Translating NCARB – Architectural Critique, and (another) Introduction to Treatise

INTRO - Where We are Going

As I continue my own attempts at architectural licensing, it is becoming ever more clear that this treatise can (and likely needs) to combine with an ongoing discussion of contemporary architectural practice - if only by which to better organize discussions, or present findings in a more accessible format.  The size, intricacy, and overwhelming magnitude of the typology necessitates a real world link to even the most general of discussions, as a better way to critique the role of such tall buildings in a larger world.   Being that skyscrapers are often a direct expression of physical and code minimums, it is also critical for aspiring designers to understand what natural limitations are or could be, in order to test, bend, or break the rules that guide finalized designs. 

That said, we here at HeightsRising find ourselves thinking: are any formats available to better filter these ramblings?  Can this treatise follow a similar layout, or quantifiable overlap, as professional testing efforts?  Is there a possible link to journalistic sources, or expanded historical formats?  Skyscrapers are not singular objects solely isolated in a theoretical realm, and are every bit as reliant on physical forces or regulatory oversight, as they are imagination.  They also remain as an integral part of architectural testing knowledge, being well represented in every division of the current American licensing exams and international codes.    

Heck, even the IBC 2012 even has their own special chapter on the typology!

As such, this post will discuss and explore overlapping possibilities within current regulatory environs, using the remainder of the treatise to better explore or define each section in greater depth.  The typology has several unique characteristics that lend itself well to this approach, and can benefit from greater research along these lines.  With luck, these principals discussed here can  better explore the relationships with skyscraper height, or general sustainability, as we continue to expand.  

Linking to NCARB – Overlapping Content Areas in the ARE 4.0

NCARB currently has several components of its ARE licensing test; those which can better organize, recognize, and discuss the many potentials in emerging skyscrapers.  Their current list is centered around the functional capacities of structures and general building design construction, with certain categories being highly applicable to sustainability or high-rise principals.  This organizational structure can also help link a candidates knowledge to professional applications, while providing a framework around the natural laws that guide buildings.  While this approach is slightly different from British and French testing systems (which place greater emphasis on individual case studies) we at HeightsRising find that this framework is a great starting point by which to disseminate initial building information.  See the "Overlaps with NCARB" link along the title bar of this page, as we continue to expand upon these concepts.  

In the meantime, the following seven categories listed below are those that are part of current NCARB testing organization.  Besides each is where we think each section can apply to forthcoming sustainable skyscraper discussions: 

Structural Systems (SS): Skyscrapers are heavily impacted by the discussion of their supporting structures, from both wind, seismic and a litany of other approaches.  The SS section listed here can likely cover a considerable amount about the basics of skyscraper skin layouts or design, and lends itself well to the possibilities of reducing costs through structural refinement.  Being that Structure can be the largest cost savings within modern skyscrapers, it is critical to understand this component first and foremost. 

Building Systems (BS): Entire rules of thumb exist, on linking skyscrapers to integrated mechanical and electrical systems.  While architects can (and sometimes likely SHOULD) rely on the specialized advice of MEP consultants, I have witnessed several projects that could have benefited from an initial understanding of these critical components.  MEP can make or break attempts at energy efficiency, and the layout and integration of these systems can often be vital to the success of sustainability.

Site Planning and Design (SPD): Skyscrapers have always had an integral relationship to site, with a majority of architectural testing and sustainable inclusions centered on these poignant goals.  As most green design decisions are intrinsically linked to Site, this section can, and should have important listings and consequences.  

Construction Documents and Services (CDS): Skyscrapers have always had a considerable need of proper Construction Documentation…..but the depth of whom is likely far too extensive to cover in a single pose, blog, or even lifetime.  See SOM for further details, or any of the current listings relating to BIM facilitation. 

Programming, Planning and Practice: Skyscraper zoning obviously varies considerably from city to city, and can requires an intimate knowledge of local building codes, or an integration of Occupancy requirements.  (In my new home base of Washington D.C. for instance, skyscrapers aren’t even allowed.)  Discussion of internal arrangement, and optimizations of this sort will likely be partly covered here.    

Building Design and Construction: This category will likely prove to be the most challenging, as construction means and methods for skyscrapers are ever changing.  Like CDS, this section will likely be given ethereal consideration, or else expand upon topics covered in Chapter 4 of the IBC.

Schematic Design: Discussion from Frazier Kahn have INCREDIBLE impact upon this category, as have recent listings from Ken Yeang and William McDonough.  Discussion of internal arrangement, and optimizations of this sort can be partly covered here.

CONCLUSION: ARE 5.0, and Treatise Prep

As is seen in the above listings, this 'NCARB organization format' can go a long way to better categorizing or arranging forthcoming postings, while linking such concepts to contemporary project practice.  I have remained surprised to find that many of these topics have enormous impact on developments occurring today, with even greater potentials for future prospects.  Overall, it is hoped that this discussion helps orient new and returning users as each topic better presents itself, and can be a benchmark from which to build.

With luck, these trends will also continue as the site progresses. 

SHARE