So this is it, plain and simple, what do you dimension to? -to the face of the stud, OR to the face of the finished surface?
I have always thought it was to the stud. Think about the building sequence, and you'll agree with me, ha! But hear me out, the 1st thing that would be laid out is the stud. Therefore, the 1st thing that the building constructor would want to know is where to lay the studs. And let's face it, we must make it easy for them so we can avoid errors and silly RFIs. However, if you want to show that your plans meet ADA clearances (ie bathrooms) to a building official, then you can say face of finish, adding a "CLR" next to the dimension.
But arguibly it is a matter of preference, firm standards, and (I must add) CAD limitations (Archicad anyone?)...
I still believe it should be to the face of the stud. What say you?
I have always thought it was to the stud. Think about the building sequence, and you'll agree with me, ha! But hear me out, the 1st thing that would be laid out is the stud. Therefore, the 1st thing that the building constructor would want to know is where to lay the studs. And let's face it, we must make it easy for them so we can avoid errors and silly RFIs. However, if you want to show that your plans meet ADA clearances (ie bathrooms) to a building official, then you can say face of finish, adding a "CLR" next to the dimension.
But arguibly it is a matter of preference, firm standards, and (I must add) CAD limitations (Archicad anyone?)...
I still believe it should be to the face of the stud. What say you?
i'm starting to think that it very well be a trade preference. architects who deal w healthcare and academic projects seem to think that F.O. finish is the way to go.
ReplyDeleteyou would think that something was simple as dimensioning would be a standarized item across architectural firms in the country.
ReplyDelete