cant remember. it doesnt really matter bcoz all use the same syllabus and have more or less the same facilities. perhaps the only difference is lecturers/teaching staff.

yeah, rite now am searching or the right poly to study. i'm worry a bit about the lecturer. heh. but i don't expect myself to just live by spoon fed till i grad.

btw azarimy, you're continuing ur study in UK under sponsorship or self-sponsor?

u know, it would be easier to put ALL ur questions in one post. this isnt a chat room, u know.

i am under sponsorship, ofcourse. i'm not from a wealthy family . o

hah. i believe that u r not from wealthy famly, but i don't believe that urself r not wealthy. hak3.

who sponsor you to study in UK? mind sharing how you get there?

Hi , im new to this thread and i find it very helpful indeed.If it wasn't for azarimy i would have known nothing bout architecture.Thank you arazimy !Well , there's something i would like to enquire about.If i were to study in a non-accredited school and have taken the LAM exam independently, does it mean my degree would then be accredited by LAM ?

This post has been edited by Erozx`: Mar 30 2008, 04:52 AM

JPA-UTM. when i was offered a place as an academician in UTM, it comes with a scholarship to further my studies in masters and PhD anywhere i want. so for my masters i chose the most expensive and prestigious school - the bartlett in UCL, and for my PhD at the leading school of architecture education - university of sheffield. the contract comes with a 7 year contract that begins after i finish my PhD.

ur degree wont, but u will.

doing an accredited degree kills two birds in one throw - u accumulate knowledge and skill + getting the license. doing an unaccredited degree only awards u with the knowledge and skills, but u'd have to get the license independently.

if for example a building collapses or something similar, will the architect in charge of it be found responsible? from what i heard even if there's flaw in the design the architects will be exempted.

Usually, the Civil Engineer & the Structurer Engineer are the ones responsible for any structurer failures in the building.

If the building collapses, expect the entire construction team to be responsible. (In the future, when I am the Architect, I will never want such thing to happen to my building.)

This post has been edited by Benjamin911: Mar 30 2008, 08:02 PM

entire construction team? does that include architects? or they're in the designer team?

in such events, it is hard to point the responsibilities to the architect, bcoz it usually boils down to two parties: the engineers and the contractors/builders.

in constructing the building, the engineers' job is to verify that the building is buildable and safe in engineering sense. meaning the structure is safe, all the the parts are actually buildable and able to take all the loads and so on. when this process is complete, they will issue endorsed drawings with their signature on it. the signature means everything has been verified and the engineer takes full responsibility of it.

the contractors' job, on the other hand, is to build EXACTLY to the architect's and engineers' specification (using the drawings). they may not, in whatsoever way differ from the drawings.

so as u can see, when the building collapses, people will first look at the engineers drawings. they'll check whether everything is truely safe. if it werent, then they'll hang the engineer. if the drawings are sound, they'll look into the contractors. if the contractors didnt follow the drawings, then it's the contractor's fault.

in such events, it's hard to blame the architect, bcoz certain responsibilities were delegated to the experts. unless the architect did the engineering calculations or constructing the building themselves, it'll be very hard to take down the architect. however, this does not mean the architect is 100% responsibility free. they will still be responsible for SELECTING the faulty engineer or contractors in the first place. so they still have a hand on it.



building collapsing is usually the least of the architect's worries. there are lots of other things where the architect can be directly at fault. for example, failure to design according to the fire-safety standards; or if tenants complain about rooms being too hot to live in; or social problems created by their designs (usually at low cost, high density houses like flats). these sort a thing is something the architect will be directly responsible for.

For my case, it is controversial;

Before I got to know about this topic, I already knew what was Architecture all about and that it fits my interest type, but when I started to join this topic, I began to feel doubtful about what I knew about Architecture! (I mean, after reading through this topic, I suddenly became doubtful about what is Architecture all about!) To the extend that I would suddenly feel the need to ask; "What does the Architect do in the Architecture profession?".

Anyway;

As long as the Architect can plan - design buildings, can plan - design cities, and can plan - design the build environment, I feel that that is where my interest and ambition lays...(The word "buildings", "cities", or "the build environment" is already enough to spark my interest!)

[I just like to plan and design, or research and develop something that can benefit, and impress mankind.]

So far, I can see that Architecture is like that, aside from Engineering. (But somehow, Architecture seems to be more prestigious than Engineering...one of the reason why is because Architecture builds BIG, or MEGA!)

Isn't a house biggg? What about a shopping mall? (What about the Patronas Twin Towers?)

EDITED because of incorrect English usage!!

This post has been edited by Benjamin911: Mar 30 2008, 08:48 PM

the engineers and contractors are selected not by the developer but architect?

The entire construction team (Which does not include the client of course.) = The Architect (The Topman! ), The Engineers (Other than the Civil Engineer, there might also be engineers from other fields), The Quantity Surveyor, The Construction Manager (They CM would also be the one supervising everyone), The Craftsman (Workers), and probably the Interior Designer or the Technician as well...There might also be other specialist who may be involved in the project. Basically, I have named the main ones.

---

Added on March 30, 2008, 9:28 pmEven if that is the case, I cannot see what is there to worry about.

I can imagine that by the time I reach the stage in the office and working world, I would already be having the level of confidence in me; that making such arrangements with the Engineers and the Contractors would be second nature.

Although I am an "introvert" today where I am not socializing around with people, I can imagine that in the future, things would change and I would be working together in a team to build a better tomorrow for mankind! (The trill to work together in a team to discuss, plan, and design is there for me!)

This post has been edited by Benjamin911: Mar 30 2008, 09:32 PM

architects would often take charge of the appointments of consultants on behalf of the developers, assuming the developers did not appoint anyone yet. even if they do, the architect has the authority to say yes or no to the suggested consultants. heck, they could even fire consultants if they want to. remember, the architect holds the plans. they have authority to give or not give it to anyone. the architect has the obligation over the client/developer, protecting their rights and interests.

usually, the architect already have a list of consultants that they could work with. so when the developer selects an architect, they always come in a package, so the developer/clients dont need to look for the consultants themselves.

---

Added on March 30, 2008, 9:53 pmusually, the construction consultancy consists of:

architects
civil/structural engineers
town planners
electrical engineers
landscape architects
interior designers
quantity surveyors
builders (contractor, construction manager, clerk of works etc)

all except builders have technicians that work under them, usually those holding a diploma in specific course. other specialists are not always needed, unless the client/developer/architect specifically requires one. for example, specialist on EIA (environment impact assessment), conservationists, historian, mechanical engineers etc.

This post has been edited by azarimy: Mar 30 2008, 09:53 PM

Oh, I was in reference to the entire construction team of a building.

Thanks anyway.

The build environment surely requires more specialist and professionals!

actually, the construction team usually refers to the builders that includes the contractors and what not. basically phua chu kang is the leader of the construction team, while phua chu beng is the leader of the entire consultancy.

heh. just fill up the polytechnic application form. i choose architecture as my first choice.

btw, is it important for diploma student to get a laptop? because i'm thinking of only buying laptop when doing my degree. i've read the 1st post and it is recommended for architecture student to have a laptop. juz that do diploma student use much of a laptop?

This post has been edited by destroyer: Mar 30 2008, 10:48 PM

when architects design a building, must it be detailed? or will a simple sketching with angles, scale, etc do? i mean, must the blueprint consists of everything like, "will the building withstand the wind force..etc"?

Sorry, I am confused.

For a building to be build, what will be the required professionals other than the ones listed below (?);

The Architect. (Design the building, the floor plans and the layouts etc...)

The Quantity Surveyor. (Determine the cost of the building and materials.)

The Construction Manager. (Supervise/manage everyone in the Construction team.)

The Craftsman (Workers). [Build the building, fix up the steel beams and install the glass sheets accordingly; screwing them into place etc...]

The Civil Engineer. (Make sure the structurer integrity of the building is intact, and that the sewage system of the building is functioning the way it should be, and etc...as such...)

The Electrical & Electronic Engineer. (Make sure the E&E systems of the building is functioning.)

The Interior Designer. (Furnish the interior of the buildings.)

Any idea about the rest, and the roles that they play in a building project?

Thanks a lot in advance.

This post has been edited by Benjamin911: Mar 30 2008, 11:15 PM

heh. just fill up the polytechnic application form. i choose architecture as my first choice.

is it important for diploma student to get a laptop? because i'm thinking of only buying laptop when doing my degree. i've read the 1st post and it is recommended for architecture student to have a laptop. juz that do diploma student use much of a laptop?


just wanna tell. i'm one of the contestant for last year national bridge competition in UTM. yeah, me n my team enter the competition. is it categorized more into architecture or civil engineering?