English for Architects and Civil Engineers ILE-494

Laura Oviedo 2010-5397

September 9th, 2014

Summary: AN INVESTIGATION OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEER-ARCHITECT

COLLABORATION, by A. W. Charleson and S. Pirie
On this article from the Journal of the Structural Engineering Society New Zealand Inc., the authors
point out the importance of collaboration between structural engineers and architects. They mention,
in relation to the built environment as well as elsewhere in society, that it implies the need for an
intensified collaboration of interdisciplinary expert teams, and this, along with their different modes
of thought, is why achieving a successful collaboration between these two professionals is a
challenge.
Since the beginning, engineering students are different from architecture students. For example,
Salvadori, a Professor of Civil Engineering, notes engineering students dont develop much of a
critical mind. They just accept the dictates of science and apply them to practical problems. On the
other hand, architecture students are more curious, open-minded, critical, and interested on the
complex problems of their culture.
Architects and engineering have different perceptions of the same reality. While engineers use a
hierarchical system to get an answer out of a situation, the non-hierarchical system of architects
thought allows for infinite possibilities. Another difference of thoughts is, for an engineer the design
process involves analysis, whereas for an architect, designing is synthesizing. Some architects feel
these different modes of thinking affects their architectural aspirations. In other words, ultimately
architects dreams have to accept the laws of physics and the analytical engineering skills available
at a given time in history.
Here is also discussed the appropriate timing for engineering involvement. Its known that architects
require flexibility and freedom at the early stages of designs, and thats why they are worried that
the prematurely involved of an engineer difficult their designs explorations. Some sustain the
structure should not be considered until the main premises of the design, but this results in structure
poorly integrated with building function and aesthetics. Others argue for earlier engineer
involvement in the architects programmatic and conceptual phase. At the end, the article concludes
that the timing of structural input has to be a personal decision each architect makes.
In an exemplary way, the article presents the results of a survey administered to architecture and
engineering students. Findings indicate there is little if any antagonism, and indeed a culture of
respect between professions. However, they both complain about some aspects of the contrary
profession. For example, engineers are concerned about architects lack of structural understanding,
while architects are disappointed by engineers lack of both innovation and engagement with
architectural design ideas.