Engineers in the construction industry - Essay Example

? BUILDINGS ARE NOT ‘COMPLETE’ WHEN THE ARCHITECT GOES HOME The role of an architect is to designs buildings and oversees their construction in accordance to specifications. Architects are tasked with responsibility of ensuring that all cautionary measures are observed in the design (Scott & Brownian 2003, p25). Architects need to balance the available resources in a way that meets all the requirements of constructing a building. Once they leave the construction site, everything needs to be in order. However, this is usually not the case. There are many requirements when constructing a building. Definitely the building has to be big enough to serve its intended purpose. This is the primary goal of an architect. He or she designs to accomplish this mission. However, secondary to this, there are many other requirements. The building needs to be potent so that it is able to support its weight, that of its occupants and their property (Scott & Brownian 2003, p 38). It should also meet the requirements of the government and the local authorities. Introduction Building owners have for long suffered in silence after the keys of their buildings have been handed to them. In many instances, they do not even know that the challenges they are facing came as a result of faults made by their architects. Architects are technically speaking elusive. They leave the scene way too soon. They do not carry on with their duty to end of the road. Building owners are left to struggle in a jungle they have never been to before. By the time they realize that the architect is to blame for their mystery, it is way too late (Hamilton & Shray 2005). The architect is supposed to walk the building owner through the path of the implementation of the building design. The design is the architects’ own creation as it came from his own imagination and technical know-how. This is subject to failure. It is almost like an experiment. It has the setting up stage, the execution stage and the results stage. The architect is like a lab technician who sets up an experiment, executes it and leave the results observation stage for the birds in the sky (Hamilton & Shray 2005, p53). It is true that architects design for the safety of the building. Some architects even use previously used design specifications that have been observed to work. They simply copy and paste them in the new project. They see the design through the construction stage. They then walk home with the believe that the design shall work considering that it has been observed to work in the past. This is not necessarily true. Every building, even with the same design specifications, has its own individual challenges. There are no two geographical locations that are similar in all aspects. Each building has its own individual challenges during and after its construction. The architect ensures that all challenges and setbacks in construction are surmounted. In this regard, buildings are not complete when the architect goes home. Consumption of buildings Buildings are consumed in two major ways; as residential premises or for commercial use. Residential buildings are designed to accommodate or house the owner of the building and his close associates. These associates might be family members, members of his work force or friends. The buildings could also be used to house the owner’s associates only. They do not attract any financial gain or profits directly. The owner of the building just benefits from the fact that he gets sheltered with the building or at least his close associates or property does so. All buildings of this nature need to be designed in a way that human health is not compromised. They should be well ventilated, warm enough and well lit. Buildings can also be consumed for commercial gain. The owner of the building may or may not reside in it. Part or the whole of the building is intended for generating financial gain. The building might even house non living objects entirely. It is possible that no human being or even animal or plant shall ever set foot in the building after the completion of its construction. Such buildings are designed simply to overcome stresses like weight, wind force, rain fall, sunshine and natural calamities. They are not designed to support life. The architect does not have to worry about aspects like creating enough room for proper ventilation, avoiding lethal fumes, designing toilets and washrooms (Debra, Alison & Bruno 2001). Some commercial buildings are however quite complicated. They are custom made for specific functions. These include handling delicate and fragile goods; handling highly perishable goods; handling extremely huge and un-proportional items. Lives of buildings (should architects consider lives of buildings?) Buildings go through one of the toughest life cycle. It is extremely vital that architects consider the life of buildings. Buildings are immobile. They have to endure the full wrath of nature. They are compelled to withstand all weather conditions and all seasons in a year without shelter. They are bombarded with external forces like wild animals, vehicle, motor and bi-cycles, human beings. All these forces have to be circum by the building. More intense forces like natural calamities are also subjected to the buildings. These include earthquakes, tsunamis, hurricanes, typhoons, floods and landslides. Accidents may also inflict intense forces on buildings. These include accidental fire break outs and air craft failures. Other causes of intense forces are terrorist attacks. They include bomb blasts, grenade attacks, gun shorts and corrosive chemical fumes. For buildings intended to last long or house extremely important and valuable items, they have to be designed to withstand these intense forces. Architects have no option but to consider this tough life that buildings are bound to live. Buildings live for a varied length of time. Some of them last for a couple of months, while others last for centuries. There are many buildings in London which are over one hundred years old. These were designed by architects who considered the lives of the buildings. The length of time that a building lasts is determined by the architect (Debra, Alison & Bruno 2001, p97). The architect chooses the type of material that is used in the construction of the building, the safety factor to be employed in the design and the level of technology applied. Materials that are used in the construction of buildings include wood, concrete, mud, stones, bricks, canvas and blocks. If the architects Discussion The architect of a building is supposed to handle the building right from its creation stage to the stage where it is finally completed. The definition of completion is what many architects misinterpret. They take it as the point when the building has all the bricks, concrete, mad and the like, and the building is capable of standing on its own. They assume that once the building takes its shape, then it has been completed. This is not true because the existence of a new building in a given locality comes along with a lot of changes. These changes bring about forces that are subjected to the building. The building needs to withstand all these external forces. Since the architect is responsible for the creating the building, he or she is also obliged to ensure that the building withstands these forces (Debra, Alison & Bruno 2001, p98). There is a lot of evidence that buildings are usually not complete when the architect goes home. For instance, the owner of the building usually finds a hard time in trying to get the perfect interior design. He or she has to hire the services of yet another individual or firm in the name of an interior designer. This is clear evidence that the architect went home while the building was not complete. He or she ought to have taken care of the interior designing of the building. The owner of the building should have just walked into the house and made him or herself comfortable. On the contrary, the architect handed the keys to him or her, but he or she had to run up and down in pursuit of completion of the building. He or she is not comfortable in his or her own house. The architects’ services were not entirely satisfactory to him or her. Total satisfaction that is needed can only be obtained from other sources to make the building complete. Another evidence of the incomplete state of the building when the architect walks away is the fact that often the owner of the building finds it hard to decide on the kind of furniture to put in the building. This is a symbol of dissatisfaction. At this point the architect has already left the construction site. The building is however clearly not complete in accordance to the desire of the owner of the building. Were it complete, the owner would have simply gotten in and carried on with the purpose of the building. The building owner is left in limbo to decide whether plastic, wooden or metal furniture is the best for the building. The size and shape of the furniture is determined not by the taste of the building owner but by the widths and lengths of the doors which the architect designed. The building is incomplete, but the architect is at home. Complaints raised by the people around are also proof of the fact that buildings are not complete when the architect goes home. These people include neighbors, passersby, clients of the building, friends and family members of the building owner. People might complain that the doors are too tight to open, the floors are too slippery, the stairs are too steep, the roofing is too noisy, the bulbs are too bright or paint is too smelly. Once again, at this time the architect is at home. He or she is responsible for all these complaints. It is his or her mess which he or she should clean up. In other words, he or she went home while the building was not complete. There are also many accidents which take place in a building after the architect has handed over the keys to the building owner. This is also proof of the fact that buildings are not complete when the architect goes home. People trip on stare cases, slide and fall on slippery floors, knock their heads on short doors or fall down trying to shut a window placed too high on a building. These accidents occur as a result of the fact that the building was not entirely finished when it was open for human consumption. The architect should have taken into account all these occurrences and put in place adequate measures to avoid these accidents from occurring before handing over the keys. The architect should have put in place proper labels and signs to warn the building users of unseen dangers. On the contrary, most architects leave that responsibility to the owner of the building. They simply go home before the completion of the building. Buildings also fall victim to natural calamities. These include hurricanes, earthquakes, typhoons and floods. The buildings might be swept away from the face of the earth completely. This can be done only in a matter of minutes. A once tall and majestic building can be turned into a heap of rubble in a matter of hours. The creation of the architect simply fails. It was designed with the belief that it would stay erect for years to come. All these go in vain. The architect went home a happy man or woman. The building he or she designed was however not complete when he or she left. It would otherwise have withstood the force of the natural calamity. Buildings also give in to physical attacks very often (Scott & Brownian 2003, p113). It is very common in the media to hear about several buildings which were destroyed completely as a result of terrorist attacks. These attacks come in form of bombings, grenade attacks, missiles launched to target specific locations, attacks in form of suicide bombing among others. Almost all buildings which are subjected to these attacks usually pave way. This includes very high profile buildings i.e. buildings that cost huge sums of money to put up. Such buildings accommodate extremely valuable items. In some cases the items are even valueless. One cannot determine the value of the items because they are beyond the human measures of the worth of an item in momentary terms. The owners of the buildings are able and willing to spend any amount of money just for the sake of getting the building to be completed by the architect. There is absolutely no room for error. The architect is supposed to ensure that the building fully satisfies the needs of the building owner right from the time he or she takes up the task of designing the building until the time the owner has no more use for the building and considers demolishing it. This however does not happen as depicted by the demolition of high profile buildings as a result of terrorist attacks. Case example is the demolition of the United States of America Pentagon by the Al Qaeda terrorist group. The building houses the headquarters of the American Department Of Defense. The items in the building are very valuable. The respect and dignity that the American government and people stand to lose as a result of the demolition of the building is simply valueless. The building was nevertheless demolished by the terrorist attack. This is clear evidence that the architect of the building went home way too soon. He or she did not fulfill his or her full mandate. The building was not complete when he or she went home. Faults in the building are also evidence of the fact that architects go home before the completion of the building. There are many faults that take place in a building after the architect flees the scene. These include electrical faults, water leakage from the pipe lines, cracks on the walls, floors and roofs. Some of these faults take place soon ar immediately after the apparent completion of the building in accordance to the definition of the architects. He or she leaves the construction site, and a water pipe bursts open. This is as clear as it can get that the building was not complete when the architect went home. He or she clearly did not complete the building. Conclusion It is quite evident that buildings are most often than not, incomplete when the architects hand over the keys to the building owners and leave the scene. Buildings are unlike the belief of many people, very fragile. They need a lot of caution. They have to be handled with a lot of care. They are a ticking bomb which is capable of exploding at any minute. When a building collapses it causes catastrophic damage (Ngonomo & Rusty 2003, p76). This is especially so if the building is large. It causes the destruction of very valuable property and the death of several people. It may also cause intense injuries on humans who survive the tragedy. These may become crippled and largely immobile. They end up becoming a burden to their dependents instead of being their bread winner. In this regard, it is extremely vital that architectures consider the life of the building when they are designing it. They should not be quick to hand over the mandate of taking care of the building to the building owner and walking away. It is the responsibility of the architect to make sure that the building serves its full intended purpose (Ngonomo & Rusty 2003, p100). The building cannot cause any danger or harm to the society if the architect does what he or she is rightfully supposed to do. On the contrary, every single day, at least one building causes unprecedented harm to the society in the world. This is clear evidence that the architects are not fulfilling their full mandate. Recommendation Many architects are oblivious of the true definition of the completion of a building. They take for granted the fact that it is their mandate to ensure that the building withstands the taste of time. They need to be in the scene when the building is being introduced to this harsh test of nature. The building is the creation of the architects. They should stand by it like a mother stands by her baby. They should nature and cherish it. The success or failure of the building is attributed to the architect responsible. Most architects fall victim of this menace not because they are barbaric and hungry for money, but because of ignorance. They do not know that the completion of a building is not achieved just by having the building standing tall. It is important that architects around the world are sensitized. Awareness campaigns should be conducted to get rid of the aura of ignorance around the globe. Architects should know that buildings are not complete when the architect goes home. References D. Scott & J. Brownian. (2003). Engineers in the building and construction industry. Australia: Pandaroma Margaret Rowland, Beatrice Gortham & Kerstin Thatcher (My 2004) Journal of fire control and fighting; safety and control: In depth analysis of the causes of fire and the ways in which to fight against it. David Hamilton and Daniel Shray (June 2005) "Journal of Construction engineers"; Establishing Construction engineers to design for unprecedented danger in commercial and residential buildings. Jeff E. Young. (Feb 2012). Canadian buildings safety factor Journal; Stabilizing safety in modern buildings Times. Canada: McGill. Beryl, E., Kimberly, J., Hailey, E., Peterson, K., Jefferson, M., Sunderland, L., & Natasha, A. (2000, Sep 7). Design approaches and strategies. Retrieved from www.theapproachesandsrategiesof design.org.uk K. Ngonomo & J. Rusty. (2003). Modern Construction Engineers in. South Africa: Kwazulu Ann Debra, Alicia Alison & Joy Bruno (Sep 2001) Journal of engineering material; selection and strengths: choice of the appropriate engineering material. Eric Gray and Darren Stewart (Jan 1999) " Gases properties and uses; The hazards and benefits of various gases to human beings. Patel E. Putanonical. (Feb 2000). The Indian revolutionary constructors; Establishing strength and safety in tall buildings. India: Shree. Tao E. Lee. (Mar 2004). Fighting human traffic in tall buildings; Modern elevators and escalators. China: Kashta. Read More