building. The point of the presentation I saw on Nova back fifteen
tears ago or so, is that the DESIGNERS of buildings seem no longer
capable of conceiving the totality.
I. M. Pei's design got the John Hancock Bldg in Boston won all sorts
of design awards - even while it was regularly popping out huge panes
of curtain-wall glass and dropping them onto th street.
William L. Polhemus, Jr. P.E.
Via iPhone 3G
On Aug 14, 2009, at 7:35 AM, Richard Calvert <RichardC@lbbe.com> wrote:
> Why is everyone down on the opera house all of a sudden?
> I mean, I can understand cost far exceeds its direct function.
> But it's a world known structure that certainly attracts more
> tourist tax dollars than something lesser would have...
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gil Brock [mailto:gil@raptsoftware.com]
> Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2009 10:07 PM
> To: seaint@seaint.org
> Subject: RE: License (Business)
>
> Conrad,
>
> Dull structural engineers should not be involved in complex
> structures, so whoever is selecting the consulting engineer should
> not select a dull one if he wants a complex structure. If the idiot
> paying the money selects a dull engineer to design a complex
> structure, what can he expect to get!
>
> I disagree with a lot of what you are saying. Yes, there are
> engineers who are only up to square boxes. There are probably some
> who should not design anything that is suspended also, because they
> hurt when they fall down. Hopefully most of them know their
> limitations and do not try to take on tasks beyond their abilities.
>
> But most times, it is the client who causes the structure to be a big
> box because they will not pay for anything else, in terms of
> construction costs, construction time and consultants fees. And often
> it is a very cheap big box because they use substandard materials
> that start to look run-down after only a few years, especially with
> cladding. I know a lot of engineers who are capable of designing any
> structure they are asked for, but I do not know of many clients who
> are willing to pay for it, except in the Middle East (and who knows
> what money is being used to pay for it there). You cannot expect to
> get the Sydney Opera House for a structural fee .5% of construction
> cost and have it designed in 3 weeks and built by the end of the year
> for $300 per/m2.
>
> I agree that the Sydney Opera House is overly complex, overly
> expensive and probably a waste of money, but that is what the
> Architect came up with and the client was willing to pay (too bad it
> was our tax dollars). They tried to get it simplified during the
> design stages but did not succeed.
>
>
> At 05:23 PM 11/08/2009, you wrote:
>> Gil,
>>
>> The architect may operate as part of a team, but the architect is
>> typically
>> the team leader and historically the team leader. They may not make
>> the
>> engineering decisions, but their decisions influence the structure.
>>
>> Thus architects determine whether get the Sydney Opera House, or the
>> Adelaide Festival theatre, or the Adelaide Entertainment centre. If
>> a dull
>> structural engineer involved then the Sydney Opera House would have
>> been
>> simplified to being like the Adelaide Entertainment centre: a big
>> box. And
>> architects do seem to have a hard time finding structural engineers
>> who will
>> go beyond the big box. If sticking with the box, and to historical
>> conventions, and the tried and tested, then what need of the
>> engineer?
>>
>> The lesser architect will be bullied by the structural engineer into
>> accepting the dull box, the great architect will not budge and will
>> find a
>> better structural engineer (real).
>>
>> Since architects are not all alike and structural engineers are not
>> all
>> alike, it makes sense that sometimes they need to be paired up and
>> sometimes
>> they have no need of each other. Some times neither is required and
>> have
>> owner-designer-builders doing it all for themselves.
>>
>> There is no one single project organisation structure, that suits all
>> projects, all the time, and in all places. The resources available
>> to a
>> project have to be managed properly: calling in the higher level
>> skills when
>> needed.
>>
>>
>>
>> Regards
>> Conrad Harrison
>> B.Tech (mfg & mech), MIIE, gradTIEAust
>> mailto:sch.tectonic@bigpond.com
>> Adelaide
>> South Australia
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
>> * Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
>> *
>> * This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers
>> * Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To
>> * subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
>> *
>> * http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
>> *
>> * Questions to seaint-ad@seaint.org. Remember, any email you
>> * send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted
>> * without your permission. Make sure you visit our web
>> * site at: http://www.seaint.org
>> ******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********
>
> Regards Gil Brock
> Prestressed Concrete Design Consultants Pty. Ltd. (ABN 84 003 163 586)
> 5 Cameron Street Beenleigh Qld 4207 Australia
> Ph +61 7 3807 8022 Fax +61 7 3807 8422
> email: gil@raptsoftware.com
> email: sales@raptsoftware.com
> email: support@raptsoftware.com
> webpage: http://www.raptsoftware.com
>
>
> ******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
> * Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
> *
> * This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers
> * Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To
> * subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
> *
> * http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
> *
> * Questions to seaint-ad@seaint.org. Remember, any email you
> * send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted
> * without your permission. Make sure you visit our web
> * site at: http://www.seaint.org
> ******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********
>
> ******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
> * Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
> *
> * This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers
> * Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To
> * subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
> *
> * http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
> *
> * Questions to seaint-ad@seaint.org. Remember, any email you
> * send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted
> * without your permission. Make sure you visit our web
> * site at: http://www.seaint.org
> ******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********
******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
* Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
*
* This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers
* Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To
* subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
* http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
* Questions to seaint-ad@seaint.org. Remember, any email you
* send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted
* without your permission. Make sure you visit our web
* site at: http://www.seaint.org
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********