Shop Drawings by Architects??

[mjuros]

I have a couple of questions for Architects and Contractors practicing outside of the US.
Do Architects ever create Shop Drawings as an additional deliverable to a standard contract for Design Services?
If so, of what? Which CSI Divisions:Casework, Millwork, Curtain wall, Furniture, Stone?
Are shop drawing deliverables left out in any Geos during construction administration?

Very curious how the rest of the world deliver projects.

MJ

[BWG]

Shop drawings are and should be created by the suppliers, manufactures, fabricators and installers. If the architect is producing shop drawings, then he is supplying a product of some sort for the actual construction or actually doing the work as a subcontractor. I would believe this would be vary rare for architects to do shop drawings of any sort, not to mention that the insurance companies would hate you for it.

[patricks]

That is correct, because suppliers and manufacturers always know more about their own specific products than architects who specify those products do. I know I wouldn't trust myself to do shop drawings on most things, because I don't know the specific details that are needed on most things to make them work.

Now I have had a couple of occasions where I detailed out some things so exactly, like some custom glass and steel canopies, that the supplier just scanned and placed my details on his shop drawing sheet, in addition to some of his own drawings and details.

But still, I would not want to be the one doing shop drawings.

[Scott D Davis]

There is discussion in the industry (and Phil Bernstein talks about it on the Vision Tour) that we as Architects are heading towards a new age in project delivery to contractors. This new delivery includes the Architect and their consultants doing the 'design' in model format, and then the contractors producing the 'construction' drawings through a shop drawing process. The Architect submits a design, the Contractor, with his construction expertise, figures out how to put it together, and the shop drawings allows the Architect to approve whether or not the construction drawings meet the design intent.

Sounds good to me! I would have no problem handing off a Design Development set and being done with it!

[mjuros]

I'm all for a reduction in the production load but am reluctant to allow contractor and subs so much design detailing control. Beauty is in the details and we still need to finish the model or communicate our intent with the 1-1/2" details. Will DD ever be enough info to get it right? If manufacturers empower our models and design process with their coordinated up to date content then the model will be more accurate earlier in the process. But to simply hand off the set and hope for the best is a nutty proposition. We will then spend a lot of time (and have built many projects with ****** docs) during CA finishing the details in a trailer with field engineers. We will have to have a war chest of fee for this phase to staff up. I think we need more complete, better coordinated working drawings and hopefully Revit will allow us to get there and produce fine examples of Architecture. I'm stepping off my soap box now.

[Scott D Davis]

I don't think you simply hand off the set and hope for the best. It's the same with ANY shop drawing process. The 'design' is conveyed in such a way so the details are shown of how it should look, and then the shop drawings show how to build it to achieve that look. The shop drawings are reviewed and approved (or rejected) by the architect, so there is plenty of opportunity to make sure that the details are going to be built in the way you expect them to look.

[mjuros]

What's also distressing is how contractors are elbowing their way into our design realm.
They are currently contracting and selling services to detail and design the DD level Architectural model and basically taking fee away from the Architect. Where would it stop? Some firms rely on that fee to bridge between marketing and new projects. A place to shift staff to, to learn the detailing.Does anyone else see this as a potential education / business cash flow issue? On the other hand, contractors would be doing the CD's and we could have more FUN designing schematic projects, doing the stuff we enjoy the most. Is this a regression back to when Master Builders built amazing stuff from very little information, but relied on shop drawings to deliver the design intent. I wonder what is the future with BIM?

[PeterJ]

I have no interest in producing rods of a reception desk, however, I may have very strong feelings about how it looks so I may produce an annotated 1:20 elevation and a 1:50 detail of a veneer lip, but how it looks behind the face is the domain of the contractors subs. They meet whatever critical dimensions and spec that I give them and we stop there.

The work I do should generate fees and should balance the load between moving onto the next bit of fun stuff, if that's how you see it, and controlling the finished quality of projects. Of course making sure it looks the way I want ought to be part of the fuin stuff too in an ideal world.

[BWG]

What's also distressing is how contractors are elbowing their way into our design realm.
They are currently contracting and selling services to detail and design the DD level Architectural model and basically taking fee away from the Architect. Where would it stop? Some firms rely on that fee to bridge between marketing and new projects. A place to shift staff to, to learn the detailing.Does anyone else see this as a potential education / business cash flow issue? On the other hand, contractors would be doing the CD's and we could have more FUN designing schematic projects, doing the stuff we enjoy the most. Is this a regression back to when Master Builders built amazing stuff from very little information, but relied on shop drawings to deliver the design intent. I wonder what is the future with BIM?


In the residential side of our practice, the most money I have made is when someone just comes in wanting floor plans only. It pays about $200 an hour, so if someone else wants the CD portion, I could probably be OK with that as long as I got the CD model back to check things over. However, if we are not doing CDs, then what does that mean for a licensure and related liabilities?

[rod.74246]

I think it really is a dangerous idea to start to lose control of the CD sections of a Project. No matter what happens it is the "Architect" who cops the blame for all the shortfalls of the eventual outcome of the Project. Regardless of where the Architects involvement stops. Personally i think we should be heading in the opposite direction and getting more involved in the construction phase of things and getting back to a traditional Architecture role. My most satisfactory projects have always been handled in the traditional sense where our involvement stops once the building is complete, occupied and defects liability is at an end.

[Martin P]

I have a couple of questions for Architects and Contractors practicing outside of the US.
Do Architects ever create Shop Drawings as an additional deliverable to a standard contract for Design Services?
If so, of what? Which CSI Divisions:Casework, Millwork, Curtain wall, Furniture, Stone?
Are shop drawing deliverables left out in any Geos during construction administration?

Very curious how the rest of the world deliver projects.

MJ

An associate at this firm did on a fairly recent job do all the stonework drawings, cills, mulions, lintols etc etc - all the stone. He's a very knowledgable guy,he can tend to go above and beyond the call of duty on drawings at times, but produces superb sets of drawings complete in every way...

For more "off the shelf" type of things - ie curtain walling etc, we just send the suppliers our drawings and get them to do it. We do this for kitchens and so on too - but if its bespoke such as this stone, we would usually do the drawings. -

I did a private job recently that had a lot of stone, but I agreed with the client prior to starting that I would not be detailing any of it, and she would sit with the stone manufacturers and chop and change the profiles etc!! I didnt fancy getting into that at all...

I have attached a couple of the many,many details that were done for that job....

[BWG]

An associate at this firm did on a fairly recent job do all the stonework drawings, cills, mulions, lintols etc etc - all the stone. He's a very knowledgable guy,he can tend to go above and beyond the call of duty on drawings at times, but produces superb sets of drawings complete in every way...

For more "off the shelf" type of things - ie curtain walling etc, we just send the suppliers our drawings and get them to do it. We do this for kitchens and so on too - but if its bespoke such as this stone, we would usually do the drawings. -

I did a private job recently that had a lot of stone, but I agreed with the client prior to starting that I would not be detailing any of it, and she would sit with the stone manufacturers and chop and change the profiles etc!! I didnt fancy getting into that at all...

I have attached a couple of the many,many details that were done for that job....

Great until there is a mistake, then you might be buying yourself a lot of cast stone for the ol' homestead.

[David Conant]

Thanks for your commentery on this. We understand that in the US and Canada, very few architects are producing shop drawings. We are interested in markets or countries where architects or engineers are typically responsible for this level of representation, and some feedback on exactly what they provide. Graphic examples are very helpful as well since one person's definition of a "shop drawing" may differ quite significantly from another's.

[Martin P]

I agree completely. In my opinion this was over the top and not our area of expertise - for example do we know how large/small they can cut, how large is safe to work with before snapping etc etc.... Not something I would do myself - leave it to the experts who do it every day.

The person who produced these drawings basically didnt want to go on to another job if the truth be told - you know what its like when you get your teeth into a project it can be hard to let it finish - particularly if all you get at the end is a new less interesting project to do..... that if you wait just a little longer it will pass on to somebody else ;) - (thats usually me)

BUT the general opinion here is that if we give that amount of detail, we know its right. The stone guy isnt going to know much about windows, or timber frames etc etc...

[MikeJarosz]

Another point: Individual manufacturers know what tooling they have and therefore what they can and cannot manufacture. One can't do 1" post forming,, another one has to subcontract the chrome plating, etc etc. Their shop drawings reflect all this.

By the way, nice name Mike. Are we related?

[aaronrumple]

Thanks for your commentery on this. We understand that in the US and Canada, very few architects are producing shop drawings. We are interested in markets or countries where architects or engineers are typically responsible for this level of representation, and some feedback on exactly what they provide. Graphic examples are very helpful as well since one person's definition of a "shop drawing" may differ quite significantly from another's.
Could you fix groups for us first, please? ;-)

[bclarch]

Think of all of the divisions and subdivisions in the CSI master format. Every aspect of the built world has its own subtleties and specialized knowledge. It would be difficult to conceive of anyone mastering it all. Think of doctors. Does anyone really expect his primary physician to have mastered all of the medical sub-specialties, (cardiology, podiatry, endocrinology, radiology, dentistry, psychiatry, gastroenterology, opthalmology, etc. etc. etc.)? No. His or her purpose is to have sufficient knowledge to provide the majority of your care and also to know when to turn to a specialist.

There is also the time factor. Having subs and suppliers do shop drawings shortens the project time. If one person (or project team) has to do it all it then it becomes a more linear process of completing Item A, then Item B, then Item C, etc. If a general contractor takes a set of drawings and farms it out to his subs and manufacturers then Items A through Z can be worked on simultaneously. In addition to shortening the process it provides the advantage of having a whole group of specialists looking at the project in detail which might help catch any errors and omissions.

[Brian Myers]

There is discussion in the industry (and Phil Bernstein talks about it on the Vision Tour) that we as Architects are heading towards a new age in project delivery to contractors. ... The Architect submits a design, the Contractor, with his construction expertise, figures out how to put it together, and the shop drawings allows the Architect to approve whether or not the construction drawings meet the design intent.


There is a problem with Bernstein's vision from the Architect's perspective. Actually, I suppose not from the Architect's perspective, but from the clients perspective which bring problems to the architectural OFFICE of today. The problem is cost.

Example: If I'm buying a structure then I would expect the architect to do the virtual model and then the contractor to produce the product as the architect designed it just as Bernstein described. But what happens in billing? Will the architect charging high dollar be inspecting the product before it is constructed? Will it be his draftsman charged out at half the cost? Do I REALLY want the Architect involved any more than I have to at his high price for non-structural issues?

Do the manufacturers have in-house architects that are paid a flat rate and are simply included in the cost of the manufacturing of the product?

Perhaps a middle-man (supplier, reseller, etc. example: Home Depot) has an architect simply on staff and pushes the product he believes most fits the spirit of the design?

In short: Yes, an architect will provide the designs in a virtual model for a contractor to take from there. But I believe one of two futures are more likely than the Architect sitting in the Architectural office as an independent contrator working directly for a client.

1. The Contractor will inspect the work and the Architect will be an employee to the Contractor (design-build). The Architect will then work with the client while being aware of the Contractor's likes and needs to produce a product the client likes and the contractor can produce. This will limit the Architect's direct role in the review process and perhaps keep the cost down on this stage of the project and aid in turn-around time.

2. The middleman will have architects on-staff to design and produce plans per the vision of the client. This means the Architect works for the middle man on the client's behalf. In the case of a giant home store they could keep costs down and charge out the Architect nearly at cost in order to supply the project with the majority of the materials involved.

In both these cases, the Architectural office as we know it really isn't needed. Now some projects will always require architectural firms to manage their projects. But the environment of the future will require this much less as the design and manufacturing process becomes more computerized and automated. In the end, Contractors and material suppliers will control these projects even more than they do today and while the Architect's role will stay basically the same, the way they work and charge out their hours may greatly change.

This may sound bad for design, but many Architects would enjoy it more! Why? Being employed by a contractor or much better yet, "middleman" can yield a steady salary, constant work load, good benefits and other perks harder to come by with architectural firms or in starting your own practice. Of course, advancement opportunities will not be as many, but for many people advancement isn't as important as a good job with good benefits.

So really in short: Bernstein and everyone here that supports this future is correct, but we must not overlook what BIM and this technology will enable us to do. No longer will a central "design team" be a necessity in most cases with one "Master Builder" controlling it all. This will be a true team effort where the architect simply plays a part in the process unless he is given a larger role by one of the major financial players in this project.