drawing standards
drawing standards
(OP)
Hi All,
I have come across two drawing standards for structural engineering plans.
1. For a framing plan the section is cut just below the floor looking up. That way, all the supporting beams are shown as solid lines and load bearing walls and their openings are shown clearly
2. For the same plan the section is cut above the floor looking down. That way the supporting beams and walls are shown as dashed lines.
I've tried using the former standard since it shows the supports more clearly and openings in load bearing walls are not lost. Where I work, there are more British/European trained architects who have an extremely hard time following through this standard.
Is one standard more North American while the other more European? Just want to know your thoughts on these.
Thanks
I have come across two drawing standards for structural engineering plans.
1. For a framing plan the section is cut just below the floor looking up. That way, all the supporting beams are shown as solid lines and load bearing walls and their openings are shown clearly
2. For the same plan the section is cut above the floor looking down. That way the supporting beams and walls are shown as dashed lines.
I've tried using the former standard since it shows the supports more clearly and openings in load bearing walls are not lost. Where I work, there are more British/European trained architects who have an extremely hard time following through this standard.
Is one standard more North American while the other more European? Just want to know your thoughts on these.
Thanks






RE: drawing standards
I think I'd get pretty annoyed trying to work with a plan from the underside of the floor. You look down when you're reading drawings, so it seems more intuitive to have the plan views arranged as though you are looking down on the structure.
RE: drawing standards
Garth Dreger PE - AZ Phoenix area
As EOR's we should take the responsibility to design our structures to support the components we allow in our design per that industry standards.
RE: drawing standards
Dik
RE: drawing standards
RE: drawing standards
The most common conventions for me follows the construction type being used:
Steel frame - solid line for framing elements and deck edge, looking down
Concrete (masonry similar)- dotted line for beams/supports below floor, solid line for elements above floor, looking down
Light wood frame - dotted line for bearing walls below (usually I omit non-bearing partitions), solid line for floor framing and walls above, looking down.
Cut lines for the view typically at 3'to 4' above floor plane. Also occasionally I'll use a "poche" in the cut elements to bring some additional clarity or differentiation to what is being described.
regards,
Michel
RE: drawing standards
Thanks for the responses.
I suppose the option 1 can be confusing since if I label a drawing "first floor framing plan" I show the ground floor walls and columns because that is the floor which supports it.
RE: drawing standards
RE: drawing standards
At one point, early in my career, I changed jobs and found that the drafters were not used to my system, so they resisted. For concrete jobs, we agreed to call them "forming plans" instead of "framing plans" so that you were looking at the form lines for the beams or walls on the floor in question.
For structural steel, it seems that a solid line is used to represent a steel beam on the framing plan. If it is the fifth floor framing plan, the solid line represents the steel beam on the fifth floor. On that point, everyone seems to be in agreement.
BA
RE: drawing standards
RE: drawing standards
It seems some people show solid lines for structural steel. Don't you then show what supports this beam? What if it is a wall that doesn't continue through the floor above. Do you still show the beams solid but the walls hidden?
Hokie....the plans are actually drawn from the top....the term "looking up" only has to do with the drawing convention that the lines are drawn solid.
RE: drawing standards
It's just how I learned to think in 3D and it works for me - kinda like 3D chess.
Mike McCann
MMC Engineering
http://mmcengineering.tripod.com
RE: drawing standards
As far as what is shown solid, dashed, shaded, cross-hatched, etc., that should be defined in a legend on the drawing.
RE: drawing standards
Mike McCann
MMC Engineering
http://mmcengineering.tripod.com
RE: drawing standards
I suppose "looking up" is not clear. The main question is whether the supporting elements are shown as solid (option 1) or hidden (option 2). Mike's way of describing it is probably clearer. Diaphragm not present so beams, columns and walls are shown as solid lines (Option 1).
RE: drawing standards
M.S. Structural Engineering
Licensed Structural Engineer and Licensed Professional Engineer (Illinois)
RE: drawing standards
RE: drawing standards
RE: drawing standards
Why would you do that? The engineer is the expert on how to present his design, not the client or the inspector.
RE: drawing standards
Mike McCann
MMC Engineering
http://mmcengineering.tripod.com
RE: drawing standards
Michael.
Timing has a lot to do with the outcome of a rain dance.
RE: drawing standards
I find option 1 fairly straightforward however I tend to have to explain it too often since most people I've dealt with are not familiar with it.
I'll try to switch to option 2 for concrete structures since it seems to be more widely used and will stick with option 1 for steel/timber framed structures.