In Germany, we use a book called the "Neufert". It contains standard drawings of pretty much everything, from bathrooms to sport stadiums. You can look up sizes of cars, chickens, anything you need to plan a building. What do American architects have?
You're right, they probably could if they wanted, it's not rocket science. Still, if I weren't working in the US, I wouldn't want to bother with a book that doesn't use metric.
So do you use something else instead or figure out all the measurements instead? I think it's a good reference. Wait - are Neufert and graphic standards the same thing?
There's parts of Neufert that I don't like. I don't think it's necessary to just collect examples of, say, airport ground floors on two pages. But the basics can't be topped.
i studied in Germany my senior year and when I returned to the US I kept asking everyone at school for something similar...no one told me about AGS, then I started working and I remembered my Freshman year of college first semester AGS recommended.
what happened? american academia.
in a similar way to the Airports there are lot details pretty damn specific in AGS, as in drawn for some real job by a real firm, so at first when you have little experience it's hard to break out of the example, but you have to start somewhere.
Both AGS and Neufert present generic drawings of generic abstracted spatial ideas. Neither truly take into account the IBC, let alone local codes. They both serve as, perhaps, a generic starting point, but neither serve as anything more. It may help in predesign and perhaps schematic, and perhaps the odd competition but once the project moves to design development[Stage C in the UK], both are useless.
And what's this about preferencing one system of measurement over another? That's laughable. People use what they were taught to use. No one system is inherently more valid than another, unless you're working internationally [then, yes, metric is better because you can more often times relate to the local architect more readily ]. Corbusier made up the 'universal man' proportions based on the 6'2" height of the detectives in mystery novels he liked.
A system of measurement is only as good in that it's used as a standard amoung the interested parties and can communicate ideas about space. Using metric is fine depending on where one is working, and using the Imperial system is fine depending on where one is working. Otherwise, numbers are numbers. It behooves architects who want to work in any locale in the world to know both that a typical stair riser in metric is 150mm and a typical riser in Imperial is 6" [a whoping difference of 24mm or 1 inch].
Being a start point for design is exactly what Neufert is for, in my opinion; I don't know AGS. For construction drawings you need others.
metric has the obvious advantage that every unit translates to each other in fractions or multiples of 10. That makes sense and reduces conversion mistakes, and that's why I prefer it. As to imperial, I agree with you that it's just some random collection of numbers.
15 cm a typical riser? Seems rather low to me. I checked: 6'' are 152 mm, that makes 2 mm difference.
The point is that any method of measurement is only as good as a means of communication. So, yes, I agree,[though you didnt even bring this up] if more locales use the same method, that makes the method better. So, yes, metric is better than imperial [isn't that what you wanted to hear all along? congrats, have a cookie]. However, if one is working in a location that doesn't use that method, then it means fuck all, doesn't it. The method itself does not contain intrinsic value, the context and location does. It's just as easy to memorize conventions, if one is brought up in a particular culture. Are you going to tell those who speak mandarin to stop writing those 3000+ characters rather than letters because letters 'just make more sense'?
be·hoove/biˈho͞ov/Verb
1. It is a duty or responsibility for someone to do something; it is incumbent on: "it behooves any coach to study his predecessors".
2. It is appropriate or suitable; it befits: "it ill behooves the opposition constantly to decry the sale of arms to friendly countries".
whop[sorry, i forgot a 'P', my bad, I know the germans love to be precise and we all should be, seeing as we're all typing into a forum nobody really reads for lessons on diction, syntax or grammar]ping Slang. adj. Exceptionally large: "yet another whopping pay raise" (Lee Atwater). adv. Used as an intensive: a whopping good joke. ...
You can't tell me that learning 20 something characters would be as hard as learning 30.000. But of course I totally agree with you when you say that a planner needs to use the system that everybody around him uses. To your question: What I wanted to hear all along was what kind of pattern book Americans use... not how laughable I am...
Did you get these definitions from the internet? Where? My dictionary didn't have these!
What I am telling you is that learning a system from birth, no matter if that system is 'objectively' 'harder' or 'easier' is always easier. Gosh, is this just common knowledge, or is it not? German is easier as a first language for a Bavravian, than a New Englander, is it not? And likewise? Isn't this just common logic?
Don't worry, it would take a hell of a lot more than this to upset me. This is Archinect, after all [Did you forget?] I suggest you learn how to use the internet though; it may help you in your search for justice and truth.
Sep 17, 10 6:37 pm ·
·
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.
A pattern book of architecture
In Germany, we use a book called the "Neufert". It contains standard drawings of pretty much everything, from bathrooms to sport stadiums. You can look up sizes of cars, chickens, anything you need to plan a building. What do American architects have?
neufurt + Architectural Graphic Standards
Oh cool, I didn't know they had an American version of that!
Does it come "translated" to imperial measures and American codes? Probably, hm?
it's english, i believe.
The original is German
the translated, i mean. i don't think it's been converted to imperial.
Oh :) Fine with me
i just checked, the english version i have is in metric (which is fine, i can switch between either pretty well)
Funny though, because I don't think most people here can, or want to. I thought you guys would have an extra version.
In any way, thanks for the information!
i think most people can but then again number of nectors have worked or attended uni outside of the u.s.
i'm sure most u.s. firms feel that the arch graphic standards is adequate, but i've never really liked it.
You're right, they probably could if they wanted, it's not rocket science. Still, if I weren't working in the US, I wouldn't want to bother with a book that doesn't use metric.
So do you use something else instead or figure out all the measurements instead? I think it's a good reference. Wait - are Neufert and graphic standards the same thing?
sort of, AGS has more info (loading tables, details, etc) neufert is mostly just planning info.
AGS sucks , Neufert rocks!!
AGS is a lot more technical...basically skip the american academic scene, by AGS and start practicing.
That would definitely save a lot of money!
There's parts of Neufert that I don't like. I don't think it's necessary to just collect examples of, say, airport ground floors on two pages. But the basics can't be topped.
i studied in Germany my senior year and when I returned to the US I kept asking everyone at school for something similar...no one told me about AGS, then I started working and I remembered my Freshman year of college first semester AGS recommended.
what happened? american academia.
in a similar way to the Airports there are lot details pretty damn specific in AGS, as in drawn for some real job by a real firm, so at first when you have little experience it's hard to break out of the example, but you have to start somewhere.
How can someoone in the US get a copy of "Neufert".
Both AGS and Neufert present generic drawings of generic abstracted spatial ideas. Neither truly take into account the IBC, let alone local codes. They both serve as, perhaps, a generic starting point, but neither serve as anything more. It may help in predesign and perhaps schematic, and perhaps the odd competition but once the project moves to design development[Stage C in the UK], both are useless.
And what's this about preferencing one system of measurement over another? That's laughable. People use what they were taught to use. No one system is inherently more valid than another, unless you're working internationally [then, yes, metric is better because you can more often times relate to the local architect more readily ]. Corbusier made up the 'universal man' proportions based on the 6'2" height of the detectives in mystery novels he liked.
A system of measurement is only as good in that it's used as a standard amoung the interested parties and can communicate ideas about space. Using metric is fine depending on where one is working, and using the Imperial system is fine depending on where one is working. Otherwise, numbers are numbers. It behooves architects who want to work in any locale in the world to know both that a typical stair riser in metric is 150mm and a typical riser in Imperial is 6" [a whoping difference of 24mm or 1 inch].
jp: 3 things.
Being a start point for design is exactly what Neufert is for, in my opinion; I don't know AGS. For construction drawings you need others.
metric has the obvious advantage that every unit translates to each other in fractions or multiples of 10. That makes sense and reduces conversion mistakes, and that's why I prefer it. As to imperial, I agree with you that it's just some random collection of numbers.
15 cm a typical riser? Seems rather low to me. I checked: 6'' are 152 mm, that makes 2 mm difference.
// what does "behoove" mean? And "whoping"?
The point is that any method of measurement is only as good as a means of communication. So, yes, I agree,[though you didnt even bring this up] if more locales use the same method, that makes the method better. So, yes, metric is better than imperial [isn't that what you wanted to hear all along? congrats, have a cookie]. However, if one is working in a location that doesn't use that method, then it means fuck all, doesn't it. The method itself does not contain intrinsic value, the context and location does. It's just as easy to memorize conventions, if one is brought up in a particular culture. Are you going to tell those who speak mandarin to stop writing those 3000+ characters rather than letters because letters 'just make more sense'?
be·hoove/biˈho͞ov/Verb
1. It is a duty or responsibility for someone to do something; it is incumbent on: "it behooves any coach to study his predecessors".
2. It is appropriate or suitable; it befits: "it ill behooves the opposition constantly to decry the sale of arms to friendly countries".
whop[sorry, i forgot a 'P', my bad, I know the germans love to be precise and we all should be, seeing as we're all typing into a forum nobody really reads for lessons on diction, syntax or grammar]ping Slang. adj. Exceptionally large: "yet another whopping pay raise" (Lee Atwater). adv. Used as an intensive: a whopping good joke. ...
Any other gems of wisdom? Or are you done?
Whoops, I didn't mean to attack you personally!
You can't tell me that learning 20 something characters would be as hard as learning 30.000. But of course I totally agree with you when you say that a planner needs to use the system that everybody around him uses. To your question: What I wanted to hear all along was what kind of pattern book Americans use... not how laughable I am...
Did you get these definitions from the internet? Where? My dictionary didn't have these!
What I am telling you is that learning a system from birth, no matter if that system is 'objectively' 'harder' or 'easier' is always easier. Gosh, is this just common knowledge, or is it not? German is easier as a first language for a Bavravian, than a New Englander, is it not? And likewise? Isn't this just common logic?
Don't worry, it would take a hell of a lot more than this to upset me. This is Archinect, after all [Did you forget?] I suggest you learn how to use the internet though; it may help you in your search for justice and truth.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.