# Can Architects do structural engineering?



## ScipioAfricanus

Sometimes on this site and frequently on the sister DIY site, I notice contractors suggesting that the OP have an Architect or engineer specify a given header or beam size or total structural design.
My question to you guys is, have you ever worked with an Archy that has engineered any non prescriptive structure (an Archy that is not also a P.E. or S.E.)? 
I just don't see this happening. I know that in Archy school they have to take some classes in engineering and the subsequent math courses like Trig and Calculus, (so have I, big whoop) but the level of courses they take does not prepare them to do structural calculations like that of a P.E.

What say you?

Andy.


----------



## Kent Whitten

Most of the prints I have worked off of that are drawn up by an architect have in house structural engineers or farm it out. The smaller "shops" will probably rely on prescriptive numbers.


----------



## Joasis

I suppose anyone can spec a specific section, but without the seal of an engineer, it is not taken as legally binding. One home designer we use often will have foundation plans and cross sections, and piers for porch posts detailed, all without even knowing the soil conditions.


----------



## Chris Johnson

The Ontario Building Code is written with various sections, the one most commonly used is called Part 9. Anyone can design and build as per Part 9. In Part 9 it gives different scenarios based on your conditions and you can literally match up rows and columns and figure it out yourself, if you fall outside the perimeters of what you are doing it goes to Part 4 which is engineered and then you need an engineer.

In the ICF industry most major manufacturers have produced tables for us to deal with rebar for backfill and lintels. The only issue I have with that is the designs are all maxed out to cover situations most times you don't get, I.E. it's all designed to meet an earthquake in California...and yet California will not accept it as it is not job specific. If your just doing a small project it's not financially worth engineering to the job. However on a larger job it pays to have an engineer as those costs maybe off set by the savings that can be realized.


----------



## katoman

My understanding is that the first job of an Architect is to design. Structural calculations/specifications need to be done by an engineer.

Which brings up something I ran into last week - a carpenter friend is building a deck for an architect. The architect specified 2x6 joists, which is illegal here under our building code.

My friend called him on it, and he said "I'm an architect, I can spec whatever I want". He stamped the drawings, and the building inspector let it go.

I believe this is wrong. So my question is - can an architect overide the building code?


----------



## thom

Around here, all that depends on what the structure is. I have neither an architecture nor an engineering stamp or degree. I may provide basic engineering which the building department double checks. The most obvious are headers and simple beams. I must show the engineering calculations. 

With engineered lumber, the software provided by the manufacturer is adequate. We must include the software supplied engineering printouts. The plans examiner double checks our work. 

There was a time (possibly still, I haven't checked) when the engineered lumber manufacturer also included in their software engineering for dimension lumber. The plans examiner would accept that. 

The plans examiner has the option of requiring an engineers seal if the application looks like something other than the standard run of the mill stuff or if engineering calculations are not provided with the plans. 

On trusses we must have the manufacturer supplied engineer stamped drawing for each different truss. If the project includes 50 different truss designs/sizes 50 engineered drawings would be required. Of course these are the very same drawings the truss supplier builds the trusses from.


----------



## txgencon

Only engineers licensed to practice in the state in which the work is to take place can provide engineering services.

In some states, only a licensed engineer associated with a registered and licensed engineering firm can perform these services.


----------



## Rio

In California an architect is licensed to do structural calculations and stamp them for quite a few structures. Some do, most don't. 

I have worked extensively with an architect who is easily as or more competent than most of the structural engineers that I've worked with and have discovered that just because someone has a license doesn't necessarily mean they're competent or they're thorough in their analysis.

Also, in response to the question 'Can an architect override the building code?' I don't think they can and they'd be crazy to do so in any case just for potential liability issues.


----------



## bwiab

This is going to vary by each State. In Wisconsin for example, anyone can design a structure under 30,000 c.f. If it is bigger than that then you need a stamped professional, either engineer or architect. As far as structural calculations go, the code goes by conventionally framed structures or structures designed by structural analysis. If the building is designed using structural analysis, per Wisconsin Code, it can be done by either an engineer or an architect. Really depends on your State. That being said, the only architects I've known that do structural calculations, have had a second degree in structural engineering.


----------



## Rob1954

Around here the building inspector considers the Architect as the Designer of Record. It's up to the Designer of Record to determine if a P.E. is required, so whether the Architect does it himself or contracts with a Structural Engineer, it's his call. Most architects send all commercial and the unusual residential stuff to a P.E. for design.

Think about this.....many plated truss and TJI layouts are done by someone who has little formal engineering training. And they often know more about design than most architects.


----------



## Builder Butch

In most states you need a PE license. This requires an engineering or architechual degree then work under a PE for 5 years then sit for the test. The catch is the disicpline you focus. For example I have a mechanical engineering degree so while I can do load calcs I cant legally sign off. A buddy has a Electrical engineering degreeand has a PE license but is not suppose to sign off on strucural load calcs since it is not in his area of discipline. He can but he will not do it under a code of ethics.


----------



## FramingPro

just gonna add onto what Chris said with something that well...Chris said.
With the generic tables for bar or lintel sizes the company expresses those with huge safety factors just to be sure that it will be appropriate in all applications, since its generic, nothing is site specific and therefore there is an opportunity for you downgrade a certain component for it to be sufficient in your specific application.
Like chris just said.
on smaller jobs it may not be worth it to re engineer but on large jobs your savings in time and material could and most likely would outweigh the cost of the engineer.
yea something like that :whistling


----------



## rshad28

Hi ScipioAfricanus,
I've gotta be in general agreement with what, Chris Johnson, and with FramingPro,
Smaller projects you may find don't require anything more than the tables and charts you can find at your local hardware store, whereas with larger projects, the Engineer would be a definite asset.

In a more detailed agreement, I'm gonna go with talk to an Engineer. 
An Architect shouldn't be doing Engineer, based on a general overview of Architects/Designers. Each Professional has their place in the industry.

This being said only because I don't know the situation with your location you're building on, so I can't say use a table to design your own-stuff if you're proposed structure is sitting the edge of a river, or something along those lines.

Consult with an Engineer, and talk to your Architect, and see what they think about what you're planning on doing.


----------



## ScipioAfricanus

thom said:


> Around here, all that depends on what the structure is. I have neither an architecture nor an engineering stamp or degree. I may provide basic engineering which the building department double checks. The most obvious are headers and simple beams. I must show the engineering calculations.
> 
> With engineered lumber, the software provided by the manufacturer is adequate. We must include the software supplied engineering printouts. The plans examiner double checks our work.
> 
> There was a time (possibly still, I haven't checked) when the engineered lumber manufacturer also included in their software engineering for dimension lumber. The plans examiner would accept that.
> 
> The plans examiner has the option of requiring an engineers seal if the application looks like something other than the standard run of the mill stuff or if engineering calculations are not provided with the plans.
> 
> On trusses we must have the manufacturer supplied engineer stamped drawing for each different truss. If the project includes 50 different truss designs/sizes 50 engineered drawings would be required. Of course these are the very same drawings the truss supplier builds the trusses from.


This is very much the way it is done here in California too.
I often do all the architectural and prescriptive 'engineering' for many of my projects here when I am allowed to by the local Building and Safety department.
Being as most of my work is done in seismic design category D sub0 I can only do single story stuff and that is only if there are no unusual circumstances that would need engineering. Rarely do the B & S depts. allow mixing of engineered and prescriptive, though some do.

I find it interesting how it is done in other states.

Andy.


----------



## hdavis

katoman said:


> My understanding is that the first job of an Architect is to design. Structural calculations/specifications need to be done by an engineer.
> 
> Which brings up something I ran into last week - a carpenter friend is building a deck for an architect. The architect specified 2x6 joists, which is illegal here under our building code.
> 
> My friend called him on it, and he said "I'm an architect, I can spec whatever I want". He stamped the drawings, and the building inspector let it go.
> 
> I believe this is wrong. So my question is - can an architect overide the building code?


Around here they can.


----------



## TimelessQuality

One of our local architects is in a court case trying to save his license...

The charge was something like 'impersonation of an engineer'


----------



## griz

To the best of my knowledge & experience California requires a Structural Engineer wet stamp on any structural drawings...:thumbsup:


----------



## Rio

griz said:


> To the best of my knowledge & experience California requires a Structural Engineer wet stamp on any structural drawings...:thumbsup:


Architects licensed to practice in California can and do stamp structural calcs. The below is excerpted from The Architects Practice Act of the State of California

_the building official having jurisdiction shall
require the preparation of plans, drawings, specifications, or calculations for
that portion by, or under the responsible control of, a licensed architect or
registered engineer. The documents for that portion shall bear the stamp and
signature of the licensee who is responsible for their preparation._
It is in reference to structures that aren't exempt from the act.


----------



## griz

Maybe so...

The archy's I have worked with have all deferred to the SE & his wet stamp...:thumbsup:


----------



## ScipioAfricanus

Rio said:


> Architects licensed to practice in California can and do stamp structural calcs. The below is excerpted from The Architects Practice Act of the State of California
> 
> _the building official having jurisdiction shall
> require the preparation of plans, drawings, specifications, or calculations for
> that portion by, or under the responsible control of, a licensed architect or
> registered engineer. The documents for that portion shall bear the stamp and
> signature of the licensee who is responsible for their preparation._
> It is in reference to structures that aren't exempt from the act.


I believe this refers to the two separate portions of mostly commercial projects, ie. the Architectural portion and the structural portion.

The architectural portion is usually the over-all aesthetic design, building materials expressed in the design, design for life safety issues like smoke screens, fire screens, guards, emergency egress, etc.
A lot of other stuff involved in all that.

The Archy has to sign and stamp all that and the engineer signs and stamps the structural stuff. 

If the structural is capable of being taken care of by prescriptive means then the Archy or designer (like myself) can sign off that portion too.

New this year in California, any commercial TI architectural pages have to be stamped and signed by either an Archy, Registered Interior Designer, Engineer or General Contractor.

I will be renewing my GC license so I can take advantage of this.

Andy.


----------



## griz

ScipioAfricanus said:


> I believe this refers to the two separate portions of mostly commercial projects, ie. the Architectural portion and the structural portion.
> 
> The architectural portion is usually the over-all aesthetic design, building materials expressed in the design, design for life safety issues like smoke screens, fire screens, guards, emergency egress, etc.
> A lot of other stuff involved in all that.
> 
> The Archy has to sign and stamp all that and the engineer signs and stamps the structural stuff.
> 
> If the structural is capable of being taken care of by prescriptive means then the Archy or designer (like myself) can sign off that portion too.
> 
> New this year in California, any commercial TI architectural pages have to be stamped and signed by either an Archy, Registered Interior Designer, Engineer or General Contractor.
> 
> I will be renewing my GC license so I can take advantage of this.
> 
> Andy.


So a GC now has a wet stamp?


----------



## KillerToiletSpider

Suffice it to say I'm glad I no longer have to correct architects or engineers anymore, though I do still get a chuckle out of the engineer that insisted that a twenty story building needed a twelve inch stack for the kitchen waste.


----------



## ScipioAfricanus

griz said:


> So a GC now has a wet stamp?


Exactly right.

I will be ordering mine from Staples.

About $30.00.

Andy.


----------



## Rio

The reason I know that architects in California can do structural calculations in many cases is in addition to being familiar with the rules and regulations regarding the practice of Architecture in California I've worked for years with an architect who has done the structural calcs and stamped them on numerous residential and light commercial projects, typically wood framed, and has done them well. 

I'm the first one to say that he is the exception and not the rule and for more complicated engineering issues, such as moment frames and steel I beams he's not up to the task but some of the engineers I've worked with have left a lot to be desired also, getting in a hurry, not reviewing the plans thoroughly, being sloppy on their detailing, leaving out important issues such as drainage, etc. To do a good job takes not only knowledge but the dedication to take the time to pore over the plans.


----------



## Chris Johnson

I was always under the impression when I was in California that the architect was allowed to stamp the drawings up to 6500 +\- sq ft. 

I did a complete remodel on a house in Kenwood including removal of 1/3 of the roof, raised the walls, garage converted to master bedroom and added a separate 4 car garage and we never had a S.E., the architect signed off on everything.


----------



## skyhook

I mostly do design and build, have it drawn up by Draftsmen and skip the architect. I have Structural Engineers who review my plans, size the beams and red iron, and or approve my designs. 
When I do have to work with an architect, the structural engineering is on them, or their Structural Engineer. 
I also employ my own Soil Engineers, when the need arises.
Having solid professionals on my team makes the walk through city hall much easier.


----------



## one man show

*yes*

In california the business and professional code allows architects to do engineering. Most will not because it takes them out of thier comfort zone but legally they are allowed to. Those that i have seen do it do vey simple basic stuff. Generally they r not doing lateral analysis of a whole building but describing a beam or shear calc yes. heck u can pull beam sizes, joist spans, rafter spans foundation specs directly out of the code book


----------



## one man show

*override codes*

hey rio
no-one can over ride the building code except the jurisdiction. they generally will do it for only geological, climactic , or topographical considerations. They do have however great latitude as to how the code is interpreted


----------



## ohiohomedoctor

One of the architects we work with is also a se. The other subs it out.


----------



## studio43

I am an architect, I will engineer certian things . Simple Footings, Wood Beams, framing Joist /rafter member spans. Most jurisdictions I work in allow me to only engineer common or simple stuff. Which is just fine with me. I always use a structural engineer on my projects. Mainly for specialty engineering. such as high concetrated loads, extremly long spans, Wind loading, which in coastal areas it essential. Tall retaining walls , cantelivers etc. For me it is cheap insurance to have the SE do the calcs and structural design to ensure the structural integrity of my buildings. Most recent building I built was designed for 130mph winds. The SE did all the structural design. I'm sure I could do some of what the SE is doing and it would be considered ok by building officials. I choose not to get into the heavy-duty stuff and leave to the guy who does it all day long.


----------



## one man show

*structural calcs*

You are a smart man. As design professional u r responsible for your building and here in calif. laywers are friggin everywhere. Most of the stuff you mentioned can be pulled directly out of the building code book 2010 ca. building code or 2009 IRC for example chapter 6 wall construction braced wall panels, masonry walls, structural connectios etc. . Rafter spans tableR802.5.1, joist spansR802.4, . This code book is written so that you can design your own building , you literally dont need an engineer but you have to be a genuis to understand the code book. It is very difficult.


----------



## ScipioAfricanus

Yeah, sometimes understanding and interpreting the CRC is a bit difficult. It is more difficult to convince a plan checker who does not agree with your interpretation of the code.

I can do and have done prescriptive design on one and two story additions here in Calif. and I am not an architect just a residential designer.

I still contend that Architects are not allowed to do actual engineer design, in Calif., or am I wrong?

Andy.


----------



## one man show

*architects doing structural*

like i said 
cal business and professional code allows architects to to structural calcs. 
plancheckers (of which I have done for a large bay area city) can have their own interpretation of a code section or the jurisdiction may see it in a particular light. Generally they interprate the code as it is written,in my opinion. 

this section in prof code is for architects practicing in ca.

5537. (a) This chapter does not prohibit any person from preparing
plans, drawings, or specifications for any of the following:
(1) Single-family dwellings of woodframe construction not more
than two stories and basement in height.
(2) Multiple dwellings containing no more than four dwelling units
of woodframe construction not more than two stories and basement in
height. However, this paragraph shall not be construed as allowing an
unlicensed person to design multiple clusters of up to four dwelling
units each to form apartment or condominium complexes where the
total exceeds four units on any lawfully divided lot.
(3) Garages or other structures appurtenant to buildings described
under subdivision (a), of woodframe construction not more than two
stories and basement in height.
(4) Agricultural and ranch buildings of woodframe construction,
unless the building official having jurisdiction deems that an undue
risk to the public health, safety, or welfare is involved.
(b) If any portion of any structure exempted by this section
deviates from substantial compliance with conventional framing
requirements for woodframe construction found in the most recent
edition of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations or tables
of limitation for woodframe construction, as defined by the
applicable building code duly adopted by the local jurisdiction or
the state, the building official having jurisdiction shall require
the preparation of plans, drawings, specifications, or calculations
for that portion by, or under the responsible control of, a licensed
architect or registered engineer. The documents for that portion
shall bear the stamp and signature of the licensee who is responsible
for their preparation. Substantial compliance for purposes of this
section is not intended to restrict the ability of the building
officials to approve plans pursuant to existing law and is only
intended to clarify the intent of Chapter 405 of the Statutes of
1985.


5537.1. A structural engineer, defined as a registered civil
engineer who has been authorized to use the title structural engineer
under the provisions of Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 6700),
insofar as he or she practices the profession for which he or she is
registered, is exempt from the provisions of this chapter, except
that a structural engineer may not use the title "architect," unless
he or she holds a license as required in this chapter.


this section is concerning engineers- note the similarity and verbage in section (b) speaks to architects designing structures that deviate from conventional framing---that is the point where a design professional must create the plans not some joe shmoe like me or you or up to a four unit building

6737.1. (a) This chapter does not prohibit any person from
preparing plans, drawings, or specifications for any of the
following:
(1) Single-family dwellings of woodframe construction not more
than two stories and basement in height.
(2) Multiple dwellings containing no more than four dwelling units
of woodframe construction not more than two stories and basement in
height. However, this paragraph shall not be construed as allowing an
unlicensed person to design multiple clusters of up to four dwelling
units each to form apartment or condominium complexes where the
total exceeds four units on any lawfully divided lot.
(3) Garages or other structures appurtenant to buildings described
under subdivision (a), of woodframe construction not more than two
stories and basement in height.
(4) Agricultural and ranch buildings of woodframe construction,
unless the building official having jurisdiction deems that an undue
risk to the public health, safety or welfare is involved.
(b) If any portion of any structure exempted by this section
deviates from substantial compliance with conventional framing
requirements for woodframe construction found in the most recent
edition of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations or tables
of limitation for woodframe construction, as defined by the
applicable building code duly adopted by the local jurisdiction or
the state, the building official having jurisdiction shall require
the preparation of plans, drawings, specifications, or calculations
for that portion by, or under the responsible charge of, a licensed
engineer, or by, or under the responsible control of, an architect
licensed pursuant to Chapter 3 (commencing with Section 5500). The
documents for that portion shall bear the stamp and signature of the
licensee who is responsible for their preparation.


----------



## ScipioAfricanus

You know what, I think that answers my question.

Thank you, I should have looked it up myself.

Andy.


----------



## Rio

ScipioAfricanus said:


> I still contend that Architects are not allowed to do actual engineer design, in Calif., or am I wrong?
> 
> Andy.


Yes you are................


----------



## ScipioAfricanus

Rio said:


> Yes you are................



Well, I wouldn't want you to have to elaborate on that rather terse statement of fact.

I have read your previous post, did your architect in question just do the prescriptive design or did he do an engineered design?

Andy.


----------



## Rio

ScipioAfricanus said:


> Well, I wouldn't want you to have to elaborate on that rather terse statement of fact.
> 
> I have read your previous post, did your architect in question just do the prescriptive design or did he do an engineered design?
> 
> Andy.


It was a little terse; sorry, the reason was that I had elaborated on the question in a post up the thread which I've copied and is pasted below

_"The reason I know that architects in California can do structural calculations in many cases is in addition to being familiar with the rules and regulations regarding the practice of Architecture in California I've worked for years with an architect who has done the structural calcs and stamped them on numerous residential and light commercial projects, typically wood framed, and has done them well.

I'm the first one to say that he is the exception and not the rule and for more complicated engineering issues, such as moment frames and steel I beams he's not up to the task but some of the engineers I've worked with have left a lot to be desired also, getting in a hurry, not reviewing the plans thoroughly, being sloppy on their detailing, leaving out important issues such as drainage, etc. To do a good job takes not only knowledge but the dedication to take the time to pore over the plans."_

To elaborate a little more, the jobs I was referring to all required structural calculations and the ensuing stamp that either a licensed engineer or a licensed architect would have to provide. 

In the case of the architect above they were for projects that required stamped structural calculations and he was performing the same duties that were previously being performed by an engineer. I think there are some structures that require a structural engineer to sign off on but am not quite sure what those are. 

Thinking of obtaining licensure?


----------



## Joggarch1

I saw this post on google and found it to be interesting enough to research further. I have read some of the answers some are interesting some are not true. Architects although are traditionally thought of as designers are very capable of designing structures. Their capabilities are restricted by codes those codes are written by no other than engineers, sanitation (garbage collectors), firemen, plumbers, electricians etc. but rarely are architects consulted as experts when it comes to the codes. 
I would like to state that architects outside of this country not only design their structures but also build them. This is a practice frowned upon here in the US. Now the codes also allow for non professionals such as home owners and contractors to design certain structures based on the complexity and scope f the structure. Some universities provide courses which provide architectural studends with courses on how to actually design in all the engineering disciplines equal to the same education obtained by the engineering students. That said the architects are only required to be educated in non complexed structural analysis and design, I.e., skyscrapers! 

Before there were engineers there were architects, they designed all the European and Eastern architectural masterpieces. Only with the onset of our industrial age did the word engineer began to be coined. Now let me take this oportunity to inform you of an other encroachment into the architects profession. That encroachment is in the computer sciences; where a computer hardware designer can be called an architect. Where is the AIA? Architects also face a perceived notion that all they can do is design and draw well. The only people that say that re people that heard that from someone in the past and are just simply repeating their un researched statements. It's like saying that contractors work is erect brick and mortar or frame-up a project.

Thus the real answer is yes they can design the residences and small buildings but code and conflict of interest issues here in the States makes it difficult for ar architect to assume his responsibilities to the fullness of his or her capacity in their profession.

Seek the right answer and it will always guide you in the right direction.


----------



## hdavis

DaVinci is a good example of the historical role of architects. In the US, the early 1900s still saw a lot of building engineering calculations being done by architects, for example truss designs. For why engineer's stamps are needed for some buildings, look to the state licensing boards and related state bodies. While there may be any number of people with and without degrees who are capable of doing something like structural design (and quite possibly better than licensed engineers), it isn't possible to just take the test and start practicing. All these professional requirements beyond competency are statutory monopolies in a way.



Joggarch1 said:


> Some universities provide courses which provide architectural studends with courses on how to actually design in all the engineering disciplines equal to the same education obtained by the engineering students. That said the architects are only required to be educated in non complexed structural analysis and design, I.e., skyscrapers!


Required for a subset, yes. I don't see how an architect in a 6 year program gets the same engineering training as a structural engineer 6 year program. In fact, I know they don't.



Joggarch1 said:


> Now let me take this oportunity to inform you of an other encroachment into the architects profession. That encroachment is in the computer sciences; where a computer hardware designer can be called an architect. Where is the AIA?


News flash, architects appear in all manner of areas - Landscape Architects, Naval Architects, Product Architects, System Architects,...


----------



## Kanding

Joggarch1 said:


> I saw this post on google and found it to be interesting enough to research further. I have read some of the answers some are interesting some are not true. Architects although are traditionally thought of as designers are very capable of designing structures. Their capabilities are restricted by codes those codes are written by no other than engineers...


Are you from the US? Very few US universities (and none that I am aware of) with arch. and civil engineering programs have equivalent structures courses for both disciplines, although a notable exception is the ‘architectural engineering’ hybrid program. Although some might, most arch. programs require no advanced mathematics or calculus-based physics, and thus these students don’t have the mathematics and basic science background required to attend even prerequisite engineering courses that come before engineering structures courses. This is not surprising, as advanced math and engineering-level structures courses are not required for architectural professional registration, unlike registration as a PE. 

That said, I agree that many architects are capable of completing the structural design for a variety of small structures. But to suggest that architect = structural engineer in technical ability, but that architects aren’t doing the complex structural designs as a PE because they are held back by restrictive building codes, is quite a stretch.


----------

