What is the thought regarding abbreviated elevations on plans. For example all of the elevations on the project fall within elevation 26xx' so you annotate flow line elevations as 88.24' meaning 2688.24'. This is pretty common on sketches...what is your feeling for using this method on project plans? If it is acceptable, do you think there needs to be a note or legend explaining the notation method?
Then how about abbreviated stations....you have even stations labeled 26+00....27+00 and label something in between as +54.23. Again acceptable on project plans? Does it require explanation on project plans?
Are you trying to save some space?
imaudigger, post: 415377, member: 7286 wrote: you have even stations labeled 26+00....27+00 and label something in between as +54.23
Caltrans did this for decades. I don't know if they still do or not.
Ya, 1"=40' plans. Just trying to keep them clean.
Something like this...My gut feeling is that to avoid liability the full into should be shown...but I like how I have it now.
I have no problem with it. What bugs me more is when they don't leave a tick mark at breaks in the alignment, especially when the only way to pull information from the paper copies of the plans is to scale. 😉 Jp
I can remember translating State Coordinates to numbers that did not exceed 10,000, 10,000 so they would be readable on an HP41 and HP48 and would not wrap around on a printout.
Would also show spot grades leaving off the hundred number when shown between contour lines.
imaudigger, post: 415377, member: 7286 wrote: What is the thought regarding abbreviated elevations on plans. For example all of the elevations on the project fall within elevation 26xx' so you annotate flow line elevations as 88.24' meaning 2688.24'. This is pretty common on sketches...what is your feeling for using this method on project plans? If it is acceptable, do you think there needs to be a note or legend explaining the notation method?
Then how about abbreviated stations....you have even stations labeled 26+00....27+00 and label something in between as +54.23. Again acceptable on project plans? Does it require explanation on project plans?
It depends. Who is your audience? Is it fellow professionals that would reasonably (sorry couldn't resist) be expected to figure it out? Or is going to be some minimum wage shovel handler or the mythical concrete right of way monument setter that didn't finish Jr. High?
Brian Allen, post: 415403, member: 1333 wrote: It depends. Who is your audience? Is it fellow professionals that would reasonably (sorry couldn't resist) be expected to figure it out? Or is going to be some minimum wage shovel handler or the mythical concrete right of way monument setter that didn't finish Jr. High?
The plans are primarily directed towards a general contractor who would be responsible for interpreting the plans sufficient to correctly bid and construct the project. Of course a surveyor/engineer would be expected to understand them as well. I may be staking the project...maybe not.
Thinking of including something like this on the first sheet to spell it out.
The abbreviated stations I something I've seen several state Dot's use (I thought it was industry standard).
As for abbreviated elevations, I'd definitely keep the note explaining it. I can't imagine anyone giving you grief over something like that (especially if it's stated so obviously like you have it shown).
I see this as no different than drawing a zig zag on a line you are showing not to scale for clarity, add a note stating 2600' has been subtracted from elevations shown for plan drafting clarity, make the font of the note bold to assure it draws the readers attention, mention the truncation method in the transmittal to client.
I see highway plans with abbreviated stations all the time. Not sure I've ever seen abbreviated elevations, but it's not really necessary in my area.
i got tired of getting phone calls from engineers complaining that "google maps says you are 7 thousand feet in error", so I put all four significant figures on my topos.
I've seen it used on airport taxiway & runway plans where grade elevations are given on a dense grid. Pages and pages of 10 foot grids. I'm not sure it would work so well for irregular spot elevations on a survey plan.