Thoughts on General Notes
Thoughts on General Notes
(OP)
I have an architect in my office who continually gripes about us putting "specifications" on our structural drawings. I've worked at several places throughout my career and we've always included a General Notes sheet. I think some people have differing ideas of what is required/what gets included on that sheet but everyone at least includes the IBC required info. I'm curious what other people in the industry do regarding General Notes and if there's any sort of industry standard. Does everyone include a general notes page? What information do you include and what is the rationale behind putting that info on the drawings rather than just including it all in the specs?






RE: Thoughts on General Notes
Rationale behind using it:
1. Some times we don't have a specification book on smaller projects so we like to include specification type language to make up for that fact.
2. The building codes require some of the information (like seismic loads, etc.) to be included on the drawings. See early parts of IBC chapter 16.
3. Even with a specification book, many times the contractors will not really read them - so like to have things emphasized by including notes.
4. In future years, when the spec book is thrown away, its nice to have a documented record of material properties, strengths, misc. details, etc.
5. Sometimes a general note can create a design feature which is much easier than drawing or noting it throughout the sheets - an example: "All exposed ocncrete corners to have a 3/4" chamfer". Saves a lot of detailing time.
Check out Eng-Tips Forum's Policies here:
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies
RE: Thoughts on General Notes
I like to debate structural engineering theory -- a lot. If I challenge you on something, know that I'm doing so because I respect your opinion enough to either change it or adopt it.
RE: Thoughts on General Notes
We have two different architects that we work with that include all of their section details and plan details on letter sized sheets in the spec. That's a nightmare, every time there are missed items both during design and construction due to this really poor way of organizing their drawing package.
RE: Thoughts on General Notes
RE: Thoughts on General Notes
RE: Thoughts on General Notes
The general notes have materials, loadings, seismic information, etc. on them. I've got to admit, when I look at an old project, I'm much more likely to get drawings than drawings and specifications. So it's easier to recreate the project with a general notes sheet.
RE: Thoughts on General Notes
That said, I wouldn't do away with the specifications. A good set of specifications can save you when the contractor doesn't do something and claims it's the designer's fault because it's not shown anywhere. There's a lot of information in specifications that would be too cumbersome to include in drawings notes. Like QC requirements, tolerances, procedures for construction like masonry grouting, administrative procedures like substitution requests, detailed requirements for shop drawings and delegated designs, etc. If it's in the spec and the contractor has claimed/certified they've followed it, there's not a whole lot they can argue when you call them on something. I've avoided a fair amount of hassle with good specifications.
RE: Thoughts on General Notes
Put items on the drawing you need to happen to ensure project success or want to be recorded for the life of the project. Assume this is the only stuff that the contractor will read. Reference specification to limit clutter on less important items (QA/QC for example) but only if you absolutely cannot incorporate it into the drawings directly.
Put items in the specification to provide benchmarks of what needs to be done to avoid disputes (i.e. all the stuff you point at when the contractors asks "where does it say we need to do that?!"). Don't specify anything that doesn't need to be specified.
Above all, ensure specifications and drawing notes are actually relevant to the project and not just blindly copied notes from some masterspec document.
Professional Engineer (ME, NH, MA) Structural Engineer (IL)
American Concrete Industries
https://www.facebook.com/AmericanConcrete/
RE: Thoughts on General Notes
RE: Thoughts on General Notes
Doth I hear the angst of someone occasionally involved in delegated engineering? Been/am there.
"Precaster shall do insanely detailed diaphragm design for the incomplete lateral loads provided. And it shall satisfy me entirely even though I clearly don't know the first thing about diaphragm design myself."
"Precast plank to be designed such that all long term deflection takes place prior to erection". That's verbatim and is my favorite to date. Perhaps I could load the plank with sand bags out in the yard to match the SDL + sustained live load, leave it sit for nine months, and then race them out to site real fast.
In slight defense of our contractor friends, I can't really read specs either, especially if they're not my discipline. They're insanely tedious. I once had to compare two slightly different versions of the same spec package in order to reconcile them contractually where a terrible QC error had occurred. I had to enlist the help of a younger fellow who could handle it without going nuts. What IS the appropriate VOC content to be used in the primer applied to the second claw of a sloth's foot when the ambient temperature is less than 20C? Sometimes I guess at bizarre stuff I don't know the answer to just to keep moving / tempt fate. Never had a single one come back to bite me.
I like to debate structural engineering theory -- a lot. If I challenge you on something, know that I'm doing so because I respect your opinion enough to either change it or adopt it.
RE: Thoughts on General Notes
RE: Thoughts on General Notes
I'd love to trade delegated precast engineering gripes over a beer with you one day.
Some of my favorite:
"Complete calculations shall be submitted and reviewed where the reviewer will be dig to find even the slightest discrepancy between the shop drawings and your calculations so that we can justify our review work."
"The sand/salt storage building shall be built to the following specification..." followed by a few hundred spec pages relating to said sand/salt storage structure. We were supplying an underground electrical vault.
To defend the spec writers, a good specification can be really nice. I love the MaineDOT project specifications and plans. It is very rare that I get caught unaware as the standard specifications cover most everything and thus once you've learned the standard spec it's fairly easy to parse the project specific specs. It makes our submittals to MaineDOT projects really smooth where we know exactly what to expect each and every time we bid a precast component for the state. I'd much rather have a well written spec than a poorly written spec, regardless of which side of the project I'm on.
The biggest benefit I've found to reading specs is if things are lumped together. For example, if you need to find all the steel fabrication requirements and they're in one section only then it's much easier to get a complete understanding of the requirements. Concrete work sucks because almost always reinforcement requirements are separate from concrete material requirements which are separate from precast and cast-in-place requirements... and so on.
Oh and for the love of toast; please make your PDF copies of your specifications searchable! It's 2018, why is your spec a bunch of scanned pages that can't be searched even via OCR?
Star for the whole reply but this alone would have been deserving enough. Thanks for the chuckle.
Professional Engineer (ME, NH, MA) Structural Engineer (IL)
American Concrete Industries
https://www.facebook.com/AmericanConcrete/
RE: Thoughts on General Notes
Kootk, you have quite a knack for entertaining us -- or at least expressing our frustrations -- in addition to your considerable technical knowledge.
Regarding this:
I agree and view that issue as a net negative to our profession. Supposedly Abraham Lincoln wrote, "If I had more time I'd write you a shorter letter." That's probably apocryphal but the point is that it takes time to produce something that is elegant or concise. As for vomiting out page after page of "Contractor shalt/shalt not...", well, unfortunately that can be done with a press of a button in this computerized age.
I have had occasion to review old specifications and the difference between them and what we often see now was very noticeably. With the old specs I could actually read and understand the majority of them, even across disciplines. I suspect something about having to actually type them out on a typewriter made part of the difference.
And, unfortunately, in my opinion this extends beyond just specs. When structural members can be designed with the press of a button the understanding of the mechanics of the structural system sometimes suffers. Likewise, when drawings are made the same way they can become quite cluttered and/or poorly thought out.
And by the way, as for your example of the silly specification for the precast deflection, as I'm sure you're well aware, the guy specifying it had no idea what he was saying and therefore no way of checking up on it. So you could have "gotten away" with almost anything. But who wins in such a scenario?
RE: Thoughts on General Notes
Much to my surprise, it turns out that I do. I've found a back door to the EOR client store. Goes like this:
1) Busy, inexperienced EOR puts out nonsensical crap.
2) Without discussing it overtly, contractor and I bond over how bad EOR drawings/specs are.
3) I take good care of my new contractor friend as far as my scope (precast) goes and help to steer things towards project success with a firm hand.
4) Contractor says "we've got this new project coming up that needs EOR and we're not happy with these guys. Can we recommend you?".
And voila! There's a shark in the water circling weak EOR's like wounded tuna. And thy name be KootK, your lowly delegated engineer!
I like to debate structural engineering theory -- a lot. If I challenge you on something, know that I'm doing so because I respect your opinion enough to either change it or adopt it.
RE: Thoughts on General Notes
This will happen. It's been on my long range todo list for some time. I've got business in the NE that will see me pay that area a visit eventually.
I like to debate structural engineering theory -- a lot. If I challenge you on something, know that I'm doing so because I respect your opinion enough to either change it or adopt it.
RE: Thoughts on General Notes
Hit me up when you do. I've got an airplane I can use and a good list of New England beers I want to try.
Professional Engineer (ME, NH, MA) Structural Engineer (IL)
American Concrete Industries
https://www.facebook.com/AmericanConcrete/
RE: Thoughts on General Notes
RE: Thoughts on General Notes
The person I think it helps the most is the steel fabricator. They almost never see/look at the project specs in my experience.
RE: Thoughts on General Notes
That's how you get canwest's bleachers.
My old boss would pride himself on getting a complicated project streamlined enough that it could all be done with the drawings and general notes; no specs. Sometimes I felt he stretched this a little far but we never had any issues that I recall and it was definitely a boon to the contractor.
Professional Engineer (ME, NH, MA) Structural Engineer (IL)
American Concrete Industries
https://www.facebook.com/AmericanConcrete/
RE: Thoughts on General Notes
I knew what you were getting at Archie. Was just having a little fun with it around the margins. And I agree completely, the benefit to society of weak, irrelevant, uncoordinated specifications is net negative. Even in the scenario that I described, it's my gain weighed against losses for the EOR, contractor, owner, and a society at large that needs its resources deployed wisely. But alas, I wax philosophical yet again...
I like to debate structural engineering theory -- a lot. If I challenge you on something, know that I'm doing so because I respect your opinion enough to either change it or adopt it.
RE: Thoughts on General Notes
So many QC issues are addressed in codes (at this point) you can generally cover yourself by just referencing them (and the inspection requirements) in many instances.
RE: Thoughts on General Notes
One trap is to not make clear in the Contract which takes preference, the Drawings or Specifications, for there will inevitably be conflicts. My choice is Drawings.
RE: Thoughts on General Notes
Interesting. I didn't even know that this was an option. In my region, our insurers teach us that precedence goes: specs --> gen notes --> drawings and details. Like you, I'd really prefer that reversed. Although, I suppose that there's no reason one can't re-specify the order of precedence. It's all just words and decisions after all. People stuff. No laws of nature being violated.
I like to debate structural engineering theory -- a lot. If I challenge you on something, know that I'm doing so because I respect your opinion enough to either change it or adopt it.
RE: Thoughts on General Notes
RE: Thoughts on General Notes
RE: Thoughts on General Notes
RE: Thoughts on General Notes
RE: Thoughts on General Notes
Contractually, in my area, yes. Hard to imagine actually getting burned on that though. Agree with UNO.
I like to debate structural engineering theory -- a lot. If I challenge you on something, know that I'm doing so because I respect your opinion enough to either change it or adopt it.
RE: Thoughts on General Notes
RE: Thoughts on General Notes
RE: Thoughts on General Notes
I tend to think of the notes filling in the gaps in codes and standard specifications. To this end we used to have up to 10 notes sheets covering all sorts of things. Generally with a view to avoidance of past problems by pointing out specific issues and requirements.
Our notes always used to start with 'refer to our specifications for x, Y, z, etc, and these points were wholly covered in the specification. Remainder of notes covered items more specific to interpretation of the drawings and standard detailing requirements, etc. The point is there was a clear indication that the specifications and drawings needed to be read in conjunction with one another.
Also helps to explain this expectation to the contractor so they don't miss things. Everyone wants to review shop drawings for example that are right first time for example and not have to regurgitate every spec clause they should have read. Facilitate them to make your job and the project go much easier.
RE: Thoughts on General Notes
RE: Thoughts on General Notes
"All welds shall be first class workmanship and meet the requirements of the welding and cutting code for buildings."
Best regards - Al
RE: Thoughts on General Notes
Of course, in an ideal world. Safety must however come first in the real world where mistakes are made. It's hardly one-way traffic in terms of cost either. In an ideal world, all contractor mistakes would be fixed but, in the real world, there are non-conformance reports which are generally requests for dispensation that benefit nobody except the contractor.
Seems analogous to the general contract conditions taking precedence over special conditions. Never seen lawyers accept that...
RE: Thoughts on General Notes
This related thread popped up in my googling: Link
I like to debate structural engineering theory -- a lot. If I challenge you on something, know that I'm doing so because I respect your opinion enough to either change it or adopt it.
RE: Thoughts on General Notes
If something's on the drawing there's at least some chance someone will read it.
RE: Thoughts on General Notes
I wonder do surgeons have notes from the head consultant which read "the surgeon shall maintain the patient in an alive condition"
RE: Thoughts on General Notes
Dik
RE: Thoughts on General Notes