Questions about construction drawings

[Mikael_L]

A quick question.
In construction drawings that show a section (cross-section) of, for example, a wall, are the different layers always indicated from the outside in?
Or does the order depend on which side the description is on in the drawing?
Or is it possibly completely random, so the reader/reviewer of the drawing has to make sure to understand the situation themselves?

I am attaching an example in the image.

 

[Mikael_L]

I have one more question.
In the same kind of context, I've seen the notation s600, c600, and cc600 to indicate that the center-center measurement should be 600mm.
What does single-s and single-c stand for?

And does it matter which one you use?

 

[anaitis]

A quick question.
In construction drawings showing a section (cross-section) of, for example, a wall, are the different layers always listed from the outside in?
Or does the order depend on which side the description is on in the drawing?
Or is it perhaps completely random, so the reader/reviewer of the drawing has to ensure they understand the situation?

I am attaching an example in an image.

You can write in any order you want, there is no standard for this.
Personally, I think it feels natural in the shown section to indicate from left to right.

 

[anaitis]

I have a question.
In the same kind of context, I've seen the designation s600, c600, and cc600 to indicate that the center-to-center measurement should be 600mm.
What do "s" and "c" stand for?

And does it matter which one you use?

An "s" is the latest method for indicating center distance according to the standard.
Most people still say "c - c" (in phonetics "sese").
The designation "cc" is the oldest of the three, since sometime in the 70s (a bit unsure here) the standard was changed to "c".
And now it should be "s"!!
I believe most people understand all three variants.

 

[Mikael_L]

Of course.
It means centrum distance ....

Then I'll go with s, if that's what applies now.
Thank you.

 

[anaitis]

I don't understand the logic either!

Norwegian??

 

[zno]

It has been a while since reading stuff like this, but if I remember correctly, the c/c designation was replaced with s. Furthermore, I believe that s stands for sidomått.

Thus, "s" should be used to specify center-to-center measurement.

(Could c simply stand for center distance, or is it possibly just an abbreviation/slang?)

Edit: I noticed a couple of responses got in before I sent mine...

 

[Mikael_L]

If anyone has an opinion on my first question, please feel free to write.

So you don't forget my second question...

 

[imported_Byggaren]

Once upon a time (read: around 1960), a group named the HALTH group* was formed in the construction field. They initiated efforts to standardize drafting methods, among other things. This led to BST stipulating a construction standard in Handbook No. 2, Construction Drawings, in 1973. This was followed by a review from SIS, which was entirely based on the work from HALTH, BST, and others. The publication is called SS 03 22 25. It prescribed that center measurements should be denoted with a simple c (e.g., c 600) and applied to Denmark, Norway, and Sweden.

(*HALTH are the initials of the group's members:
Hultqvist, Sven, civil engineer
Albrektsson, Sten, civil engineer
Lundin, Gösta, civil engineer
Tyrén, Sven, civil engineer
Holmberg, Åke, PhD

Tyrén is known from his reputable engineering firm. Holmberg was also a well-known name in construction. I don't know anything about the others. But they managed to publish a document that preceded both the BST and SIS work on the drafting standard. The publication is titled 'Appropriate Documents for Building Constructions' and was released as early as 1960 with the help of the National Building Research Committee. It describes everything from how the drawings should be arranged, folded, formatted, dimensioned, material designations indicated and illustrated, sections laid out, etc. That's the answer to your question about why the text is ordered from outside to inside.)

c/c was an older way to denote center distances. (Read 'center to center,' which is the same as measuring 'edge to edge' across, for example, a stud in a wall, provided that the part included in the measurement is equally thick throughout.)

Then the EU came into play, and our standard was compared to Germany's and France's (to name a few other EU countries). Therefore, I cannot say today where the s for center comes from and why. In German, English, and French, the word 'center' is 'centrum' and abbreviated c.

The EU has caused quite a few problems in its effort to standardize so that other countries can understand construction documents and bid on jobs in other countries, according to one of the four cornerstones of the EU Treaty. (Services, etc., should be able to move freely between... etc.) This is to harmonize with procurement rules. But these are purely political and financial in nature, with no technical building implications. So I happily continue to draw using both c/c, cc, and a simple c (seeing a simple c as a simplification of c/c). But I would never dream of writing an s for center measurements. That's creating misunderstandings when we are on domestic ground, except possibly in Norway
____________
The Builder

 

[Mikael_L]

There was a proper account, as usual thoroughly from i_byggaren.

History, whatever people might think, is important. Without it, it is usually harder to understand the present, whether we are talking about technology, politics, or anything else.

... Everything is described in it from how the drawings should be arranged, folded, the lettering designed, dimensioning done, material designations specified and illustrated, sections placed, etc. There comes the answer to your question why the text is written in order from outside and in. )

I take this as an indication that the only correct way is to specify from outside and in, whether it is a wall, roof, or foundation being described. But now I am uncertain about the foundation, does it seem so natural?

I assume that over the years there have been shifts in these standards. Is there somewhere online to read these? I will try to google a bit...

 

[imported_Byggaren]

---
I take this as evidence that the only correct way is to specify from outside to inside, whether it's a wall, ceiling, or foundation being described. But now I'm unsure about the foundation, does it seem that natural?

I assume that over the years, these standards have shifted.
Is there anywhere online to read these? I'll try to google a bit ...

Not quite. The section shown is a wall. There, 'outside to in' applies. For roofs and floors, it's 'from top to bottom'.

Please let me know what you find, even if my 'best-before date' expired almost seven years ago
_______________
Byggaren

 

[Mikael_L]

I can say that I didn't find any "free" documentation.

I can imagine that this is the book that might cover roughly the same topics, but in the latest edition:
http://www.byggbokhandeln.com/sok/detalj.asp?ArtikelNummer=6428012
...or maybe a completely different book, what do I know ...

Otherwise, among others, this PDF (which is about transferring construction info to database systems) supports your statement about the halth group. Not that I doubted, of course ...
http://www.itbof.com/2002//rpt_dh_bh90-it.pdf

There they have a little summary of the history from the 50s-60s onwards.

 

[imported_Byggaren]

I can say that I did not find any "free" documentation.

I imagine this is the book that maybe covers roughly the same topics, but in the latest edition:
[link]
...or maybe a completely different book, what do I know ...

Alternatively, this PDF (which is about transferring construction info to database systems) supports your statement about the halth group. Not that I doubted it...
[link]

They have a little summary of the history from the 50s-60s onwards.

Thank you!


I haven't tried to look for newer info on the execution of drawings even though I have Auto-Cad on the computer (which I have never used and probably never will use).

With computer-aided drafting (Cad), a whole new world has opened up for consultants, where, for example, an architect used to have to break the job to make an intermediary original without dimensions and text so that HVAC and electrical could draw their drawings without interference in their text, etc. Now it is drawn on the computer in layers and a layer can then be connected so that a change in the base immediately reflects on the others' layers so that subcontractors get the correct basis for pipe, duct, and electrical layout as soon as something is changed by the architect. (Therefore, for instance, there should no longer be switches on the wrong side of the door (which was common before when the electrical consultant was not informed that the architect had reversed the door swing). But whether that is still the case or not, I do not know?)

I am definitely in favor of computer-aided design for that reason alone. There are more. For example, repetitive tasks. Once you have drawn a window on the facade and the others are of the same type, you just need to cut and paste. The 3-D possibility is another advantage of Cad where you can rotate the building to study the appearance from different angles endlessly. Even the sun's shadows on the facades, depending on how the facades are oriented to the cardinal directions and the sun's height during different seasons (such manual work takes time).

However, I also have reservations about it because you lose the sense of what you are dealing with. There is, for instance, a big difference between seeing the drawing on the screen and on paper. Not least in scale. Therefore, it's easy to make judgment errors. It is also easier to go back to the previous drawing version on paper than on the computer, even if a new layer is created for new versions of the drawing. And if we consider the crash probability of the computer and compare it to a paper drawing being burned or destroyed in another way, the chance is greater that it hasn't burned at all those who have received copies of the drawing than that others have a copy on their hard drive. Because the backup is mostly not managed as it should be, and this is usually discovered only when an accident happens. Even if the backup is made, it's not certain that the restoration will succeed. It has even happened that the backup gets damaged during the restoration, which is the same as losing the original.
_______________
Byggaren