What are the most effective ways to review and revise construction drawings?

Actually on our sites , the last update drawing should be stamped with IFC " Issue for construction " which means engineering issued this document with full coordination with installation and testing teams awareness. Any update for any revisions should be through an official communication such as a meeting with all stakeholders. Regular baseline file which shows document, documents references and might be shared with all people via a official meeting. The risk if we install the equipment's on site based on old drawings , risk of rework , re testing and replacing the materials. So let us agree about the main goal fir all the projects QCD to be respected. Q quality Ilif the work C cost if the project D deliver of the project on time

For review and revising drawings at the first step we can establish a standardized review process which can help ensure consistency and accuracy in the review process. Then, Use a checklist that outlines all the items that need to be reviewed in each drawing set which help ensure that all the necessary elements are reviewed and revised. After that, review each drawing systematically, starting with the cover sheet and moving through each drawing in order. This will help ensure that no drawings are missed or overlooked. Last but not least, use revision clouds and callouts to identify areas that require revision. This will help ensure that all revisions are clearly communicated

One thing I have found important is to have a drafting manual that contains all drawings standardrization guidance in company. These can be then embeded in drawing templates to initiate any drawing and help creating a consistant construction drawings in minimal preparation time.

From my experience, Construction drawings are the blueprints for any project, and getting them right is essential to a successful outcome. 1. Use a standard format. This will make it easier to identify and review different elements of the drawings, and it will also help to prevent errors. 2. Gather all relevant information. This includes the project specifications, site plans, and any other documentation that may impact the drawings. 3. Review the drawings thoroughly. Check for any errors or omissions, and make sure that all of the information is clear and concise. 4. Coordinate with the project team. Get feedback from other team members, such as the architect, engineer, and contractor.

IFC issued for construction or RFC released for construction drawings are issued to site for construction. Before IFC/RFC some advance drawings are issued to site for planning/ resource mobilization purpose. Even after the release of RFC/IFC, revisions are released for construction. So, at site there must be document control on the drawings. We nominate planning engineer to issue drawings to site engineers/ vendors. After receipt of new revision RFC drawings, old revision drawings were collected and marked as superseded. Master drawing list MDL excel sheet is maintained for control on all the revision of drawings and drawing register is maintained to record the drawings issued and returned as per requirement.

Till now i see only few organization around the world who can comply the CAD and BIM Model with the codes and standards, the development of this kind of solutions is not easy and costly but it will save time in the future, one more thing this solution i had saw it's architecture and structure solution if you know any other solution for MEP, i will be happy to react insightful for it.

Compliance to codes and regulations is not always the issue. You may have a design that is safe but not the best economical one and sometimes it might be an issue that you figure on site and you have to modify shop drawings.

At big firms there is either a code expert dedicated to review code compliance at every phase of the projects which happens as a scheduled conversation at first and will then be checked during quality control or you budget in the project to hire a third party reviewer, these reviewers are thorough, it makes for a great review, and educational experience. For smaller firm this is a lot more difficult to accomplish.

The only thing that works as far as I can see, is third party reviews, obliged by law. Like the new Dutch law for “quality securation “

Project Document Control shall process sample checks & ensure the referenced codes, standards & Contracy causes are applied in the review process of documentation.

One of the things that is missing from this advice, is “who” should compare the drawings. I agree that conflicts between discipline drawings has always been a big issue in the field… The openings on the mechanical drawings don’t match the structural drawings, you are supposed to install a 4 inch pipe in a 2x4 wall, etc. This is a continued problem that, in my opinion, should never reach the field. Far too often this coordination issue gets dumped onto the contractor with catch all text on the drawings that transfers the responsibility and the risk to the party who is least suited to manage it, and who is not being paid to manage it. Drawing coordination belongs with the architect. They are being paid to do it.

This is one of the most salient part of reviewing. Before approving a drawing for construction (AFC), we must check drawings relatted to every discipline such as electrical, mechanical, piping, structure and so forth with our drawing to avoid contradiction between them. If there were no contradiction, we can approve the drawing for construction whereas on the other hand, if the drawings were not compatible with each other, we have to have revising process.

In my experience, client is not very clear on the details and not able to visualise complete picture. So it is important to translate their requirements into engineering requirements and check for gaps. All the stakeholders needs to be part of the process. Gaps are also in onboarding all the stakeholders in time leading to gaps. Making drawings is just a tool.

Agree with Mr Jim Rogers that ideally construction drawings should have been fairly coordinated will all disciplines but practically it's not viable for client to spend extensive amount of time & money at tendering stage to take up detailed shop drgs & coordination drgs. Also contractor do propose value engineering, stakeholders proposes changes, specialist equipment supplier (Fire,LPG,UPS,CCTV etc) proposes location change as best suit to their models and hence drgs gets progressive changes which contractor requires to manage. Drawing control register to be implemented to retract superseded drgs from team and to issue latest version drgs to ensure all intended changes/revisions executed correctly.

Comparing here related to Survey and as-built more reliable than comparing drawings to other disciplines, this is one of the steps in the early stage of any project, and it's mandatory from my point of view to bring the data of site to the table. to avoid any clashes with the nature.

Yes, some of the software tools and apps built for the field can help you annotate and markup drawings, and this has its place during the building phase. I have been demonstrating how to use Fieldwire to do this in a series of videos I have posted here on LinkedIn. The ability to overlay drawings in these apps is probably underutilized. Not only can you overlay different versions of the same sheet, you can overlay different discipline drawings of the same floor (such as overlaying the mechanical drawing with the structural drawing). In terms of finding clashes and conflicts prior to sending to the field, you can’t beat everyone contributing to a shared 3D Building Information Model (BIM).

A tool is a tool. Nothing more, nothing less. Tools will not save you from mistakes. CAD/BIM/Blubeam etc. greatly improve efficiency, but in the end, they are just tools. Acquiring the skills to operate these highly sophisticated pencils will not make you a professional. It's the person behind the hammer that hits the nail but you also have to know where to put the nail (and the hammer isn't going to tell you that).

My opinion in this point about software i see one of the best solutions nowadays is ACC-Autodesk Construction Cloud because it has capability and function to do markup and Automate revision and Naming standard. This feature gives the platform accessibility to all project stakeholders and transferability.

Software tools are no more as the word “tools” mean. Good software can be useless if the engineer is not experienced enough…and even when he/she is experienced, one can just not see his/her own mistakes. Always use a third party

i Can Say this is the Review process mostly people used to do it in the manual way like emails and what's App. i didn't prefer this way at all consequently i tried Aconex and ACC both are ok hopefully to see offline software can do the same process, but for your information consider the review process must have approval or rejection by the end of this workflow. by the way this will keep drawings, models and file trusted more if the workflow keep going in the right direction.

This is inherent in the design process. Only minor construction projects can be done “alone”. Investors must and should be more aware of hiring an independent specialist to manage the design process out of the interests of the investor

Review is crutial whenever there is a change made to drawing or design intent. In instances where official revised drawing is not received, it is important to review marked up drawing with the AOR to ensure design change and intent got captured fully and correctly.

Feedback is always useful. Even experienced people make mistake and when 6 to 10 difference interfaces are working on a particular project, lack of communication can result in rework. In such cases, the idea is to learn where the gap was and ensure in future this area is not neglected.

To make it more easy today we need AI to continue improving from the most of our experience.From my point of view, we make alot of human error throughout the history than AI doing it.

Work progesses in the field faster than you think and updated drawings and design documents is crutial to ensure latest design is being utilized in the field. Re-work always takes more time and money, and in this fast paced construction environment, there is no time for rework. Goal is zeor issues and zero punchlist.

Update regularly and keep al the role players updated. Make sure everyone are understanding the requirements needed and the work flowchart/ schedule.

Design development and BIM coordination with CSA, MEPF and other disciplines should occur in parallel and be tied to the schedule as a succeeding activity for anything other than a "Plan-Spec" project delivery method. This is the best lean construction method to keep up with the design yet not losing track of the new/modified data. As a byproduct, it bridges the gap between BIM and the field. ACC Compare tool helps to review the changes in 2D while the model represents the current 3D for anyone who might take value from both.

First, the technical office must be strong enough to prepare the drawings in cooperation with strong project planners. Secondly, comes the role of the document controllers, who are able to arrange the files and present them first to the project consultant and send the response to the technical office to edit any comments on the drawings , and then make a clean copy and deliver it to the implementation engineers. .

For the most effective project review and revision, it's crucial to consistently identify gaps (finding the missing most useful information) in construction plans before starting. We should avoid overloading plans with excessive, irrelevant details or generating impractical questions that may not be apparent during construction. This ensures that all project stakeholders can clearly prioritize critical tasks for project success. A sense of habit should always need to think in mind.

In my experience, below issues should be mentioned -issue documents based on project scope , standards ,.. - Qualified engineers - strong and live PMIS system - active and energetic DCC experts - Smart Work shop engineering office.

Varies among Tender drawings, IFC, shopdrawings - checking the drawing revision & consultant comments - checking the levels, sections, legend & complying with other relate drawings - Ensuring that there is no conflict with other drawing from different discipline, such as civil must comply with the mep levels & installation - Review if the false ceiling comply with the tiling layout for architectural drawings - Reviewing the pullout bars location in addition to ensuring that all development length for L bars can be executed per site as per drawings for structural drawings.