Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

"Dear Architects"

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    haha, I made that sn when I signed up for the first forum I ever joined, when I was 16. I had just bought a 5 sp 94 accord the previous day. when thinking of a screenname, my buddy said "hot accord." I said "my car sucks" and decided to call it coldaccord. I've kept it since, even though I haven't owned an accord nor any honda in years

    I just picked up an e34 5 series. 5 speed, h&r sports and bilstein sports, and m5 throwing star wheels for $2k! just needed an intake boot (cracked from age) and the exhaust manifold. The header came in the other day, so now it can go in.

    that's why school sucks. I have a ton of automotive projects (72 datsun 240z, 88 bmw 325i wagon (1 of 9 wagons in the country), 89 325i, and an 06 ninja 636 that is for sale as I'm trying to buy a house) that don't get finished because school keeps me so busy

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by TomYoung2424 View Post
      Icecaps, Do they make you take any courses in structures / engineering ?
      Not for engineering. Technics is considered our first of many structure courses. Right now I take design, representation (hand drafting class). At least for the first semester, the academic work is a joke (English and History). My design teacher is full of concepts but can't teach at all. My representation and technics teachers are great. My English teacher gives no work at all.

      Buffay, what kind of school is yours: abstract or more technical.

      I will post pics of projects, hopefully by tonight.
      Last edited by icecaps; 11-07-2007, 09:22 AM.

      Comment


      • #18
        I remember sitting in the drafting lab trying to figure out loads and deflections, while the engineering students were trying to figure out a straight edge! It's been a while, but I kind of miss the manual drafting. I was working with my 4 year old on her letters and took out a ruler to define some lines for her to use; I ended up doing the alphabet with the straight edge just to see if I still had it. Where would we be without AutoCAD?

        Comment


        • #19
          Ahhh, the eternally hopeful that are architecture students... warms my heart.

          Buff, don't turn into one of those architects who believes that engineers would only build and design concrete boxes if architects weren't around. I thought (and still do) you were smarter than that. You have engineering consultants who are specialists in their field that are hired by your firm to put a project together. They are hired because of the knowledge and experience they possess, not to be a second class citizen to the "all-knowing" architect. Good engineers thrive on challanges, but they are also extremely educated on what is just a bad idea. Listen to them when they say something doesn't make sense. It probably doesn't.

          At the end of the day, you have to remember that those fancy lines you draw have to be turned into a real, functional building. Not communicating (pretty common), talking down to (extremely common), and ignoring (almost a given) the advice/concerns of your engineering consultants is a quick and efficient way to ensure that you will never rise above a glorified CAD operator.

          Comment


          • #20
            E, it was just a joke. A fine example is the thread posted yesterday about Frank Gehry being sued for his MIT building....


            My design classes have been all abstract thus far. We are just manipulating mass and void now abstractly creating space. Next semester we start with actual architecture of buildings and such. I'll post some pictures late tonight.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by biguglygoalie View Post
              remember that seifeld...

              "Well, isn't an architect just an art school drop-out with a tilty desk, and a big ruler?"
              George: I'm, uh, I'm an architect.
              Vanessa: Really. What do you design?
              George: Uh, railroads, uh...
              Vanessa: I thought engineers do that.
              George: They can...

              Comment


              • #22
                If architects cared more about functionality and less about "light & space", I would not have pulled out my hair tring to design steel to steel connections. They sould be called art-nontechnicals.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by icecaps View Post
                  Not for engineering. Technics is considered our first of many structure courses. Right now I take design, representation (hand drafting class). At least for the first semester, the academic work is a joke (English and History). My design teacher is full of concepts but can't teach at all. My representation and technics teachers are great. My English teacher gives no work at all.

                  Buffay, what kind of school is yours: abstract or more technical.

                  I will post pics of projects, hopefully by tonight.
                  So if I'm reading this correctly all you do is draw it and it is up the engineer to make it happen?

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by buffay34 View Post
                    E, it was just a joke. A fine example is the thread posted yesterday about Frank Gehry being sued for his MIT building....
                    ...
                    I figured, but your brethren have made me very bitter lately.

                    Just doing my part to make sure you don't become part of the problems someday. I'd never be able to forgive myself.
                    Last edited by Eidolon; 11-09-2007, 10:21 AM.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      I hear ya.




                      Here are a few photos from a recent project. We were given the construct, and 3 volumes (cubic, vertical, and horizontal), and we had to place the 3 elements in the construct and pretty much create space......
                      Attached Files

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Few photos of my work thus far

                        Techics- Wood Cantilever 36 inches




                        Design- my "wood joint" It is a 9x9 cube that represents putting on the shirts, socks and pants and using three verbs: cover, slide, and confine. This is a very abstract concept that I am working with.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by TomYoung2424 View Post
                          So if I'm reading this correctly all you do is draw it and it is up the engineer to make it happen?

                          Not by a long shot.

                          (FYI - I work as an architectural specifier. I write project specifications for architects. My background is architecture, and I have worked for architects prior to specializing in a particular aspect of contract documents. Many architects' offices issue their own specifications on their projects, but others farm them out to people like myself.)

                          It's very easy for the general public to assume that architects are unnecessary to the functionality of a building, but that is far from the truth. Unlike engineering, one cannot actually take the architectural licensing exams until first aqcuiring on-the-job credits in several categories. Subsequently, the architect on a project is responsible and professionally liable for the coordination of all the associated disciplines (structural, mechanical, electrical, plumbing, civil, landscape, technology, A/V, etc.), as well as protecting the interests of the owner until the contractor turns the building over.

                          Additionally, architects are required to be proficient in other life and safety code design considerations, such as smoke/fire separation and containment, accessibility guidelines (ADA minimum clearances), energy code compliance, number and locations of exits based on sqaure footage and occupancy type, and now, sustainable (green) design.

                          I think the public perception is that architects do little more than design a building shape and pick paint colors. The reality is that most people would be shocked to know how much work for which an architect is responsible on any project. What most people think an architect does is actually the work of an interior designer, commonly derided as "inferior designers" or "interior desecrators."

                          I'd also like to add that I strongly believe that architecture school does not teach enough about the real world of architecture. In general, far too much empahsis is placed on conceptual design, and not enough on the everyday business of architecture. I have learned 95% of what I need to know to perform my duties while on the job. It has also been published that an intern straight out of architecture school going to work does not actually turn a profit for his company until he's been learning on the job for eighteen months. To me, that's grossly inefficient, and should warrant a long, hard look at the established norm.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            I'd also like to add that I strongly believe that architecture school does not teach enough about the real world of architecture. In general, far too much empahsis is placed on conceptual design, and not enough on the everyday business of architecture. I have learned 95% of what I need to know to perform my duties while on the job. It has also been published that an intern straight out of architecture school going to work does not actually turn a profit for his company until he's been learning on the job for eighteen months. To me, that's grossly inefficient, and should warrant a long, hard look at the established norm.
                            Amen Brother!

                            This coming from a surveyor/city inspector! It seems like all the buildings being built here are block cubes with different brick treatments on the facades. Don't forget to hit the landscape plan with the tree stamps.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by IcePossum13 View Post
                              ...

                              It's very easy for the general public to assume that architects are unnecessary to the functionality of a building, but that is far from the truth...
                              Originally posted by IcePossum13 View Post
                              ...I think the public perception is that architects do little more than design a building shape and pick paint colors. The reality is that most people would be shocked to know how much work for which an architect is responsible on any project. What most people think an architect does is actually the work of an interior designer, commonly derided as "inferior designers" or "interior desecrators."...
                              Maybe it's just me, but I find just the opposite to be true. Whenever I tell somebody what I do for a living, the first reply is usually, "Ohh, like an architect." Public perception of an architect's role seems to encompass all facets of a building design, including structural, mechanical, electrical, civil, etc. Next time you see an article in the MSM about a building, look for information on the consultants on the project. Rarely does anyone other the architect get attributed any portion of the design. I'd venture that 99% of the planet doesn't even realize the existance of most consultants in building design. They think Mr. Owner asks for a building design and the architect sits down and cranks out finished documents in a couple of months. That couldn't be farther from the truth.
                              Originally posted by IcePossum13 View Post
                              ...Unlike engineering, one cannot actually take the architectural licensing exams until first aqcuiring on-the-job credits in several categories. Subsequently, the architect on a project is responsible and professionally liable for the coordination of all the associated disciplines (structural, mechanical, electrical, plumbing, civil, landscape, technology, A/V, etc.), as well as protecting the interests of the owner until the contractor turns the building over..
                              I'm confused by both of these statements. You can't put your seal on a building design in ANY state in the country without sitting for the Professional Engineering exam AFTER 3-4 years of documented internship under licensed engineers. That applies almost across the board regardless of discipline (mech, elec, structural, civil, surveying). The exam is no slouch, especially the structural. It isn't a minimum competancy exam, but rather a demonstration of knowledge necessary to design safe buildings and structures. It's a beast, largely to make sure you don't kill anybody. States like Hawaii, California, Illinios, Washington, and Oregon have even more stringent requirements. In Caly for example, you can't design schools or hospitals or buildings over a certain height or occupancy without taking additional tests to prove your knowledge in seismic and wind design.

                              You may be referring to a the Fundamentals of Engineering exam, which can be taken right out of school. It IS a minimum competancy exam, but all that does is ensure your employer that you have the ability to be taught. It's a stepping stone to becoming an engineer. In fact, some major engineering bodies are considering changing the model law to require a master's degree IN ADDITION to a BS from an accredited university, passing the FE, and 4 years of experience.

                              Also, as for as resposibility and being liable, structurals carry a large burden. How does the responsibility of COORDINATING the job correspond to a SE liability for a collapse or failed design? I doubt it does very much.

                              You are correct that in most cases the architect is the owners representative and is charged with delivering the final product. In my experience, this is secondary to most 'artsy' architects. They routinely design impractical and expensive buildings that fail to meet the owners needs just to make an artistic point. Those architects have failed the client, IMO.

                              Originally posted by IcePossum13 View Post
                              Additionally, architects are required to be proficient in other life and safety code design considerations, such as smoke/fire separation and containment, accessibility guidelines (ADA minimum clearances), energy code compliance, number and locations of exits based on sqaure footage and occupancy type, and now, sustainable (green) design...
                              This is true, however most times, it is the fresh-out-of-school architect that does the lion's share of this work. The experienced artsy architect is to busy with concepts and sketches to worry about whether or not you can exit the building safely.

                              Originally posted by IcePossum13 View Post
                              ...I'd also like to add that I strongly believe that architecture school does not teach enough about the real world of architecture. In general, far too much empahsis is placed on conceptual design, and not enough on the everyday business of architecture...
                              Again, we agree. The portion of education that is lacking for most architects is an understanding of how a building actually goes together. How does concrete get designed and built, how steel beams are intended to work, how much does brick actually weigh, how load travels through a building, etc. Day-to-day operations in the design world are also neglected, such as how small changes in things like building height can radically affect building design across all disciplines, what information consultants need to be able to do their jobs, how moving a line on a drawing is all well and good for architectual plans, as there is rarely a complicated analysis behind it, but that same change could invalidate days/weeks/months of work for the consultants.

                              An architectual degree should be more than a mildly technical art degree. Communication, organization, and responsibility aren't part of the programs in most cases, but they should be.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by IcePossum13 View Post

                                Unlike engineering, one cannot actually take the architectural licensing exams until first aqcuiring on-the-job credits in several categories.
                                To take the PE exam in Colorado you need to have 4 years under a PE.

                                Originally posted by IcePossum13 View Post
                                Subsequently, the architect on a project is responsible and professionally liable for the coordination of all the associated disciplines (structural, mechanical, electrical, plumbing, civil, landscape, technology, A/V, etc.), as well as protecting the interests of the owner until the contractor turns the building over.

                                Additionally, architects are required to be proficient in other life and safety code design considerations, such as smoke/fire separation and containment, accessibility guidelines (ADA minimum clearances), energy code compliance, number and locations of exits based on sqaure footage and occupancy type, and now, sustainable (green) design.
                                I understand that you do all of the layout of the building but are you actually crunching the numbers to see that the load bearing wall needs to be here etc..?

                                Originally posted by IcePossum13 View Post
                                I think the public perception is that architects do little more than design a building shape and pick paint colors. The reality is that most people would be shocked to know how much work for which an architect is responsible on any project. What most people think an architect does is actually the work of an interior designer, commonly derided as "inferior designers" or "interior desecrators."

                                I'd also like to add that I strongly believe that architecture school does not teach enough about the real world of architecture. In general, far too much empahsis is placed on conceptual design, and not enough on the everyday business of architecture. I have learned 95% of what I need to know to perform my duties while on the job. It has also been published that an intern straight out of architecture school going to work does not actually turn a profit for his company until he's been learning on the job for eighteen months. To me, that's grossly inefficient, and should warrant a long, hard look at the established norm.
                                I've worked on the other side of this where I get a design from an architect and I'm the one designing the support for the decorative feature, not the architect as you mention above. That is where my original question came from. I think your point of 95% of what you learned is from the field and not the classroom is spot on for most occupations.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X