Topic: Why are Civil plans 17,000 miles from the orgin?

[danallen]

Who said trump? If I ask for something that doesn't work structurally, our engineers tell us and we work it out. My point is that when I design a building, I make sure I know where everything goes.

[danallen]

How does the state plane grid apply to this drawing?
(units = km)
http://autodesk.blogs.com/between_the_lines/2011/02/the-solar-system-drawn-to-scale-in-autocad-dwg-scale-is-everything.html

[sinc]

Well, my general response to THAT is "Are you INSANE...?"

Sorry if that seems harsh...   But REALLY....?  Do you seriously think Solar-System-Scale DWGs have any relevance to Civil plans?

[sinc]

I'm actually very distressed about DanAllen's comments.  I think they reflect poorly on both our professions.

[Krushert]

There are lots of different ways of working, all the work I have done is design focused and as the architect I direct the location of everything in the building that I can see and locate all columns, all walls, all foundations, etc. When I work with a structural engineer who will dimension every structural element, then my job is to review and coordinate all those dimensions. I do that manually by checking prints, highlighting correct/redlining etc. I also check all the steel shop drawings for dimensions as well. Some engineers won't be bothered with updating dimensions and put all that on us.

That sends shivers down my spine...  You think you can trump decisions made by the Structural Engineer...?

Well, I guess as long as you haven't been sued yet....

Are you  saying a structural engineer drives the team aka trumps the architect?

Architects define the shape and location of stuff.  Structural engineers make it stand up.  At my last job, the sturctural engineer works for us so there is a clear chanin of command.  But a good sturctural engineer will push back when things do not work.  Only a knot head of an Architect would not listen to his team.    And I like Danallen would check shop drawing for size and loaction conformace to the design.  A good team would does that.

[danallen]

I'm actually very distressed about DanAllen's comments.  I think they reflect poorly on both our professions.

I'm not understanding what distresses you. But to be clear, while as the architect I do set the design and location of the building and elements within, I do that as part of a team of engineers, designers, the owner, etc. We generally intend to work with, collaborate, take input, ask for recommendations, learn from, etc, all the disciplines on the team, structural, civil, landscape, MEP, lighting, acoustics, you name it. But ultimately I am responsible for coordinating all the work with the architecture, and that usually means reviewing and redlining drawings as part of coordination. I understand there are hacks in every field, but on my projects, for the civil to discount my drawings because "structural dictates" is just wrong.

[danallen]

Do you seriously think Solar-System-Scale DWGs have any relevance to Civil plans?

No, I just posted to talk about how AutoCAD's units can be inches for architectural, and feet for civil, and there is a reason for that in the context of what AutoCAD is capable of. I've never had a problem scaling up civil and survey drawings by 12 when we xref.

[sinc]

I think we may be all saying the same thing, from different viewpoints.

The Architect is the "artist", who drives it all.  But that can be radically affected by the property boundaries and topology, which fall into the domain of the Surveyor.  That data can then reflect back into the Architect's design.  The Structural Engineer must then make sure the Architect's design doesn't fall down.  The Civil Engineer must make sure details like water, sewer, etc. are taken care of.  The Surveyor again becomes responsible when it comes to site layout.  The Builder is then responsible for making sure the end result reflects the Architect's vision.

None of us can do our job without the rest...