legal limits of pe versus architect 2

[jgeng]

What can an architect do that a PE can't? I have seen in state statues statements like an engineering can do architectural work only if it incidental to his work. What does this mean? Where is the line drawn between engineering tasks and architectural tasks?

Could an engineer ethically/legally do the following tasks on his own without the help of an architect?

1.design a residential building
2.design a commercial building
3.prepare a life safety plan
4.complete a full building code review of an existing or proposed structure.

 

[rbulsara]

Good question! I would be watching for others' responses. I am inclined to say yes, except where there are statues preventing them. I may stand corrected.



Rafiq Bulsara

http://www.srengineersct.com

 

[FeX32]

The question is "What can the Architect do without first consulting the Engineer?"


Fe

 

[Ron]

In most states, it is recognized that engineers and architects provide overlapping services, particularly civil engineers and architects, because of the broad nature of both professions. In most of the state laws that I've read for engineering practice, the "incidental" statement is in there.

Your item 1 rarely requires an architect, but often requires an engineer for structural purposes, particularly in wind and seismic cases.

Item 2 is where it gets a bit fuzzy. Architects would complain if the building were anything but a box. An example would be something like a tilt-up concrete warehouse building that has essentially all structural elements and the "look" of the building is only differentiated by its exterior finishes and perhaps the window selection. If an engineer tried to design a 4-story office building, he'd probably get some flack from the architects. Conversely, if the architect tried to do the structural design on a 4-story office building, he'd get flack from the engineers; however, if he wanted to design a steel or wood frame one-story office building, he could probably do so.

Item 3 is a life safety issue which can be handled by either an architect or an engineer, as long as the engineer has general code interpretation experience.

Item 4 is done by both as well, general without complaint from either side, as there are more engineers doing condition assessments and code review than architects.

All comments are relative to US practices.

 

[MiketheEngineer]

A terrible problem - seems to vary from state to state and even from region to region....

In Illinois an archtiect can design steel I-beams but the engineer must have an SE license... makes no sense.

In Missouri - if a building has so many cubic feet or will be oocuppied by so many people - you have to have an architect - but not an engineer. Rediculous!!

A few years ago, an engineer designed a simple but fairly large warehouse where about 20 people would work. He got nailed.

Check with your local board.

 

[MiketheEngineer]

As an update - I ran into a similiar problem a few years ago. I called the state board which is run by engineers and architects.

The head of the architects said no way. The head of engineering said sure.

Go figure

 

[JLSeagull]

This is a two-way street. Check out this article in the Austin American Statesman via a link from the Texas PE site.

http://www.tbpe.state.tx.us/article_dukingitout.htm

;-)

 

[casseopeia]

I think the laws are purposely fuzzy to allow local interpretation. I don’t think you will ever get a definite answer.

From my own experience, good engineers with a sense of design are more capable of designing a building than some bad architects whose work I’ve reviewed and whose work I testify against in court. There are plenty of architects out there wiling and downright eager to design flat boxes. There are legions of namby-pamby architects who bend over and grab their own ankles and do whatever their Client wants even if it makes for a poorly functioning building.

But there are also visionary architects untethered by convention whose imaginations have spurred engineers to push the boundaries structural design.

"If you are going to walk on thin ice, you might as well dance!"

 

[cvanoverbeke]

In Ontario, Canada, the Architects and Professional Engineers have a Joint Practice Board. Basically in Ontario if it has to do with fire safety in a any reasonably sized building, it is the architect's responsibility. I am working on a public school where I refused to give an opinion on the fire rating of an wall assembly because it is DEFINITELY the architect's responsibility. I basically told the architect he had to give the opinion to the General Contractor. For Small Buildings (as defined in the Ontario Building Code 2006), engineers can perform alot of the functions of an architect. I have designed 2 custom homes, one worth $2,000,000 and one worth $250,000. My experience is that some architects have no idea now to build anything and very limited knowledge of actual construction methods and construction management techniques. I do not wish to paint all architects with the same brush but I have found that I would rather hire the architect and be the prime consultant. However in the public sector, they cannot get their head around an architect working for an engineer.

Regards,
Cvanoverbeke

 

[cvanoverbeke]

Joint Bulletin by Ontario Association of Architects and Professional Engineers Ontario. It is quite clear where the you need an architect or an engineer.

Regards,
Cvanoverbeke