legal limits of pe versus architect
legal limits of pe versus architect
(OP)
What can an architect do that a PE can't? I have seen in state statues statements like an engineering can do architectural work only if it incidental to his work. What does this mean? Where is the line drawn between engineering tasks and architectural tasks?
Could an engineer ethically/legally do the following tasks on his own without the help of an architect?
1.design a residential building
2.design a commercial building
3.prepare a life safety plan
4.complete a full building code review of an existing or proposed structure.
Could an engineer ethically/legally do the following tasks on his own without the help of an architect?
1.design a residential building
2.design a commercial building
3.prepare a life safety plan
4.complete a full building code review of an existing or proposed structure.





RE: legal limits of pe versus architect
Rafiq Bulsara
http://www.srengineersct.com
RE: legal limits of pe versus architect
Fe
RE: legal limits of pe versus architect
Your item 1 rarely requires an architect, but often requires an engineer for structural purposes, particularly in wind and seismic cases.
Item 2 is where it gets a bit fuzzy. Architects would complain if the building were anything but a box. An example would be something like a tilt-up concrete warehouse building that has essentially all structural elements and the "look" of the building is only differentiated by its exterior finishes and perhaps the window selection. If an engineer tried to design a 4-story office building, he'd probably get some flack from the architects. Conversely, if the architect tried to do the structural design on a 4-story office building, he'd get flack from the engineers; however, if he wanted to design a steel or wood frame one-story office building, he could probably do so.
Item 3 is a life safety issue which can be handled by either an architect or an engineer, as long as the engineer has general code interpretation experience.
Item 4 is done by both as well, general without complaint from either side, as there are more engineers doing condition assessments and code review than architects.
All comments are relative to US practices.
RE: legal limits of pe versus architect
In Illinois an archtiect can design steel I-beams but the engineer must have an SE license... makes no sense.
In Missouri - if a building has so many cubic feet or will be oocuppied by so many people - you have to have an architect - but not an engineer. Rediculous!!
A few years ago, an engineer designed a simple but fairly large warehouse where about 20 people would work. He got nailed.
Check with your local board.
RE: legal limits of pe versus architect
The head of the architects said no way. The head of engineering said sure.
Go figure
RE: legal limits of pe versus architect
h
RE: legal limits of pe versus architect
I think the laws are purposely fuzzy to allow local interpretation. I don't think you will ever get a definite answer.
From my own experience, good engineers with a sense of design are more capable of designing a building than some bad architects whose work I've reviewed and whose work I testify against in court. There are plenty of architects out there wiling and downright eager to design flat boxes. There are legions of namby-pamby architects who bend over and grab their own ankles and do whatever their Client wants even if it makes for a poorly functioning building.
But there are also visionary architects untethered by convention whose imaginations have spurred engineers to push the boundaries structural design.
"If you are going to walk on thin ice, you might as well dance!"
RE: legal limits of pe versus architect
Regards,
Cvanoverbeke
RE: legal limits of pe versus architect
Regards,
Cvanoverbeke