APPENDIX B PREAMBLE TO APPENDIX B ~ DRAWING REVIEW CHECKLIST In the design and construction professions, the importance of providing the owner with a “successfully completed project” is clearly paramount. And itis the opinion of the writers of CASE that this issue is well understood within the professions. However, itis also clear that the understanding is not adequately carried forward in the prosecution of some projects, and, consequently those projects fall short of achieving that sought-after “successfully completed” status. ‘The reasons for these short comings are myriad and varied, but chief in importance among them are lack of attention to project planning, communication, coordination, and the detailed efforts necessary to provide an appropriately complete set of design documents ‘This Guideline serves to reacquaint the members of the structural engineering profession and their colleagues in other disciplines in the design and construction profession with those principles of coordination and completeness. While most practitioners can and will apply those principles, many structural engineers have found the use of checklists to be an aid in the production of quality Documents. ‘This Guideline includes, in Appendix B, a “Drawing Review Checklist,” provided to assist structural engineers in their goals to produce Documents of a quality that will lead to the “successfully completed project.” This checklist is based upon the “Checklist for the Development of Contract Documents and Submittal Review”, prepared by CASE in 1995 and revised in 1997. It has been developed based on the broad experience of the committee, with the intent of identifying key elements conceming coordination and completeness, but with the recognition that a checklist can never be considered to be complete. A checklist should be considered as a “Living Document”, subject to periodic revisions. Each structural firm should consider the checklist included in this Guideline and develop a firm checklist, applicable to the practice of the SER. While the use of such checklists is an extremely helpfal tool, it should not be considered as establishing a standard of care, or a scope of basic services. B4DRAWI REVIEW CHECKLIST INDEX 1 General Drawing Format IL. mL. Architectural/Structural Coordination Civil/Structural Coordination Mechanical-Electrical-Plumbing/Structural Coordination General Structural Drawings General Foundation Systems Driven Pile Foundation Systems Drilled Pier Foundation Systems Concrete Systems Masonry Systems Structural Steel Systems Steel Joist Systems Metal Deck Systems Wood Systems Pre-Engineered Building SystemsCASE DRAWING REVIEW CHECKLIST Project: Project Manager: Reviewer: Project No. Engineer: Date: |GENERAL DRAWING FORMAT 2 ; ITEM Yes | No | N/A COMMENT [Is there a Project cover sheet including: lame of Project? [Address of Project? [Design team and Contact person? [Scope of Work? .|Cocation and Project Site Plan? [Deferred Item List [List of Governing Codes? Saravana [Drawing List? [B. [Do the sheet titles in the Drawing Index match the individual drawing titles? [Are the dates, commission members, revision lescriptions, and initials consistent from shect to kheet? [D. [Do title Blocks appear consistent between structural and architectural drawings (project jname, fonts, text size, drawing numbering |convention, ete.)? IE. |Are drawing scales shown correctly? IF. [Do plans show north arrow for orientation? IG. |Are match lines shown consistently from sheet to kheet? T ye match ines consistent with locations shown mn architectural drawings? Ir JAre structural plans orientated to match rchitectural drawings? [Are key plans correctly shaded or hatched? B6ET [ARCHITECTURAL STRUCTURAL COORDINA’ ITEM v Yes ebay v |v No | N/A COMMENT [Do structural drawings address items shown on \demolition drawings? |Has the SER provided special direction on {demolition plans, particularly if phased or partial {demolition involves specific planned procedures, jincluding shoring? [Are all dimensions checked for consistency in kthemselves and in agreement with architectural irawings? [Are all column Tocations and orientations shown he same on structural and architectural drawings? [Do perimeter slab edges agree with those shown mn architectural drawings? [Do depressed or raised slab Tits agree with those kshown on architectural drawings? [Do floor and roof elevations agree with those own on architectural drawings? [Do structural drawings reflect additional structure for folding suspended partitions, including any leflection limitations? [Do expansion joint locations agree with those lshown on architectural drawings? [Do control joints in walls agree with those shown jon architectural drawings? [Do architectural drawings specify adequate Tintels lor non-load bearing wall openings? [Do architectural drawings adequately specity |iesign elements for stairs by others, including lstringer, post, and railing sizes? [is all information noted as "See Structural” noted n structural drawings? is information shown in wall sections in lagreement with structural drawings? [Are brick ledges and footing steps in agreement jwith structural drawings? BTITEM Yes No | N/A COMMENT [Are governing regulations and code references {coordinated between architectural and structural {irawings? [Elevator Coordination 10, 0 design Toads include allowance for impact? (typ. double static) re supports designed per ANSVASME callowable stresses and deflections? ye Toads designed for and points of applic indicated on drawings? oes elevator up-pull reaction at pit included for ‘igh speed elevators? Similarly for underslung lelevators? Te intermediate elevator rail supports provided lwhere required? \iesigned for specified reactions including. lnorizontal?” [Are Separator beams and intermediate rail bracing lis elevator hoist beam provided over center of Ishaft? lis minimum clear overrun provided above top floor served? is elevator sill support detail coordinated with larchitect and elevator spec.? [Are clear hoistway dimensions coordinated? [Are references to Architectural drawings clearly jdentified? [Are connections for architectural attachments coordinated with structural requirements? [Are connections for equipment and systems referenced to structural documents as applicable? BS[ni ITEM Yes No | N/A COMMENT [Do new or old underground utilities (power, Ielephone, water, sewer, gas storm drainage, fuel lines, fuel tanks) interfere with foundation lsystems? [Do building foundations interfere with property lines or foundation systems for existing adjacent buildings? |Have wility inverts been coordinated with footing lclevations? [Do roadways result in the potential surcharge of retaining walls or below grade building walls? [Do final site elevations correspond to elevations lused for design of retaining walls or below grade building walls? is drain tile routing and slope coordinated with footing elevations? |Have earthwork requirements regarding Jcompaction, imported fill materials and lengineered fill been specified in accordance with the Geotechnical Report used as the basis for ldesign? liv. [MECHANICAL-BLECTRICAL- |PLUMBING/STRUCTURAL COORDINATION, [Do footing elevations accommodate plumbing linverts/elevations? |Are floor openings framed out to accommodate luctwork and other penetrations? [Are lintel provisions included for all ductwork and| jother penetrations? [Do toilet penetrations conflict with steeV/concrete Jbeams and joists? [Does imbedded conduit conform to ACI318? [Fas light fixture interference with structural framing been checked? BOITEM Yes | No | N/A COMMENT [Are slab openings coordinated with risers (ducts, lhot and chilled water, conduit banks, bus ducts)? [Are slab openings and support for grease traps |provided? |Has punching shear been evaluated for conc. Flat |sabs/plates with mechanical openings? [Are riser supports coordinated (every floor, specific floors, base support)? [Do reactions account for expansion/contraction? [Are slab construction details provided around lconduit banks? [Are beam web penetrationnotches and their reinforcement coordinated with M.E.P. and with lother framing e.g. perpendicular beam {connections? [Do structural drawings account for heavy hanging loads due to piping, particularly near mechanical lor boiler rooms? |Have reactions for mechanical or electrical lequipment been shown on the drawings where necessary for the design of specialty structural systems by others? [Do M/EIP drawings show special details for Jpiping, equipment, ete which crosses building lexpansion joints? [Do structural drawings address vibration isolation lof mechanical equipment? [Are acoustic eritera for structure surrounding heavy mechanical equipment known and included in design (ada. mass)? [Are cooling tower/generatorichilleboiler support criteria coordinated? Is separate steel above vibration isolators included? Is coordination with support criteria for vibration isolators ine.? B10