Why and Why not show Non-load bearing walls in structural plans?

[JohnWk]

Concrete mix, connection to top , bottom and other details are in the standard details and general notes sheets, but why to show them in the structural plans as they are in the Architectural drawings?

UPDATE(4 OCT 2024): those walls are usually block or facade precast concrete walls which are initiated by either the architect or the contractor mainly for fire rating or to ease the construction , they are not initiated by the structural engineer or have bracing function,. Showing them in structural drawing seems to be common in Country like Australia but not common in other countries that I worked on . that is why I'm asking the question. Sorry If I caused any confusion

 

[Greenalleycat]

This feels like a question with a specific context in mind
The short answer is probably: for context and consistency
It's much easier for the contractor to build what you've designed if your drawings more closely match the architectural drawings i.e. you show the same walls as they do
It also prevents mistakes - imagine you had a single bracing wall and that was all that you showed on a plan...how the heck could the contractor know which wall it was if you didn't show the other walls?

 

[JohnWk]

@Greenalleycat
the contractor need to setout from the architectural drawings anyway, duplicate info in the structural drawings might cause issues with coordination and put the wrong details, the contractor can be confused of why the wall in the structural drawings if it doesn't have structural function?

 

[Greenalleycat]

Here, we develop our plans from the architect's, so the walls should be in the same place.
Occasionally a wall shifts slightly etc - if it's a significant change then the onus is on the architect to notify us after we issue our Coordination drawings to them
If it's minor, it will often get missed but usually isn't a big deal

It should be obvious if it has a structural function because you will have called it up for that function - a beam will land on it, it will be shown as bracing, whatever
Otherwise, if it's just a few lines showing the outline of the wall, it's pretty obvious that it's just shown indicativly

I don't know how a contractor can read and understand your plans if you ONLY show structural elements and don't include anything contextual

 

[1503-44]

Industrial work often has a reverse work flow. The architects will design and fit out a control room, laboratory, battery rooms, row of shipping receiving, security, or supervisor's offices, rest rooms showers, changing and locker rooms, whatever, and put their nonload bearing walls anywhere they like, fitting all inside the structural plans provided to them. Several projects I've done they managed to build entire living quarters, complete with kitchen, mess hall, sleeping barracks, recreation entertainment center, conference room, all 50m underground inside a concrete lined tunnel structure. Offshore oil platform design is similar. Totally reversed the typical architectural workflow.

--Einstein gave the same test to students every year. When asked why he would do something like that, "Because the answers had changed."

 

[Greenalleycat]

I suppose I should specify: I've assumed residential work.
If this is commercial then I would agree with not showing fitout walls.

 

[1503-44]

It's a problem for them?

--Einstein gave the same test to students every year. When asked why he would do something like that, "Because the answers had changed."

 

[Greenalleycat]

I don't understand your question

 

[phamENG]

In residential, I show them for context. They are halftone and thin lines so the bearing and shear walls jump out at you, but non-bearing walls are still there for reference. I've had projects where I only showed bearing walls, and the truss manufacturer picked a non-bearing wall that was close to the bearing wall, leading to some confusion and a pain to get the truss designs corrected.

In a frame structure? I only show the columns, beams, vertical LFRS, and the exterior walls (unless there's some unique or critical situation that calls for more information on the plan).

 

[1503-44]

Me Confused. If you only showed bearing walls, how did the truss mfgr pick a nonbearing wall?

--Einstein gave the same test to students every year. When asked why he would do something like that, "Because the answers had changed."

 

[EngDM]

In NBCC, if non-load bearing partition walls are shown you don't need to take the blanket 1kPa dead load partition allowance, and can instead calculate an accurate dead load. That's my biggest reason to show it, especially in apartment projects where the partitions are not likely to ever move.

 

[Retrograde]

For blockwork walls, which may be load bearing or non load bearing, the reason to show both on the same drawing is because the same sub-contractor will be supplying/installing them - so it helps with procurement.

Similar for precast walls.

 

[phamENG]

1503-44, they looked at the architectural drawings, saw two walls a few feet apart, and picked the wrong one. Learned my lesson.

 

[RPGs]

In residential, I show them for context. They are halftone and thin lines so the bearing and shear walls jump out at you, but non-bearing walls are still there for reference.

I do this and it appears to be the norm in my area.