Why a Structural Engineer?

structural engineering is a 4 year degree. architecture is a 5 year degree. if you think that an architecture degree should comprise 4 years of training in structural engineering with a year tacked on to allow for the whole architecting bit, you’re mad.

i’m trying to think of a suitable analogy, and it might be apt to compare the services of a car designer. would you rather the car was designed by a car designer, the chassis was designed by an engineer and the tyres were designed by bridgestone for safety, drawing on the expertise of each person involved,or would you like the car designer to do the whole lot? sure what’s involved in making a bit of a steel frame and lashing some rubber around a wheel? any idiot could do it.

Not mad……ignorant, maybe!
Still you gotta ask to learn, right?

So basically what you’re saying is that an architect is really only involved in drawing sketches and dreaming up interesting designs etc, and he can’t really be sure if the thing might actually stand up, and basically couldn’t be bothered, because thats the job of the engineer?
And he gets 15% for that?:rolleyes:

I’m sure the structural engineering degree is 4 years long because it involves learning about building bridges and nuclear power plants.
BIG engineering in other words.
Why can’t the educational establishments fashion an architectural degree that incorporates enough basic engineering to allow some architects to design smaller projects which they KNOW will really stand up?
Like a house?
How difficult can it be?
Probably easier than designing a car! It won’t be doing any high speed cornering.

Fees are a matter between client and practitioner

I very much doubt that you would pay €44,000 for a house design unless it is something very very special; I recently had a design for 2 houses done for a lot less than this and the architect involved has spent to date 14 months working on this. Given that solicitors get 1% of property vs construction cost for a few hours at the conveyancing stage I think that architects if you negotiate can provide very good value.

Remember that if you download something from the internet which costs €2-3,000 and it is refused you not only lose your money but also create negative site history with many practices having an in house planning consultant to consider . If you decide to sell your house down the line and it is ugly it will also probably be aged looking as well as there will have been no consideration on how the various materials will age.

Most architects probably can design basic structures without help from an engineer but if there is a prevailing soil condition that is in any way complicated the architect is simply protecting the longevity of your investment unlike the house plan companies who will never list your building in their portfolio unless you wreck an area of outstanding natural beauty with it.

Just remember there is no investment that is free that is worth having; an architect designed building is a product where if the practitioners are good will have involved a number of inputs; all of which require time and specialist expertise start removing inputs and you go from Aston Martin to Proton at well beyond the legal limits.

The structural engineer will assess conditions on site. This can’t be designed on paper by the architect. One house design that stood up on one site might collaspe on another site a mile away.

Thats why there are different people involved in all stages of a job. The architect, the technologist, the engineer.

As for the degree that “incorporates enough basic engineering to allow some architects to design smaller projects which they KNOW will really stand up”

People leaving this course would most likely not know enough engineering to design anything complicated, and at the same time not know enough about design to create anything worth looking at.

PVC King, I’ve spoken now to a good half dozen architects and I’ve had fees (inc.VAT) for a 2,000 sqFt house quoted from 55K (min) to 97K (max). Thats the truth. The house will incorporate lots of glass, and is contemporary in design, but I find those numbers as incredible as you obviously do.
97K?!?! I’m just gobsmacked! If that guy does 5 houses a year at that rate he’s clearing 500K. Maybe he does 10? Who knows? I’m definitely in the wrong line of work.

Given that solicitors get 1% of property vs construction cost for a few hours at the conveyancing stage I think that architects if you negotiate can provide very good value.

In England self-conveyancing is now possible, and fixed price conveyancing runs way below 1%. More like point two of a percent.
I bought my site on a fixed fee of 780 euro through a solicitor in Dublin.
Its coming here too.
All those “searches” solicitors carry out are repeated duplication of the same work over and over – generating a nice little earner,thank you.
The resistance to change will be mighty of course!

Just remember there is no investment that is free that is worth having;

I agree. You mention getting 2 houses designed for less than 44K. 22k each? I’ll pay that tomorrow!
ANYBODY WANT A JOB??

If it were the medical field, the architect is a GP, and an engineer is a specialist.

Right. Like an anaesthetist.
But hey – isn’t an anaesthetist an MD also?

How long is an anaesthetology (sp?) degree?

BTW, I’m waiting for one of the architects to get annoyed at what you just said. I bet you’re an engineer, eh!

@Meccano wrote:

In England self-conveyancing is now possible, and fixed price conveyancing runs way below 1%. More like point two of a percent.
I bought my site on a fixed fee of 780 euro through a solicitor in Dublin.
Its coming here too.
All those “searches” solicitors carry out are repeated duplication of the same work over and over – generating a nice little earner,thank you.
The resistance to change will be mighty of course!

You do so at your own risk] I agree. You mention getting 2 houses designed for less than 44K. 22k each? I’ll pay that tomorrow!
ANYBODY WANT A JOB??[/QUOTE]

As the great Mary Harney once said “Shop around”

@PVC King wrote:

You do so at your own risk]
I understand that computerisation of records has eliminated those multi-duplicated searches in dusty Law Libraries, thus eliminating a large element of cost. Also, I understand vendors are producing ‘conveyancing packs’ with all the required documentation assembled – saving more time and money.
Anyhow this is all beside the point.

As the great Mary Harney once said “Shop around”

I have been – since last July!

Still looking around Meccano? I remember when you were on AAM.
A simple design will not require an engineer.
A moderately complicated design will require some engineering input for a set fee ( e.g. €1000).
A complicated design will require full engineering input (1.5%).

If you are looking for an architect in Dublin, you will pay for it.,

This is the wrong website to be asking questions on.

Why?
They are more tolerant so far than bloody Brendan wossname on AAM.
Have you been banned yet?

@Meccano wrote:

While I continue my efforts to understand the ‘architecture and design industry’ from my viewpoint as a customer, could anyone explain to me – why is it that when I ask an architect to give me a fee to design a house I get an additional cost included for the services of a Structural Engineer?

Doesn’t the profession of Architect demand that you are equipped to actually build something you design?
Isn’t structural engineering part of the Architecture Degree Course?

If not, why not??

I agree with the others above, that engineering is specialised. Each area of the construction industry is becoming more and more specialised. I’m an architectural technician and my job gets more and more complicated every day because there are new regulations coming all the time! There are regulations for fire, disabled access, drainage, sound, thermal performance of your building etc. etc. I can learn all these, that’s fine – but I don’t think anyone could learn ALL the architecture ones AND ALL the engineering ones and keep fully up to date with all the current regs and legislation- sure- you’ld spend all day, every day reading!!! You wouldn’t be able to actually do any work!!! So, that’s why we’re all becoming specialists….. in college I learned how to size basic structural beams but in reality the design gets sent off to an engineer’s office … The problem is all these new regulations. In the past, my job didn’t actually exist- but in the future (and it’s already happening) there will be specislists for each area of my job. ie- fire consultants (already exist- they prepare Fire Safety Cert Applications), there’s the new guy’s who specialise in U-Values (for 2007 energy certs), soon I believe we will require certs for universal access to buildings- hence another specialist, because the technician will be too busy with other new legislation that’s not dreamt up of yet!! And the Health & Safety Regulations have gone mad.

Anyway- the bad news for anyone building now is bills will be from the following:
1. Architect’s office
2. Engineer (Architect will with)
3. Fire Safety Consultant for a Fire Cert (Architect will liaise) (Not for a house luckily-not yet anyway)
4. Health & Safety Consultant (Client’s responsibility-even for a house now)
5. Energy guy for your Energy Cert- so new I don’t even know what their job title is yet !!!
6. God only knows 7…8….9…10….

That’s before you pay your planning fee of 3.60 per sq.m for a commercial building and also 2.90 per sq.m for a fire cert application, then of course IF planning is granted you have to pay contributions….

Yikes…. I’d say multiply your bill by 10,,,possibly more, before you even lift a rock……;)

Can a structural Engineer do a Cert of compliance for building/planning regulations for a residential extension?

Dont forget, the services of a Quantity Surveyor is needed too :p