Continue to Site

Eng-Tips is the largest engineering community on the Internet

Intelligent Work Forums for Engineering Professionals

Register Log in
  • Congratulations KootK on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!

Architect Responsibilities

Status
Not open for further replies.
tedmed

tedmed

Civil/Environmental
Oct 9, 2000
6
On a design/bid/build public works project (a pedestrian bridge with rather long spans and major architectural embellishment), we are being told the following by our client (an architect):

- The structural engineer is responsible for the layout and dimensioning of staircases (rise/run, ADA issues, etc.)

- It is perfectly normal practice for the architect to refer to the structural drawings for all details and dimensions not shown.

- On a bridge with multiple skews, arched span fascias, battered pier fascias, quoining, etc., it is perfectly normal practice for the precast detailer to figure out how everything fits together and that no details are necessary beyond the general appearance concept and perhaps the arch radius, pier fascia batter and general quoining dimensions.

- An architect's seal can cover the structural design of special fencing and guardrails on the bridge (from our quick inspection, it is highly likely the design is not adequate).

Our firm mainly does bridges and other highway related structures. We do not deal with architects very often. From our limited experience, it appears that the architectural plans are merely conceptual at best. The architect has implied that the real intention is to do the architectural design by RFI and beating up the contractor's shop drawings. This seems to leave a structural engineer in a bad position to produce sealed drawings.

Any advice, ideas or similar experiences would be appreciated.
 
Replies continue below

Recommended for you

Sort by date Sort by votes
Architect usually provides this detail... that's the reason he makes the 'big' bucks! Is he the prime consultant and what does your agreement with him state?

I normally don't show dimensions on structural drawings, unless they are critical, and have on a couple of projects where the architect has insisted on dimensions advised him that we would only include dimensions that were provided to us... too often I've been involved on projects where dimensions have changed so frequently that some are missed, or where architects have not coordinated things...

As far as stonework, tile, terazzo, patterns or details, this is also the realm of the architect... also been involved with some major malls, where the architect has laid out the patterns for flooring to the greatest detail...
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Thanks for the comment.

Somehow, we wound up driving the train on this project, which was probably our biggest mistake. We were specifically directed by the architect "to make assumptions and move on" and repeatedly told that our deadline for biddable structural plans would not be allowed to slide. This essentially forced us to do the entire structure layout, trying as best we could to interpret some conceptual renderings for the structure by a third party architect who represents the property owner where the bridge is located. We provided the architect with our concept for the structural core very early in the process.

Our original agreement was for a plain pedestrian bridge with minimal architectural features, so we have been in the land of supplements and extras for quite some time.

I hope dealing with architects isn't like this all the time.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Not all the time, just 99% of the time...
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You may want to put them on notice that you are being directed to do work beyond your original scope and that you are relying on their skills to check and coordinate issues... In that fashion, you may be able to claim additional fees as well as shift a large part of the liability!
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
What can I say, I'm yet to work with an architect that has a good enough knowledge of structural engineering to know what they should and should not be doing on a project. Remember most architects are not taught structural design topics in depth. They know enough to be dangerous.

If you have concerns over structural issues that the architect is directing, then document the issues and discussions with the architect. Then when it comes to a court battle it is clear that you have upheld your end of the deal and ensured that you have covered your own bum with respect to ethical questions (such as protection of the public from bad design).

Your first responsibility is always to the unsuspecting public, the client comes second.

Good luck

sc

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Ben29
  • Locked
  • Question
Liability when you "markup" architect drawings?
Replies
7
Views
165
WesternJeb
WesternJeb
hemiv
  • Locked
  • Question
SE vs Architect license question 1
Replies
14
Views
166
dauwerda
dauwerda
objengrs
  • Locked
  • Question
Roofer, constructor, S.Engr, or architect. Modify flat roof on church: where to start? 1
Replies
6
Views
63
dik
dik
CaPE90
  • Locked
  • Question
Approx. 300 sq ft, 19 ft suspended architectural ceiling 2
Replies
17
Views
218
dold
dold
JStructsteel
  • Locked
  • Question
Scope creep into Architectural
Replies
14
Views
193
dik
dik

Part and Inventory Search

Sponsor

Back
Top Bottom