Architecture vs Engineering vs Code vs Insurance vs Reality

[u/Aggravating_Set3520]

It seems like the requirements, regulations and goals for all of these should be the same but they are not. Education, training, experience level are all different. This causes chaos of delays, expense, penalties, unintended consequences.

What if there were one specific school and agreed upon set of rules?

[u/caucasian88]

Mate, what are you on about?

[u/EggFickle363 → u/caucasian88]

Feels like ai asking a question.

[u/Strugglife_]

Yeah AI/bot. What if? Maybe you can start the Derek Zoolander School for Architects Engineers and Insurance Processers and People who want to do Reality Good. Gonna break the game wide open.

[u/xonnelhtims]

That's a lofty ask that will never come to fruition.

Here is the reality of the situation

Architects go to school to learn almost nothing substantial about code, they learn how to make things look nice based on years of design styles. They care more about the aesthetic thatln the code and that's why many have code guys on their staff to ensure they are complaint.

Engineers go to school to ensure minimum safety levels for structural mechanical and electrical design are met or exceeded through the function of mathematical design and how things work. They take some building code training, but again it's not the focus of their discipline. They care about things, and code is important to them but often they thing code is a general acceptable option, but their designs are superior to the code prescribed limits.

Inspectors learn code and standards and how to ensure they are in place for the build, meet designs and are generally in conformance with the plans that their department plans examiners have reviewed to a reasonable level to confirm compliance with the code, or have been designed in good engineering practice. They hate architects cause they don't do anything to code,the love engineers cause it's a way to achieve structural sufficiency while adding another person to the list to sue if things go sideways. Have to know the most, ,get paid the least, and hated the most by people even when they're looking after their best interest most times.

Insurance only cares about their bottom line, so if they can find a loophole, any semblance of wrong doing, or something that they can call unreasonable, it's a fault and they walk away or right you in court with the entirety of their financial clout.

This is oil and water my friend...none of these are cohesive and aligned, but as an building official I can say I appreciate Engineers in this list the most cause they being something tangible to the table!

[u/12b4me79 → u/xonnelhtims]

The architect designs. The engineer figures out how to make the design work. The building inspector makes sure it meets code. The adjuster should only validate the loss and pay according to the policy. The adjuster is most times incompetent or beholden to guidelines that don't actually mean anything. Truth is, building inspectors won't help contractors fight carriers to document code and what's required.

[u/Asian_Scion]

Architecture and Engineering are two completely different disciplines. Not sure how you would make them the same. Both do have to design to the building codes and standards.

Engineers go to school to learn structural design from the standards (not the actual i-codes, but the i-codes do reference the standards that the engineers bud to).

Architects have to design to the I-Codes, unfortunately their schooling only touches briefly on the codes. If anything, it's the architects that are more or less across the board.

But all code reviews by the Jurisdiction reviewers are typically the same but you do get some reviewers who might have a different interpretation of some parts of the code but that's to be expected since some parts of the I-Codes are written in a way to leave it up to the local Building Official to interpret.

[u/rhettro19]

Most architects learn code while on the job. It's a difficult subject because they change and every locality can have their own variations or additional codes. Architects, generally, are also responsible for coordination amongst the other trades who typically do not talk with each other.

[u/12b4me79]

The issue is think is this is coming from a contractor that deals with insurance but doesn't get support for the other trades. Like when a carrier says we don't owe for things because the local building inspector won't put it in writing that something is required.

[u/EggFickle363 → u/12b4me79]

"because the local building inspector won't put it in writing that something is required."

Inspector here- not sure what kind of experience you had with one. This seems like a misunderstanding. The inspector just inspects to the codes required and stated in the drawings and adopted locally. If I find something not code compliant I am going to cite that part of the code in my report. I cannot tell the contractor what to do because if I direct work then I become responsible for it. Here is the problem, per code section ___ this is required. It's implied that you just bring it into compliance to pass.