Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...
Re: ArchitectÕs dilemma - the burden of determining competence is essentially self-r[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- To: <seaoc(--nospam--at)seaoc.org>
- Subject: Re: ArchitectÕs dilemma - the burden of determining competence is essentially self-r
- From: "wish" <wish(--nospam--at)cwia.com>
- Date: Fri, 23 Jan 1998 17:44:20 -0800
Whoa Fred!!!!!!!!! First, AIA is not a licensing agency, it is a professional organization. One can be an architect without belonging the American Institute of Architect - and many are who feel that the organization is too controling and political. Second, the Board of Architectural Exam regulations do not, I repeat, do not limit an architect from practicing structural engineering. Nor do they test an architectes ability beyond a basic seismic understanding of section 16 of the UBC. This essentially tests them on their ability to understand or regurgitate the base shear formulas in the code (or the last time I tutored an architect on this issue ZIKCsW) and some knowledge of wind. Certainly not enough to start designing structural components and lateral restraint to a building (and forgive me, even a residential structure of low importance can fail and kill a family). Where is it in the Architects licensing provisions that prevent him from stamping and taking responsibility for structural drawings and calculations unless he has a sufficient Polytechnic education and can pass even the EIT let alone CE exam? Simply put, the are only tested to competent levels of architectural specialties, but have the legal right to scribble a few calculations and take responsibility over the structural nature of a building. Granted, not an intellegent thing to do, but then money has a way of corrupting common sense. This is very true in my area as at least 40% of the architects do their own structural design at the blessing of local building officials whose hands are tied from requireing otherwise. Something it terribly, terribly, TERRIBLY wrong here! Dennis Wish PE PS, When was the last time an Architect was brought up to disiplanary actions for providing a structural design for which he has not proven competency? -----Original Message----- From: FredT5 <FredT5(--nospam--at)aol.com> To: seaoc(--nospam--at)seaoc.org <seaoc(--nospam--at)seaoc.org> Date: Friday, January 23, 1998 4:56 PM Subject: ArchitectÕs dilemma - the burden of determining competence is essentially self-r >Just some minor points: Architects ARE required to complete continuing >education if they want to belong to the AIA nationwide. However, they have a >wide range of topics to pick from. California Architects are also limited to >practice only within their areas of demonstrated competence and training in >accordance with Board of Architectural Exam regulations in California. > >Fred Turner >Staff Structural Engineer >Ca. Seismic Safety Commission >1900 K St. #100 Sacramento, CA 95814 >916-327-1606 916-322-9476 Fax >FredT5(--nospam--at)aol.com > > >
- Prev by Subject: RE: 2nd try - Subject of Code Clarification - Non-Building Structures
- Next by Subject: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?What_is_a_Micropile?/_=BFQu=E9_es_un_micropilote??=
- Previous by thread: Re: SE by Education?
- Next by thread: Re: Aluminum: Welding to Teflon-backed plate