Which types of structural framing systems and materials are most commonly used in the US for residences? For office buildings?
What factors determine why these are the most used materials?
Stick framing, also called platform framing is the most common form of structural framing for residences in the U.S. This type of framing makes use of wood for material. For residences, this materiality is beneficial because lumber is readily available in the U.S. which makes it extremely cost effective. Stick framing is a good choice in form because it is quick to build and allows for design flexibility. Quick on-site and post-construction adjustments can be made without much effort.
Steel framing is the most common form of structural framing for office buildings in the U.S. Steel is an ideal material because it is extremely strong, durable, fire resistance, and can be manipulated to support various designs. Steel can also be made off-site which allows for faster construction. Steel can cost more initially, but its durability and low maintenance proves to save costs long term.
Why do different teams of designers and subcontractors link and share their models during the design process?
What are the advantages of linking models?
Linking models is extremely advantageous because it can ensure that the design remains consistent through various planning and design stages. For example, by linking an architectural model to a structural file, the contractor designers can have access to the design without having to accurately recreate it in a new file, saving time and ensuring small reproduction errors are avoided. Further in the process, these linked models can be uploaded to the acc or another similar program to analyze clashes almost instantaneously. This is an incredible time saver, allowing the teams to easily pinpoint issue areas and address them.
Are there any disadvantages to linking models?
In some cases, linking models can transfer unwanted information that can clutter the final models and potentially confuse contractors during the final construction process. Another potential issue is ownership and liability. If multiple groups are working on the same linked model and a design choice ends up creating a problem in real life, responsibility can be difficult to pinpoint. Lastly, communication still needs to occur even when models are linked. For example, the architects could easily link their model to the structural side, but without giving guidelines, the structural engineers could design something that goes against the big picture design concept that the architects desired.
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?
Design coordination occurred in person over physical drawings and blueprints. I assume that immense planning went into each design and each process involved in the physical fabrication of the building. I would guess the firms would divide into groups to each tackle different elements or stages of the design, frequently meeting to develop ideas together, then cross meet with other groups to insure that their ideas aligned. High precision in the designs and craft of the drawings would have been required to find clashes between elements.
Coordination digitally has various advantages. Primarily it is a huge time saver. Updating automatically, ideas are constantly being communicated between all workers and designers. Further, because everything becomes uploaded digitally, designers can work remotely, abandoning the requirement that everyone needed to be present to ensure that ideas were communicated clearly.
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?
Is it ever too early?