Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Design Options vs. Phases for Additive Alternate

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Design Options vs. Phases for Additive Alternate

    I am interested in some opinions about criteria one might use to decide whether to use design options or phasing for a large additive alternate for a building. The additive alternate is substantial - adding almost 25% floor area on 3 stories and must be documented in the same document set with the base project. It is essentially adding another wing to the building This also includes consideration for MEP systems (which I know do not play well with design options) as well as floors, stairs, roofs, etc.
    What do you consider to be the inflection point where design options just don't work well with a large enough data set? Is there a limit? What other factors might affect a decision to go one way or the other? Is this even an intelligent question? Any insight you can provide is appreciated.

    #2
    It's a very intelligent question ... one I've asked myself many times. I think I might go with phasing for this one ... at least architecturally. Unless the MEP systems are completely independent, they won't be able to use phasing.

    Design options require an additional layer of view management beyond phasing that is unnecessary (IMHO).

    A third option: use a scope box for that area (as well as one for the main project area(s)). Then use the scope boxes to crop the undesired part of the building out of your views. At a minimum MEP could use this technique.

    Comment


      #3
      I don't consider there to BE an inflection point. That would 100% be design options, for me.

      Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk
      Aaron "selfish AND petulant" Maller |P A R A L L A X T E A M | Practice Technology Implementation
      @Web | @Twitter | @LinkedIn | @Email

      Comment


        #4
        +1 for design option. Just be clear and precise with the separation line.
        There are no stupid questions, only stupid people

        Comment


          #5
          Phasing implies time/sequence. Design Option implies scope change. That's how I always look at it, so this would be 100% DO. Worksharing becomes an issue if there are multiple people working on it, that's the only 'limit' I usually consider.
          Last edited by zsmith3; February 10, 2021, 04:33 PM.

          Comment


            #6
            Originally posted by zsmith3 View Post
            Phasing implies time/sequence. Design Option implies scope change. That's how I always look at it, so this would be 100% DO.
            Agreed. Phases for construction sequence. Design options for alternates and scope change.
            Tony Perez @Twitter
            Senior Structural Designer
            Tesla Gigafactory - Austin

            Comment

            Related Topics

            Collapse

            Working...
            X