Archinect
anchor

CPBD exam specifications under review by NCBDC.

1368

Lets also look at Chapter 34 Sections 3403-3407.

Apr 29, 16 4:04 am  · 
 · 

What does Chapter 3406.1 say?

Apr 29, 16 4:05 am  · 
 · 

Lets also take a look at Section 3410.1. What does it say?

Apr 29, 16 4:07 am  · 
 · 

Forget it.... guys. I'm tired and exhausted debating this shit. If this was new construction, I can understand applying all the requirements for new buildings but existing buildings can never meet the entire prescriptive path of new construction. Historic buildings and other existing buildings pre-UL listings or an antiquated listing. The CMUs are probably UL listed on an ancient list somewhere. I don't have the UL number for that. I don't have a copy of the 1950s era UL listing for CMUs if they even had a listing back then. 

I've worked with buildings that literally pre-dates UL.

Lets move on. The project was back early in my career. Okay. If I were to come across a similar project, I wouldn't do it unless its new construction design, for one. Two, I'm being paid a real design fee. Three, it would have vestibules and all that. I have no interest in doing any such projects involving a A-1 occupancy. It was baptism by fire. 

As for grant writers, there are probably professional grant writers whose does this for a living and probably knows more places to write grants including the one you learned in class even the ones you learned that are now defunct and no longer available. 

Licensed or not, I wouldn't be trying to find grants. It's not my job. That's not the Architect's job to find money. That is not what architect training is about. Not every education you take is architecture. Just because you learn computer programming and can possibly find a way to use it in connection with architecture doesn't male computer programming practice of architecture. No more than it is for me to apply computer programming in some peripheral way to building design.

The problem architects have is an identity crisis. They want to be everyone else and make everyone else's occupation "practice of architecture" so they are in charge. That is because they are unhappy about architecture for what it is.

If you don't like architecture for what practice of architecture is for Frank Lloyd Wright and every architect from the pre-"Hippy" generation, then you don't know what architecture is if you think it is being everyone else. Trying to redefine your occupation as everyone else's is EXACTLY why you have no relevance and why everyone hates your profession except you guys because you are not a profession.... just a licensed "pseudo-occupation" because you lost sight of what is architecture and know where it is to draw the line. 

You can't be doctor, lawyer, computer software developer, etc. all in one. Even when I do,  I still can delineate and distinguish them as concurrent and distinct occupations. Whenever I can, I'd draw from upon every lifetimes.

Anyway, we debate this far enough.

Apr 29, 16 6:28 am  · 
 · 
Non Sequitur
You forgot about the kangaroos Ricky.
Apr 29, 16 6:33 am  · 
 · 
awaiting_deletion

no we did not. you do not even understand the basics of being an architect and understanding how and why and when codes and reference standards are applied in the design of life safety issues........kangeroos for life

Apr 29, 16 6:45 am  · 
 · 
awaiting_deletion

Richard - the way you write about these things indicates so clearly to me that you barely understand how these things work in "practice". But you are not licensed so why would you? Here are signs of some of your inexperience and ignorance......What is an ME? Why do they design a Sprinkler system? Is that like saying an AOR picks furniture? this kind of sloppy assumption writing is the first sign of you not having a clue how the legal aspect of life safety design even works................Do you know the "prescriptive" and "descriptive" code difference? ............here is another ignorant sentence "The backstage floor is poured reinforced concrete, 1980s era. That's UL listed rated. Standard concrete." - I nearly fell out of my chair when I read this sentence. UL stands for "Underwriter Laboratories". UL LISTED assemblies are tested assemblies. Nothing in that sentence indicates what you have there matches a UL listed assembly. You are actually making a statement about "prescriptive" code which you then go on and cite to a degree with again strange assumptions on applications and use. What I am trying to tell you Richard you can not just read shit and think you have understood the problem or narrative. Besides you being extremely annoying at times, the other reason no one takes you seriously is you have no idea what you are talking about.

Apr 29, 16 6:59 am  · 
 · 
Non Sequitur
I felt the mic drop from here Olaf.

Kangaroos over hoes.
Apr 29, 16 7:43 am  · 
 · 
awaiting_deletion

kangeroos 4life!

Apr 29, 16 7:45 am  · 
 · 
Non Sequitur

SHOWING BALKINS HOW IT'S DONE KANGAROOS FOR LIFE | image tagged in kangaroo knockout | made w/ Imgflip meme maker

.

Apr 29, 16 8:24 am  · 
 · 
JeromeS

Olaf: boom!

Apr 29, 16 9:02 am  · 
 · 
This thread:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xawixxFdaVE
Apr 29, 16 9:08 am  · 
 · 
eeayeeayo

Rick I'm quite familiar with Chapter 34 and it doesn't get you out of the requirements I asked you about - which you still haven't answered.

A concrete wall can be a fire separation - but there would need to be perpendicular extensions of that extending at least 5 feet on both ends of it on both sides.  Similarly I do understand that the two roof systems are separate - but they're both combustible so you don't have a fire separation unless you've built one on both sides from the interior and exterior, or have a high parapet.  I can see from the photos that neither is the case.

The more you write the worse it gets.  I truly believe this is a mass tragedy waiting to happen, so I'm sending all of your descriptions to your city and to the state fire marshall and they can sort it out. 

Apr 29, 16 9:23 am  · 
 · 
nicholass817

MIke Drop!!...almost

australia kangaroo kangaroos mad cuties

Apr 29, 16 10:40 am  · 
 · 
no_form
"Lets move on. The project was back early in my career. Okay. If I were to come across a similar project, I wouldn't do it unless its new construction design, for one. Two, I'm being paid a real design fee. Three, it would have vestibules and all that. I have no interest in doing any such projects involving a A-1 occupancy. It was baptism by fire."

So you would design another death trap? I hope eeay really does report you because this isn't a joke. You can do your aunt's sun deck but you can't do a theater that's going to burn 100+ people to death.

You have no career and you are ignorant beyond words.

Side note: kangaroos 4 life.
Apr 29, 16 10:52 am  · 
 · 
tduds

Well...

Apr 29, 16 11:11 am  · 
 · 
Dangermouse

>Licensed or not, I wouldn't be trying to find grants. It's not my job. That's not the Architect's job to find money. That is not what architect training is about. Not every education you take is architecture. Trying to redefine your occupation as everyone else's is EXACTLY why you have no relevance.

 

Yes. The ~3 million in billing which grant writing brought to our firm in 2015 is a great expression of our irrelevance.  I also know that overworked and understaffed community organizations HATE it when we provide consulting and grant writing services to help increase their budgets.  

 

Richard Balkins Building Design: "Why have more money for your core mission, when you can have less?" 

Apr 29, 16 11:25 am  · 
 · 
Bloopox

If you work on an existing building, regardless of its age, if there is a change of use then you have to bring it up to current code.  I checked your city and state codes and there is no Astoria-specific or Oregon-specific amendment that says you can turn a washing machine store into an assembly space and ignore HSW requirements on the basis that your CMU wall pre-dates the existence of UL listings. You hang out on architecture and code sites pretending to be an expert on the basis of a few credits of community college historic preservation classes and a CAD certificate, and yet you do something this stupid - that's precisely the problem with the majority of unlicensed "building designers", and the reason that AIBD membership makes anyone less credible.
 

Apr 29, 16 11:27 am  · 
 · 
x-jla

I'm pretty certain that Balkins is a paid propaganda agent sent by NCARB and the AIA to discredit the AIBD.  There's really no other explanation at this point. 

Apr 29, 16 11:37 am  · 
 · 
awaiting_deletion

this thread is hilarious! k4life

Apr 29, 16 11:38 am  · 
 · 
tduds

Pretty sure if I took the time necessary to read this whole thread I'd be in danger of losing my job.

I can't even imagine the career-stifling implications of taking the time to actually write all this drivel.

Apr 29, 16 11:41 am  · 
 · 
Non Sequitur

Easy, Balkins has no career, so he's free to spew his nonsense as he pleases.

K4Life homies.

Apr 29, 16 11:47 am  · 
 · 
proto

Forget it.... guys. I'm tired and exhausted debating this shit.

 

quoted for posterity

#K4L

Apr 29, 16 12:06 pm  · 
 · 
x-jla

Archiroos unite!  

Apr 29, 16 12:21 pm  · 
 · 
shellarchitect

spent my entire lunch reading this, and would like to add this paraphrased quote to the discussion...

"Mr. Balkins, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul."

Apr 29, 16 1:14 pm  · 
 · 
tintt

If this thread doesn't take down the whole CPBD credential (if that even exists) I would be shocked. Yay for social media. 

Apr 29, 16 1:20 pm  · 
 · 
nicholass817

HA!!!...addressing the wrong character though.  Rick Rolls is the Steve Buscemi character in that movie...in his mom's basement with an ashtray overloaded with butts and a list with a bunch of forum aliases on it.

Apr 29, 16 1:24 pm  · 
 · 
Non Sequitur

^Ricky while reading anything even remotely relevant to architecture, practice law, Ikea instructions, basic kangaroo guides, etc.

Apr 29, 16 1:32 pm  · 
 · 
Shuellmi, you stole my line...either in this thread or elsewhere.
Apr 29, 16 1:44 pm  · 
 · 

no we did not. you do not even understand the basics of being an architect and understanding how and why and when codes and reference standards are applied in the design of life safety issues........kangeroos for life

24/7 shithead.

UL LISTED assemblies are tested assemblies.

UL probably has a rating for poured concrete for 4" and even 6" reinforced concrete floor. Fuck worrying about UL for the floor. The floor is like a sidewalk with fine aggregates. Standard CMU are pretty made the same way today as they were in the 1950.  Go test it. 

Concrete is a NON-COMBUSTIBLE material. It's basically "fire-proof". I'd say its fire-resistant because while it won't burn, the aggregates might explode under enough heat. Nothing is 100% fireproof. The CMU wall on this building is continuous from a point 2 feet BELOW the elevation of the back stage floor all the way up. (There is a reinforced concrete foundation stem wall) There is a continuous physical separation of the roof line. The stage doesn't go into the back stage. The backstage floor is concrete. The main theater floor in concrete. Aside from the pre-existing addition that was used for the "backstage", the main building that the theater was all all concrete/CMU except for the roof structure, windows and doors, and parts of the north elevation (where a big steel beam spanning about 38-ft.) 

Every CMU wall out there has more than 1-hour fire rating. 6" to 8" thick CMU walls has a higher fire-resistance than 1.25" of Type-X Gypsum wall board. The fire resistant barrier applies to the wall not the assembly of the building. Fire does not consume the non-combustible material. The concrete floor is a fire break. Unless you lay combustible material or chemicals on top of the concrete, the fire is contained to the vicinity of combustible material.  If for example a fire occured on the stage, the stage burns. The automatic sprinklers are activated.  The trussess above have the potential of combustion. There is no storage or electrical service under the stage. The risk of the stage burning from a source under the stage is very unlikely. Do you think the concrete floor under the stage is going to spontaneously combust?

Fire's comsumption doesn't just spread along non-combustible material. You need a layer of combustible matter for fire to spread. There has to be a 'fuel' for the fire. Fire needs what three things? You know what the fire triangle is?

Heat, fuel and oxidizing agent. Concrete is not a good fuel for fire. For the most part, concrete does not sustain fire as a fuel.

Apr 29, 16 2:25 pm  · 
 · 
Dangermouse

when balkans writes 500 words on how concrete assemblies cannot burn:

Apr 29, 16 2:47 pm  · 
 · 
Non Sequitur

Such ignorance Ricardia. It's almost like you've never actually designed anything.

oh wait, you haven't! This explains everything then.

As an aside, concrete is not "fire-proof", it's fire resistant up to a point where it's rating is determined by the thickness of concrete between the fire and re-bar. A half-competent 2nd year undergrad should know this. CMU ratings vary quite a bit based on their weight and "density".

Again, thank you for demonstrating that you know jack-shit about construction.

Apr 29, 16 2:49 pm  · 
 · 

Non Sequitur,

Didn't I just say that. Nothing is 100% fire proof. However concrete does not burn. When I looked at the ratings, I use the lowest fire rating numbers as the guiding numbers. Without disassembly a CMU block and testing it. I use the lowest fire rating numbers for the wall for the size category. You still get over 1 hour rating, N.S. 

EVERY concrete masonry unit of 6" or thicker masonry units has at least an hour rating. You might melt it. You might cause aggregates to explode at a high enough temperature. 

The building still has new sprinklers installed so as to mitigate that. At some point, there isn't enough fuel in the immediate area to get through all that. 

Yes, they do vary. However, the poured concrete from the late 1980s is about the same as they are today. The floor of the theater room is concrete about 6" thick if I remember correctly.

It terminates at the concrete foundation stem wall. That's 8" thick poured concrete.

Look at chapter 7. It would at least be 2-hr. 

Apr 29, 16 4:12 pm  · 
 · 
awaiting_deletion

ricki said - "UL probably has a rating for poured concrete for 4" and even 6" reinforced concrete floor"......so you have never opened a UL book in your life before? ....carry on. dangermouse, love it

Apr 29, 16 4:19 pm  · 
 · 
Non Sequitur

Enjoy digging holes? You must, given the rate you're burying yourself. Your cavalier attitude towards fire assembly and spatial separation is alarming. You're a perfect example as to why we have real licensed professional (ie. architects) and pretenders (what ever is on your business card).

Soon you'll dig all the way to Australia and be properly schooled by kangaroos.

Apr 29, 16 4:20 pm  · 
 · 

Olaf, 

There's no such thing. They don't publish any of those things.

Apr 29, 16 4:40 pm  · 
 · 
nicholass817

https://applications.tweddle.com/ulecommerce/Products.aspx

You were saying?

Apr 29, 16 4:46 pm  · 
 · 

Non Sequitur,

Don't build anything with combustible material then?

Why don't we just get a bunch of NASA space shuttle tiles. They don't need them anymore.

You sound like a New York City Dweller where wood is an outlawed material. Lets just have stone slabs for table tops, concrete chairs, Concrete curtains,  GFCI electrical service to all outlets, Lets just have 16 sprinklers per 4 sq.ft. while we are at it. NASA space shuttle tiles for interior wall finish.  Oh yeah, lets have one of these for a big ventilator fan?

 Lets make sure the concrete walls are 10 FEET thick while we are at it and the floor slab be 5-ft. thick and the roof be 2-ft. wide by 6-ft. deep reinforced concrete arch beams every 4-ft. o.c. Reinforced concrete joists that are 12" x 2.5 ft. deep @ 24" o.c. and the slab on top is 12" thick. The arch beams terminate into pilasters of 5-ft deep (making the wall up to 15-ft. thick

Lights are just LED lights.

Apr 29, 16 5:01 pm  · 
 · 
x-jla

^Is that your computer fan...it must need a lot of cooling with all the bullshit you type...

Apr 29, 16 5:04 pm  · 
 · 
Bloopox

"There's no such thing. They don't publish any of those things."

WHAT?? ?

Richard I know your experience in firms is not extensive,  but....  you've claimed to have been in at least a couple architects' offices, and to have hung around an architecture school for several years, and to have gone to more than one institutions of higher education that probably contain libraries - did you not never the shelves of big orange books?? 

There are so many UL books in most offices you can reach out blindfolded and grab a handful.  There are seven of them in within my reach right now.  On AIBD's facebook page you write about designing restaurants and theaters (plural). You've been haunting code forums for a decade pretending to be an expert.  How could you possibly remain unaware of UL directories?  Are you legally blind? How did none of those "thousands of pdfs" you've read about architecture not mention this once?  http://sweets.construction.com/swts_content_files/153435/ULcomArchitects-UL-for-Architects-L-Sweets-718828.jpg

It is, in fact, a complete compilation of every test-compliant assembly.

You've just got to be a bot, programmed to write the most wrong, opposite thing in response to any statement or question. 

Apr 29, 16 5:04 pm  · 
 · 

It's not a book Nicholas. It's a disc. It's not a complete compilation of every building material and assembly that was UL listed in its history.

If it was printed, that's 4 books. To get complete UL documentation, you need a big book shelf.

Apr 29, 16 5:04 pm  · 
 · 
Dangermouse

balkans you are going to kill people.  you don't need to dissemble for hours on UL fire ratings for individual concrete units.  just fucking follow the IBC.  you say the building has sprinklers, which is great!  but you still have insufficient egress for an assembly space.   

Apr 29, 16 5:08 pm  · 
 · 
awaiting_deletion

you are a fucking moron Rick. i will send a photo of my UL books. maybe you should google shit first before sounding like a complete retard. oh wait thats all you do and you do not do it well. one set of books for floors, walls, penetrations etc...

Apr 29, 16 5:08 pm  · 
 · 
Bloopox

Yeah, because needing a big bookshelf for all the books is exactly the same as the books don't exist, they don't publish them.

Apr 29, 16 5:08 pm  · 
 · 
awaiting_deletion

thanks nicholas.

Apr 29, 16 5:09 pm  · 
 · 
x-jla

Balkins logic:  I do not have a bookshelf big enough to hold all those books, therefore those books do not exist. 

Apr 29, 16 5:19 pm  · 
 · 
Non Sequitur
This is great.

Gents and madammes, I'll be out of town consuming whiskey in amounts equaled only by the size of Balkins ignorance. Keep the fires burning here so they don't spread to Balkins poorly executed assembly space.

Kangaroos for life.
Apr 29, 16 5:29 pm  · 
 · 
x-jla

I just read Balkins last post in Morgan Freedmans voice to see if it would sound better...it didn't work.

Apr 29, 16 5:36 pm  · 
 · 
awaiting_deletion

what? how? sounds hilarious?

Apr 29, 16 5:37 pm  · 
 · 

I really, really, really feel bad for the theater company. This makes me want to see reciprocity in Oregon and help them out with real professional architectural services.

I'm hopping mad, y'all.

Apr 29, 16 5:37 pm  · 
 · 

Block this user


Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?

  • ×Search in: