Engineering drawing review: what is reviewed?

The original poster should search on the forum; there are many discussions on this topic

http://bbs.hcbbs.com/viewthread.php?tid=410061&highlight=%BB%E1%C9%F3 I’ll help you search for that post and take a look

You need to see what stage it is at; if it’s the stage before construction, then it basically involves providing the drawings for explanation； If it is in the design phase, then external review of the preliminary or detailed design drawings!

Generally speaking, the aspects that should be checked when reviewing a drawing are roughly as follows: . Check whether the types and quantities of drawings are complete, in accordance with the regulations for each respective stage. . Check whether the existing drawings meet the depth requirements and if there is any content that needs to be added. . It is necessary to check whether there are any errors in the content of the existing drawings and make corrections if needed. There are certain principles to follow when reviewing drawings, so it is necessary to be familiar with the relevant regulations.

Are you the general contractor or something similar? If you’re a beginner without any project experience, it’s better to start with the big picture before moving on to the details. First, gain an overall understanding of drawing management, and then delving into the specifics of the drawings will be more effective.

Before construction, it is necessary to carefully check whether the contents listed in the drawing catalog are comprehensive; an overall understanding of the construction drawings is essential. A holistic concept of the general layout plan as well as the specific locations depicted in the drawings must be established, dimensions must be verified, and it is important to assess whether the logical relationships between the different drawings are sound.

1. Self-review of drawings 1.1 The self-review of drawings is organized by the project manager or chief engineer. 1.2 Upon receiving the drawings, the project manager or chief engineer shall promptly arrange or organize relevant personnel from the technical department as well as experienced workers to conduct a self-review, and prepare self-review records for each specialty. 1.3 Convene the relevant personnel in a timely manner to organize internal reviews, discuss the issues and suggestions identified during the individual professional reviews, and clarify the design intent as well as the characteristics and requirements of the project. 1.4 Main contents of self-review of drawings: 1.4.1 The number and numbering of construction drawings for each specialty, and whether they match the drawing catalog. 1.4.2 Whether the construction drawings, construction drawing specifications, and general design specifications are complete, whether the requirements are clear, and whether there are any contradictions among them. 1.4.3 Check whether the coordinates, absolute elevations indicated on the plan are consistent with those in the general layout. 1.4.4 Check for any errors in the dimensions on the drawings, the elevations, the locations of reserved holes and embedded components, as well as the reinforcement in the plan and elevation views and in the cross-sections. 1.4.5 Check whether there are any contradictions regarding axes, positions (coordinates), elevations, and intersection points between the building construction drawings and structural construction drawings, as well as between the structural construction drawings and the professional construction drawings for foundations, water supply, electricity, heating, sanitation, ventilation, etc. Are there any contradictions between the floor plans and the detail drawings? 1.4.6 Whether the numbers, specifications, models, and quantities of the components shown on the drawings match those in the component list. 1.5 After self-review of the drawings, any issues identified along with relevant suggestions should be recorded and submitted for discussion and resolution during the drawing review meeting. 2. Drawing Review 2.1 Purpose of Drawing Review: To understand the design intent and clarify quality requirements, and to resolve as many of the issues and errors present in the drawings, as well as any conflicts between different specialties, as possible before the start of construction. 2.2 Participants in the review: project manager, project technical leader, professional technical personnel, quality inspectors, and other relevant personnel. 2.3 Review time: It should generally be carried out before the start of the construction project; in special cases, the review can also be organized while construction is in progress (for example, when the drawings cannot be provided in a timely manner). 2.4 Review Content 2.4.1 Examine whether the construction drawings meet **relevant technical, economic policies and applicable regulations. 2.4.2 Review the foundation engineering design and ground treatment in the construction drawings to check for any issues and to ensure they are in line with the actual geological conditions at the site. 2.4.3 Check whether the coordinates, elevations of the construction project are consistent with those indicated in the general plan, and whether there are any contradictions or errors in the geometric relationships with related construction projects, as well as in terms of axis relationships and directions. 2.4.4 Check whether the drawings and specifications are complete and clear; verify that the drawings related to architecture, structure, water supply and drainage, heating, plumbing, ventilation, electricity, and equipment installation are consistent with each other, and that the dimensional relationships and elevations are accurate. 2.4.5 Check whether there are any contradictions among the architectural plan, elevation, and sectional views, or whether any markings are missing; verify if there are any errors in the plan dimensions of the architectural drawings, ensure that all elevations meet the required standards, and confirm that they are consistent with the plan dimensions and elevations in the structural drawings. 2.4.6 Examine whether there are any conflicts between the construction project and underground structures, pipelines, etc. 2.4.7 Check whether there are any errors or contradictions in the structural diagram itself, and whether a list of rebar details is included in it. If no such list exists, verify whether the requirements regarding the rebar configuration in reinforced concrete are clearly specified in the diagram, such as the rebar anchorage length and the lengths required for seismic resistance. 2.4.8 Examine the parts of the construction drawings where construction is particularly difficult, determine what special materials, components, and fittings will be used, and plan how to source them. 2.4.9 Discuss the feasibility of the new technologies, new structures, new materials, new processes, and new equipment adopted in the design, as well as the necessary measures to be taken. 2.4.10 In cases where new technologies or new structures proposed in the design are constrained by factors such as construction conditions, the capabilities of construction machinery and equipment, and safe construction practices, and it is necessary for the design team to make adjustments to the design, these issues must be raised during the review process so that they can be discussed together to find an optimal solution. 2.5 Review Procedure 2.5.1 The review is convened by the project owner. The project owner shall separately notify the design party, the supervision party, and the subcontracted construction units (in the case of subcontracting by the construction unit, it is the construction unit that shall give the notification) to attend. 2.5.2 Review is divided into “specialized review” and “comprehensive review”, aimed at resolving various contradictions within a particular specialty as well as between different specialties, as well as issues related to coordination during construction. Whether it is a \"specialized\" or \"comprehensive\" review, before the review takes place, the design unit should first explain the design intentions, as well as the important and critical aspects. It should also outline the methods, requirements, and quality standards related to the new technologies, structures, processes, materials, and equipment that will be used. Only after that can various parties raise their questions. 2.5.3 During the joint review, the project technical personnel shall put forward the unified opinions from the self-review and record them. After the joint review, the review records for the drawings are compiled, and they become valid once stamped by all the units that participated in the review. 2.5.4 Depending on the actual circumstances, the drawings can also be reviewed in stages, such as for the basement works, the main structure, the decoration work, and the plumbing, heating, and ventilation systems ； When there are many and significant issues with the drawings, a re-review can be conducted during construction to address the design problems that arise during implementation. 2.6 Contents of the joint review record 2.6.1 Project name (specify the phase of the individual work items during phased joint reviews). 2.6.2 Units participating in the joint review (full names required) and the names of their personnel (titles are not allowed in place of names). 2.6.3 Location of the joint review (the location must be specific), and date of the joint review (year, month, day). 2.6.4 Contents of the joint review record: 1) Contradictions and issues identified by the construction entity and the construction contractor in the design drawings, which require responses and revisions from the designer. (Mention the figure type and figure number; include a figure caption if necessary). 2) The results of discussions and solutions proposed by the construction contractor regarding requests to the design unit to modify certain aspects of the design, for the purposes of facilitating construction, ensuring construction safety, or addressing issues related to building materials. (Mention the figure type and figure number; include a figure caption if necessary). 3) Issues that have not been resolved during the joint review or require further discussion. 4) List the names of the units participating in the review, and it shall take effect after stamping.

Do you review the drawings at the design institute, or is it the client who reviews the drawings prepared by the design institute? If it’s the design institute doing the review, it’s likely that the supervisors want to train you first, to help you learn; you need to examine the process flow, look at the standards and specifications referenced, and see how others draw diagrams. If it is the owner’s review, you need to first check whether the list of drawings is complete, then see if the level of detail in the drawings is sufficient to meet the requirements of the design phase, and finally check for any errors. Anyway, first of all, one must learn more from the experienced masters* and be a bit more polite

1. The number and numbering of the construction drawings for each specialty, and whether they match the drawing catalog. 2. Errors on the surface of the drawings, such as spelling mistakes, consistency between different parts of the drawings, and various basic annotations. 3. Are the construction drawings, construction drawing specifications, and general design specifications complete? Are the regulations clear? Are there any contradictions among the three? 4. Do the numbers, specifications, and quantities of the components shown on the drawings match those in the component list? 5. Focus on the technical aspects: whether there are any deviations from the standards and whether the calculations meet the requirements. 6. Is the coordination among various specialties consistent? 7. Are the drawing names and review checks correct and complete?