Hacker News Reader

Comment by ansgri | Hacker News Reader

Do architects nowadays not have to be competent structural engineers? If so, it would amuse me greatly: how can you be entrusted in drawing new building shapes if you have no clue on their feasibility?

In other words, have the word 'architect' devolved into a 'building (exterior & interior) designer'?

View on HN

Architects these days often seem to be large scale sculptors who inflict strange shapes on people who then have to live in or around them, without regard for engineering or human psychology.

Not really "these days". Unliveable spaces has a good longstanding tradition. Just check Le Corbusier and Niemayer works.

Reminds me of the complaints and lawsuits[1] regarding the Stata building at MIT. Apparently in the beginning it had leaks and other lacks of fit and polish.

[1]https://thetech.com/2007/11/09/lawsuit-v127-n53

This is extremely common, check out the book "How Buildings Learn", which has a few chapters on this phenomenon. The type of buildings you are describing are "Magazine" (buildings that get on the cover of architecture magazines)

From what I've heard, for high-profile 'designer' construction, the architect will draw the outside of the building and hands the design to engineers, who will have to add all the structures so that the building is usable and buildable.

Architects have to know material physics, structural physics and structural engineering, but they don't need to have specialist level knowledge. There are architects who specialize in innovative structural designs and their work combines both.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com