HUnewearl_Meira
Mar 9, 2007, 01:54 PM
For much of my professional life, I've found Architects to be my bane. As a Civil Draftsman, I was a constant witness to thoughtless design mistakes; such as mirroring a gated entry to gain landscaping space on a particular side of it, to the end result that people entering the complex would have to reach out of their passenger-side window to enter their entry code. Another incident involved an architect repeated failing to provide a design for a Home Depot parking lot that meets that particular city's parking-to-building space ratio, despite us providing him with several suggested plans that would each do the job.
This rant isn't about that, though. I'm not a Civil Draftsman, anymore. Now, I work with styrofoam, manufacturing Architectural Facing, and I'm still getting screwed up by Architects' short-sightedness.
I have to draw a shape that is meant to be cut from foam. The shape is coming from the details in a set of Architectural plans. It's been faxed, so I can't scale it (faxes smoosh their contents around, and they're also horribly low resolution and high contrast, making it impossible to get an accurate measurement), and while some of the dimensions are usefull, it has otherwise been made quite clear that the person responsible for these drawings has absolutely no concept of how these shapes are supposed to go from his plans to the face of the building. None.
The trouble is, that they want this thing to match the underside of an outcropping on a parapet wall, but they have exactly failed to provide a dimension of the outcropping that the piece is depicted under. The piece includes two circular portions, at the top, a projection with a two and a half inch radius which joins with a large circular piece that's been removed from the shape beneath it.
I'm not sure why they felt it was necessary to include a vertical dimension and a radial dimension for the 5" tall circle at the top. The vertical dimension would have been plenty sufficient for the purpose. What really bothers me though, is that they provided me with a radial dimension for the lower circular portion, a vertical dimension, but not a horizontal dimension. I don't even need a radial dimension for this portion of the shape. It is far more helpful to have both vertical and horizontal dimensions. As it stands, I have no idea whatsoever, what portion of the circle that this arc comes from, because neither of the end points line up with anything. Not having an overall dimension, or at least a dimension of the outcropping this thing is meant to fit, I am left with nothing but to blindly stab at a wild guess.
Why, oh WHY can you not learn to dimension things properly, Architects? How am I meant to reproduce this shape for the contractor building your design, when you don't provide the proper information? Why do you make it a puzzle for me to solve, instead of simply providing useful information instead of useless information?
http://www.pso-world.com/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/icon_disapprove.gif
This rant isn't about that, though. I'm not a Civil Draftsman, anymore. Now, I work with styrofoam, manufacturing Architectural Facing, and I'm still getting screwed up by Architects' short-sightedness.
I have to draw a shape that is meant to be cut from foam. The shape is coming from the details in a set of Architectural plans. It's been faxed, so I can't scale it (faxes smoosh their contents around, and they're also horribly low resolution and high contrast, making it impossible to get an accurate measurement), and while some of the dimensions are usefull, it has otherwise been made quite clear that the person responsible for these drawings has absolutely no concept of how these shapes are supposed to go from his plans to the face of the building. None.
The trouble is, that they want this thing to match the underside of an outcropping on a parapet wall, but they have exactly failed to provide a dimension of the outcropping that the piece is depicted under. The piece includes two circular portions, at the top, a projection with a two and a half inch radius which joins with a large circular piece that's been removed from the shape beneath it.
I'm not sure why they felt it was necessary to include a vertical dimension and a radial dimension for the 5" tall circle at the top. The vertical dimension would have been plenty sufficient for the purpose. What really bothers me though, is that they provided me with a radial dimension for the lower circular portion, a vertical dimension, but not a horizontal dimension. I don't even need a radial dimension for this portion of the shape. It is far more helpful to have both vertical and horizontal dimensions. As it stands, I have no idea whatsoever, what portion of the circle that this arc comes from, because neither of the end points line up with anything. Not having an overall dimension, or at least a dimension of the outcropping this thing is meant to fit, I am left with nothing but to blindly stab at a wild guess.
Why, oh WHY can you not learn to dimension things properly, Architects? How am I meant to reproduce this shape for the contractor building your design, when you don't provide the proper information? Why do you make it a puzzle for me to solve, instead of simply providing useful information instead of useless information?
http://www.pso-world.com/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/icon_disapprove.gif