Regarding the preparation of as-built drawings

A cover must definitely be used; moreover, when printing your electronic signature, color printing is required.

In accordance with the requirements of **DA/T28—2002: Requirements for Archiving Documents of Major Construction Projects and Standards for Document Organization – Section 1: Use of As-Built Drawing Stamps**, all as-built drawings must be stamped and signed by the entity that prepared them, one by one. The contents in the as-built drawing stamp must be filled in completely and clearly; no proxy signing is allowed. 2 Where the industry regulatory authorities require the design unit to prepare as-built drawings, the as-built drawing symbols may be used in the new drawings, with the symbols signed as required. The content format of completion icons is uniformly specified by the industry. 3 The completion stamp should be applied with red ink, in a blank area near the title bar. For reference!

Article 4.2.8 of the \"Code for Organization of Construction Project Documents\" GB/T50328-2001 specifies that the completion drawing stamp should be 50x80 mm in size, with detailed requirements regarding the font and content used. The stamp is to be applied using indelible red ink in an empty area at the top of the completion drawing.

May I ask whether the as-built drawings are prepared by the design institute or by the construction unit? The as-built drawings of our company are all prepared by the construction contractor, but I think they should be prepared by the design institute.

How to use an electronic stamp on a ready-made blueprint? It’s not realistic. It’s still better to use a stamp; you can engrave the name of the company on it, and all you need to do is write your signature and date. Moreover, it’s not certain where the completion stamp should be placed; it depends on the person in charge.

Discussion: I think it’s better to use an electronic stamp; using a red stamp is inconvenient. In the past, when drawings were made by hand, stamps were also applied to the corners of the sheets; after going digital, direct pasting was used instead. Previously, it was the construction company that prepared the as-built drawings, and since they did not have an electronic version of the original drawings, it would be a good approach for them to stamp the prepared as-built drawings with a red seal and then sign them. The problem is that it’s now the design firm that is responsible for preparing the as-built drawings. Since the design institute already has the electronic versions of these documents, why go through the extra step of stamping them with a red seal? Isn’t that complicating something that could be done simply? If a red stamp is used for signing, the workload is much greater; the name of the supervision company must be entered manually for each instance, and separate documents need to be signed one by one. Additionally, some drawings simply cannot be signed. To take an extreme example, if a domestic company does the design and a foreign company oversees the project, should we invite staff from the foreign supervision company to sign there, or go abroad with the drawings to carry out the signing? I think using red stamps on as-built drawings still fails to fully demonstrate the advantages of digital design. SH3503-2007 requires the use of a completion stamp, but it does not provide detailed instructions on how to apply this stamp. I tried calling for clarification, but no one answered, so I had to turn to fellow members for help. Personally, I think the main purpose of as-built drawings is for reference; as long as the information is accurate and complete and there are signatures, that’s sufficient. The form of the signature isn’t that important, so it’s better to use electronic seals instead.

This post was last edited by ms3210 on 2009-11-1 at 19:39. I really agree with this guy’s opinion; our current employer stipulates in 3503 that it should be the design firm that prepares the as-built drawings, yet they insist that it be done by us, the construction team, and they don’t even pay us for it. Where can we go to appeal this?

In the past, it was the construction companies that prepared the as-built drawings, and at that time, each drawing was stamped to indicate that it was an as-built drawing. Currently, it is required that design institutes prepare as-built drawings, but the specifications do not outline exactly how such drawings should be prepared; this also depends on the requirements of the owner’s archives department. I think it’s better to stamp each one individually.

CNPC requires that for those as-built drawings or corner stamps that already indicate “as-built drawing,” there is no need to apply an “as-built drawing stamp”; instead, a “supervision unit approval stamp” should be used. Such stamps generally include fields such as the supervision unit name, the supervision engineer’s name, and the date. The entity responsible for preparing the as-built drawings must sign the as-built drawing according to the requirements. The supervision unit reviews the as-built drawings as required and signs to confirm them on the \"Supervision Unit Review Seal\".