Structural Engineering Detail Library 6

[chamokinawan]

Wanted to get some input on the different ways of managing a detail library. The firm I am at has built up a library full of typical details you can pick out and customize for each project. They are all printed out on paper and appear as a book, if you will, of details separated into different topics such as wood, cmu, steel, etc. I am interested in how other firms manage their library of details. I am trying to create a search engine for the firm so we can type in key words and details will pop up so to make for faster and more efficient detailing. Thanks in advance!.

 

[Rabbit12]

My firm, approximately 450 total employees across all disciplines has no such thing. Boggles my mind.

If you've worked here awhile you know jobs when you can go "rob" details. If not you start from scratch.

My previous firm had exactly what you describe and it worked well. IMO, it's best to keep detail libraries somewhat small. Include only the details you use most often. If it gets to big and too tough to navigate people won't use it.

 

[chamokinawan]

@Rabbit12 There a certain details that I remember being on other projects I've done and will go back and "rob" those details as well...except they were mine, so it would be more like "recycling". I actually just experimented with creating jpeg file out of the CAD details then assigned tags to them. It is working brilliantly right now and just showed our principal engineer. It might help with the huge library. I can simply type "wood beam discontinuous" and booom, the detail pops up and you can see the pictures.

 

[dik]

I keep my drawings in several directories... I have a Library Directory that has seals, drawing borders, and drawing notes details. I keep the bulk of my drawings in a MasterFormat with all divisions and related details stored in these. Under Div 03, Concrete, I have maybe 30 sub-directories for structural slabs and types, SOG, beams, walls, columns, post tensioning, etc. It's not the best maybe, but, I can normally find things pretty easily... I likely have a few thousand details collected/developed over the years.

Dik

 

[thaidavid40]

chamokinawan
We keep a multitude of previous and typical details in our CAD library for reuse. We group the details CAD files in subfolders by division/type (steel, concrete, masonry, foundations, etc.). We also keep up-to-date spreadsheets of the details in each category, with them listed by practical, descriptive name, and also by unique detail number identifier. This system has served us well over the years. I hope you find the system that works right for you,
Dave

Thaidavid

 

[London]

I try to keep my own details and technical library. Only by organising, trimming and archiving bits and pieces do I know where to go and what to use.

I find large libraries can get unwieldy and harder to use. The best details get used often and then with greater confidence.

 

[chamokinawan]

@thaidavid we do the same thing with the subfolders, but don't keep a spreadsheet. I think the system i created for searching the library using key words will help since our library is getting bigger as we diversify our projects. I'm interested in hearing from anyone in a big firm, how they manage details or share details.

 

[sandman21]

New system I plan to try is to use Bluebeam to paste the detail in one document with name so it is searchable and you can see the detail before taking.

 

[Stenbrook]

Assuming you title your details appropriately for what it is, you could store your details in a PDF file and search for whatever it is that you need. I had a designer keep every detail he ever made in a big PDF/CAD file and if I needed something I would just type in some key words for what I was looking for. This enabled us to save time and not have to recreate every detail over and over again. I can see the negatives for having a large detail library, however I think the ability to save yourself 10-30 min a detail is worth it. This also helps you maintain consistency from job to job. If having an overly large library scares you or whatever, you could keep a typical library full of the details you use regularly and then an additional file with the weird conditions.

 

[bigmig]

I have generic templates of all the "standard details" in a generic drawing that goes into every job. That way it is a "delete" what I don't need, instead of having to remember what I don't have.
That way I never miss a detail that should have been on there.

Regarding cutting and blasting "sort-of-similar" details onto other jobs, I stopped doing that (when I can help it) with the introduction of BIM software. I have found that if the detail doesn't match what they are looking at, it throws the builder off and they just ignore it.

I started drafting with a BIM software, so now every detail is the actual view of the actual model. It is just a better quality of drawing then the CAD stuff where things were "almost" like the way it is in the real world.

 

[XR250]

I started drafting with a BIM software, so now every detail is the actual view of the actual model. It is just a better quality of drawing then the CAD stuff where things were "almost" like the way it is in the real world.

Interesting. I find most BIM cut details to be awful (at least on the Arch. drawings.) I much preferred the "hand drawn" CAD details.

 

[jayrod12]

I started drafting with a BIM software, so now every detail is the actual view of the actual model. It is just a better quality of drawing then the CAD stuff where things were "almost" like the way it is in the real world.

Interesting. I find most BIM cut details to be awful (at least on the Arch. drawings.) I much preferred the "hand drawn" CAD details.

I agree with XR250. BIM sections look like garbage until the draftspeople go and clean them up overtop with standard CAD linework.

 

[SteelSlugged]

XR250, I think bigmig means you see in the section is what is actually built instead of typical details. I think the BIM drafting details look better - the lines have rounded ends instead of squared. Personal preferences may be involved.

The other problem with live sections in BIM is once you tweak a live section in the model, your sections need to be cleaned up, whereas in CAD as long as you didn't dimension anything, your section will be fine.

At my office, we have been experimenting with the engineer creating the model and created live cuts where unique sections exist. A draftsperson goes in afterward and, depending on their experience and knowledge, starts to apply the typical callouts to the plans and sections, adds the typical details, and dimensions everything. The engineer has already created the plan views, labeled the beams with live beam tags, created column schedules.

I'm relatively new, less than 10 years experience, but learned through BIM. I can tell you by looking at architectural drawings from 10 years ago made with CAD and the drawings today, that the quality of sections, plans, and generally everything from an architect has gone way downhill. They don't care about what their drawings look like anymore. This is a general statement. I know architects who still produce works of art in terms of drawing appearances, but it's the exception now. It was a struggle at our office in the beginning, but now anyone fluent in BIM can produce a complete set of concrete or steel drawings faster than CAD. The problem, as always, is that the architect's are MUCH more inclined to make last minute changes.

Has anyone else experienced this with architects?

 

[medeek]

I have created one large AutoCAD drawing with all my standard details in it. I then group them as logically as possible to make find a specific detail more easily. I deal mostly with residential work so the number of details is probably not on par with larger organizations that have details for much more exotic commercial/industrial work.

Some of my details are very specific to a job (ie. Window Walls) so those do not go into this CAD file but I can always draw on the various ones I have done to give me ideas for a new project.

A confused student is a good student.
Nathaniel P. Wilkerson, PE

http://www.medeek.com

 

[3DDave]

A Wiki. It allows building not only any arrangement anyone likes, it allows building pages for projects of which details were used and why, with little effort. It avoids the folder failure of having to pick one place for a detail to be when it falls into more than one category without having to decide on categories.

It also has the advantage of automatically saving change history, and changes can be commented if anyone care to. Native files can be attached to pages along with person readable files, such as PDF.

The challenge is it requires a database and web server to back it, but those are commonplace. Lots of companies in the hosting business and the prices are likely to be low.

If I had to lose an app I'd give up spreadsheets before the wiki. I can write software to add and subtract in anything that moves, be a nice wiki makes every other minute of working a joy.

 

[chamokinawan]

@3DDave This is exactly what I was looking for. I didn't know how to create a website to hold all my details so I could easily search for them. How does one go about creating a Wiki? Is it just written in HTML?

Thanks to everyone else who replied. This is turning into an interesting thread to see how many other offices operate.

 

[RFreund]

Dave pointed me in this direction in past and it is a great idea. My problem is/was, it is a somewhat daunting task for one person who doesn't know that much about creating wiki's / websites html and to get others to participate who are unfamiliar as well. I'm sure it doesn't take too much to learn but I just had too much else to do.
Currently I have set up somewhat of an engineering library using Onenote. Since I have yet to use an actual wiki I don't know how it compares, but I'm wondering if I could use it to also set up a CAD library. Onenote seems to function a lot like a wiki and it is free to use. Although I'm not sure what sort of space limits there are for the free version.

EIT

http://www.HowToEngineer.com

 

[manstrom]

We have a few different CAD files with a few hundred details sorted into categories.

For example, there is a "wood details" file with a category for "exterior walls" and "balconies". Every year, I grab the best from a dozen or so projects and update the library.

Individual files are a pain to store and log. It's best to store them in one big bin.

The older guys prefer a book with all the details printed. However, this never gets updated.

When I am working on a problem, I never think about beauty but when I have finished, if the solution is not beautiful, I know it is wrong.

-R. Buckminster Fuller

 

[medeek]

Here is my latest detail library. I've compiled this over the last couple of years and have finally brought most of it together in the last couple of months. This small library is mostly for typical residential work and is a continual work in progress. I still would like to organize it in a more logical manner and add in more details regarding stepped footings and foundations.

http://design.medeek.com/cad/autocad/MEDEEK_STRUCTURAL_DETAILS_VOLUME2.dwg

A confused student is a good student.
Nathaniel P. Wilkerson, PE

http://www.medeek.com

 

[RobertHale]

For what it is worth, When I developed a detail library for my last firm I organized it by sheet. A firm that I previously had worked at (and I work at again) had a fairly set sheet scheme (E.g. S00x front matter, S301 shallow foundations, S311 Slab on ground, etc.) I leveraged that scheme with some modifications including a couple of levels of delineation to get a framework to fit my details in. It seemed logical to me to group the details by system. If you need a foundation wall detail then you work your way through the foundation series (S3.xx) then to sheet S3.11 for foundation walls. Then you have to pick your details as appropriate. I tried to use a numbering scheme for the details loosely based on CSI divisions. I liked that it had one level of QA in terms of seeing large typical detailing holes on a project. One result of the system is a larger number of sheets if you rigorously adhere to the sheet naming. I think if I had the time and basis knowledge a wiki based on this scheme with notes and tips would have been really powerful. I attached a partial excel sheet of my system (I am not sure where the more complete sheets are; likely on a thumb drive floating around). This was developed for AutoCAD and using XREF's to get the details into the projects. I don't see why it wouldnt work with one giant revit file that only contains the typical details (the way my current company does it). I am not terribly keen on live revit sections.

Robert Hale, PE