Student1

well, is there really a difference? heh, I remember from the show, prison break that the main character was a structural engineer and did work that seemed like what an architect would do (blueprints of buildings, models, etc) but not once did they call him an architect. any ideas?

larationalist

An architect figures out what the building should look like, what it should feel like, the sequence/arrangement of spaces, the materiality of it, and coordinates the requirements of various consultants like the structural engineer, mechanical/electrical/plumbing, along with code requirements for safety and accessibility.

A structural engineer makes sure that the building will stand up, and meets any codes pertaining to the strength of the structure, structural connections, and the calculations required to demonstrate these things. A structural engineer for the most part could care less about accessibility, other trades, or finish materials. They often are barely involved in how the building looks at all since many/most buildings hide the structural elements. Though a good structural engineer in the right situation can work with the architect to enhance the space with exposed structural elements, this does not always happen.

I've never watched Prison Break, but architects are not always portrayed with strict accuracy in the media, so it would not be suprising if the same were true of structural engineers. However, almost all building trades do work with some sort of plans, but each set of plans contains a different type of information on them, so it is only when you have looked at each set of plans that you have a complete picture of what the building looks like and how it is functioning.

cagb1016

Architecture is mainly art and design with some supporting engineering courses. Structural or architectural engineering is mainly math, physics and engineering.

brooklynrats

AIA

go to www.aia.org and look at "Architect Finder" and under it, "What an Architect Can Fo for You". The structural design comes after the design of the building, as larationalist said. The structural engineer is hired by the architect to provide a limited scope of advice.

UriA702

Limited scope of advice? LOL - not the case. Civil Engineers work on teams and work closely with developers and architects. All must work together to insure the property will reach its full potential. Engineers also make many decisions such as building materials, floor design, elevators, maximizing space, the engineers make the major decisions regarding how to put everything up structurally sound, running into minimal problems, while working under a lot of pressure with contractors to fix problems they may run into - all with the lowest economic contribution by the investors.

While both provide a very comprehensive part of the building process it is unrealistic to say engineering offer "a limited scope of advice." Especially in regard to Civil Engineering which is regarded as one of the oldest and most respected professions in the world. Engineers are responsible for the safety and accessibility of the tenants. Engineers jobs are extremely important, just as important as the investors and the architect.

Tzar

From what people have said so far I am getting the idea that:

Architects have the vision, the dream

Civil Engineers try to make that dream happen. (is this about right?)

larationalist

Well, a civil engineer and a structural engineer are different things. When working on a building, the civil engineer deals with the sitework- grading and drainage and how different utilities are accessed; while the structural engineer deals with the building itself. Maybe these go through the same program in school, I don't know. My descriptions are based off of the people I have to coordinate with on a daily basis.

To some level, the structural engineer's scope is more limited than the architects. That is not to say it is not important, just that he spends less overall time on the project than the architect does, and deals with fewer elements of the project. He has a narrower, but important, focus.

sashimi46

when engineers are hired as contractors or consultants for an architect, they achieve the architect's vision....but engineers also are involved in the design process or the creation of the vision...they are both a challenge and a blessing to the design process....resistance is often good

engineers, when working on their own projects such as bridges, usually are in charge of the design process...so they themselves create their own vision.

in some aspects, engineers and architects think quite alike but have different approaches. both attempt to solve problems.

cheers

Depends on the dream. For an engineer, finding the constructable solution to a stretched physics and maths problem is the dream.

If you enjoy taking things apart and solving maths problems, you're better off as an engineer. If you enjoy artistic endeavors, you're better off as an architect.

Engineers have a huge role--the geotech engineer analyzes the substrata and tells the architect what's doable, the civil engineer tells the architect what's drainable, the structural engineer tells the architect what's buildable, the mechanical engineer tells the architect what is breathable, the lift engineer tells the architect how the lifts will work, the elec engineer tells the architect how elec will flow thru the project. The fire engineer tells the architect how to minimize fire risks.

It is a total collaboration.

entomom

Here's an interesting article about Cecil Balmond, a structural engineer. It is originally from the New Yorker:

http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2...6-31835822_ITM

menorca1

bump bump bump

ken285

Not sure what else there is to add to this subject. The consensus seems to be consistent with what I always thought as well. Architects pretty much design the layout and aesthetics of a building, while engineers are specialists that help make the design a reality.

larationalist

I think that's shorting the Architect's role as coordinator a bit. The structural engineer doesn't care about duct sizes, and the mechanical engineer doesn't usually bother to look whether there's a beam in the way: as well as aesthetics, it's up to the architect to take the input from all of the various consultants and find a middle ground where everything has its place. Heck, I'm just now taking a break from figuring out where there's room to run some big plumbing lines, and the only thing aesthetic about that is that I won't let them be run on the outside of the building! So to say that architects only care about aesthetics and aren't involved in making the design a reality is still a limited view of the profession.

ken285

Of course that's the case; I didn't mean to leave that responsibility out. It definitely is a very important part of the architect's responsibility, from initial design all the way through construction. Perhaps my choice of words wasn't the best... when I said "making the design a reality," I was thinking of only the technical aspects of the project, such as the size of steel beams, strength of concrete, etc.

cheers

Just for grins, let's examine that Prison Break character for a moment because I think that character points to the fundamental difference between architects and engineers.

I must know a couple of hundred different engineers. They have similar personalities. They all get excited about taking things apart and putting them back together. They are captivated by all sorts of puzzles. They love widget tools. If they have a really neat one, they carry it in their pocket and they seceretly hope for opportunities to pull that neat widget tool out to show evryone just how super duper neat it is.

Engineers are usually missing a 'style' chip. They don't care. (I've met one or two who cared about style and they were mediocre engineers).

Architects are visually oriented. Their first instinctual response is a visual one. Architects are artists who force themselves to figure out where the plumbing stacks go--only because if they don't do that--the stacks will ruin a nice visual. It's very hard to motivate an architect without some visual imperative.

The Prison Break cat seemed more like an architect than an engineer. The brooding, stylized affect was much more like an architect than an engineer. A real engineer breaking out of prison would be giggling about all the escape possibilities.... a la Hogan's Heroes.