Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...
Re: Dilbert's Theorem (architects vs. engineers)[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- To: <seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org>
- Subject: Re: Dilbert's Theorem (architects vs. engineers)
- From: "Chris Towne" <ctowne(--nospam--at)newwave.net>
- Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1999 13:36:55 -0500
I think this is a little ridiculous. Chris Towne E.I.T. -----Original Message----- From: JAKABY(--nospam--at)aol.com <JAKABY(--nospam--at)aol.com> To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org <seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org> Date: Thursday, March 04, 1999 11:58 AM Subject: Re: Dilbert's Theorem (architects vs. engineers) >Who could resist an open invitation to snipe at a Plan Checker! Sweet revenge >is at hand! Well, let's see where should I start....hmm. So in your opinion >engineering is "dry numbers". Thats' typical coming from an architect where >creativity abounds and to hell with practicality. Where form follows >function... NOT! Oh and I suppose the plan checking arena is not dry!? This >has to be one of the most boring occupations there is. Talk about dry. More >like parched of any creativity. As a plan checker do you design anything? No. >Been out to the job site lately? I doubt it. Have you produced a drawing that >someone actually used to build something from? Can I check it? > >DRY NUMBERS! If thats what you think engineering is you are missing the >entire picture. Engineers know more about the built environment than most >architects could ever dream of. Thats why engineers are relied upon for the >actual design. The structural components are decided upon and designed by >engineers. Right down to the aluminum frames of the storefront. The >difference between architects and engineers is that engineers can actually >back up what they design with more then concepts, textures and colors. That's >the beauty of it. As an engineer, I can look at a building design, layout the >framing, pick a system, conceptualize the lateral bracing and design it. The >engineer can determine how every component of the building/structure will fit, >what size, how many bolts and more importantly engineers are responsible for >the life safety protection of the occupants. > >Plan checking doesn't even come close to any form of architectural or >engineering design. As a plan checker your job is to check for conformance to >building code. Period. You have no say in the configuration, looks, >components chosen, location, concepts or anything else. Your area of expertise >is the building code. As a structural engineer I have been in plan check >situations where I have to educate the plan checker about the code. This is >usually like talking to a brick wall. > >As for dry numbers, do you really think we as a society would be able to span >the bay or build a high-rise structure without those dry numbers? > >So. you consider yourself a hired gun working for the dastardly building >department. Thats nice. As they say whatever floats your boat. Actually, I >thought you were the guys with the white hats that ride in to save the day. > >Blame it on Dilbert. I hate to say it, but you asked for it. > >Snipefully yours, >Tom Jakaby, SE >(DISCLAIMER: The above opinions, conlusions and snipes are intended to be >taken in a lighthearted way. It is not intended to alienate, offend or cause >any consternation.
- Prev by Subject: Re: Dilbert's Theorem (architects vs. engineers)
- Next by Subject: Re: Dilbert's Theorem (architects vs. engineers)
- Previous by thread: Re: Dilbert's Theorem (architects vs. engineers)
- Next by thread: Re: Dilbert's Theorem (architects vs. engineers)