Thoughts on General Notes 1

[Struct1206]

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?

 

[JAE]

We use a Gen Notes page....usually a full sheet of 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

 

[KootK]

I'm heavy on the general notes sheets. I'd put everything there and not have specifications if I could. The practice does require careful coordination with the book spec to avoid conflicts though. From a process standpoint, as a sub-consultant, I really don't enjoy specifications. I feel as though I often don't exert enough control over them and I dislike hemorrhaging time when folks want my specs reformatted to match their stuff. I did a project last summer where the architect was using a spiffy database program to cook up a unified spec. Using my spec wasn't an option because it would mess up the coordinated checkbox thing they had going on with the software. They couldn't even export me a word file to edit. I had to mark it up in bluebeam without changing any of the base structure. 'Twas a nightmare.

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.

 

[jayrod12]

General notes all the way. If I never had to prepare another specification the rest of my career I'd retire a happy man. Similar to JAE's comment, rarely does the contractor and even more rare his sub-contractor ever read the specifications. But they finally are learning they better damn well read the 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.

 

[Struct1206]

The first firm that I worked at was a structural only consulting firm and they refused to do specs. They simply told the architects that they would include all necessary information on their drawings and that was that. We listed material requirements and submittal info in the general notes and let it go at that. I now work at a full service A/E firm and we almost always have a spec book that goes out with all our projects. My personal preference is to edit the spec book to have it read "as noted" or "as indicated" in as many places as possible. That way I can keep the specs pretty standard and just change my general notes as required on a job by job basis. For example, I don't like having to go to the specs to edit my deck type, gage, fasteners and fastener spacing.

 

[Archie264]

Echoing what others have said, years ago I had a contractor tell me that spec books simply got thrown behind the seat of his pickup truck, unread. That was in the days when pickups had bench seat and did not have extended cabs. In other words, it got put in a holding bin before it was thrown away. I'm not saying that's right, I'm just saying that it might be reality. Further, JAE's point about tracking down the spec book in future years is an astute one.

 

[JedClampett]

I've been forced to repeat much of the book specification information on my general notes. The city plan reviewers tell me they will not look at specifications. Flat out refused. I tell them that information is in the specifications (i.e. requirements for PEMB suppliers to submit calculations), and they make me put it on the drawings. It's not a negotiation. It's do it their way, or no permit. I've heard this more than once. Our company is very specifications oriented, so we still have to do them. We now have fill in the blank general notes, too.
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.

 

[MrHershey]

I'll go ahead and throw everything in the specifications as long as the contractor agrees to read them. I mean actually read them, not flip through them for ten seconds and claim they've read them.

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.

 

[TehMightyEngineer]

My thoughts:

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/

 

[Struct1206]

I agree that having some of the information on the drawings for situations in the future where the drawings exist but the specs are long gone. I do a fair amount of work on existing structures and having a set of the original drawings with design loads on them is about the best thing you can hope for. However, when we are talking about the contractors tossing out the spec book, does it seem like maybe we are enabling them by putting information on the drawings?

 

[KootK]

Above all, ensure specifications and drawing notes are actually relevant to the project and not just blindly copied notes from some masterspec document.

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.

I mean actually read them, not flip through them for ten seconds and claim they've read them.

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.

 

[canwesteng]

Precast is a dangerous game - not me but someone designed precast bleachers for an arena here, with the stairs in the middle of the precast span. Of course the camber in the span varied quite a bit from bleacher to bleacher, and there was no grout allowance on the steps to even things out. I suppose a spec stating "precast sections to be perfectly level" would have surely sorted that out /s...

 

[TehMightyEngineer]

Doth I hear the angst of someone occasionally involved in delegated engineering? Been/am there.

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.

In slight defense of our contractor friends, I can't really read specs either, especially if they're not my discipline.

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?

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?

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/

 

[Archie264]

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?

Kootk, you have quite a knack for entertaining us -- or at least expressing our frustrations -- in addition to your considerable technical knowledge.

Regarding this:

They're insanely tedious.

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?

 

[KootK]

But who wins in such a scenario?

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.

 

[KootK]

I'd love to trade delegated precast engineering gripes over a beer with you one day.

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.

 

[TehMightyEngineer]

KootK's not wrong. I've seen that play out as well and am in the process of trying to feast on some of these "wounded tunas".

I've got business in the NE that will see me pay that area a visit eventually.

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/

 

[Archie264]

Well, Kootk, what you've described is a very constructive solution and you're right to get your name out there as a problem solver. I had in mind a less capable engineer coming up with a poor design with no one to back-check him. I guess the market would bear that out at some point but hopefully without anyone getting hurt in the process.

 

[WARose]

I've done a bunch of jobs lately where there are no specs.....just the general notes. But my general notes are thorough enough (and reference enough code) where it typically is no issue.

The person I think it helps the most is the steel fabricator. They almost never see/look at the project specs in my experience.

 

[TehMightyEngineer]

I had in mind a less capable engineer coming up with a poor design with no one to back-check him.

That's how you get canwest's bleachers.

've done a bunch of jobs lately where there are no specs.....just the general notes.

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/