Who Should Supervise A Building Project; Architects, Builders Or Engineers - Properties (2)

Who Should Supervise A Building Project; Architects, Builders Or Engineers - Properties (2) - Nairaland

Nairaland Forum › Nairaland General › Properties › Who Should Supervise A Building Project; Architects, Builders Or Engineers (22989 Views)

1 2 3 4 Reply (Go Down)

Re: Who Should Supervise A Building Project; Architects, Builders Or Engineers by softboiy: 7:23am On Feb 09, 2017

na engineer na. if it collapse who dem go hold?

1 Like

Re: Who Should Supervise A Building Project; Architects, Builders Or Engineers by mokaflex(m): 7:25am On Feb 09, 2017

You are dull ooh, are you Daura?

saydfact:
Lets make Dangote or Adenuga that Owner - Can he really supervise his project?

Lets also make the owner the average man who knows nothing about building; can he supervise his project? or even manage the project cost?

Thanks

Re: Who Should Supervise A Building Project; Architects, Builders Or Engineers by mokaflex(m): 7:25am On Feb 09, 2017

You are dull ooh, are you Daura?

saydfact:
Lets make Dangote or Adenuga that Owner - Can he really supervise his project?

Lets also make the owner the average man who knows nothing about building; can he supervise his project? or even manage the project cost?

Thanks

Re: Who Should Supervise A Building Project; Architects, Builders Or Engineers by haulagehandlers(m): 7:28am On Feb 09, 2017

tankara1010:
Oh Lord....help us in this country because some people are very daft. I'm 100% sure you voted for Buhari with your level of IQ!

Where is your sense of humour? The guy was obviously joking!!!

3 Likes

Re: Who Should Supervise A Building Project; Architects, Builders Or Engineers by abdurrazaq(m): 7:29am On Feb 09, 2017

@OP, I just have to correct a certain impression that the architect is always the Project Manager. I can agree with most times but not always. Sometimes (and on landmark projects as well) the project manager could be a professional different from both architect and the structural engineer.
On the issue of management, ANY Professional (even outside the built environment profession) can do that so far he/she is duly and legally qualified to do so. While on supervision, no professional has absolute supervisory role to play as each one supervise and take responsibilities for parts of the project designed by him/her.
But, on site works management, only the builder does that ensuring all the various designs of all other professionals are properly implemented.
In summary:
Site Management - Builder (Sometimes loosely referred to as contractor in most part of the world) or Construction Technologist or Construction Manager
Project Management: Any professional (Builder inclusive)

Re: Who Should Supervise A Building Project; Architects, Builders Or Engineers by pweshboi(m): 7:36am On Feb 09, 2017

the architect I believe is the chief supervisor according to the built environment in Nigeria, while the quantity surveyor also supervises all the stages of the project... now the trick about who should supervise is not limited to a particular profession. because if y'all knows how a project is conceived then I believe the argument about who should supervise shouldn't have risen. in a brief and sketchy explanation..... the client has a project in mind and calls an architect to give him/her a rough sketch/drawing of how it'll be... then a quantity surveyor is called upon to determine if the project is feasible. then when the QS as ascertain that the project is feasible then the client gives the architect the go ahead to give a detailed drawing... after that the drawing is sent to the QS to cost (that's too determine the actual cost it will take to complete the project) now this is limited to a simple construction project like for example a 2bedroom building.... cos if it were to be a very big project then the structural engineer would prepare his own drawing and submit to the Qs to price as well... now after pricing the accident is now informed of bow much the project will cost and when Jr's to be executed the builder is then introduced so as to build according to the specifications of the architect and the recommendation of the Qs due to his substitution of specified items when the one the architect as offered is not available or too expensive to incur... now during the construction of the project... the architect comes to the site to inspect if they are adhering to the specifications he's given... the Qs comes to site as well to check both the quality and quantity of the items for the project are adhered to... but the builder i believe should always be on site cos he should be in charge of the masons and labours on site and executes the drawings and act according to the estimates in the BOQ given to him. so my assertion is for a good project to stand... they all have to supervise the project but they have there roles to play.

Re: Who Should Supervise A Building Project; Architects, Builders Or Engineers by darkenkach(m): 7:36am On Feb 09, 2017

Acasian:
owner of design means the person who created the design which is the architect *how do you think urgh* dangote and adenuga are clients

Well said.

Re: Who Should Supervise A Building Project; Architects, Builders Or Engineers by adimsmt: 7:42am On Feb 09, 2017

saydfact:
There is an everyday argument on WHO SHOULD SUPERVISE A BUILDING PROJECT; The Architect, Builder or Civil/Structural Engineer?

Well, before we go into details, I'm sure we all agree the Mechanical Engineer shouldn't be responsible for task of ensuring 'Your Design' comes out as expected - conducive and beautiful (Aesthetics). LoL

Lets define the 3 professions we're considering (in alphabetical order)

A. Architect
According to the English dictionary:

* Architect [n.]: A person skilled in the art of building; one who understands architecture, or makes it his occupation to form plans and designs of buildings, and to superintend the artificers employed.

Lets further look at the meaning of 'SUPERINTEND':

* Superintend [v. t.]: To have or exercise the charge and oversight of; to oversee with the power of direction; to take care of with authority; to supervise; as, an officer superintends the building of a ship or the construction of a fort.

We'll stop here for now, while we get the definition of B & C from the same dictionary.

B. Builder
* Builder [n.]: One who builds; one whose occupation is to build, as a carpenter, a shipwright, or a mason.

this definition in my opinion wasn't fair or deep enough so I looked further down:

* Builder; constructor: someone who contracts for and supervises construction (as of a building)
* Homebuilder; home-builder; housebuilder; house-builder: someone who builds houses as a business

This definitions, almost limits the builder to a business man, (that's not my conclusion) - that's what the dictionary thinks.
we'll also come back to argue this, while we look at the last definition 'C' below.

C. Civil/Structural Engineer

* Structural: affecting or involved in structure or construction (ex.: the structural details of a house such as beams and joists and rafters; not ornamental elements; structural damage)

* Civil engineer: an engineer trained to design and construct and maintain public works (roads or bridges or harbors etc.)

* Civil engineering: the branch of engineering concerned with the design and construction of such public works as dams or bridges

Lets summarize the 3 definition on here; The first mentioned structures but noted that these does not include ornamental elements eg pop designs, tiling etc while the other two (from civil) were silent about buildings. The first conclusion we can draw from this definition is that the Civil Engineer is solely responsible for supervising structures like bridges, roads, dams and he has no competition in those area.

Verdict: The dictionary thinks the Architect is the more appropriate person to supervise the building BUT WE WOULD NOT CONCLUDE HERE.

LETS LOOK AT WIKI DEFINITIONS NOW:

* An architect is someone who plans, designs, and reviews the construction of buildings. To practice architecture means to provide services in connection with the design of buildings and the space within the site surrounding the buildings, that have as their principal purpose human occupancy or use. Etymologically, architect derives from the Latin architectus, which derives from the Greek (arkhi-, chief + tekton, builder), i.e., chief builder

Like in the dictionary definitions; wiki gives so much power to the Architect calling him 'CHIEF' -

* Structural engineering is mainly a sub-division of civil engineering where structural engineers are trained to understand, predict, and calculate the stability, strength and rigidity of built structures for buildings and non-building structures, to develop designs and integrate their design with that of other designers, and to supervise construction of projects on site.

* Builder may refer to:

- Construction worker who specializes in building work
- Carpenter, a skilled craftsman who works with wood
- General contractor, that specializes in building work

Off-course wiki didn't rule out the engineer as a supervisor on site - we can only argue that the website seems to have placed him under a 'chief' - perhaps not, AND except we're biased IT IS COMMON KNOWLEDGE that the builder is the least recognized among the three. (No dis-respect meant please)

LETS LOOK AT LOGIC / COMMON REASONING:

Starting with C, B then A.

I'M SURE WE ALL AGREE THAT THE CIVIL/STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS ARE INVOLVED IN DESIGN OF THE STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS EG COLUMNS, BEAMS AND SLAB - BASICALLY HE DESIGNS & RECOMMEND ON ALL STEEL WORKS....If we all agree on the above, then 'my question is; SHOULD THE STRUCTURAL ENGINEER BE INVOLVED IN ANY BUILDING THAT DOESN'T HAVE HAVE HIS DESIGN INPUT?

Lets support our claims with the Nigeria Approval Process - When seeking approval for a bungalow, all you're required to submit is an Architectural Plan - You would not be required to submit a structural design / calculation sheet until you start going up with a storey on another.

This means; The only person involved in all types of building (emphasis on BUILDING) is the Architect....

WHO UNDERSTANDS THE BUILDING MORE:

A. The person who designed it OR
B. The person who recommended what strength is required to make it stand
C. The person who only received series of drawings and required to build / supervise it

I'll leave every man to his conclusion here.

ACTUAL PRACTICE:

For those of us working with multi-national company, expatriates or dealing with big organizations have you ever noticed that the PROJECT MANAGERS are always Architects?

This is because of the single rule that Architects are the head of the construction team - I'm yet to come across a Project Managed by an Engineering firm or where the NO1 man on site is the Engineer.

Maybe I've just been on the wrong types of projects - which includes Factories, Warehouses, Mega Stores, Luxury apartment etc.

Could this be a co-incidence?

SO; MY QUESTION STILL IS "WHO SHOULD SUPERVISE A BUILDING PROJECT" well, I'm not ruling out the importance of both the Architect & Engineers especially on very complex structures.

Written and shared by 'SaydFact' on www.nairaland.com and www.palmchatnow.com

All three

Re: Who Should Supervise A Building Project; Architects, Builders Or Engineers by Nobody: 7:43am On Feb 09, 2017

Actually, all of the professionals have supervisory roles on a building project. Architect, structural engineers, mechanical engineers, electrical engineers, and sometimes even accoustic engineers and more intricate specialists. When the project is in progress, all these professionals who have produced their designs, come to site to ensure that the designs are being realized to specification. No professional should approve works when he is unqualified to do so. The architect, for instance, should not verify pressure tests or arrangement of reinforcement, no matter how straight forward it seems.

Even though all the professionals supervise on the project, the Architect is considered the point person and prime consultant because he integrates the building project. He has envisioned the building in its entirety. And he is the first one in and last one out. The client/owner makes contact with the architect first to develop the brief, and eventually is handed the keys by the architect when that brief has been realized. At the various stages, the architect coordinates the timely input of other consultants, who each have limited relevance across the duration.

In some cases, especially in situations where a business case is crucial, a project manager is consulted by the client to conduct a whole lot of project initiation activities (eg need assessment, feasibility studies, prototyping, etc) before the designs are made. In this case, the building has a more complex use - it is supposed to satisfy certain project objectives. And the professional with the clearest vision of those objectives would be the project manager. Therefore he would be the prime consultant, tasked with maintaining the overview of the project until completion.

Re: Who Should Supervise A Building Project; Architects, Builders Or Engineers by abbatoir(m): 7:44am On Feb 09, 2017

Good point.....

Re: Who Should Supervise A Building Project; Architects, Builders Or Engineers by Myself2(m): 7:45am On Feb 09, 2017*

Architects causing confusion in the construction industry since 100AD grin

From the OPs submission,it's clear he wants to railroad nairalanders into the false notion that architects should be in charge of construction works.
It,s actually the Engineer that should supervise the construction of any building.The architect only draws PINSHURE with zero knowledge of calculations that give rise to beams and columns that give the building structural integrity.
THE BUILDING APPROVAL AUTHORITIES HAVE ANSWERED TJIS QUESTION FOR ALL.
IF you want to approve any building plan,which has five sets of architectural and five sets of structural drawing amongst other things,the authorities will REQUIRE A LETTER OF SUPERVISION from a COREN registered engineer,stating that he will supervise the job.They NEVER ask for an architect
tongue

1 Like

Re: Who Should Supervise A Building Project; Architects, Builders Or Engineers by asamaigho(m): 7:57am On Feb 09, 2017

LEMVEG:
i am an architect.. for a succesful building project all hands must be on deck because the different professionals plays differerent roles.. but the architect is trained both in design and construction thats what makes him overseer

let's not confuse the public with the word "design",....the architectural drawing is a mere picture of the geospatial arrangement of the building, while the civil designs shows the structural arrangements of beams columns,slabs,staircases,and the right quality and quantity of materials that will provide structural stability for the building.
for me a civil/structural engineer should supervise the building processing.
have you ever wondered why an architect is not called to question when a building collapses?

1 Like 1 Share

Re: Who Should Supervise A Building Project; Architects, Builders Or Engineers by Nobody: 8:00am On Feb 09, 2017

I supervised my own build as a general contractor but asked questions from pros as appropriate.

Nigerians seems to like packaging and nonsensical dramas.

1 Like

Re: Who Should Supervise A Building Project; Architects, Builders Or Engineers by Sunmolar(m): 8:14am On Feb 09, 2017

It's a teamwork but literally an arc is the team's head. Expect otherwise stated by the client.

Re: Who Should Supervise A Building Project; Architects, Builders Or Engineers by Reference(m): 8:27am On Feb 09, 2017

In a nutshell, they supervise their input. The Architect designs the habitable space so he ensures (supervises) that the construction process makes reality the vision he lays down. The Builder designs the nuts and bolts of the vision and the flow patterns to achieve it and ensures (supervises) the patterns are followed. If there is any engineering to be done it is designed and supervised by the relevant party. So each of them has a responsibility as part of a team the captain of which is dependent on the nature of the project. Just like in team sports.

Now, the Client I will liken to the coach. He chooses his team and appoints his captain from amongst the various professionals involved. In football some coaches prefer defenders being captains, some prefer midfielders, some prefer strikers. Some coaches select based on service longevity, some on leadership qualities, some just because the fellow brings them tea in the morning. It is the coaches preference just as it is the preference of the client to choose whichever professional heads his construction team. In most cases individuals select individuals they know while corporates are more likely to go with conventional wisdom in selecting the Architect as captain since he is likely the first peraon to earn a pay check on most building projects.

Re: Who Should Supervise A Building Project; Architects, Builders Or Engineers by yomiracles: 8:37am On Feb 09, 2017

A Project Manager should be in charge of any project. he may now be a specialist in Building Projects or other kind of projects.

Re: Who Should Supervise A Building Project; Architects, Builders Or Engineers by seguntijan(m): 8:38am On Feb 09, 2017

BUILDERS WILL TAKE THEIR PLACE!!!
someone first asked, what is the difference between a builder and a civil engineer?
I took time to enlightened him; read along with me.
Concerning professionals in construction industry, let me briefly state the roles of relating profession.
we all believe that the major role of an architect is production of building plans; considering some principles, (not to construct or supervise building production.)
Her own is to liaise with the builder on how to bring his dream on the CAD or paper to reality. The builder ensures BUILDABLITY. Mind you, Architectural design is not a graphics design.
For acclaimed civil Engineers, categorically speaking, they have seven branches and that a part of it is the structures.
The role of structural engineer is to design for all structural members such as beams, columns slabs structural steelwork etc., liaise her design with the builder on how visible is the fabrication of all these members and their arrangement to fulfill the aim of his design( under worst loading the structure most not fail).
A building services man designs for mechanical/ electrical services and liaise with builder on the arrangement and fixing ( hmmm... I know you will argue that he can't do that)
The quantity surveyor takes care of the estimations of project.
Now, who understands estimation process the more? structural engineer, architect, others professionals?
The fact remains that, if (Qs) overestimate or price substandard materials or add up what is not suppose to be, it is only a builder that understand the techniques of estimation.
so what's now the work of a builder?
From the aforementioned premises, judge for yourself.
The next question the person asked is ,you mean it is only builders that can do all d work on site, when it comes to structures?
I laughed, and i gave emphatic NO.
According to Nigeria building code, builders are not trained to hijack the work of other professions but due to the vast scope of our profession, we use all the knowledge we gain from all others professions to carry out BUILDING PRODUCTION MANAGEMENT....
That's why a builder can easily detect error and suggest correction to architect design because, whenever he sees design, he does not only view it from the perspective based on architectural mentality alone but reason about the structural stability, estimation in other to be economically safe and comfort of the occupant(s) and maintenance including the aesthetical view.
Hope you are getting along.
The next question ,what is d difference between structural and civil engineer?
To me, to call someone civil engineer is a wrong usage because the word ''civil engineer'' is like a general name that encompasses all construction expertise.
so, ''structural engineer'' is someone who's area of specialisation in civil engineering is mainly in structures.
someone that specialise in highway construction is not a structural engineer which implies he/she should not have any thing to do with structures. Mind you, a structural engineer is not a builder
Friends, construction is in three(3) aspects. The design, fabrication(pro
duction and management) and maintenance.
So, if your interest is more of design, then, architecture or civil engineering is good but if your interest is the actual construction of building (of course, we all want to bring our dreams of building or structure to come true) then, the best choice for you is to call on '' A BUILDER'' which in the profession is the only professional that span across all other professions in construction company industries for effective delivery of a project.
NB. As regards the incessant building collapse in Nigeria that have been recorded so far, who then are those responsible for such project. Is it not those that form bossy on such project(s) and yet it collapsed?
Hummm... the so called engineers, architects and sometimes Estate surveyors.
Mind you,since the builders have been handling projects and structure, BUILDERS have NO record(s) on building that are managed and supervised by a professional builders that have ever collapsed in Nigeria !!! you can Google search to confirm... No not one.(1)
...ALL PROFESSIONS IN BUILT ENVIRONMENT ARE UNIQUE IN THEIR OWN WAYS..
The next question is, who is now suppose to be the project manager of structures?
Be wise, choose by yourself. Let me say a project manager is someone that have knowledge to manage a project. Mind you, project are of different types. Here, We talk about structures, who is suppose to be the project manager?
Be wise, engage professional (builders) for effective delivery.
BUILDERS BUILD RIGHT.
Compiled by Atom

1 Like

Re: Who Should Supervise A Building Project; Architects, Builders Or Engineers by Pro2makx(m): 8:42am On Feb 09, 2017

Civil engineers are trained both in design, construction and even in detailed design.
There are lots of architects who only cause problems for an engineer with their ambitious drawings which they can not even construct or interpret into a steucture them self. As an architect he is trained to concieve design ideas, but in most cases he can not construct it. The civil engineer no matter what, will find a way around the construction.
Truth is, architects have no business on site except to be sure the construction does not deviate from his idea. When it comes to proper construction he can't stand an engineer.
Is it an engineer who can design and construction complex structures like bridges, dams and the likes that will have any itch designing a building?
As an engineer, I can design any kind of structure, it's a fraction of what we are trained to do.
Never forget all men are born equal, but only the finest are Engineers (civil and the rest)

Re: Who Should Supervise A Building Project; Architects, Builders Or Engineers by ccasilas(m): 8:49am On Feb 09, 2017

let me just give a brief to your above post, all of the above mention is technically require to participate in supervision of a construction meanwhile, i can not give total write up about this base on my limited tym.
An architect designer does not know mush about building construction rather about the design and beautification of the construction, the master of building construction is civil/structural engineer, and there work started right from the point of completion of designed by putting in place first the structural calculation to the completion of the project because any failure in the structural calculation will definitely cause structural failure.
in every project there are phases, from first phase to the last phase and the last phase are mainly for architect prior to Testing and Commissioning.
be remind that the builder are also remind as civil/structural as well which included concrete structure, wooden structure,and dry wall etc.
here is the hierarchy as below particularity on mega project and None mega project for construction,

Civil/Structural ( also refer to as Builders ) 1 phase.
MEP (Mechanical and Electrical Plumbing) 2 Phase.
Architect this is for last phase 3 PHASE.
T& C last Phase.
Any project management company must have the complete team above .

Re: Who Should Supervise A Building Project; Architects, Builders Or Engineers by penitential(m): 8:51am On Feb 09, 2017

LawFight:
An Architect are to design the proposed building and build, if it is in contract signed between the client and Architect.example is design and build contract. at this stage we will have a residence Architect on the site checking at list once in a week to know the progress of the work. while builder are to build the building itself, and use of technique and providing of workers to the site. and also provide equipment that will be used on the site. Engineers. we have different engineers. we have the cost engineers. this are also called Quantity Surveyors, structural engineer,M&E engineer. this guy provide electrical, mechanical and plumbing drawing to the building. they can come to site to check if there workers are doing things apporiately. that is reason in school
as a student of Architecture offered all the causes in environmental and engineering faculty just to have the idea.
Architect are the leader of the building team. (Architect,Quantity Surveyors, builder, Structural Engineer, services Engineer, project manager and the contractor) sorry for my typing and grammar errors. #IAM ARCHITECT #

To the bolded and quoted; I strongly disagree with you.
Reason is because an architect cannot take all the courses a civil engineer is offering. Infact the course they do take is 'Theory of Structure' which is just part of the elementary courses of a civil/structural Engineer (Structural analysis, Determinate and indeterminate structures, Design of structural elements, advanced structural design, RCC, Steel structural analysis and design.....).
Also note that in schools, Civil engineers are trained to use Autocad as well both for Architectural and structural design. Which is to say to a very reasonable extent, a civil engineer can still produce architectural design of residential buildings (majorly) whereas an architect can neither analyze nor design a structure.
As to who should supervise a building construction, I think the OP has stated it clearly that civil/structural engineers are specifically trained to supervise complex project like bridges, roads, dams....while a structural Engineer or an architect can also supervise general buildings. Thanks.

Re: Who Should Supervise A Building Project; Architects, Builders Or Engineers by afamaustin(m): 8:52am On Feb 09, 2017

intrestine

Re: Who Should Supervise A Building Project; Architects, Builders Or Engineers by Mzsolmi(f): 8:53am On Feb 09, 2017

English dictionary ko,English encyclopedia ni.....Architects supervise buildings, Structural Engineers deal with structures like bridges,roads etc....tanchu

1 Like

Re: Who Should Supervise A Building Project; Architects, Builders Or Engineers by ccasilas(m): 8:56am On Feb 09, 2017

you are right , because is not all designer know how to construct, normally i have been on a project in which the approved designed given to the engineer can not be achieved at site . (so is not every construction engineer that can design and not every designer can construct but only share one thing in common which is drawing interpretation)

Pro2makx:
Civil engineers are trained both in design, construction and even in detailed design.
There are lots of architects who only cause problems for an engineer with their ambitious drawings which they can not even construct or interpret into a steucture them self. As an architect he is trained to concieve design ideas, but in most cases he can not construct it. The civil engineer no matter what, will find a way around the construction.
Truth is, architects have no business on site except to be sure the construction does not deviate from his idea. When it comes to proper construction he can't stand an engineer.
Is it an engineer who can design and construction complex structures like bridges, dams and the likes that will have any itch designing a building?
As an engineer, I can design any kind of structure, it's a fraction of what we are trained to do.
Never forget all men are born equal, but only the finest are Engineers (civil and the rest)

Re: Who Should Supervise A Building Project; Architects, Builders Or Engineers by saydfact(op): 9:04am On Feb 09, 2017

abdurrazaq:
@OP, I just have to correct a certain impression that the architect is always the Project Manager. I can agree with most times but not always. Sometimes (and on landmark projects as well) the project manager could be a professional different from both architect and the structural engineer.
On the issue of management, ANY Professional (even outside the built environment profession) can do that so far he/she is duly and legally qualified to do so. While on supervision, no professional has absolute supervisory role to play as each one supervise and take responsibilities for parts of the project designed by him/her.
But, on site works management, only the builder does that ensuring all the various designs of all other professionals are properly implemented.
In summary:
Site Management - Builder (Sometimes loosely referred to as contractor in most part of the world) or Construction Technologist or Construction Manager
Project Management: Any professional (Builder inclusive)

Thanks for the correction, noted...

Re: Who Should Supervise A Building Project; Architects, Builders Or Engineers by ogtavia(m): 9:04am On Feb 09, 2017

let's put it this way...there is a design team and there is a construction team...the architect is the head of the design team...While the client has powers to choose who will be in charge of the construction team...in a situation where an architect is a prime consultant...he automatically holds the role of the head of the construction team..however...he requires the skills and expertise of allied professionals i.e the civil or structural engineer,the mechanical engineer,the electrical engineer,the fire safety engineer and other professionals depending on their relevance to the project...

conversely,where a structural engineer is the head of the construction team,he requires the services of an architect as a matter of utmost importance...then employs other specialist professionals as per relevance to the project..

Re: Who Should Supervise A Building Project; Architects, Builders Or Engineers by ncoolsome(m): 9:06am On Feb 09, 2017

saydfact:
There is an everyday argument on WHO SHOULD SUPERVISE A BUILDING PROJECT; The Architect, Builder or Civil/Structural Engineer?

Well, before we go into details, I'm sure we all agree the Mechanical Engineer shouldn't be responsible for task of ensuring 'Your Design' comes out as expected - conducive and beautiful (Aesthetics). LoL

Lets define the 3 professions we're considering (in alphabetical order)

A. Architect
According to the English dictionary:

* Architect [n.]: A person skilled in the art of building; one who understands architecture, or makes it his occupation to form plans and designs of buildings, and to superintend the artificers employed.

Lets further look at the meaning of 'SUPERINTEND':

* Superintend [v. t.]: To have or exercise the charge and oversight of; to oversee with the power of direction; to take care of with authority; to supervise; as, an officer superintends the building of a ship or the construction of a fort.

We'll stop here for now, while we get the definition of B & C from the same dictionary.

B. Builder
* Builder [n.]: One who builds; one whose occupation is to build, as a carpenter, a shipwright, or a mason.

this definition in my opinion wasn't fair or deep enough so I looked further down:

* Builder; constructor: someone who contracts for and supervises construction (as of a building)
* Homebuilder; home-builder; housebuilder; house-builder: someone who builds houses as a business

This definitions, almost limits the builder to a business man, (that's not my conclusion) - that's what the dictionary thinks.
we'll also come back to argue this, while we look at the last definition 'C' below.

C. Civil/Structural Engineer

* Structural: affecting or involved in structure or construction (ex.: the structural details of a house such as beams and joists and rafters; not ornamental elements; structural damage)

* Civil engineer: an engineer trained to design and construct and maintain public works (roads or bridges or harbors etc.)

* Civil engineering: the branch of engineering concerned with the design and construction of such public works as dams or bridges

Lets summarize the 3 definition on here; The first mentioned structures but noted that these does not include ornamental elements eg pop designs, tiling etc while the other two (from civil) were silent about buildings. The first conclusion we can draw from this definition is that the Civil Engineer is solely responsible for supervising structures like bridges, roads, dams and he has no competition in those area.

Verdict: The dictionary thinks the Architect is the more appropriate person to supervise the building BUT WE WOULD NOT CONCLUDE HERE.

LETS LOOK AT WIKI DEFINITIONS NOW:

* An architect is someone who plans, designs, and reviews the construction of buildings. To practice architecture means to provide services in connection with the design of buildings and the space within the site surrounding the buildings, that have as their principal purpose human occupancy or use. Etymologically, architect derives from the Latin architectus, which derives from the Greek (arkhi-, chief + tekton, builder), i.e., chief builder

Like in the dictionary definitions; wiki gives so much power to the Architect calling him 'CHIEF' -

* Structural engineering is mainly a sub-division of civil engineering where structural engineers are trained to understand, predict, and calculate the stability, strength and rigidity of built structures for buildings and non-building structures, to develop designs and integrate their design with that of other designers, and to supervise construction of projects on site.

* Builder may refer to:

- Construction worker who specializes in building work
- Carpenter, a skilled craftsman who works with wood
- General contractor, that specializes in building work

Off-course wiki didn't rule out the engineer as a supervisor on site - we can only argue that the website seems to have placed him under a 'chief' - perhaps not, AND except we're biased IT IS COMMON KNOWLEDGE that the builder is the least recognized among the three. (No dis-respect meant please)

LETS LOOK AT LOGIC / COMMON REASONING:

Starting with C, B then A.

I'M SURE WE ALL AGREE THAT THE CIVIL/STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS ARE INVOLVED IN DESIGN OF THE STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS EG COLUMNS, BEAMS AND SLAB - BASICALLY HE DESIGNS & RECOMMEND ON ALL STEEL WORKS....If we all agree on the above, then 'my question is; SHOULD THE STRUCTURAL ENGINEER BE INVOLVED IN ANY BUILDING THAT DOESN'T HAVE HAVE HIS DESIGN INPUT?

Lets support our claims with the Nigeria Approval Process - When seeking approval for a bungalow, all you're required to submit is an Architectural Plan - You would not be required to submit a structural design / calculation sheet until you start going up with a storey on another.

This means; The only person involved in all types of building (emphasis on BUILDING) is the Architect....

WHO UNDERSTANDS THE BUILDING MORE:

A. The person who designed it OR
B. The person who recommended what strength is required to make it stand
C. The person who only received series of drawings and required to build / supervise it

I'll leave every man to his conclusion here.

ACTUAL PRACTICE:

For those of us working with multi-national company, expatriates or dealing with big organizations have you ever noticed that the PROJECT MANAGERS are always Architects?

This is because of the single rule that Architects are the head of the construction team - I'm yet to come across a Project Managed by an Engineering firm or where the NO1 man on site is the Engineer.

Maybe I've just been on the wrong types of projects - which includes Factories, Warehouses, Mega Stores, Luxury apartment etc.

Could this be a co-incidence?

SO; MY QUESTION STILL IS "WHO SHOULD SUPERVISE A BUILDING PROJECT" well, I'm not ruling out the importance of both the Architect & Engineers especially on very complex structures.

Written and shared by 'SaydFact' on www.nairaland.com and www.palmchatnow.com

bt really if u could look all this up in google..why didn't u just look up whose job it is huh

nice write up

Re: Who Should Supervise A Building Project; Architects, Builders Or Engineers by Water9430(m): 9:11am On Feb 09, 2017

[color=#006600][/color]

pweshboi:
the architect I believe is the chief supervisor according to the built environment in Nigeria, while the quantity surveyor also supervises all the stages of the project... now the trick about who should supervise is not limited to a particular profession. because if y'all knows how a project is conceived then I believe the argument about who should supervise shouldn't have risen. in a brief and sketchy explanation..... the client has a project in mind and calls an architect to give him/her a rough sketch/drawing of how it'll be... then a quantity surveyor is called upon to determine if the project is feasible. then when the QS as ascertain that the project is feasible then the client gives the architect the go ahead to give a detailed drawing... after that the drawing is sent to the QS to cost (that's too determine the actual cost it will take to complete the project) now this is limited to a simple construction project like for example a 2bedroom building.... cos if it were to be a very big project then the structural engineer would prepare his own drawing and submit to the Qs to price as well... now after pricing the accident is now informed of bow much the project will cost and when Jr's to be executed the builder is then introduced so as to build according to the specifications of the architect and the recommendation of the Qs due to his substitution of specified items when the one the architect as offered is not available or too expensive to incur... now during the construction of the project... the architect comes to the site to inspect if they are adhering to the specifications he's given... the Qs comes to site as well to check both the quality and quantity of the items for the project are adhered to... but the builder i believe should always be on site cos he should be in charge of the masons and labours on site and executes the drawings and act according to the estimates in the BOQ given to him. so my assertion is for a good project to stand... they all have to supervise the project but they have there roles to play.

You are missing one vital professional in this your talk. A quick one, what about the acquisition of land who does that or will all this be done on paper. Even if is still a big project, when you talk of compensation who does that if not the Estate Surveyor. And besides, a land surveyor will still come in at a point, before the architect comes in

1 Like 1 Share

Re: Who Should Supervise A Building Project; Architects, Builders Or Engineers by saydfact(op): 9:12am On Feb 09, 2017

ncoolsome:
bt really if u could look all this up in google..why didn't u just look up whose job it isnice write up

hahahahahahahahah - I wanted to provoke a discussion; so we all cld learn.... thanks

Re: Who Should Supervise A Building Project; Architects, Builders Or Engineers by penitential(m): 9:14am On Feb 09, 2017

seguntijan:
BUILDERS WILL TAKE THEIR PLACE!!!
someone first asked, what is the difference between a builder and a civil engineer?
I took time to enlightened him; read along with me.
Concerning professionals in construction industry, let me briefly state the roles of relating profession.
we all believe that the major role of an architect is production of building plans; considering some principles, (not to construct or supervise building production.)
Her own is to liaise with the builder on how to bring his dream on the CAD or paper to reality. The builder ensures BUILDABLITY. Mind you, Architectural design is not a graphics design.
For acclaimed civil Engineers, categorically speaking, they have seven branches and that a part of it is the structures.
The role of structural engineer is to design for all structural members such as beams, columns slabs structural steelwork etc., liaise her design with the builder on how visible is the fabrication of all these members and their arrangement to fulfill the aim of his design( under worst loading the structure most not fail).
A building services man designs for mechanical/ electrical services and liaise with builder on the arrangement and fixing ( hmmm... I know you will argue that he can't do that)
The quantity surveyor takes care of the estimations of project.
Now, who understands estimation process the more? structural engineer, architect, others professionals?
The fact remains that, if (Qs) overestimate or price substandard materials or add up what is not suppose to be, it is only a builder that understand the techniques of estimation.
so what's now the work of a builder?
From the aforementioned premises, judge for yourself.
The next question the person asked is ,you mean it is only builders that can do all d work on site, when it comes to structures?
I laughed, and i gave emphatic NO.
According to Nigeria building code, builders are not trained to hijack the work of other professions but due to the vast scope of our profession, we use all the knowledge we gain from all others professions to carry out BUILDING PRODUCTION MANAGEMENT....
That's why a builder can easily detect error and suggest correction to architect design because, whenever he sees design, he does not only view it from the perspective based on architectural mentality alone but reason about the structural stability, estimation in other to be economically safe and comfort of the occupant(s) and maintenance including the aesthetical view.
Hope you are getting along.
The next question ,what is d difference between structural and civil engineer?
To me, to call someone civil engineer is a wrong usage because the word ''civil engineer'' is like a general name that encompasses all construction expertise.
so, ''structural engineer'' is someone who's area of specialisation in civil engineering is mainly in structures.
someone that specialise in highway construction is not a structural engineer which implies he/she should not have any thing to do with structures. Mind you, a structural engineer is not a builder
Friends, construction is in three(3) aspects. The design, fabrication(pro
duction and management) and maintenance.
So, if your interest is more of design, then, architecture or civil engineering is good but if your interest is the actual construction of building (of course, we all want to bring our dreams of building or structure to come true) then, the best choice for you is to call on '' A BUILDER'' which in the profession is the only professional that span across all other professions in construction company industries for effective delivery of a project.
NB.
As regards the incessant building collapse in Nigeria that have been recorded so far, who then are those responsible for such project. Is it not those that form bossy on such project(s) and yet it collapsed?
Hummm... the so called engineers, architects and sometimes Estate surveyors.

Let me enlighten you on this because it shows your little level of knowledge about that.
Majority of the structures that collapses are not to be blamed on the structural engineer. Because it is one thing for a structure to be perfectly designed and it is another thing for the builder on site to actually follow the actual design of the structural engineer.
Let me tell you categorically, that a builder will not be held responsible for any building collapse(because they know nothing about structural stability which is the sole work of a structural engineer).
The builder is just like a messenger to both the architect and the engineer (take to instruction of both parties as regard their design) the builder has no intellectual knowledge to alter the deign of both the architect or the engineer (the builder has little or no idea of how the engineer came about the specifications and designs for such project).
So it will be wrong for anybody to call on the builder to come and explain why a building collapsed. Infact if a builder is called upon to say anything about it, what they will definitely say is 'I only supervised base on the design and instructions that the engineer gave me.
I've seen lots of cases whereby the structural engineer made a design, and the builder on site built something else ( can't interpreted structural drawings thereby building using his own idea) which later caused problem for the engineer when he was called on to come and explain the reason for the collapse.

Mind you,since the builders have been handling projects and structure, BUILDERS have NO record(s) on building that are managed and supervised by a professional builders that have ever collapsed in Nigeria !!! you can Google search to confirm... No not one.(1)
...ALL PROFESSIONS IN BUILT ENVIRONMENT ARE UNIQUE IN THEIR OWN WAYS..
The next question is, who is now suppose to be the project manager of structures?
Be wise, choose by yourself. Let me say a project manager is someone that have knowledge to manage a project. Mind you, project are of different types. Here, We talk about structures, who is suppose to be the project manager?
Be wise, engage professional (builders) for effective delivery.
BUILDERS BUILD RIGHT.
Compiled by Atom

Re: Who Should Supervise A Building Project; Architects, Builders Or Engineers by Saintmary(f): 9:25am On Feb 09, 2017

Myself2:
Architects causing confusion in the construction industry since 100AD
From the OPs submission,it's clear he wants to railroad nairalanders into the false notion that architects should be in charge of construction works.
It,s actually the Engineer and Architect that should be on site.The architect's input is mainly centered around aesthetics and stuff like that,while the engineer's input is mainly centered around structural integrity and soundness of buildings.
In a situation where the client can't afford both or has to choose,well I'll rather choose structural integrity and soundness over aesthetics

you nailed it

Re: Who Should Supervise A Building Project; Architects, Builders Or Engineers by uvalued(m): 9:36am On Feb 09, 2017

saydfact:
There is an everyday argument on WHO SHOULD SUPERVISE A BUILDING PROJECT; The Architect, Builder or Civil/Structural Engineer?

Well, before we go into details, I'm sure we all agree the Mechanical Engineer shouldn't be responsible for task of ensuring 'Your Design' comes out as expected - conducive and beautiful (Aesthetics). LoL

Lets define the 3 professions we're considering (in alphabetical order)

A. Architect
According to the English dictionary:

* Architect [n.]: A person skilled in the art of building; one who understands architecture, or makes it his occupation to form plans and designs of buildings, and to superintend the artificers employed.

Lets further look at the meaning of 'SUPERINTEND':

* Superintend [v. t.]: To have or exercise the charge and oversight of; to oversee with the power of direction; to take care of with authority; to supervise; as, an officer superintends the building of a ship or the construction of a fort.

We'll stop here for now, while we get the definition of B & C from the same dictionary.

B. Builder
* Builder [n.]: One who builds; one whose occupation is to build, as a carpenter, a shipwright, or a mason.

this definition in my opinion wasn't fair or deep enough so I looked further down:

* Builder; constructor: someone who contracts for and supervises construction (as of a building)
* Homebuilder; home-builder; housebuilder; house-builder: someone who builds houses as a business

This definitions, almost limits the builder to a business man, (that's not my conclusion) - that's what the dictionary thinks.
we'll also come back to argue this, while we look at the last definition 'C' below.

C. Civil/Structural Engineer

* Structural: affecting or involved in structure or construction (ex.: the structural details of a house such as beams and joists and rafters; not ornamental elements; structural damage)

* Civil engineer: an engineer trained to design and construct and maintain public works (roads or bridges or harbors etc.)

* Civil engineering: the branch of engineering concerned with the design and construction of such public works as dams or bridges

Lets summarize the 3 definition on here; The first mentioned structures but noted that these does not include ornamental elements eg pop designs, tiling etc while the other two (from civil) were silent about buildings. The first conclusion we can draw from this definition is that the Civil Engineer is solely responsible for supervising structures like bridges, roads, dams and he has no competition in those area.

Verdict: The dictionary thinks the Architect is the more appropriate person to supervise the building BUT WE WOULD NOT CONCLUDE HERE.

LETS LOOK AT WIKI DEFINITIONS NOW:

* An architect is someone who plans, designs, and reviews the construction of buildings. To practice architecture means to provide services in connection with the design of buildings and the space within the site surrounding the buildings, that have as their principal purpose human occupancy or use. Etymologically, architect derives from the Latin architectus, which derives from the Greek (arkhi-, chief + tekton, builder), i.e., chief builder

Like in the dictionary definitions; wiki gives so much power to the Architect calling him 'CHIEF' -

* Structural engineering is mainly a sub-division of civil engineering where structural engineers are trained to understand, predict, and calculate the stability, strength and rigidity of built structures for buildings and non-building structures, to develop designs and integrate their design with that of other designers, and to supervise construction of projects on site.

* Builder may refer to:

- Construction worker who specializes in building work
- Carpenter, a skilled craftsman who works with wood
- General contractor, that specializes in building work

Off-course wiki didn't rule out the engineer as a supervisor on site - we can only argue that the website seems to have placed him under a 'chief' - perhaps not, AND except we're biased IT IS COMMON KNOWLEDGE that the builder is the least recognized among the three. (No dis-respect meant please)

LETS LOOK AT LOGIC / COMMON REASONING:

Starting with C, B then A.

I'M SURE WE ALL AGREE THAT THE CIVIL/STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS ARE INVOLVED IN DESIGN OF THE STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS EG COLUMNS, BEAMS AND SLAB - BASICALLY HE DESIGNS & RECOMMEND ON ALL STEEL WORKS....If we all agree on the above, then 'my question is; SHOULD THE STRUCTURAL ENGINEER BE INVOLVED IN ANY BUILDING THAT DOESN'T HAVE HAVE HIS DESIGN INPUT?

Lets support our claims with the Nigeria Approval Process - When seeking approval for a bungalow, all you're required to submit is an Architectural Plan - You would not be required to submit a structural design / calculation sheet until you start going up with a storey on another.

This means; The only person involved in all types of building (emphasis on BUILDING) is the Architect....

WHO UNDERSTANDS THE BUILDING MORE:

A. The person who designed it OR
B. The person who recommended what strength is required to make it stand
C. The person who only received series of drawings and required to build / supervise it

I'll leave every man to his conclusion here.

ACTUAL PRACTICE:

For those of us working with multi-national company, expatriates or dealing with big organizations have you ever noticed that the PROJECT MANAGERS are always Architects?

This is because of the single rule that Architects are the head of the construction team - I'm yet to come across a Project Managed by an Engineering firm or where the NO1 man on site is the Engineer.

Maybe I've just been on the wrong types of projects - which includes Factories, Warehouses, Mega Stores, Luxury apartment etc.

Could this be a co-incidence?

SO; MY QUESTION STILL IS "WHO SHOULD SUPERVISE A BUILDING PROJECT" well, I'm not ruling out the importance of both the Architect & Engineers especially on very complex structures.

Written and shared by 'SaydFact' on www.nairaland.com and www.palmchatnow.com

Re: Who Should Supervise A Building Project; Architects, Builders Or Engineers by waldigit: 9:53am On Feb 09, 2017

KINGwax007:
Builder. Though, every professional must be invited at the right time.

But as a builder, your main job is a site manager. You must have knowledge of everything being done on-site. Your mission is to interpret the drawing, physically on site.

That is why,

We were being taught accounting
We were being taught structural engineering
We were being taught architectural design
We were being taught electrical technology
We were being taught carpentry works and wood design
We were being taught bricklaying
We were being taught law in contact management
We were being taught building services
We were being taught soil technology
We were being taught land surveying
We were being taught estate management

We must understand everything and everyone...

I can go on and on but why shld I?

You wanna take a dose, go study building technology!

Bit the truth is, the most lucrative among building technology, architecture, structural engineering, estate management and quantity surveying is the last one- Quantity surveying.

I always wished I didn't shed off that course after my ND. But hey, I am a farmer now, a builder, a serial and dynamic entrepreneur. Who cares abt the yeye certificate?

I do

Don't mind them, idleness and recession is worrying them all.

1 2 3 4 Reply

Fire Guts A Building In Ketu, Lagos (Photos, Video) • See A Building On Fire In Ikeja Lagos • Cost To Supervise A Foundation Of 2storey Building Of 6flats • 2 • 3 • 4

#ItaFaaji: LASG Takes Over The Land, Begins Massive Demolition In Lagos Island • Quality & Affordable interior and Exterior Designs Services For your Home/Office • Residents And Traders Count Their Losses As 23 Road Festac Market Is Demolished