Field Measurements on Shop Drawings?

Log Out | Topics | Search Moderators | Register | Edit Profile

Author Message David J. Wyatt, CDT Senior Member Username: david_j_wyatt_cdt Post Number: 271 Registered: 03-2011 Posted on Monday, October 01, 2018 - 09:36 am:    I need the perspective on this from the 4specs thought leaders. Several people in my firm think it is a good idea to require that field measurements be included on the shop drawings. I want to omit this requirement, because I am not going to approve or verify them. Yet, by specifically requiring that they appear on the shop drawings, it presumes that I am accepting some level of responsibility for their accuracy. What do you think? Ronald J. Ray, RA, CCS, CCCA, CSI, SCIP, AIA Senior Member Username: rjray Post Number: 184 Registered: 04-2004 Posted on Monday, October 01, 2018 - 09:58 am:    Hi Dave, Per AIA A201, when one approves/reviews submittals, it is only “for the limited purpose of checking for conformance with information given and the design concept expressed in the Contract Documents.” So, I would see no harm in having field measurements included on shop drawings. However, what purpose does it serve, or what benefit does it provide to the architect? Does an assumption by the Contractor that the Architect reviewed the field measurements provided a basis for a future claim, whether the claim is valid or not? In my opinion, it field measurements reveal an issue that needs to be addressed by the Architect, a request for information, rather than something included on a submittal,. is the more appropriate process for resolving the issue. Chris Grimm, CSI, CCS, SCIP, LEED AP BD+C Senior Member Username: chris_grimm_ccs_scip Post Number: 422 Registered: 02-2014 Posted on Monday, October 01, 2018 - 12:05 pm:    The main idea is take away the excuse "I didn't know it wouldn't fit and now I have to charge extra". The simplest way to do this is to have field measurements as a requirement in the specs but without any associated submittal. Otherwise, what are you going to do when the Owner & Contractor who "knows better than AIA" want to fly without a good general conditions or without any? Chris Grimm, CSI, CCS, SCIP, LEED AP BD+C Senior Member Username: chris_grimm_ccs_scip Post Number: 423 Registered: 02-2014 Posted on Monday, October 01, 2018 - 12:20 pm:    An exception might be if the A/E firm is part of a joint venture or contractor-led team. But otherwise isn't the A/E firm setting themselves up as the babysitter, if the rationale for this requirement is just to make sure the field measurements got done? Then they will have to do the babysitting. Instead it may be better to be a good adviser to the Owner / involved Contractor, and strongly recommend AIA documents -- then whether or not the recommendation is followed does not add burden to the A/E. David J. Wyatt, CDT Senior Member Username: david_j_wyatt_cdt Post Number: 272 Registered: 03-2011 Posted on Monday, October 01, 2018 - 01:16 pm:    Thank you for the important reminder about the limitation of responsibility for shop drawing content. Chris Grimm's analogy to babysitting is apt. You take a step in a direction and find the steps never end. ken hercenberg Senior Member Username: khercenberg Post Number: 1181 Registered: 12-2006 Posted on Monday, October 01, 2018 - 04:03 pm:    David, I prefer to require it as part of the coordination drawings. It's up to you and your clients/consultants whether you want to see coordination drawings. I always list them as Information Submittals if they are to be submitted at all. I know that MEP and structural want to see where the cores in the slab are and how everything gets coordinated so those are usually required Informational Submittals. Otherwise I just require that they be submitted with RFI's to show that the GC has attempted to solve the problem before asking me to. John Bunzick, CCS, CCCA, LEED AP Senior Member Username: bunzick Post Number: 1762 Registered: 03-2002 Posted on Monday, October 01, 2018 - 04:07 pm:    It's really a bigger question because many shop drawings have dimensions that aren't technically "field dimensions" - they are fabrication dimensions for lack of a better term. So the issue extends to almost every custom-fabricated product (and many non-custom products). I often approved "as noted" with one of the notes being "dimensions not verified." One advantage of having field dimensions shown is that it indicates that the fabricator has actually done the field measurements (maybe). Greta Eckhardt Senior Member Username: gretaeckhardt Post Number: 83 Registered: 08-2013 Posted on Monday, October 01, 2018 - 04:43 pm:    Shop drawings offer a valuable opportunity for a dialogue, and indicating field dimensions can be one part of that dialogue. Adding disclaimers about what has or has not been approved would seem to take care of establishing responsibility, and certainly an RFI may be warranted if resolution of a discrepancy is needed.