Tardis Blue Prints

Police Call boxes

3rd printing submittal

from sddrawings.com

Art and prints are so much fun to work on.  There is a growing trend in digital art.  A lot has to do with the availability of high quality cameras as well as easy to manipulate those images easily.  Today's post/submittal has taken years in the making.  From an old school project, I have since modified these plans and got my first copyright (how exciting).

These are 18" x 24" 'Blue' Construction plans Version 3

The Metropolitan Police Telephone box (also known as a Tardis 

from the popular television show Dr. Who) was the successor to the old 

'watchbox' established in the London area early in the 19th Century. 

The first Police Telephone boxes were introduced into America in 1888. 

The earliest Police Box resembling Drawing G/A1 was erected in Newcastle 

in 1929. Originally built of wood, the design had changed to reinforced 

concrete, weighing in around two and one-half tons. 

Police Call Boxes, after which this design was drawn upon, were first 

built and placed in London in 1930. 

The cost was 43 L each, and by December 1953, there were 685 in existance. 

With the introduction of personal radio equipment, the Police Telephone 

Boxes were gradually phased out. 

This plan is nearly a full reproduction of the original plans used to build 

these icons of the past.

Art in Architecture

Art in Architecture

Why drawing systems matter and what that means to all of us

Like so many of my associates, I have always felt that in Architecture, the labor of craftsmen should stem from a well thought through design. The design process itself should come from a carefully thought through plan and executed as a work of art.  So the entire process of getting something built can be a beautiful form, from start to finish.  Otherwise, what is the purpose of just throwing something out there as technical garbage to be built from.  If Designers & Architects expect something beautiful to come from their drawings, shouldn't beauty be built into their plans and design?  Is it really enough to just have a technical drawing in hopes to have a structure built?

Maybe I'm over romanticizing the idea that blueprints and construction drawings have always been a thing of beauty.  If I look at Jefferson's designs and blueprints, using the University of Virginia's design (as seen above); I could very well imagine this piece framed in my office. That is my intent and purpose during design, the entire process should be a worthwhile endeavor.

So, in order to follow through and produce a set of plans; I don't think it's enough to simply have ideas and not implement them.  They need to be put into action.  For years I've been adding fills to technical drawings to give them the appearance of the material they represent (learned under Architect Mouzon), I've since began to add shadows and color to roofing for my 2D drawings.

Take a look at the following house:

The Top picture is more representative of conventional technical drawings. Flat & Bland.

This bottom picture shows shadows & a fill applied to the following: The Ground, Windows & Roof, each more closely representing the material they are graphically representing, such as glass & shingle roofing.

Shadows come last, it's not an exact science, most "Art" isn't.  It's there to convey an idea and give a feeling.

There are further ways to graphically show material such as glass. Industry standards dictate a series of diagonal lines.  Though what is standard in Construction Drawings becomes too muddled to try and show everything exactly as standards dictate, giving the drawing a feeling of "busyness"  Combat this solid or greyed fills, such as seen in the windows above

For future projects, I am experimenting in another direction, leaving behind the world of 2D elevations and implementing 3D rendering from Sketchup PRO, and will begin using it for Construction Drawings.

Basically, my idea is to not even bother drawing flat 2D CAD elevations or building sections, since those are really there to tell a story. I'll draw it in all in sketch up, export it to DWG or DXF and do a take off for floor plans and Wall Sections.

It's not as robust as Revit, but it seems to be working out well. I'm still developing the ideas to implement them; clients love it, Contractor's seem in different.

I wanted to share all of this, because as a community, I think we can knock heads and build a more beautiful world. I also think Art should be brought back to the entire process of Architecture, which begins when you put pen to paper or hear the chimes of the MAC fire up.

Sddrawings.com

The story of two hammers

Two different hammers,

Sometimes you're reminded how good that old hammer is...

Finally taking a step towards using AutoCad 2013 for Mac.  The juxtaposition between the CADD system (engsw.com) I am used to drawing with and the "industry leader" as two competing CADD packages shows noticeable differences.  I'm convinced if I were operating on a standard PC, the software would be much more robust.  Thus far, the Apple version of AutoCad leaves much to be desired.  I had no idea that you actually have to construct a door instead of having a dedicated tool palette.

The above graphic shows the same plan at different stages of

production on 2 separate CADD systems.

Furthermore, The Trim line function is nearly non existent without having to look up special "codes" to be typed in.  As I dig further into the inner workings of AutoCad, I see that one can get everything done with the same software I was raised up on, but it seems backwards and non-intuitive.  As if only special members of the club are invited.


As a "for Hire" Draftsman and Designer, I really have to make every hour count.  Maybe learning a new system will glean me more clients and help me to be more valuable and useful to the ones I have.  Here's to hoping so.  Through it all, I think using a new tool, that effectively drives the same nail into framing will be neat to use. It should get the job done, it's just that I know how to use one hammer over another with more in-depth knowledge.

Powercadd
Two screen shots showing the difference in tool pallets. You'll notice this screen shot, Powercadd (by engsw.com) has all the tools readily available.  Reminds me of the old Microstation CADD from the 80's.  Which featured a huge board with each tool right at your finger prints (you actually used a stylus).  One thing I really like about PC (powercadd) is how every single item from line weight to a specific function or tool is easily configurable as key commands.  Also built in are powerful informational tools and a developer who will actually take your emails and call you on a saturday morning to discuss your ideas and needs in a cadd package.  My only problem, text conversion can be an issue between this and other platforms.  You also lose fills, gradients and hatches when converting.  Though the native tools can help you to create an amazingly beautiful drawing.  I would say it is the premiere Apple compatible CADD system, even the late Mr. Jobs may approve of.

Autocad 2013 for Mac

Autocad 2013 for Mac, limited tools are readily available, and everything is more chunky. Requires memorizing specific tool commands.  This may be good for Architectural firms and drafting shops that need people to operate a system that is already configured for use. I understand Autocad has some good features, it wouldn't be the Q-Tip to the Great cotton swab industry if it didn't offer a way to get the job done.  It seems to lack any kind of shading and intuitive use.  Drawings look clear and crisp like Powercadd, though very technical.

Regardless of what system you use, branching out and trying something new is always good.  Then sometimes you realize how good you already have it. Any Cad package is essentially a hammer used to drive a nail into a wall.  It's the final design and attention to detail coupled with the ability to listen and help guide Owners in building, that make a designer worth while.

sddrawings.com

So, Just who is an Architect?

Who is an Architect?

Stepping into a hornet's nest here I know...

This was inspired by a thread over at Linkedin, where there are some wonderful thoughts and then there are some very ignorant opinions.

So who is an architect? from sddrawings.com

An Architect is a person whom: graduates from an accredited University, works in an Architectural office, obtains the proper amount of time as required under the direct supervision of a licensed Architect, passes their accrediting exams and becomes licensed themselves.  They then will have to keep their license through on going education, keep insurance on themselves and continue to practice in the field of designing buildings.

At least that is the synopsis I got from reading the thread. There has been very little discussion about what to call the class of professional whom has the talent to design some of the most beautiful buildings and is not a registered Architect.  A great man once told me, Jefferson was not a licensed Architect, though he designed and built Monticello, undoubtably one our nations greatest examples of classical Architecture and a crown jewel.  Under the current system, a person can not call themselves an Architect even if they have completed school and been in the field for decades on end.  This is absurd and irrational.  This ideologue is akin to the seagulls in "Finding Nemo" who screech "mine", when they see a bit of food being offered.

Architecture is the science of blending Art with construction to form the art of design through the built form, more or less.  In today's construction world, A licensed contractor can erect an enclosed space with minimum plans and the final product can be abysmal.  His take at Architecture on that project could be seen as a failure, even if the building is sounds and meets all codes, the final aesthetic appeal makes the project a flop.  He is still not an Architect, just a builder.  An Architect can design a building and it too can be a flop, even if it passes all building codes.  Just like writers can flop at their craft, painters etc… So this argument leads me to consider anyone who engages in the design of a building is practicing Architecture, just as anyone who obtains pay to build a building is a Builder, anyone who paints and gets money for it is a painter; painter, "one who paints".

I am a draftsman.  I draw for a living under the direction of Architects, Planners and Contractors.  Often time I am asked to draw a house plan or help with the renovation/addition of a house.  I could be considered a Designer under this pretext.  I have been in the field of Architecture for roughly 14 years. I have not been through an Architecture program, much to my dismay.  Life events have kept me from the opportunity to do such, and so I would never use the term Architect, to describe myself.  This does not mean I am not qualified to be able to produce a set of construction drawings and a beautiful design.  After so many years in a field, one learns a little something.  With side studying and networking, I have picked up and am more capable of most students, interns and probably many registered Architects to come up with a solution to a design need.

Now, of two people, one being a licensed Architect proven by the state to have met the minimum requirements to be capable of designing a building; the other having 20 years in the field and perfectly capable of the same project management and design.  Common sense tells us to hire the person with the degree, then we look at experience, ability, availability and cost.  That is what a client really needs to consider: "Can this person perform for me and help me design the best design for my needs".  THAT is what I do.  When I need another professional such s a structural or civil engineer, I call someone.  When I need a registered Architect, I have a group of people I work with I can pick who I think would be the best person to work on a specific project.  In essence, I'm not selling you on just me and my ability, but someone who can choose the right team for your project.

Then there are the Java/software Architects... that's for a whole other discussion...

sddrawings.com

This little Cabin Packs a Punch with lots of amenities

The little Cabin that could,

This Cabin Packs a Punch with lots of amenities...

2d plans | 3d plans

At 612 sq ft on the First Floor, a little less upstairs. This Cabin features:

• 3 bed / 2 bath
• An integrated Booth @ the Kitchen Island, open Pantry shelves so your foods don't get lost in the back (look for a blog rant about that here soon)
• Ample room in the open Den featuring a fireplace and vaulted ceiling that looks up to a sleeping loft.
• Master Bedroom shares a full bath with guests downstairs
• 2 Bedrooms and full bath upstairs with more room in a common sleeping loft for bunk beds or to be used as a play room
• Wide front porch for enjoying this beautiful Fall weather in October

sddrawings.com

On the state of Computer Hardware for Drafting

On the state of Computer Hardware for Drafting from sddrawings.com

Drafting has come a long way from the old drafting tables and drawing buildings by hand, or cutting out GFCI outlets and pasting them onto a floor plan.  I view drafting as part of my artistic endeavors.  So when I design something (even if it may never be built), I still consider it to be a piece of art that I would find pride in hanging, on anyones wall.

So if drafting is an art, how far back can we define drafting as it is known today?  Surely we can all agree modern CADD drafting falls under this pretense.  Using a computer & sitting down to render an object (think ship blueprints, or designs for your 'what-ch-a-ma-call-it') or a building in any shape or form is considered drafting.  If we go back further than modern day to 1889 when the Eiffel Tower was erected, the blueprints for the Eiffel tower and the process of creating those plans was considered being 'drafted'. The tools were different, the process was probably a bit more involved, yet the team of Designer's and craftspeople accomplished an amazing structure by drawing it first.

What about further back through the years?  Tools and processes continue to change the further back we go in time.  Egyptians used reeds and papyrus, wooden boards and hieroglyphic symbols to get their point across.  I'm sure the pyramids and cities were thought through prior to just digging down and laying a foundational stone. Same with the Mayans, whom used animal hair and feather quills to write in their codexes.    So through the years, drafting has always been a beginning phase of where the Art of building, begins and intercedes with an idea.  Infact, that's the entire process of drafting, to get an idea across.  To make something so you can make something else, properly.

Using modern equipment involves a computer, a mouse, keyboard, screen and the software to make it all go.  I use an Apple MacBook Pro with a Microsoft bluetooth mouse.  I've used probably at least a dozen different computers or laptops to make my drawings.  I've dealt with printers and plotters, setting up rolls of paper and hand feeding in special printed vellum with title blocks and stamps.  In the drafting field, we are so much more lucky to have what we have today versus the tools of the past.  We are so disconnected from having to render anything by hand, I'm afraid the 'art' of drawing is going to be lost.  One of my last projects 'The Austin', I did sit down and make 3 or 4 pages of hand drawings and sketches.  They were rudimentary to the point where I achieved the basic shapes and proportions I felt would look appealing. In fact, I jumped straight to a 3d rendering of this house plan and skipped the standard 2 dimensional floor plan process completely.  Then there is my Lake Cabin 1 (3d version) where I never did touch graphite to paper to draw the first line, though I did draw the floor plan in 2d CAD and the 3d renderings last.  So my process has been a mix of hand drawing, photography of interesting details, maybe I just saw a bracket I liked and sketched it for later, or sometimes inspiration hits by the ways of a paying client who just wants a floor plan, which was the case with my Lake Cabin 1 (2d version).

Drafting on a laptop has it's ups and downs, I can draw whenever and where ever, though I find using the trackpad unbearable, so my needs necessitate the use of a mouse, mouse pad and table to set up my computer.  I prefer to have a secondary screen to just my laptop screen.  Having two monitors is a game changer.  I can only imagine thinking about the egyptians attempting to draw on half a board, where having two halves would be a huge bonus.  Think about your computer set up, could you operate more efficiently by having your tools pallets on one screen and your main drawings on another?  Another bonus to this set up is having reference files open on your smaller screen behind your tool pallets.  I can open a reference file from a past job, check font types, line weights and then jump straight back to the plan I'm working on currently.  I've talked about this in a previous article, How to deal with Learning a New Drafting Style.

As far as computer systems go and monitors, most are interchangeable.  If you're new to the drafting world, you're going to become a tech guy once you land a job in the field.  Especially if you find a position in a smaller firm.  Not only did I draft for an Architect *Cough Steve Mouzon, but I became quiet proficient at removing boards, knowing how to install, reinstall software, rebuild operating systems, setting up local area networks and trouble shooting a myriad of problems.  What you'll learn if you don't already know (the younger generation here probably already has it all figured out) is that the ability of certain graphic cards installed in a computer can only push out so much information to a monitor, or vice-a-versa; a monitor can only handle so much while a graphics card may well exceed the screens ability to render at the highest setting.  The same goes with computers, ram and hard drive space.  While the difference between different setups is usually cost to you the end user (buyer/consumer), the end difference is likely negligible with modern systems.

A question was posed to an online forum of CADD users I frequent, 'What's the difference between 2 computer set ups' one advertising a clock speed of 700 mhz faster than another model.  The consensus from the group with this answer: 'About $250 and maybe 15 seconds of lost rendering time a day, IF you're using a highly intense 3d program'.  So in a nutshell, yes, time is money and you get what you pay for, but you can still get to the store in a Pinto, as you can a Mustang.  I chose a middle of the road rebuilt Apple laptop.  Namely because I can travel and work out of the office at remote locations.  I didn't want to spend excess money or go into debt to buy the top of the line computer where a used one was only 6 months old. I preferred a built in DVD/CD drive over having to buy an external one to go with the top of the line model. I have made some choices with other hardware.  I wanted a bluetooth mouse so I could hook up an external drive to my laptop (the drive uses both USB ports to power it).  Had I gone with another brand like a Logitech mouse, I would have lost mouse use or backup use; as those mice require the use of one of your USB ports to power the RF controller so the computer can talk to the mouse. So I would then have to draw with the trackpad, which again, I disdain.

Since we're talking backing up your computer, I see it much like the old Realtor's slogan 'Backup, Backup, Backup'.  You can never have enough backups.  I keep 4 separate copies of current projects.

*One backup is the hard drive is in my laptop

*Second backup is an external hard drive

*Third hard drive is another external hard drive I back up to about once a month

*Fourth hard drive is a free online backup service (Dropbox)

Older projects are on all of my local external hard drives while I also burn DVD's once a year of my entire system.  Losing a hard drive doesn't have to be a problem, if you will just back up.

So on an Apple computer running Powercadd, I chose a setup that works for me.  Research your programs to see what will work for you. Buy an external hard drive and setup an incremental backup regiment. Research is easy with a couple of hours and a wideband connection.   If you don't have a computer yet, use a friends, or the public library.  You don't need the most current computer and your most cost effective way to get a faster system will be to increase RAM.  Other parts can be changed out later over time.

sddrawings.com

Design & Drafting techniques

Another week: sddrawings.com In Keeping with drafting techniques for the beginner. Again, another post about keeping to the basics, keeping it simple, and keeping it accurate. I hope that even these ideas can be used in what ever job you may go into; whether it is design, pet sitting, auto mechanics, climbing telephone poles, etc…

Every Engineering firm & Architectural office has their own way of producing CAD drawings.  Just like every artisan has their own way of painting, every mechanic has their own way of fixing a problem and every telephone lineman has their own way of placing strand and cable.  The old saying goes at 'Ma Bell', you send 6 linemen out to do a job, you'll have 6 different ways for it to get done.  Whom ever you work for will have their own set of rules and ways of drawing.  A big secret I've used for years was to ask an Architect or Engineer for a copy of their work to reference.  Even a paper copy will give away secrets to their drawing style, though paper copies will not show advanced CAD information such as 'layers'.  Having a paper copy of a similar project as a reference handy, will help you on matching the office standards.

 Some Designers tend to have a lax approach to their drafting techniques.  They opt to simply get their point across, making the design being built their main focus, while they see CAD drawings are simply the means to make that happen.  Where they are lax in drawing techniques, they usually have a more hands on approach to the final outcome of the project.  The Contractor will usually find this designer in the field more often.  This designer is also more apt to make calls to check on projects and verify everything is going the way it should.  As a draftsman working for this style of Designer, you will probably be called upon to make field visits and document the progress or verify dimensions.

 Other designers are very meticulous about their drawings.  They will have every element fit on a page precisely.  This can provide for very quick drafting and allow for modifications easily.  Usually these designers are very detailed orientated and have greater success through release of their drawings to be built correctly, with little or no further input from the Designer.  Even during construction, a builder will have fewer questions regarding this Designer's intent (which I will address in the future).

 I personally like to use a mix of these two drafting techniques.  My goal is to find a happy medium between art and giving instructions on how something should be built or compiled.  One aspect of any design work, is the use of 're-usable' content.  This spans across all industry.  It is rare to find a car where every bolt is a different size and thread count.  The same goes for any of my designs, whether that is drawing a house or designing a web site. 

if we look at a few of my latest web site designs:

sddrawings.com   hikealabama.org   habitat2012.org (Just to name a few) 

You'll see a common element in all three of these.  That element is the menu bar (as of Sept 2012), is essentially the same across all 3 sites.  I did this to simply save time.  Not that I can not go back and change it later, but an initial place holder with a product I know was designed correctly the first time saved me days of fiddling with html & css code.  Just like one of my past posts about getting things drawn right the first time see http://sddrawing.blogspot.com/2012/09/its-all-in-dimensions_9.html, once you get a detail or drawing element correct, it's easy to reuse it across many drawings, or in this case a web page.

The bonus of this 're-use' of an element or detail, is that my finished product is completed much quicker as there is less drafting & design work to do.  The entire point being; learn what works for your office, learn how to reference other work to mimic or match what has been done in the past & be accurate with your work as it will make it much easier in the future to reuse your own work.

Feel free to email or post your own thoughts. sddrawings.com