You know you're an Architect when...

[Counterfit]

If you buy the expensive wheels, they won't fall off. But it will take them a month to put a set on your car, rather than an afternoon.

What kind of wheels do you use on your car that take an entire afternoon to put on?

So, seeing as my first school consisted of about 55% architecture majors, some of this is familiar to me.

6. ...you've slept more than 20 hours non-stop in a single weekend.

22...you consider 3AM an early night.

Those describe one of my freshman-year roommates PERFECTLY! I think he slept 20 hours on Veterans Day ALONE. I left the dorm room with my parents at about 10:3-11AM, and came back around 5PM, and he was still in his bed.
As for sleep times, my Computer Networking roommate went to bed around 2-2:30AM, I (Mechanical Engineering Technology at the time) followed about 30-45 minutes later, and then my Architecture roommate stayed up for about another hour or so. The one exception was one night were I had to do half a semester's worth of hand drafting in one night. Isometric by hand FTL!

 

[skunk]

It's all "E & O E" with you guys.

 

[adrianblaine]

It's all "E & O E" with you guys.

It is difficult to not have any errors. There is almost always ways to improve anything. Are you implying that in your design/build experience you've never run into a problem you didn't foresee?

 

[skunk]

Of course not, I've made my fair share of cock-ups. But I haven't yet drawn three flights of stairs for a three storey house, or placed a soilpipe in the middle of a doorway, or left only four feet of headroom under a landing, which are all things I've had to deal with from architects in my time. Sure, we all make mistakes, it's just that architects' mistakes tend to be more expensive and more spectacular than others'.

 

[jdechko]

So is anyone else here practicing, or all students?

HA! I just forwarded that to everyone in my department (about 12 people).

I work for a "Building Consulting" firm, so we have Architects and Designers, Engineers (Structural, MEP and Civil) and inspectors. I'm CAD manager, but also the lead civil drafter, and I occasionally do a 3D model or two in Viz. Basically, I drew the short straw by being the most knowledgable CAD operator in the company. So not only do I get to do the drafting for all the Civil packages (currently about 5 projects) I get to do Architectural plans as well as CAD support for when someone can't figure out how to do something.

The thing is that I've got a a BS in Business management, and I'm doing this. I've really got to get out and find another job.

 

[jdechko]

Surely a beam that should have been there in the first place falls under the category of inadequate design? Typical f*cking architect!

That depends. In our company, it would be the job of the structural engineers to make sure the beams are sized properly and aren't omitted, not the architects. A beam in the middle of the doorway, however is both a design flaw and an engineering flaw. Fortunately for us, our workflow is design first then (building) engineering so that the beams would work around/with the door header in mind.

But in either case, a project would (should) never get so far as to realize that a beam is missing--either the department of plan review would catch it (without a permit, a building is usually not gonna fly--not that some contractors/owners really care) or the inspector would catch it during the building process.

Sorry about the double-post, I decided to go back and respond to you, skunk.

 

[arkitect]

Sure, we all make mistakes, it's just that architects' mistakes tend to be more expensive and more spectacular than others'.

Ahh well…
A doctor can always bury his mistakes...
An architect can only advise his client to plant ivy.
Frank Lloyd Wright

 

[mactastic]

That depends. In our company, it would be the job of the structural engineers to make sure the beams are sized properly and aren't omitted, not the architects. A beam in the middle of the doorway, however is both a design flaw and an engineering flaw. Fortunately for us, our workflow is design first then (building) engineering so that the beams would work around/with the door header in mind.

But in either case, a project would (should) never get so far as to realize that a beam is missing--either the department of plan review would catch it (without a permit, a building is usually not gonna fly--not that some contractors/owners really care) or the inspector would catch it during the building process.

Sorry about the double-post, I decided to go back and respond to you, skunk.

Plan review agencies are fairly useless in terms of finding missing components in my experience. They can evaluate items on the drawings, but they are not really looking for things you missed. However, it is the responsibility of the Contractor to inform the Architect as soon as a missing structural member is noticed. Of course, that's subject to interpretation. If a Contractor is putting beams every 10'-0" OC, then hits a similar span that doesn't have a beam called out, he should get on the phone or write an RFI. If it's a unique situation, or one where the structural requirements are difficult to discern, all bets are off.

Personally I'm workin in Contract Administration at the moment. My position is that the plans are never wrong. That's my story, and I'm sticking to it!

 

[jdechko]

Plan review agencies are fairly useless in terms of finding missing components in my experience. They can evaluate items on the drawings, but they are not really looking for things you missed.

Obviously you've never submitted anything to Gwinnett County or Forsyth County. (Obviously - based on your location )

However, it is the responsibility of the Contractor to inform the Architect as soon as a missing structural member is noticed. Of course, that's subject to interpretation. If a Contractor is putting beams every 10'-0" OC, then hits a similar span that doesn't have a beam called out, he should get on the phone or write an RFI. If it's a unique situation, or one where the structural requirements are difficult to discern, all bets are off.

Sure. The point I was trying to make is that it should never get to the point where a building is "completed" and someone realizes during the 100% inspection that the building isn't structurally sound. Of course, I did say should because in our line of work, we've had "completed" projects that have had to have beams/trusses replaced (without tearing the entire building down) because someone screwed up when the building was originally being built.

Case in point, we have a condo community that, while it was being built, had the trusses left out in the weather. As a result, the trusses exibited signs of rot and cracking (now several years later). The floors of several units were un-level to say the least. But as in your anecdotal story of the architect (or engineer) and builder, once you get hired, it becomes your problem to figure out.

And personally, I'd much rather see a project through from the start rather than do a (complete) remodel. We are just finishing up on a nightmare project where the GC (knowingly) did the work without a permit. Got a Stop Work Order, then came to us to get 1) a set of pre-construction existing conditions 2) a set of current existing conditions and 3) a set of final construction documents (all along with a complete Civil package). Of course, the owner is pissed because they're paying interest on a loan while (if you can imagine) it's now our problem.

 

[iKwick7]

You know you're an Architecture Student when...

6. ...you've slept more than 20 hours non-stop in a single weekend.
12. ...you've used an entire role of film to photograph the sidewalk.
14. ...you take notes and messages with a rapidograph and colour markers.
15. ...you see holidays only as extra sleeping time.
16. ...you've got more photographs of buildings than of actual people.
17. ...you've taken your girlfriend (boyfriend) on a date to a construction site.
18. ..you can live without human contact, food or daylight, but if you can't print, it's chaos.
19... when youre being shown pictures of a trip, you ask what the human scale is.
20. ...you can use Photoshop, Illustrator and make a web page, but you don't know how to use Excel.
22...you consider 3AM an early night.
24... you ask Santa Clause for architecture supplies.
25...Your four basic food groups are candy, caffeine, coffee, and pretzels.

A solid post. I agree with most of them, except for the showering referenced points- my dorm was only a couple blocks from studio and I would go take a shower twice a day or so to refresh myself. Tis a good wakeup and I am not at all a fan of dirty, smelly people.

In my experience you know your dealing with an architect when

1. They can't draw a straight line.
2. They charge me for work they have got the office junior to do.
3. They can't measure a simple square.
4. They add on things we specifically say we don't want.
5. They don't understand how much things cost to build.
6. They can't stick to a budget.
7. They don't seem to understand simple planning regulations.
8. Everything takes 2 weeks.

It's funny and sad how true some of those statements are. My current boss is a total clueless idiot. The man can't draw or do simplle calculations, sucks horribly at AutoCad (and has been using it for over 10 years), sucks at computers even more, and doesn't understand that people don't want or like things that he does. I keep telling myself it is only a temporary job (really, it is! I have to get out of here asap!). And everything takes 2 weeks would be a HUGE compliment to the man.

I am quite fortunate in that I was taught AutoCad in high school but then didn't use it at all for my first 3 years of college. I fine tuned my model building and drawing skills big time.

I remember during a review in my third yea r of college (I had just transferred to NJIT and it was my first semester there) about a week or 2 in- we had a crit for a quick post up of a bunch of sketches every one was supposed to do over the weekend and it was not going so well- most of the sketches sucked real bad, had no organization, and didn't really make any sense. My professor looked at mine and then asked me who I had the semester before- I told her I went to a different college and her response- something to the effect of "I can tell. Nice work. You can actually draw."

One thing a lot of people don't understand about architects is how bad the programs are in most colleges. Seriously. I had 3 classes in my almost 7 years of college (5 year program, 2 classes didn't transfer with me, thatq made it 6y years, I needed a break before I went crazy towards the end, blah blah blah...) that actually taught me how to build a building. And guess what- they were never used in any class or studio after that. Now that's pretty bad.

 

[mactastic]

Studio is an exercise in schematic design over and over. Never any progression from there to reality. No accountability for bad schematic decisions. I was very frustrated with the school process. Besides, who gets to do schematic design when they graduate? Very few. Most of us will start with con docs, likely detailing restrooms and such for a long time before being given any design responsibilities.

Seriously, I had classmates whom i swear thought that hot-melt glue was a moment-resisting connection. Connections and details were Very Difficult for most of them.

 

[adrianblaine]

Studio is an exercise in schematic design over and over. Never any progression from there to reality. No accountability for bad schematic decisions. I was very frustrated with the school process. Besides, who gets to do schematic design when they graduate? Very few. Most of us will start with con docs, likely detailing restrooms and such for a long time before being given any design responsibilities.

Seriously, I had classmates whom i swear thought that hot-melt glue was a moment-resisting connection. Connections and details were Very Difficult for most of them.

Some schools are starting to change that though. The teachers at my school for example, have begun integrating design development beyond just schematic design. My 4th year project 1st semester was to design a courthouse and fire station, then 2nd semester I had to develop the design further while laying out mechanical systems and detailed wall sections for part of the building. Then I had to build a wood model at 1"=1' of a section of the building. It really makes you think hard about how things go together. I know in real life those go much faster, but I'm thankful to have had some experience in school.

 

[mactastic]

Some schools are starting to change that though. The teachers at my school for example, have begun integrating design development beyond just schematic design. My 4th year project 1st semester was to design a courthouse and fire station, then 2nd semester I had to develop the design further while laying out mechanical systems and detailed wall sections for part of the building. Then I had to build a wood model at 1"=1' of a section of the building. It really makes you think hard about how things go together. I know in real life those go much faster, but I'm thankful to have had some experience in school.

IMHO, students should have to produce con docs for a small project. A small cabin for instance. Everything from foundation and moisture-barrier to the roof and roof flashings.

There should be classes where you review submittals, answer RFIs, and evaluate cost proposals. Learn to take meeting notes. Write field reports. Identify extra services and write an extra services proposal. Write letters resolving some cost or costruction issues. Learn how to read and write specs. Learn how to divine information from a set of plans. Draw an ADA-compliant bathroom. Understand how to do code research.

 

[ErikCLDR]

Since we're cracking wise here:



That's what contingency money is for. You did set aside contingency money, didn't you?

Well they said they fixed the problem but I don't think it worked.

 

[Genghis Khan]

Studio is an exercise in schematic design over and over. Never any progression from there to reality. No accountability for bad schematic decisions. I was very frustrated with the school process. Besides, who gets to do schematic design when they graduate? Very few. Most of us will start with con docs, likely detailing restrooms and such for a long time before being given any design responsibilities.

Seriously, I had classmates whom i swear thought that hot-melt glue was a moment-resisting connection. Connections and details were Very Difficult for most of them.

lol...yeah...hmmm

1) if you go to work for a small company (which you can, but for less money) you will design actual stuff

2) depends what uni you go to...e.g. mine is the only one in the state that has engineering subjects as part of the course


but i have to agree with alot of people here who say architects are crap...if you look around the center of your city...every building was designed individually by an architect for the site and yet they suck

but...

"Those who can do, those who can't administor"

unfourtunately, architects get the worst of this...e.g the melbourne square was designed by an architect, then the civil servants/politicians fired him and redesigned it slightly (but enough to destroy it)...the sydney opera house interior was also designed by a politician who fired the architect...the list goes on

you see, architects have little control over the built form, the way it's set up atm, they design, sell the design, and the client does what they want

it really is a never ending circle of mal-designed buildings...lots of people want to desin buildings...so lots of uni's offer poor courses just to get the numbers...in the workplace, architects have little control over what's built


basically, architecture is the longest lasting sign of our times, so everyone wants a finger in it, the result you can see for yourselves

 

[Genghis Khan]

p.s. check out Vitruvius

 

[mactastic]

lol...yeah...hmmm

1) if you go to work for a small company (which you can, but for less money) you will design actual stuff

2) depends what uni you go to...e.g. mine is the only one in the state that has engineering subjects as part of the course

I guess it depends on what you call design. If your firm is willing to let an intern (someone with less than 2 years of work experience) do SD on anything over a million USD, I'd suggest that firm is not set up right. That kind of stuff needs to happen at the project manager / principal level. Can an intern be involved heavily, particularly at a smaller firm? Sure. But they just don't have the experience to pull all the competing needs into form.

If you're good, a couple years out you can begin to take on that role; but the costs of rookie mistakes are too high to let an intern make without intensive review by more experienced personnel.

but i have to agree with alot of people here who say architects are crap...if you look around the center of your city...every building was designed individually by an architect for the site and yet they suck

I tend to agree, but the blame goes beyond architects. You can only do so much with what you're given.

but...

"Those who can do, those who can't administor"

unfourtunately, architects get the worst of this...e.g the melbourne square was designed by an architect, then the civil servants/politicians fired him and redesigned it slightly (but enough to destroy it)...the sydney opera house interior was also designed by a politician who fired the architect...the list goes on

Exactly. The amount of external influences upon the final product is hard to overstate. Once every agency in the area has gotten a say, along with the public, the financeers, and the owner, not to mention the overall construction environment at the time, the product can easily have little resemblance to the Architect's vision. That gets compounded when the Architect's vision is crap to start with.

 

[adrianblaine]

I tend to agree, but the blame goes beyond architects. You can only do so much with what you're given.

This is very true. I remember hearing that only 2% of existing buildings have been designed by architects. It may not have been 2%, but it was an insanely small number.

I think a lot of problems were also caused by the notion back in the mid 1900's that we needed to reinvent everything and forget about the past. I think it has proved that things only get better by building on the past and improving, not discarding and starting over.

 

[skunk]

but i have to agree with alot of people here who say architects are crap...if you look around the center of your city...every building was designed individually by an architect for the site and yet they suck

In defence of architects, that simply isn't true: in my experience, the vast majority of "architect-designed" buildings are seriously compromised by accountants, clients or city planners before they even leave the drawing board.

 

[Genghis Khan]

i know what you're all saying about tight budgets...most people try to get away with as little cost as they can...if you're going to hire an architect, make sure you have the money to pay for it...otherwise the design is bound to be compromised

ah well that's the trouble with living in democracies...they don't spend as much on architecture as dictatorships or empires

 

[Rodimus Prime]

oooh....i see we have either an engineer or a builder.........what you didn't say was that if the built world was left to those two occupations we'd be left living and working in perfectly rectangular spaces in perfectly rectangular houses

i don't want to get into an argument about who's right...

but let me say..

.i'm spending 5.5 years learning how to create spaces for people to live and work in, preferably putting a smile on their face...engineers/builders spend 3-4 years learning how to make a building stand up...so when an architect says they want unevenly spaced beams, engineers/builders go crazy....what they don't see is that the roof is going to have a window in it

anyway...thanks for dissing an entire occupation

You do know how much a pain in the rear it is when having to deal with unevenly spaced beams and windows in the roof is. The windows is because it makes it harder to build and support. The unevenly space beams besides screwing with the load calculation you have to understand the labors are not exactly the sharpest people in this world. The key to them is keep is simple. The extra amount means a lot more checking and a lot more likely they will screw up.

Archs a lot of the time do not understand how hard some of their designs are to build.

 

[Rodimus Prime]

Plan review agencies are fairly useless in terms of finding missing components in my experience. They can evaluate items on the drawings, but they are not really looking for things you missed. However, it is the responsibility of the Contractor to inform the Architect as soon as a missing structural member is noticed. Of course, that's subject to interpretation. If a Contractor is putting beams every 10'-0" OC, then hits a similar span that doesn't have a beam called out, he should get on the phone or write an RFI. If it's a unique situation, or one where the structural requirements are difficult to discern, all bets are off.

Personally I'm workin in Contract Administration at the moment. My position is that the plans are never wrong. That's my story, and I'm sticking to it!

And there you have why contractors call the architects the enemy. I am a construction Engineering techology student. Some contractors have talk with us and stated if something is wrong with the plans do not even bother going to talk to the architect because they are to full of them selves to think they are wrong. Plus they cover their one asses to well. On top of that they tend to refuse to listen to you because you the contractors (even though I have a engineering degree). It go talk to talk with the engineer of the project and he will listen to you. Then he goes to the architect and says this will not work, Change it.

Nice part about is the engineering can force it to happen. Plus the engineer and I speak the same language. Architects speak something else plus they are to far right brain to understand the engineer speak.

IMHO, students should have to produce con docs for a small project. A small cabin for instance. Everything from foundation and moisture-barrier to the roof and roof flashings.

There should be classes where you review submittals, answer RFIs, and evaluate cost proposals. Learn to take meeting notes. Write field reports. Identify extra services and write an extra services proposal. Write letters resolving some cost or costruction issues. Learn how to read and write specs. Learn how to divine information from a set of plans. Draw an ADA-compliant bathroom. Understand how to do code research.

It would be nice but there is not enough time in 5 years of college to pull that off. Don't forget they are already running 15+ hour semesters like crazy and not sleeping as it is.


Ah this tread remines me of why it took me 30 sec to say screw architects. I like having a life plus I think like an engineer. I may not get much sleep but I do have time for a life. My lack of sleep is more because I work at night on my class work.

 

[mactastic]

And there you have why contractors call the architects the enemy.

That was a joke. However, the tension is healthy. If contractors and architects get too chummy, the owner gets screwed.

I am a construction Engineering techology student. Some contractors have talk with us and stated if something is wrong with the plans do not even bother going to talk to the architect because they are to full of them selves to think they are wrong. Plus they cover their one asses to well. On top of that they tend to refuse to listen to you because you the contractors (even though I have a engineering degree). It go talk to talk with the engineer of the project and he will listen to you. Then he goes to the architect and says this will not work, Change it.

Trust me, you're only getting half the story. Contractors like to cover their asses too.

Nice part about is the engineering can force it to happen. Plus the engineer and I speak the same language. Architects speak something else plus they are to far right brain to understand the engineer speak.

LOL! The engineer doesn't force anything. The engineer does what the architect tells them to do. If any contractor I work with talks to any of my consultants without my prior knowlege or approval, I send a series of letters that ensures it does not happen again. I don't tolerate conversations behind my back. Conversely, if I trust the consultant and contractor enough, I allow them to communicate between themselves as long as they understand that any decisions made must be communicated to me prior to any action being taken.

And believe me, I am fluent in engineer-speak.

It would be nice but there is not enough time in 5 years of college to pull that off. Don't forget they are already running 15+ hour semesters like crazy and not sleeping as it is.

Oh crap, I'd forgotten what my own education was like!

I was suggesting that some of the stuff they do be replaced with my suggestions.

Ah this tread remines me of why it took me 30 sec to say screw architects. I like having a life plus I think like an engineer. I may not get much sleep but I do have time for a life. My lack of sleep is more because I work at night on my class work.

Ah yes... And you claim architects are the ones who are full of themselves? Nice try though!

 

[Genghis Khan]

Archs a lot of the time do not understand how hard some of their designs are to build.

may be my huge ego here...but the builders job is to build the building, really i don't care how hard it is...they get paid for however much time it takes

and engineers study for 3-4 years at uni to learn how to calculate the loads and forces in buildings architects design...if everything was squares and circles and evenly spaced...i could calculate them myself with my high school physics knowedge

Architects speak something else plus they are to far right brain to understand the engineer speak.

Architects speak an emotional language, because clients hire them want a building they buy on awesome looks...not cost of newtonian efficiency

and Architects need both left and right brain...but tend to fall into right brain after uni as it is far more enjoyable...if you can draw awesome, and calculate to some degree of awesomeness...you'll fall into the drawing side inevitably


p.s. just so you know...i did all maths in final year high school

 

[wimic]

.i'm spending 5.5 years learning how to create spaces for people to live and work in, preferably putting a smile on their face...engineers/builders spend 3-4 years learning how to make a building stand up

I can usually bite my tongue but this just plain pissed me off.

I spent 6 years in university to become a civil engineer and we do a hell of a lot more than just make buildings stand up. that's just disrespectful. you might not see all of the science and physics that goes into making a building not fall on your head, but we do - we have to... afterall, it's our ass that's on the line. and yes, there is a notoriously bad relationship between engineers and architects (mostly because architects dream up big beautiful things that are hard to build) but not all engineers go around trying to make architects look bad.

i guess all i'm trying to say is watch the generalizations... you never know who's toes you might be stepping on.