Design Program Documentation

[WesternJeb]

Just curious what others practice is.. When we design structures using Risa, Enercalc, Tedds, etc., are you all printing out design reports? Up until this point that hasn't been something I have typically done but I am not quite sure what all is required from the legal standpoint. Is having just out stock design files as a reference enough to hold up legally and as a legal reference?

I usually provide some notes that explaining design intents and notes in our folder with the design files with the intent that those design files are used in addition to my notes, but rarely do I print out design reports directly from those design files. what is your standard practice?

 

[StrEng007]

From my company's point of view, anything that is a repeat method should have a stock calculation on file somewhere. That way if subpoenaed, you'd be able to prove why you use the schedules, design values, standard connections you use. I wouldn't go about recreating or assembling reports/files for this if it's been established as a company standard. If required by the AHJ or client, then yes, you should have this printed/PDF and available for distribution.

For new designs that require you to put pencil to paper or run a computer analysis, you should have this saved and archived in such a way that you can show it was the calculation documentation for a specific project. My company only requires that we create those design reports if they are required by the AHJ, or as requested by your client. Similar to the first situation, you need to have the correct paper trail available somewhere (even if that means the file lives in Enercalc as an example).

Me personally, I like to have everything printed to PDF, sorted, archived, etc. I frequently go back to my previous design work as a launching point or training tool for the next out of the box project. This is not something required by my company, but it's something I like to do.

 

[271828]

I'll print to pdf the condensed report for a simple component design program such as for steel connections, because they're a few pages of info someone might look at.

For general purpose frame analysis programs, I've never found the reports to be useful. They seem more like a document dump of crap no sane person would dig through. For those, I'll have a Mathcad file that has explanatory text, criteria such as deflection limits, calcs of loads that I'm feeding into the program, etc. and screenshots of critical output. For example, I might have a screenshot of the SAP2000 steel checks with the color coding indicating no strength ratio exceeds 1.0, and a note below saying "detailed output available upon request." (I have never had anybody request it.) As another example, if I've pulled a table out of SAP2000 and post-processed in Excel, I might screenshot critical parts of it and put those in the MC file.

I don't see how legality comes into the picture. I don't think there's a rule that says you have to print this or that.

Each project has a project folder full of subfolders with calcs. If there's no report to submit, then those files are the documentation. If someone wants the documentation in some other format, I could print whatever they want to pdf.

 

[WesternJeb]

"detailed output available upon request." ... If there's no report to submit, then those files are the documentation. If someone wants the documentation in some other format, I could print whatever they want to pdf.

I really like that approach that is more of the minimal effort / information but good CYA language. I guess I was operating under if there is a subpoena, there wouldn't be an opportunity to get in the design files and print them out.

 

[JoshPlumSE]

I usually provide some notes that explaining design intents and notes in our folder with the design files with the intent that those design files are used in addition to my notes, but rarely do I print out design reports directly from those design files. what is your standard practice?

It depends on what sort of jurisdiction you're submitting it to. When doing OSHA / hospital work, we always put a header in the calculation that specifically pointed to the detail, drawing or such that was produced based on that calculation!

That being said, this is a bit overboard for most standard city or commercial work. For that, I usually do have print outs of the computer program results pages (or other such calculations) that justified certain designs. Maybe with an image or write-up that identifies the critical / controlling elements of the structure. Often I would identify which Load Combinations controlled design. Not just the number of the load combination, but what the load combination was (1.2 DL + 0.2Sds*DL + ELx + 0.5LL, 0.9DL - 0.2Sds*DL + ELx or such).

That being said, the companies I've worked for (and California plan checkers in general) tend to be a bit more rigorous in their plan check reviews perhaps.

 

[wth]

Most of our work needs to be verified by a colleague pr. local regulations, so our criteria is that it must be enough documentation for a colleague to review it.
I usually produce a simple report with importation inputs (loads, geometry, supports etc), key results for verifying the model and design outputs.
The printouts from the different softwares is mostly 90% spam, so I use Word, Smath or OneNote for this, with screenshots and selected printouts.
Sometimes I'll save the software printout as an appendix.

My colleagues use the same software, and can delve into further details in the model if needed.

For simpler design programs, with a static printout template, I always print a PDF when saving.