Which types of structural framing systems and materials are most commonly used in the US for residences? For office buildings?
In the U.S., residential buildings most commonly use light wood framing because it is inexpensive, easy to construct, and well-suited for the smaller spans and loads found in homes. Wood framing is also widely available, familiar to contractors, and flexible enough to accommodate quick on-site adjustments. For low-rise multifamily housing, wood or light-gauge steel can be used, but wood remains dominant due to cost efficiency and simpler construction workflows.
In contrast, office buildings typically rely on steel framing or reinforced concrete systems, especially for mid-rise and high-rise structures. These materials provide the greater strength, stiffness, and fire resistance required for large spans, heavy loads, and multi-story configurations. The choice of steel or concrete is driven by factors such as structural performance, cost, fire codes, speed of construction, and the need to integrate mechanical systems within open floor plans. Overall, material selection is influenced by the building’s scale, required durability, local construction practices, and economic considerations.
Why do different teams of designers and subcontractors link and share their models during the design process?
What are the advantages of linking models?
Are there any disadvantages to linking models?
Different design teams and subcontractors link and share their models so they can coordinate their work and avoid conflicts as the project develops. Since each team focuses on a specific system such as architectural, structural, mechanical, electrical, or plumbing, linking models allows everyone to see how their components interact in a shared environment. This improves accuracy, reduces errors, and makes it easier to identify issues such as clashes between beams, ducts, and walls before construction begins.
The advantages of linking models include smoother collaboration, better alignment between disciplines, and fewer unintended surprises on the job site. It also keeps each team’s work organized in separate files, which makes updates easier to manage. However, a disadvantage is that linked models depend on everyone maintaining consistent file locations, naming, and coordinates, which can lead to confusion if not managed carefully. Additionally, if someone forgets to update or reload a linked model, the coordination can become temporarily out of sync. Overall, linking models is essential for efficient, coordinated design but requires good teamwork and communication.
How do you think design coordination was done before we started using digital models?
What advantages does doing this coordination digitally have over previous methods?
What strategies can design teams use to find and avoid clashes prior to the start of construction?
What can be done besides sharing the models digitally?
At what point in the project development process should design coordination start?
I believe design coordination should start as early as possible in the project development process. Early coordination helps teams align on major decisions like structural grids, floor-to-floor heights, equipment zones, and circulation paths before detailed modeling begins. Catching conflicts early prevents costly redesigns later and ensures that all disciplines are working within the same spatial and organizational framework.
It is essentially never too early to begin coordination, because even high-level decisions can impact every discipline downstream. Starting coordination early doesn’t mean modeling every detail. Instead, it focuses on sharing massing, levels, grids, and major layout ideas. This early alignment builds a smoother workflow and reduces the amount of rework needed as the project progresses.