Structural Engineers getting slammed II 9

[Qshake]

All,

Having already read a thread where structural engineers have found themselves at the ire of one industry, I didn't know if I should dare post this little editorial.

I do think it would be good for all of us to vent on this topic...

STRUCTURE Magazine, a joint publication of NCSEA, CASE, and SEI April 2005 regenerates that age old arguement over architects doing structural engineer's work. The magazine lists

http://www.structure.org

for the website.

I can't for the life of me, understand how any architect in good judgement can do structural engineering work unless he or she is also educated as a structural engineer and in possesion of a PE or SE license.

On the flipside, I rarely see of any engineers being accused of practicing architecture. And why would we want to?!

There should be a clear line drawn so that architects cannont practice structural engineering unless they meet the criteria noted above. Heck I know of civil engineers who wouldn't dare practice structural engineering.

Regards,
Qshake

Eng-Tips Forums:Real Solutions for Real Problems Really Quick.

 

[jike]

The other day, I was called to look at a very, very simple building. It was designed by an architect only. My initial look at the drawings revealed number of structural problems.


The State Boards seem unwilling to tackle this polictically sensitive issue and I am sure that the AIA lobbies to maintain the status quo. The only way that it seems that it will getted solved is thru lawsuits and public awareness of this issue.

The temptation for the Architect is to earn more money and not have to hire a consultant. This is a self defeating attitude since if the Architect hired a consultant then he would have more time to market and take on additional projects.

Unfortunately, the unsophisticated clients are the ones that will get burned. The sophisticated clients generally want to know the qualifications and ability of each team member.

 

[MikeT14]

I have to agree with jike. Having seen the level of structural education given to most architects (I tutored a few in college), very few are qualified to make an entire structural design for a building. Not necessarily from an analysis standpoint, but more likely from a code enforcement and practicality/constructability standpoint.

Chances are nothing will change until something collapses or somebody rich gets burned on a design. Remember, SE's didn't have to be registered in Illinois until almost all of Chicago burned down!

 

[whyun]

It was not too long ago, when there weren't any structural engineers, greatest of architects roamed the earth. By no means were they trained to perform non-linear analysis. They still were able to build magnificent structures all around the world.

Where did they all go?

One solution is to elevate the level of structural portion of the architectural exams. Less competent ones will surely be weeded out, the ones who passes through the sieve will certainly be an asset to the modern-day structural engineer's career advancement. No more silly questions about how to attach a handrail bracket.

 

[swine]

I feel very safe when I walk into a building. Apparently architects are doing a good job designing buildings.

What is uncomfortable is the ever increasing number of titles, laws, specifications, codes, etc...

 

[jike]

Most of the buildings that architects perform the structural design are wood frame and simple steel framing. The common problem areas are usually things related to lateral loads or uplift. Shear walls, collectors, drag struts, diaphragm chords, eave blocking, holdowns, proper load path, etc. are often ignored. Many times, they simply specify that "the truss supplier shall design for the governing code" with no load diagrams for drifted snow or value for wind uplift given. I have seen wood floor framing for an office with no partition allowance!

 

[drawoh]

whyun,

A major reason that old stuff impresses us with its quality is that all the sloppy crap they made back then has fallen apart. For example, several medieval cathedrals fell down during or shortly after construction.

JHG

 

[SacreBleu]

Architects doing structural design? If i need an appendectomy, would I go to a chiropractor?
Frank Lloyd Wright despised structural engineers. He did his own engineering. Read all about the failing cantilever concrete beams in his Falling Waters masterpiece.

 

[JJF]

While I've had situations with architects influencing good structural design, most of my experience has been in heavy industry where the structural engineer is under a more difficult microscope.

In a plant environment, the scrutiny is by plant personnel (all "experts" in steel and concrete, after all, they built their own; garage/shed/outhouse, sometime in the past), other disciplines: I had an electrical engineer tell me that a building brace was unnecessary, because when he had the contractor cut through it, the building didn't fall down and of course project management: too expensive/too time consuming.

Unfortunately, since the structure (building or foundation) doesn't actually add to the plant production, it is one of those necessary evils. Death, taxes and the building doesn't fall down (no matter how many fork trucks crash into it) are the three inescapable facts in an industrial environment.

While this venting doesn't answer the original thread, I appreciate an opportunity to vent.

JJF

 

[whyun]

Point I wanted to make was that architects' abilities have declines over the last century. I am a structural engineer and I do agree with everyone's concern about how little architects know etc. Yes, in this millenium, I would not rely on an architect alone to design anything but single family homes, if that. I think that's a shame.

 

[EddyC]

My employer had a project where the Architect wanted as few columns as possible. The Architect created his layout (with columns) and passed it over to our structural group. The structural group had to go through iterations of design ($$$$, uncompensated) before they got something to work. They had to use large fixed footings, moment connections and very deep beams. All this on a town house complex. There is now so little space between the beams and the ceiling that the HVAC engineer had to go through design iterations of his own in order to get his part of the design to work (3 inch deep ducts). The plumbing system was affected as well, with the need to cut holes on the beam webs for the piping. All this nonsense was because the architect wanted too few columns. Lets see what happens when it goes into construction.

 

[LPPE]

I think that todays architects do not realize the consequences of their elaborate design. Not only does it effect structure sizes and layouts, but also HVAC, plumbing, etc. Where I work, there's not one engineer here who doesnt hate the architects. And we've even tried to have kick-off meetings to discuss whats reasonable, and at the meeting, the architects will agree, and then a month later we get the plans and they completely ignored what we had initially discussed. For instance, I have an existing shearwall. The architect asked how much of it they could remove for windows. I gave them a round figure of 30%. I saw the floor plan yesterday - 95% of shearwall is gone.
Granted, there are some smart, intelligent, well thought architects out there. However, it seems to me that a 95% of them are dumb as rocks.

 

[SacreBleu]

LPPE-
Architects are egotistical, and do whatever pleases the client. Anything the structural engineer does "spoils" their party. They couldn't care less about lack of shear. I have learned to deal with it.

 

[JAE]

I guess this is "dump on architects" day. But I will agree with what has been dumped above, but also add a bit of a counter to it all... I've worked with some good architects in the past (and currently) who have a fantastic general understanding of many disciplines and even have a bit of empathy for the design requirements of each.

What I think does happen is that an architect has his/her own set of pressures to produce the best design, under the budget, and coordinate all the disciplines as well.

So I think that many of them enter the equation with the attitude that "everyone has needs and is pulling on their rope...I'd better pull on my rope or I'll get screwed". They push as far as they can to get what they want, assuming that the engineer has the moxie to fight back when it "just can't happen". Many of us structurals, I think, don't fight back but, being the problem solvers that we are, sometimes relish a difficult problem and spend lots of time on it to see if it can work.

So maybe we need to use our instincts more and say "no way" prior to doing all the calculations to prove it can't happen.

 

[jike]

The problems that we face are not all created by architects, many of them are created by us! The general public often thinks that architects do structural design. What are we doing to change this perception?

Until only recently, I have seen architects many times being interviewed, in the media, trying to explain a building collapse or damage during an earthquake.

I have also worked with some excellent architects on some large projects that are a true pleasure to work with. These architects, in turn, respect the experience and knowledge that I can bring to their project. It is usually only the small time architects that think that know more than you do and consider you an unnecessary evil.

 

[jike]

JAE:

I agree with your comment about sometimes using your best intuition for determining feasibility up to a point. Some simpler decisions can be based on experience and good engineering judgement. Other decisions need preliminary calculations such as "how many floors can be added to this building?".

 

[Dinosaur]

Although in my profession I design bridges and have little to do with architects, my experience with them is poor. The ones I have worked with draw a pretty picture and then say the details of how it is to be constructed or the potential costs are not 'What he does.' I thought architects were professionals and expected to give professional advice.

To also echo something said earlier, I am always working with other (licensed) Civil Engineers, and they are always quite up front that they aren't going to offer any direct advice concerning structural design. The most they usually do is ask why we recommend it be built a particular way, why is it so thick, so heavy, whatever.

Getting back to architects doing structural work . . .
I think they are nuts because of the liability. I review calculations where structural engineers screw up royally. I can't imagine a non-structural engineer trying their hand at it. Yes, I know there are exceptions, and I hope to run into one of these fellows someday. But in general, I can't fathom what they are thinking.

 

[JAE]

In many good architectural firms, there is a division of labor where some of the archies are in a "design" group and the rest in a "production" group.

The design group tends to be very artsy, imaginative, etc. and usually work in the initial stages of the project with the owner.

The production group are focused on producing the plans, details, and specifications. They tend to be more practical, identifying constructability issues, etc. as well as working with the engineers.

At least this is the general standard I've seen. Guess which group works better with engineers?

 

[whyun]

JAE,

I agree with design/production division within an architectural firm. Experience I had a while ago: A firm had an inexperienced design architect and a very seasoned production architect on a project. The design architect had very little sense of reality. The production architect would complain about the design architect to me (a consultant)! I mean, they were supposed to be on the SAME SIDE. I should be the outsider.

Structural firms suffer from similar situation when a "talker" gets promoted a bit too fast in his career and becomes a project manager leading a group of engineers who are more technically competent.

I do value strong management skills, however, ones who lead should at least have a certain level of competency.

 

[Beggar]

I'm just curious, where do Architectural Engineers fit into this mix?

My alma mater offers degrees in Architecture, Civil Engineering (Structural concentration), and Architectural Engineering (through the school of Architecture).

I never spoke to any of them but always wondered about the ArchE folks.

--------------------
Bring back the HP-15

http://www.hp15c.org

--------------------