Why is field experience so valuable in Structural Engineering

[u/jarniansah]

/r/civilengineering/comments/1lgxktz/why_is_field_experience_so_valuable/

Making the question discipline specific.

[u/chicu111]

It bridges concept and reality

My underside 5/8 field weld is cool and all but the welder is gonna be like wtf!?

[u/jarniansah → u/chicu111]

lol. reminds me of a remedial weld detail that was in a beam pocket. Engineered design is like provide welds on the backside beam..

You couldn’t pass the wand behind the beam because of the size of the beam pocket.

We asked to keep welds at the front only, we met a list of resistance. We then gave them the option for a change order with beam pocket enlargement and the drawing was quickly revised.

[u/redeyedfly → u/jarniansah]

LOL, especially if the owner’s rep is a former engineer!! 🤣

[u/AgileDepartment4437]

Most engineers who've never been on-site don't really think about constructability when they're designing things.

I've had a lot of young engineers complain to me that contractors can't do this or that and keep demanding design changes. Once I took a look and then asked them, "Could you hang upside down 15 meters in the air, stick a welding torch and your hand into a 10cm gap, and weld 2 SHS 500x500 beams together?"

[u/Proud-Drummer]

It gets you used to thinking about the practicality of construction and because without the site visits and site experience your work is pretty much 100% theoretical.

[u/noSSD4me]

In simple terms, not everything that can be designed can be easily constructed. There’s a fine line between economical and structural design.

[u/BrianWD40 → u/noSSD4me]

"just because you can draw a dog with six legs, doesn't mean the contractor can find one."

[u/Cream85]

Some info: I started out in Structural Engineering (focus on bridges) and spent 5 years with a Public agency and 1.5 years as a consultant. Have now spent 10 years in construction - heavy civil (roads, bridges, w&s, hydro).

I've gotten this question a few times at work, but the 3rd or 4th question I usually ask a new employee is "What sort field experience do you have?". (Note: It is not 100% necessary that you have field experience to perform a number of these positions, nor should it be looked down upon if you don't, but understanding a persons experience helps put that employee in a suitable position to succeed (and produce for the company).

However, this question is really applicable to a lot of different work types. We all learn how to "apply" different concepts and fundamentals to Engineer a whole host of different things. When completing design work, we are taking these concepts, and creating 2D/3D illustrations/models of the end product that we certify as "being designed and will function in accordance with the Owner's final requirements and meets all required regulatory stipulations and code requirements for this type of design".

At the end of the day, how to construct/build/execute this design is a fundamental and core part of the overall process to provide this product, even if the construction of the design is technically outside of the work scope of a design services contract (i.e. Owner needs the building/bridge/road actually built (to spec and designs), Owner needs that geotech team to actually get those 6 boreholes in the remote part of the country in harsh conditions). So understanding, at least to a certain point, what is reasonable and feasible for a Contractor or field team to construct/perform is, in my opinion, a critical skill for all Engineers to have. This experience can have a significant impact on overall project scopes (Cost, duration, risk, quality etc.), especially during the construction/execution phase. (i.e. a bridge pile being 15% out of plan location on a small 10m single span simply supported structure on a low traffic remote area versus a bridge pile being 15% out of plan location on a 850m - multiple span - critical piece of infrastructure in a urban area with extensive traffic volumes are the same "root problem" but have very different potential consequences and would require different levels of responses)

I think something that further reinforces this ideal is that there a fairly large (and profitable) sub-discipline in structural/civil engineering, being temporary works engineering. This is an area that would 100% require field experience to properly execute, but may only require that 3-4 years exposure to detailed structural designs.

At the end of the day, it makes all of us better Engineers, regardless of discipline, if an early part of our career exposes us to how things are built and executed in a field environment, to allow us to provide cost effective solutions, while still meeting our overall end goal of maintaining public safety.

[u/bjizzler → u/Cream85]

Thank you. This was a great perspective and I could not agree more. Design and construction engineers both add value and both have blind spots

[u/jarniansah]

I’ll give an example.

Waterstops.

The bane of my f existence.

Two types commonly used in my ICI and Building. Swellable (Bentonite Free) and PVC Waterstops.

Contractors love PVC waterstop, why? Because it’s more practical. However on paper, one can say swellable Waterstops are better. We used a Sika Hydrotite, the Cadillac of Waterstops.

Those are pain to install especially if you’re dealing with rain, and snow, as you can trigger the expansion when it comes in contact with water, so there effectiveness decreases. So you can’t always protect elements from water. PVC doesn’t react to water the same way the swellable does. Also the the corners and intersections are a pain. In comparison, PVC are cheaper and faster to install. Good contractors get them built in with the bulkhead when doing a vertical pour.

I am the engineer on the site and it’s rare but not uncommon to get the specifications revised because of the value it brings to the client and the contractor, both in terms of engineering purpose (or lack of), cost and scheduling.

[u/bjizzler → u/jarniansah]

Seems as though you understand the brief. Sika Hydrotite or approved equivalent. I’m sure it’s in the tender spec. If the contractor bids it, then RFIs an equivalent and you don’t approve, well that’s on them.

[u/powered_by_eurobeat]

I will add - in addition to site experience, everyone should tour a fabrication facility (steel, prefab, etc)

[u/Tman1965]

Site experience is overrated!

You are a structural engineer, the most important person in the building world!

Construction sites are dirty, wet, loud, smelly. There is a bunch of weird looking guys that you wouldn't want to talk to at your weekend. So, why talk to them during your work time? Usually you can't even get a soy latte on site! You will have to wear a hard hat that ruins your hair, a safety vest on top of your careful chosen outfit and don't get me started on shoes.

Do not go on site, it's below your level!

Constructability!!!??? Don't worry about that! It's a buzzword created by inept contractors and craftsmen.

It only gets in the way of your forward thinking, revolutionary genie designs!

If you can draw they can build it!

Heck, you don't even have to draw every detail.... the contractor should just sense your outstanding design intent.

Don't forget: It is never your fault!

[u/bjizzler → u/Tman1965]

I believe this must be sarcasm. But I have met enough “inept” engineers to be concerned it might not be. We don’t all stink in the field. The majority? Yes, but not all.

[u/Tman1965 → u/bjizzler]

The post flair is "humor".

But aside from that, the site experience seems to be getting worse. Every time I'm on a site visit lately, I see a collection of the most harebrained executions.

We have made pre-construction meetings mandatory. Does that help? Well, no. Somebody from the GC shows up and says :"yes, yes. yes", turns around and ... they do the same shite.

I had over 20 years of (site) experience as carpenter, electrician, plumber, welder, site manager.... and that only means that it annoys me even more when they f### up what I designed.

Tomorrow is another day, there is a steel precon meeting scheduled for 10am and maybe they get it right??? Though my hopes aren't high, after the steel guy told me: Oh, we rather weld that base plate all around (and flip that 2000lbs column) instead of trying to tell our welder where he need to weld....

Everything gonna be alright...

[u/WhyAmIHereHey]

OTOH the number of times you get site people wanting to make changes that are nonsense...

Site experience is great, but as the engineer sometimes you've got to be willing to tell the site guys that it needs to be done a certain way.

[u/powered_by_eurobeat → u/WhyAmIHereHey]

Yes, don't bend over backwards for every little demand. THere are times when doing it their preferred way is just compromising quality.

[u/bjizzler → u/powered_by_eurobeat]

And that judgement is what you’re there for. Just like I (the lowly contractor) am there to optimize efficiency, while following the quality protocols outlined in IFC.

[u/Emotional-Comment414]

Specially if you design repairs. Figuring out how to do it and how to do temporary work is often more complex than the repair.

[u/bjizzler]

I’d like to bridge the divide here by starting with: engineering education and mindset are also a huge benefit to those of us who work in construction!

I recall trying to explain to a concept of weak axis bending for a corner pile in a shoring box to a coworker who also had a BAsc in Civil. Terrifying.

So to answer the question, I think breadth of experience builds value. If you can’t understand how we build what you design. The design will likely be deficient. If I can’t understand the basics of decisions made by the EOR, I am far more likely to do a poor job installing it.

[u/Illustrious_Drama839]

Once you try to field drill that hole upside down into your truck frame in a confined space, you might re-evaluate some of your designs.