Working drawing management
doors and roof lights, respectively, may be grouped
together for easy reference.
As noted above, the complete CI/SfB Table 1 should be
included. (If, of course, the Uniclass coding system is
being used then a complete copy of Uniclass Table G
should be provided, and the individual element
references should be to that system.)
Other consultants’ drawings
Little has been said so far about the drawings of other
consultants and it may be appropriate to comment here
on the problems of liaison and coordination of drawings
produced outside the architect’s immediate control. Part
of the difficulty arises from the fact that neither the
structural engineer nor his M & E counterpart really
produces production drawings in the strict sense of the
term as it has been used here, i.e. as a definitive
instruction to the builder. Each produces traditionally
what is in effect a design drawing, relying on others to
provide supplementary information for construction
purposes. For example, the structural engineer
constantly relies on the architect’s drawings to convey
such fundamental information as chases in upstand
beams for asphalt, throatings in soffits and the required
finish for exposed in situ concrete. The M & E consultant
is more often than not unable to provide information on,
for example, holding down bolts because the position of
these is dependent upon a plant manufacturer who may
not have been selected at the time he considered his
drawing effort complete. So ‘See architect’s detail’
appears on the structural drawing (if we are lucky) and
‘See manufacturer’s shop drawing for setting out of
pockets’is frequently the best that can be achieved by
M & E. Neither is very satisfactory, yet the difficulties in
effecting an improvement are substantial, for both spring
from a historical and artificial fragmentation of the
building process: in the first instance a fragmentation of
professional disciplines; in the second an unnatural
alienation of the designer and the constructor.
Changing roles
Changing the roles of the profession and the industry
may well be desirable, but it is a long-term process
and not the function of this book. The best must be
made of the present situation. It is therefore incumbent
on the architect to acknowledge his management
function as coordinator of the professional team, and
he must accept responsibility for ensuring that the
structural engineer is aware of M & E requirements,
and that M & E are equally aware of structural
constraints. In an imperfect world nobody else is going
to do this.Elemental drawings
Another consideration must be that if we are dealing, as
proposed, with a largely elementalised set of drawings as
an aid to communication between designer and operative,
then it ought to be made possible for a carpenter to build
his formwork from the engineer’s drawings alone, without
the need to refer to drawings prepared by others for
information which may be vital to him.Requirement of a formal meeting
It is beneficial for drawings which are to be prepared by
others to be agreed at a formal meeting, which can be
minuted. Clearly the architect is in a better position if he
has firm proposals and methods worked out to put to
the meeting than if he throws the meeting open
to suggestions from all sides.Design team meeting
Such a meeting should cover the following points:1 Introductions. Individuals in each organisation must
be named as the link men through whom information
is to be channelled. They should be of sufficient
standing to be able to act and make decisions
responsibly and with authority and, if possible, they
should be of comparable standing within their own
organisations. It is unhelpful to the project for aWorking drawing management