Anyone having problems with disclipline overlap issues 1

[alphamaleomega]

I am a practicing structural engineer. Many of our projects are small building projects. Architects in our community are saying that ANY structure for human occupancy needs an Architect as the project leader.

We in the engineeing community feel the client can decide what range of services they need, as long as the project is code compliant in regards to life and safety review.

This issue is heating up to be a major turf war. My clients usually know what they need, and do not wilh to pay 5-15% of a projects cost for full Architectural services. Most have bben down that road and want a code compliant plan that is economical to build and didn't cost them a fortune to design, and build because an Architect wanted to put his or her artistic signature ion the job.

I would like to hear what others have to say about this issue.

 

[HgTX]

Offering nothing useful in the way of turf war experience, just opening my mouth with an opinion.

You can have a functional safe structure without an architect, but it might not be pretty. Which aspect should have priority? Which should have the leadership role? I cannot BELIEVE there's even a case to be made for the architects to be in charge. An architect can't put up a safe structure, and I have seen plenty of "architectural" decisions make for a code-compliant but still less robust structure than the un-architected one would have been.

It's not just architects, either. I'm going through major annoyances right now because a mechanical engineer had "input" into a civil engineering structure. Mechanical engineers may know a lot more about moving parts than we do, but they sure as hell don't know a damn thing about the codes we work to.

Hg

Eng-Tips guidelines: faq731-376

 

[Slugger926]

In Oklahoma, the engineers, fire marshalls, and architects created a document for building constructions that outlines exactly when an architect or engineer needs to sign off on a project, and what roles they will take. The law also states that certain buildings will always need an architect such as schools and churches. It also states that if an engineer designs a building, the engineer can't sign off or advertise the drawings as architecture drawings (whatever that means).

The regulations and law are still vague if I can design my own house and sign off on it as a PE even though I would follow all of the codes. My wife is wanting to design our next house ourselves and do our own subcontracting.

 

[TheTick]

Mandating that an architect be a project leader is simply petty. There may be a need for a requirement for an architecht's involvement, but this does not mean an architect must be the project leader.

 

[EddyC]

The various states have rules on who should be the prime designer on different types of building projects. In New York for example, engineers and architects are considered interchangable, as long as they have sufficient proficiency in the aspects of the project involved. But if you go over to New Jersey, there is an entire list of building types that require architects to be the lead designer. Of course, the various design professions do try to have the laws changed to favor their particular profession. I personally object to engineers being subcontractors to architects or construction companies. It makes life harder for the engineer.

 

[jheidt2543]

This turf war has been going on for decades. Every time there is a slow down in construction, the battle begins again. As noted by EddyC, most states have requirements and define the rolls somewhat.

I don't agree that engineers can't produce a good looking building. There are many engineers that have designed good looking and functional buildings. Don't believe all of that AIA promotional info. But, like every building material, each designer has a place. We just should allow the architects to squeeze us out of one.

If you are really going to do battle, contact the National Society of Professional Engineers (NSPE). They have been down this road before and can bolster your arguments.

 

[plasgears]

Architects used to demand primacy on bridges of all descriptions. The best bridges were honest engineering works with form following function. When architects got involved, meaningless filigree additions and sculptures invaded the scene.

When photos are shown of the Westinghouse Concrete Arch Bridge in Pittburgh, the usual depiction is one of the sculptures on the deck. The long view of the multiple arch structure is really the best depiction.

Part of the reason for architects demanding primacy is that, in the early years, engineering was viewed as one of the trades.

 

[Ron]

Most state boards recognize the overlap between architects and engineers. In my home state, it is specifically addressed in the law....that engineers may design certain projects as the sole project leader and architects may do the same...check your state board's position on the issue.