A Rule of Thumb to some is a cheat code to accomplishing a task, but it often represents a larger truth or a big picture view too. Sometimes it’s a simpler way of understanding an esoteric complexity. It doesn’t have to be about building science; it could be about managing expectations or drawing or business practice or…
proto
Feb 25, 23 10:52 am
Some examples:
People hire people.
Insulation is cheaper than HVAC.
Don’t show anything to a client you wouldn’t want to get built.
What rules of thumb have you found related to architecture?
proto
Feb 25, 23 10:54 am
Hopefully this doesn’t just devolve into cliche or memes…
citizen
Feb 25, 23 5:30 pm
Excellent topic. But I promise nothing.
Non Sequitur
Feb 25, 23 11:59 am
don’t present anything to clients, contractors, or firm owners that is not complete.
chigurh
Feb 25, 23 2:05 pm
Discuss budget and schedule first - if you are not on the same page on those items, you can do a phenomenal job and it will still be deemed a failure.
Kinsbergen
Feb 25, 23 2:56 pm
Always lower your expectations on your consultants' input.
Also, learn to yawn with your mouth shut in meetings. (this being more of a survival tip, rather than a rule of thumb).
Jovan Millet
Feb 25, 23 5:17 pm
Rule of thumb down here is that a concrete and glass building that stands after the hurricane is far better for the environment than re-building that sustainably-farmed wood house. Longevity environmentalism trumps material environmentalism any day.
citizen
Feb 25, 23 5:29 pm
Getting regularly stuck writing and circulating meeting notes has its advantages.
Wood Guy
Feb 26, 23 11:09 am
It may not be quite what you intended but I have developed (or noticed) a lot of design rules that I go by or at least start with and only break when there is a good reason to break them. I have written articles about some of them.
One is for designing the rise and run for stairs. I wrote a short article about it several years ago (https://www.finehomebuilding.c...) and the magazine has shared it online every few weeks ever since. It's amusing because I didn't even get paid for that article yet I have probably responded to 50 emailed or phoned-in questions about it since it was originally published.
Another popular article I wrote is about designing shed dormers: https://www.finehomebuilding.c.... In particular, keeping the dormer pitch at about half the main pitch, keeping the cheek walls pulled in from the house gables and keeping the dormer ridge below the main ridge have all proved to be helpful and consistent, though I break all of those rules when necessary.
Regarding Jovan's point above, I am strongly in favor of short-term environmental solutions; this is the worst time in history to put carbon dioxide (or equivalents) into the atmosphere. Few homes last more than 50-100 years anyway, so when given two equally effective solutions, go with the one that is environmentally preferable over the next few decades at most, not for the next 100-500 years.
I have a lot more but don't want to dominate what should be an interesting thread.
ivanmillya
Feb 26, 23 12:06 pm
To be clear, I agree wholeheartedly with ending or mitigating harm to our environment. I have conflicts in my daily life with the sector I work in, because the greater part of my work is designing homes for the extremely wealthy on what is fundamentally a barrier island just off the coast of Southwest Florida. But having now been through the vast destruction of Hurricane Ian, I see so many homes that have been utterly destroyed, in no small part because they were built of wood.
No matter what kind of pressure-treatment, sealants, coatings, or paints you apply, wood construction in some environments will rot and create dangerous living conditions.
ULTIMATELY, the goal should be to move away from allowing development on barrier islands. However, FEMA exacerbates this by providing methods for developing, rather than outright banning it.
In the meantime, all of the houses that my firm has designed in the past decade survived the hurricane where their neighbors were ripped apart, and we attribute this heavily to the fact that they're built not only out of concrete, but done so in a more comprehensive fashion that involves not only pilings, but a whole monolithic diaphragm using pilings, grade beams, shear walls, and floor systems.
ivanmillya
Feb 26, 23 12:08 pm
But honestly WG I would love to hear your opinions and knowledge. Sustainability is tough, and here, our reaction to the devastation of hurricanes is that we'd rather build homes that withstand and thrive, even if it means that the materials being used have much higher embodied carbon.
Wood Guy
Feb 27, 23 10:50 am
I didn't mean to sound like I was saying you're not doing the right thing but I got sidetracked while writing. I meant to say that I prioritize occupant health and safety, then building resilience and durability; only when those are addressed do I consider the environmental impact of the structure.
I use plenty of foam and concrete as a result, especially on renovations where nothing else will reasonable work, or when costs to do the environmentally preferable thing are significantly higher than the alternative.
I do my best to decline projects that I know won't be well aligned with my values, such as a new home for an owner pre-sold on SIPs or spray foam, but that only kicks the can down the road. The fact is that almost all construction is bad for the environment, and I try to remember to not get too high and mighty about my slightly-better-than typical approaches to single family housing.
My honest opinion is that I don't think we should try so hard to live in places that are not conducive to human habitation, but even with my tendency to tilt at windmills, I don't think it's worth trying too hard to promote that one, true as it may be.
Orhan Ayyüce
Feb 26, 23 12:02 pm
Pre-digital times in the drafting room...
Older architect to me,
"never draw in the morning more than you can erase in the afternoon."
Almosthip
Feb 27, 23 10:30 am
Insulate or ventilate
Wood Guy
Feb 27, 23 10:53 am
Why not insulate AND ventilate? As Joe Lsiburek says, build tight and ventilate right!
Chad Miller
Feb 27, 23 12:57 pm
People don't quit firms, they quit management
You're part of a team.
Accept blame, give credit
More insulation does not always mean better thermal performance
Don't forget you dew point location when using continuous insulation
If you can't explain your design to your grandma in terms she can understand you don't understand it.
Masonry coursing needs to be multiples of 8"
Allow the building to breath
Water will get in, allow a way for it to get out.
Estimate how much time you think it will take to do something then double it
Do what you say you'll do
Cheap, Fast, or Innovative - you can have two
Wood Guy
Feb 27, 23 1:28 pm
I'm on board except for, "a building needs to breathe." I would be happy if that phrase were killed by fire. Buildings don't need to breathe, people do. Buildings need to dry.
Chad Miller
Feb 27, 23 2:18 pm
True. It's a rule of thumb statement. For a building to dry it needs air movement - hence the 'breath' statement. Obviously you don't want air moving unimpeded through an assembly.
Wood Guy
Feb 27, 23 2:38 pm
I think most people have a vague idea that "breathing" means vapor-permeable, but that's not always the case. It's a term that only causes confusion. I don't think it's clear at all to many, even most people that we don't want air moving through the envelope.
Chad Miller
Feb 27, 23 4:53 pm
Good point. In some cases though you need more than just a vapor permeable assembly. Attic spaces and rain screens need actual moving air to work. Too bad there isn't a good nomenclature we could use to describe a vapor permeable assembly with air movement in concealed spaces.
Non Sequitur
Feb 27, 23 5:26 pm
Air mouvement is your friend until it’s not. Then it’s a bitch. Also, why bother with language and terms, just detail it correctly and you have nothing to worry about. Looking at you fellow coworker who wrote vague and misleading notes. No, don’t give the contractor vastly different options in your sectional details.
Wood Guy
Feb 27, 23 5:28 pm
"People need to breathe, houses need to dry, vapor needs to be managed."
proto
Feb 27, 23 2:20 pm
thanks, guys, some good stuff...
this thread doesn't have to dominate the top line, it can be cultivated over time...so thx for getting it started
citizen
Feb 27, 23 7:01 pm
Don't be afraid to compliment someone on good work.
(This is in response to managers or partners who seem to fear that any word of praise will automatically bring a request for a raise.)
A Rule of Thumb to some is a cheat code to accomplishing a task, but it often represents a larger truth or a big picture view too. Sometimes it’s a simpler way of understanding an esoteric complexity. It doesn’t have to be about building science; it could be about managing expectations or drawing or business practice or…
Some examples:
People hire people.
Insulation is cheaper than HVAC.
Don’t show anything to a client you wouldn’t want to get built.
What rules of thumb have you found related to architecture?
Hopefully this doesn’t just devolve into cliche or memes…
Excellent topic. But I promise nothing.
don’t present anything to clients, contractors, or firm owners that is not complete.
Discuss budget and schedule first - if you are not on the same page on those items, you can do a phenomenal job and it will still be deemed a failure.
Always lower your expectations on your consultants' input.
Also, learn to yawn with your mouth shut in meetings. (this being more of a survival tip, rather than a rule of thumb).
Rule of thumb down here is that a concrete and glass building that stands after the hurricane is far better for the environment than re-building that sustainably-farmed wood house. Longevity environmentalism trumps material environmentalism any day.
Getting regularly stuck writing and circulating meeting notes has its advantages.
It may not be quite what you intended but I have developed (or noticed) a lot of design rules that I go by or at least start with and only break when there is a good reason to break them. I have written articles about some of them.
One is for designing the rise and run for stairs. I wrote a short article about it several years ago (https://www.finehomebuilding.c...) and the magazine has shared it online every few weeks ever since. It's amusing because I didn't even get paid for that article yet I have probably responded to 50 emailed or phoned-in questions about it since it was originally published.
Another popular article I wrote is about designing shed dormers: https://www.finehomebuilding.c.... In particular, keeping the dormer pitch at about half the main pitch, keeping the cheek walls pulled in from the house gables and keeping the dormer ridge below the main ridge have all proved to be helpful and consistent, though I break all of those rules when necessary.
Regarding Jovan's point above, I am strongly in favor of short-term environmental solutions; this is the worst time in history to put carbon dioxide (or equivalents) into the atmosphere. Few homes last more than 50-100 years anyway, so when given two equally effective solutions, go with the one that is environmentally preferable over the next few decades at most, not for the next 100-500 years.
I have a lot more but don't want to dominate what should be an interesting thread.
To be clear, I agree wholeheartedly with ending or mitigating harm to our environment. I have conflicts in my daily life with the sector I work in, because the greater part of my work is designing homes for the extremely wealthy on what is fundamentally a barrier island just off the coast of Southwest Florida. But having now been through the vast destruction of Hurricane Ian, I see so many homes that have been utterly destroyed, in no small part because they were built of wood.
No matter what kind of pressure-treatment, sealants, coatings, or paints you apply, wood construction in some environments will rot and create dangerous living conditions.
ULTIMATELY, the goal should be to move away from allowing development on barrier islands. However, FEMA exacerbates this by providing methods for developing, rather than outright banning it.
In the meantime, all of the houses that my firm has designed in the past decade survived the hurricane where their neighbors were ripped apart, and we attribute this heavily to the fact that they're built not only out of concrete, but done so in a more comprehensive fashion that involves not only pilings, but a whole monolithic diaphragm using pilings, grade beams, shear walls, and floor systems.
But honestly WG I would love to hear your opinions and knowledge. Sustainability is tough, and here, our reaction to the devastation of hurricanes is that we'd rather build homes that withstand and thrive, even if it means that the materials being used have much higher embodied carbon.
I didn't mean to sound like I was saying you're not doing the right thing but I got sidetracked while writing. I meant to say that I prioritize occupant health and safety, then building resilience and durability; only when those are addressed do I consider the environmental impact of the structure.
I use plenty of foam and concrete as a result, especially on renovations where nothing else will reasonable work, or when costs to do the environmentally preferable thing are significantly higher than the alternative.
I do my best to decline projects that I know won't be well aligned with my values, such as a new home for an owner pre-sold on SIPs or spray foam, but that only kicks the can down the road. The fact is that almost all construction is bad for the environment, and I try to remember to not get too high and mighty about my slightly-better-than typical approaches to single family housing.
My honest opinion is that I don't think we should try so hard to live in places that are not conducive to human habitation, but even with my tendency to tilt at windmills, I don't think it's worth trying too hard to promote that one, true as it may be.
Pre-digital times in the drafting room...
Older architect to me,
"never draw in the morning more than you can erase in the afternoon."
Insulate or ventilate
Why not insulate AND ventilate? As Joe Lsiburek says, build tight and ventilate right!
I'm on board except for, "a building needs to breathe." I would be happy if that phrase were killed by fire. Buildings don't need to breathe, people do. Buildings need to dry.
True. It's a rule of thumb statement. For a building to dry it needs air movement - hence the 'breath' statement. Obviously you don't want air moving unimpeded through an assembly.
I think most people have a vague idea that "breathing" means vapor-permeable, but that's not always the case. It's a term that only causes confusion. I don't think it's clear at all to many, even most people that we don't want air moving through the envelope.
Good point. In some cases though you need more than just a vapor permeable assembly. Attic spaces and rain screens need actual moving air to work. Too bad there isn't a good nomenclature we could use to describe a vapor permeable assembly with air movement in concealed spaces.
Air mouvement is your friend until it’s not. Then it’s a bitch. Also, why bother with language and terms, just detail it correctly and you have nothing to worry about. Looking at you fellow coworker who wrote vague and misleading notes. No, don’t give the contractor vastly different options in your sectional details.
"People need to breathe, houses need to dry, vapor needs to be managed."
thanks, guys, some good stuff...
this thread doesn't have to dominate the top line, it can be cultivated over time...so thx for getting it started
Don't be afraid to compliment someone on good work.
(This is in response to managers or partners who seem to fear that any word of praise will automatically bring a request for a raise.)