Path: ccsf.homeunix.org!ccsf.homeunix.org!news1.wakwak.com!nf1.xephion.ne.jp!onion.ish.org!onodera-news!Q.T.Honey!komachi.sp.cs.cmu.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsgate.netvigator.com!imsp212.netvigator.com!not-for-mail From: "tudytet" Newsgroups: alt.architecture,alt.building.architecture,alt.building.construction,alt.building.engineering,alt.engineering,alt.engineering.electrical,alt.engineering.fire-protection,alt.engineering.maintenance,alt.engineering.nuclear,alt.hk,fj.soc.law,hk.ge Subject: ARCHITECTS ARE MAKING USE OF LEGAL FRAMEWORK TO PROTECT THEMSELVES Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2003 15:37:49 +0800 Organization: IMS Netvigator Lines: 274 Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: pomtnt02b024.netvigator.com X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4910.0300 Xref: ccsf.homeunix.org fj.soc.law:277 "3D Peruna" wrote in message news:vcn4r45op432d@corp.supernews.com... > Can this student learn proper construction theory in Architectural School? > > I > >>can say he still cannot find out the correct size of the weld or the > > number > >>or sizes of bolts required of the construction joints or size of the >>structural members after he graduate, if he does not take the advice of >>sdsa. If I am wrong, please let me know. > > > I think that you're mistaking structural design for construction details > which are related, but not the same thing. > > Does the structural engineer concern himself with flashing details, interior > framing? Trim? Insulation location & placement? Fire rated construction? THAT'S THE POINT!! THE ARCHITECTS DO NOT UNDERSTAND STRUCTURES AND THE STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS DO NOT KNOW FLASHING DETAILS AND SO ON. THE RESULT IS BOTH THE ARCHITECTS AND THE STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS DO ABORTIVE WORKS A NUMBER OF TIMES BEFORE A REASONABLE DESIGN CAN BE ACHIEVED AND THIS IS USUALLY ACHIEVED WITH THE HELP OF THE CONTRACTORS. THE CLIENTS ARE LOSING MONEY THIS WAY WITHOUT KNOWING THE TRUE REASONS. THEREFORE, THERE MUST BE PROJECT MANAGERS WHO HAVE REASONABLE KNOWLEDGE OF BUILDING TECHNOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT TO LEAD THE CONSTRUCTION TEAMS. UNFORTUNATELY, ONLY THE ARCHITECTS ARE "QUALIFIED" TO BE TEAM LEADERS UNDER LAW AND THEY ARE MAKING USE OF SUCH LEGAL FRAMEWORK TO PROTECT THEMSELVES, KNOWING THAT ACTUALLY THEY ARE NOT COMPETENT ENOUGH. a.. Not only that, but a good architecture student will LEARN what the > structural details look like and will try and understand what the engineer > does and how the engineering impacts the design and vice versa. b.. c.. HOW CAN ARCHITECTURE STUDENTS LEARN STRUCTURAL DETAILS? YES, HE CAN, IF HE UNDERSTANDS ADVANCED MATHEMEATICS AND FUNDAMENTAL STRUCTURAL THEORIES. HOWEVER, STUDENTS WHO CHOOSE TO STUDY ARCHITECTURE ARE THOSE WHO DO NOT LIKE ADVANCED MATHEMATICS AND STRUCTURAL THEORIES OR DO NOT HAVE THE BRAIN POWER TO LEARN SUCH. ANYWAY, IF THEY WISH TO LEARN STRUCTURAL DETAILS, THEY SHOULD HAVE PROPER TRAINING BY OBTAINING A DEGREE IN BUILDING CONSTRUCTION. HOWEVER, "NO" DEGREE COURSES INCLUDING MSC AND PHD DEGREE COURSES CAN TEACH YOU EVERYTHING. THEREFORE, THE MOST IMPORTANT THING IS ONE'S ABILITY TO EXPAND HIS KNOWLEDGE QUICKLY AND IN A RIGOROUS WAY AND APPLY THEM APPROPRIATELY. "3D Peruna" wrote in message news:vcsbuesnn2go46@corp.supernews.com... > > > You miss the point..the entire production of a building is a team effort > starting with the client through to the client passing through architects, > engineers, mechancial consultants, building officials, product reps, > interior designers, day laborers, and many others. Each as a specific job > to do. You don't expect the mechancial engineer to understand the flashing > details, and you don't expect the architect to be a mechanical engineer. > However both can screw up the other's work...I'm working on some buildings > where the original architect designed a structure that cause the supplies > and returns to be within 2 feet of each other, both on the interior side of > the room. The result is a very uncomfortable room. The mechanical designer > should have told the architect that this wasn't going to work...but he > didn't need to be a mechanical engineer. > > Communication between the various parties is very important and the > architect needs to have an understanding of all the parts, but he doesn't > need to design all the parts. The architect does not need to do structural > calclulations for moment connection between a beam and column...that's not > his job. He needs to know what a moment connection does, and how it might > impact other parts of the design. > > As for the help of a contractor, yes sometimes they help, and sometimes they > don't. If they are interested in producing a quality building, then they'll > make suggestions and recommendations that best serve the client. Sometimes > they just want to increase the amount of money in their own pockets a the > expense of someone else. In these times, it's imporant the architect stands > their ground and ensures that the building is constructed as designed. I've > worked with both kinds of contractors and the ones that are the best are the > ones, who like the architect, doen't assume they know or understand > everything. > > Finally, getting all over for somebody who doesn't understand construction > details isn't a good idea...see, he might be starting small and working his > way up to advanced structural calculations. You won't ever know...but to > jump on somebody for trying to learn... > > P > > PS - I have a degree in engineering AND in architecture...becareful what > assumptions YOU make. > > You miss the point..the entire production of a building is a team effort starting with the client through to the client passing through architects, engineers, mechancial consultants, building officials, product reps, interior designers, day laborers, and many others. Each as a specific job to do. You don't expect the mechancial engineer to understand the flashing details, and you don't expect the architect to be a mechanical engineer. BUT THERE MUST BE SOMEONE WHO HAS "SUFFICIENT" KNOWLEDGE IN DIFEERENT AREAS TO CO-ORDINATE AND CONTROL THEM. ARE THE ACHITECTS GOOD ENOUGH FOR SUCH A JOB? However both can screw up the other's work...I'm working on some buildings where the original architect designed a structure that cause the supplies and returns to be within 2 feet of each other, both on the interior side of the room. The result is a very uncomfortable room. The mechanical designer should have told the architect that this wasn't going to work...but he didn't need to be a mechanical engineer. Communication between the various parties is very important and the architect needs to have an understanding of all the parts, but he doesn't need to design all the parts. The architect does not need to do structural calclulations for moment connection between a beam and column...that's not his job. He needs to know what a moment connection does, and how it might impact other parts of the design. IF, IN THIS WORLD, TIME AND COSTS ARE OF NO SIGNIFICANCE, ARCHITECTS MAY BE SOME CUTE CREATURES ON EARTH. THE REALITY IS THAT WE HAVE LIMITED TIME AND BUDGET FOR MOST PROJECTS. IN MANY CASES, THE ARCHITECTS DO NOT UNDERSTAND HOW THEIR "DESIGN" OR CHANGES THEY INTEND TO MAKE WOULD AFFECT THE TIME AND COSTS OF THE PROJECTS. I DO NOT MEAN THAT THEY HAVE TO COUNT EVERY MINUTE AND EVERY CENT, BUT AT LEAST THEY SHOULD HAVE SOME ROUGH IDEAS OF THE TIME AND COSTS IMPLICATIONS. WITHOUT "SUFFICIENT" UNDERSTANDING OF THE SCIENCE OF BUILDING CONSTRUCTIONS, THE ARCHITECTS ARE NEVER ABLE TO DO SO. THEIR ACADEMIC TRAINING IS SO INSUFFCIENT THAT THEY ARE UNABLE TO EXPAND THEIR KNOWLEDGE COMPETENTLY. LET ME GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE. UNDER STANDARD CONTRACT TERMS, THE ARCHITECTS ARE THE CONTRACT ADMINISTRATORS OF THE PROJECTS AND THEREFORE THEY HAVE THE DUTIES TO ASSESS THE APPLICATIONS FOR EXTENSION OF TIME AND OTHER CLAIMS FROM THE CONTRACTORS. HOWEVER, MANY ARCHITECTS DO NOT EVEN UNDERSTAND CRITICAL PATH ANALYSIS (CPA). THEN, HOW CAN THEY FULFILL SUCH OBLIGATIONS SATISFACTORILY? THE SAD THING IS THEY ARE GIVEN THE AUTHORITY UNDER THE CONTRACTS, BUT THEY DO NOT HAVE SUFFICIENT KNOWLEDGE TO EXERCISE THEIR AUTHORITIES APPROPRIATELY. EVEN WORSE, THEY ABUSE THEIR AUTHORITIES. As for the help of a contractor, yes sometimes they help, and sometimes they don't. If they are interested in producing a quality building, then they'll make suggestions and recommendations that best serve the client. Sometimes they just want to increase the amount of money in their own pockets a the expense of someone else. In these times, it's imporant the architect stands their ground and ensures that the building is constructed as designed. I've worked with both kinds of contractors and the ones that are the best are the ones, who like the architect, doen't assume they know or understand everything. THE FACT IS, THE COMPETENT CONTRACTORS CAN PUT UP BUILDINGS WITHOUT ARCHITECTS, BUT THE ARCHITECTS CAN DO NOTHING WITHOUT THE CONTRACTORS. THERE ARE WAYS TO IMPROVE THE QUALITY CONTROL OF WORKS, BUT THE ARCHITECTS JUST DO NOT KNOW HOW. NO ONE WOULD DISPUTE THAT THE ADVANCE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY STEMS FROM OUR ABILITY TO "MATHEMATIZE" NATURE. IT IS THE MOST SYSTEMATIC WAY TO ANALYZE THE NATURE, AS FAR AS WE KNOW. INDEED, WE MAY SAY THAT OUR PHYSICAL WORLD IS GOVERNED BY PHYSICAL AND MATHEMATICAL LAWS. ECONOMISTS, MANAGERS AND SOCIAL SCIENTISTS ETC. SHOULD KNOW THAT USE OF MATHEMATICAL MODELS CAN HELP THEM UNDERSTAND THEIR SUBJECTS OR PROBLEMS MORE THOROUGHLY. ADMITTEDLY, THERE ARE MANY ISSUES WHICH ARE SO COMPLICATED THAT WE ARE UNABLE TO "MATHEMATIZE" SATISFACTORILY FOR THE TIME BEING. HOWEVER, WHAT OTHER TOOLS ARE AVAILABLE? THE ARCHITECTS SHOULD FEEL SHAMEFUL, IF THEY CLAIM THAT THEY HAVE MADE SIGNIFICANT ACHEIVEMENTS IN CONSTRUCTION TECHNOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT, BECAUSE THEY CANNOT EVEN "MATHEMATIZE" THE ISSUES THEY ARE TO DEAL WITH. IT IS A SHAME THAT OUR CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY ARE BEING LED BY THESE SILLY "ARTISTS"!! Finally, getting all over for somebody who doesn't understand construction details isn't a good idea...see, he might be starting small and working his way up to advanced structural calculations. You won't ever know...but to jump on somebody for trying to learn... P PS - I have a degree in engineering AND in architecture...becareful what assumptions YOU make.