architects
|
vs
|
structural engineers
|
The process of structural design and construction is
sometimes a brutal process, when your design team is not on the same page.
Structural engineers think their team’s architects just want to complicate the
structure by beautifying it and perfecting it. Architects think their team’s
structural engineers are too rigid and think too conservatively. Both think the
other party has their shortcomings. However, both parties are dependent on each
other. Our different perspectives and thinking patterns all help bring projects
into completion and make designs into reality. As a team, we should learn to
communicate effectively and technically to each other and to understand xand appreciate the ideas that both parties have. To
communicate technically, we need to learn the techniques or, at least, the
basics of the science that the other party practices.
I cannot speak much for architects. But, as a growing structural engineer, I think architects
can benefit from learning the load paths of different structural systems (i.e. how
loads are transferred through different structural elements). This is so they can visualize how their different room
uses on each floor affect the overall structure. Also,
architects need to understand that structural engineers work with capacities
and with safety factors. They should consider load distribution in their
designs in order to adapt to capacities of the superstructure and of the
foundation. Their designs and their placement of loads can affect bearing capacity pressure distributions and
differential settlements.
Architects should also understand the
necessary structural elements required for lateral systems, such as core walls
or bracings. They can then expect placement of these necessary elements in the
structure. Moreover, knowing the rules of thumb for structural element sizes
will provide immense efficiency during the drawing preparation process. During
initial design, architects can then better visualize the amount of headroom and
plan space they can have for each room’s usage. Most importantly, architects
need to understand that changing (even the smallest changes) loading or
structural layout affects structural calculations. Once a change is made, we
have to apply the changes to our model or calculations, recalculate member
flexure, shear, axial forces and their capacities, displacement, deflection, as
well as, foundation bearing pressure values and differential settlement
calculations. Even though experienced structural engineers can determine right
off the bat that certain small changes can be done and
will not affect the existing design, other changes that are not as certain
whether they can negatively affect the design will need to be confirmed by
detailed calculations. This takes time to calculate and confirm whether the
changes are okay.
In no way am I saying that architects should
learn all the basic stuff that structural engineers should know. These ideas
are for architects to understand where we, as structural
engineers, think and our suggestions for better communication and effective
teamwork. As leaders of the project, architects should know basic
structural engineering knowledge to coordinate the design team, to effectively communicate with us, and to make
important design decisions.
Structural engineers should also learn the
basics of architecture, as well, such as client requirements, aesthetics,
orientation, planning requirements, energy conservation, functionality, etc.
Structural engineers, if you have any friends
or colleagues who are in architecture,
please ask them what they feel about learning basic structural knowledge to
increase their coordination skills. Architects, do you think learning basic
structural engineering knowledge will help coordination and team work? What do you suggest that we, as structural
engineers, should learn about the art of architecture?