR "REVERSE" OR "MIRROR". Review of store drawings prepared past the fabricator detailing these items provides an opportunity for everyone to check that the design intent has been correctly understood.

An instance would be a multi‐storey stair for which typical baby-sit and handrail elevations and required loadings have been provided on the construction documents. The shop drawings provided by the supplier volition include elevations of all guards and handrails, allowing what is existence provided to exist checked for compliance with the structure documents and applicable codes, and to evidence how atypical atmospheric condition are being addressed. It is also an opportunity to examine anticipated conditions that may have inverse due to field conditions.

2 Several important aspects of the shop drawing submission and review process are discussed below.

ii.1 Submittal Schedule

The specifications should require the contractor to set and submit for review, prior to the contractor's first application for payment (similar to the requirement for the submittal of a "schedule of values" prior to the first application for payment), a submittals schedule indicating when the various shop drawings, samples, product information, mock‐ups, photographs and certificates are to be submitted. This allows the contractor to demonstrate that they take identified all the required submittals and have scheduled them appropriately to let enough fourth dimension for review and for re-submission. By doing and so neither the project schedule nor the consultant team will be unnecessarily encumbered with numerous concurrent submittals. The size and complexity of submittals that may necessitate longer review periods than typical (which may take been specified) should likewise be addressed by the submittals schedule.

Review of the submittals schedule will too aid identify any shop drawings that are non required and which should not exist submitted for review. Prior to receipt of the submittals list prepared past the contractor, the consultants should review the specifications and ready their own lists of required submittals, to check against the list provided past the contractor. Additional information regarding the preparation and maintenance of a submittal schedule can be found in the OAA/OGCA document "Articulation Best Practise Statement Shop Drawing Schedule" available on the OAA web site.

2.2 Delegated Design

The specifications should too indicate which shop drawings require a delegated design engineer's review and seal. If blueprint is delegated to a fabricator's engineer, the specific requirements for the engineering review should be noted in the specifications including the requirement that the engineer must be licensed to practice in the jurisdiction of the place of the work. State any requirements for professional liability insurance, both the corporeality (every bit required by the client) and how long it must be carried for.

Note that the engineer'southward seal may not appear on the first submission of the shop drawing. Engineers are permitted to review and seal drawings prepared past others, so often the drafting volition be done by the fabricator based on experience and not reviewed by the engineer until after the shop drawing is otherwise accustomed past the consultants. Suggested practice is to marking the store drawings with "revise and resubmit" status with the only note being to affix the engineer's seal, assuming in that location are no other bug. A submittal requiring an engineer's seal should not be marked "reviewed" or "reviewed as noted" if the engineer's seal is not affixed.

This extra round of review volition need to be accommodated in the schedule. Boosted information regarding delegated design can exist found in OAA Practice Tip PT.37 Delegated Design and Shop Drawings and the peer commodity Delegated Design: Complexities and Effective Implementation found in the Knowledge Base

2.3 Contractor's Review

Upon receipt of a shop drawing submittal, the reviewer should first check for the contractor'due south review stamp. If it is non there, or in that location is evidence that there has not been adequate review/coordination (such as dimensions indicating/requesting confirmation or adjacent material or telescopic not indicated) the submission should exist returned immediately to the contractor. Although application of the contractor'south review postage stamp is supposed to mean that the contractor has thoroughly reviewed the shop drawings, marked up any discrepancies, and provided requested site dimensions, the quality of such review may vary. The question and so becomes, what is the point of insisting on the contractor's review stamp on the store drawings? Past returning unstamped submissions, it sets a precedent for the project in terms of post-obit correct process. In improver it makes it more hard for the contractor to avoid responsibleness should issues arise related to the work shown on the store drawings.

2.4 Reviewing for Design Intent Simply

The purpose of store cartoon review by the consultants is to verify that the store drawings correctly correspond and implement the design indicated by the structure documents. Dimensions or information that practise non relate to the design intent should not be reviewed.

As an example, the outside dimensions of a custom casting should be reviewed, only the wall thicknesses do not need to be reviewed by the architect equally the wall thicknesses may simply relate to the particular fabrication procedure or be of business only to the structural engineer (who should then review the wall thickness). Aspects of the cartoon which pertain to engineering science should exist reviewed by the appropriate engineer. Review must be limited to aspects of the submittal that are relevant to each field of study. Commenting on aspects of the submittal outside of the reviewer's discipline and expanse of expertise may betrayal the reviewer unnecessarily to additional liability. If the consultant is concerned virtually something related to another discipline this issue should be discussed direct with the representative of that subject field.

It is critical that the store drawings be forwarded to all the relevant disciplines for review, and that the reviews of diverse disciplines be coordinated. Finally, bank check the disquisitional dimensions that determine that the components fit with each other and with the surrounding construction.

two.5 Employ of Supplemental Instructions

Dimensions on shop drawing submittals are sometimes bubbled by the subcontractor or the contractor. If the dimension in question can be obtained from the contract documents, then the reviewer tin simply brand reference to the drawing from which the requested information can exist obtained. If the dimension needs to be verified in the field, this should exist noted. If the requested dimension cannot be obtained from the contract documents or through field verification, and so a Supplemental Teaching should exist issued which specifically addresses the requested information.

It is important to issue a Supplemental Instruction rather than simply marker the information on the shop cartoon. By issuing a Supplemental Instruction the information is fabricated bachelor to the entire squad and additional RFIs from other trades may be avoided. If the additional information is noted on the shop drawing rather than in a Supplemental Instruction, information technology becomes unclear who is responsible for the correctness of the shop drawings and may crusade bug with the work of other trades.

ii.half-dozen Reproduction of Contract Documents as Shop Drawings ‐ Potential Risks

One of the issues of hands reproducing drawings is that drawings prepared past the consultant forming part of the construction documents are sometimes simply reformatted and annotated by the supplier or fabricator, then submitted as shop drawings for review. This arroyo can exist problematic. The supplier or fabricator may not have thoroughly reviewed the contract documents, captured all the necessary information from various sheets, details, or specifications, or detailed their component of the work from first principles to ensure that they have understood the project correctly.

Secondly, any inconsistencies in the contract documents will be copied into the store drawings, missing the opportunity for concluding coordination. For example, the supplier of open up web steel joists may request a CAD file of the structural consultant's roof plan, and resubmit that file every bit a shop drawing with additional annotations. Withal, there may be an inconsistency between the architectural and structural drawings, due to design changes or pending coordination. Site conditions may have resulted in changes from what is shown on the drawings. If the supplier simply copies and resubmits the engineer's roof program, the opportunity for an contained assessment while redrawing the roof plan is lost. This of course does not mean to advise that the fabricator is responsible for terminal drawing coordination. Information technology is nonetheless, an important part of the process helping to ensure that whatsoever coordination or site condition bug are resolved prior to further structure.

Some other instance would be millwork shop drawings. While the construction drawings may testify the intended configurations, they typically exercise non show all of the details of construction covered in the AWMAC specifications. Copying the structure drawings does not improve the state of affairs nor show that the required quality and construction standards will be role of the finished work.

Information technology should exist noted that incorporation of electronic contract documents/drawing files may be necessary for complex designs. The in a higher place noted concerns should be considered when reviewing such submissions.

2.vii Final Opportunity to Coordinate, Clarify and Confirm

There may be resistance on the function of the supplier or contractor to provide shop drawings. It is all the same, where specified or noted, a requirement of the construction contract, and a valuable concluding opportunity to coordinate, to address whatsoever site conditions, and to review adjacent atmospheric condition and how they may impact the installation or performance of the product.

Shop drawing review is an opportunity to collaborate and note whatsoever misinterpretations of the contract documents at a point when the problems tin can be far more hands addressed, rather than at a point in the construction process where the issues may cause construction delays and cost increases.

3 Conclusion

It is in the all-time interest of the entire team to ensure the preparation and review of appropriate shop drawings is earnestly included in the construction process and proceeds in a collaborative and timely mode. Every bit noted in Atul Gawande's "The Checklist Manifesto", a submittals schedule is a form of checklist and is proven to be useful in successfully completing structure projects, all of which are considered circuitous.

iv Additional Information:

1. Checklist CH‐46 "Checklist: Typical Items for Shop Drawing Review" from the Canadian Handbook of Do for Architects (CHOP) is an excellent resources, providing a comprehensive list of potential shop drawing submissions for a big scale project, and the items to be reviewed by the Consultant in the submissions.

2. Electronic Shop Drawings Review This article describes the procedure of shop drawing review prior to the extensive use of electronic documents, and a typical process for electronic markup and issuance.

These manufactures do not correspond OAA policy or guidance simply rather are based on the opinions and experiences of members of the OAA and are prepared for the benefit of the profession at large.

Updated: 2020/Jun/11

Source: https://www.oaa.on.ca/knowledge-and-resources/practice-advisory-knowledge-base/practice-advisory-knowledge-base-detail/The-Shop-Drawing-Review-ProcessA-Brief-Discussion

Posted by: williamsblithad.blogspot.com