a function of supply and demand, why would engineers support facilitating the enhanced “birthing” of still

more engineers?  Consider this article. Looking back, when we study what happened to the employment of engineers in the space industry, when the interstate construction program slowed to a “walk,” and when the funding for the surge of water pollution control facilities stopped,where did all of those “under-employed” . . . read “Willing to relocate my family at my expense, and work at entry-level pay“…go?

Credit: Google Images.

YOUR CHOICE:

Either we regulate our profession, or others will.

Seems like the medical and legal professions discovered that many years ago.

The McCormick Tribune Campus Center, Illinois Institute of Technology by Rem Koolhaas and the Office for Metropolitan Architecture, built 2003. A 530-foot oval tube made of concrete and steel, encloses and muffles the el as it passes over the student center. http://www.galinsky.com/buildings/mccormick/index.htm

Each week I’m going to try to post an interesting civil engineering photo. I’ve captured too many interesting images to keep up with full blog posts. If you have an interesting photo of your own to share, please send me a link in the comments below.

The Wilsons and their architect faithfully recreated a country estate in the traditional Tudor style. Although the Tudor revival of the 20^th century first emphasized the simplicity of English country homes, it soon became popular among the upper class. In addition to exposed beams, herringbone brickwork, pitched roofs and other characteristic architecture, patrons like Matilda Wilson included wildly elaborate chimneys, gothic arches, and exotic furnishings.

Although the final building would have seemed at home in the English countryside, the Wilson’s insisted that all of the building materials be sourced locally. Unlike many of the neo-gothic buildings on college campuses, Meadow Brook was authentically American, like the rise of the Wilsons.

Mrs. Wilson, however, was born in Canada. She met John Dodge while working as his secretary. Shortly thereafter she married the man almost two decades her senior. John Dodge, whose moniker still graces a make of Chrysler vehicles, made his fortune first as supplier to and then investor in Ford Motor Company. Mr. Wilson meanwhile did well as a lumber trader but didn’t hit the high life until he met widowed Matilda Dodge.

Money can buy a remarkable estate, luxurious trips around the globe, and the world’s best horses, but it cannot stave off tragedy. Matilda Dodge Wilson lost both her first husband and 5-year-old child less than one year apart. Later, her only son died in a dynamite accident just a year after getting married. One of Mrs. Wilson’s biological children survived, and the Wilson’s adopted two other children. Her legacy also continues through the endowment of Oakland University and public use of Meadow Brook.

ASCE is helping kids open the floodgate to a deeper exploration of civil engineering through the addition of content specifically focused on many of the project areas in which civil engineers work.  Through exploration of easily identifiable structures in their daily lives like dams, bridges, roads and transportation, water systems, sustainability and disaster response, kids will come away with a broader understanding of how civil engineers help find technological solutions to overcome many of the world’s most interesting challenges.

In ASCEville.org’s section about Dams, for example, kids learn that dams make modern life possible. They also learn about different types of dam structures, what materials are used to make dams and how engineers overcome forces of nature to build dams, protect people and harness the power of water. They also examine the impact of dams on ecosystems. 

ASCE members often ask how they can use ASCEville in their educational outreach.  Although projecting a Website on a screen is fairly lack luster as a classroom activity, companion stickers, postcards and posters are great classroom leave behinds for kids, parents and teachers, reminding them about the fun they can have exploring the site.  Kids will love the fun games and activities, parents will appreciate the family orientation of the site and teachers will find valuable connections between civil engineering and the lessons they teach about sustainability and the value engineering has had on the development of civilizations over the course of history. ASCeville resources are available by emailing outreach@asce.org

In addition, exhibits featuring ASCEville are sure to attract attention, especially when visitors are free to spend a few moments or several minutes talking about the site.   ASCEville’s home page features a scavenger hunt challenging kids to find 20 ways civil engineers are working to make our communities better places to live and work.  The site can be featured on a laptop at a computer kiosk or displayed as a laminated dry erase poster offering a low tech/high-touch opportunity to learn ways individuals and communities are choosing to maintain a healthy water supply, save energy and conserve scarce resources. 

If you haven’t been using ASCEville in your outreach program, stop by for another visit. You’ll be excited to see just how much fun it is learning about civil engineering!

What do you think is the most interesting section of the new content?  How could you use it to engage kids?

Leslie Payne

Senior Manager, Pre-College Outreach

The issues of Keystone XL, funding and financing options, an amendment stripping EPA of regulatory power over coal ash, and House language streamlining environmental policy still remained the most important issues needing compromise. However, it did appear during many of the remarks there existed support for the RESTORE Act, Senate TIFIA language, as well as the RAMP Act. The RESTORE Act would direct fines from oil companies responsible for the 2010 Deepwater Horizon spill to Gulf Coast restoration and clean-up efforts, and the RAMP Act would ensure revenue in the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund be dedicated and used solely for harbor maintenance programs.

The general feeling throughout the opening statements was far less acrimonious than the House Transportation and Infrastructure markup of H.R. 7, which saw lawmakers bicker over amendments into the early hours of the morning this past February. Throughout the opening statements, the majority of lawmakers around the table stressed how critical it was to work quickly to get this done and how vital a bill is to job creation, with both sides stressing the need to work for the American people. One memorable line came from Representative Nick Rahall, the ranking minority member on the House T&I committee – “we cannot let hard heads get in the way of hard hats”.

ASCE’s 2009 Report Card for America’s Infrastructure gave the nation’s energy system a D+. To better explain how the Report Card’s grades affect America’s economic future, ASCE has produced the Failure to Act series of economic reports focused on the real effects on our nation’s economic performance if the nation continues to under invest and defer spending on our energy grid.

This report concludes that by extending current investment trends for the nation’s energy assets through 2020, the U.S. would be investing $566 billion but that would still be $107 billion below the needed investments. To close this gap, an additional $11 billion in new funding annually is needed to decrease brownouts and blackouts and save American businesses $126 billion, prevent the loss of 529,000 jobs, and save $656 billion in personal income loss. America’s economic competitiveness would also benefit by protecting $96 billion in Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and $10 billion in revenue from U.S. exports.

ASCE held a discussion with a panel of experts this morning to release the report and discuss the energy infrastructure needs for the nation. The panel was moderated by ASCE President Andrew W. Herrmann P.E., SECB, F.ASCE, and included two former FERC Commissioners, Jim Hoecker and Curt Herbert Jr.; as well as Otto Lynch, who heads the energy section of the ASCE Report Card for America’s Infrastructure, and Samir Succar, a scientist at the Natural Resources Defense Council.

For more information on ASCE’s Failure to Act series please visit - www.asce.org/failuretoact .

Following some  2 1/2 days of interaction, preceded by 2 years of planning, one of the top 4 issues identified as needing significant attention in CE programs as well as in public and private practice, was “communication.”

Looking back, it appears that  some perceived that as a call to send more emails, faxes, letters, and make more telephone calls.

One aspect of communication that is sorely missed is the recipient confirming the intent and meaning of the words said (or written). This phenomenon, when not done effectively, results in a myriad of challenges to projects meeting the client’s expectations, as well as to scope creep, schedule busts, and budget deficits.

The skill to transmit meaning and confirm that the receiver interprets it with the meaning you intended is not done by asking “Any questions?” Just today I witnessed an example of how people listen.

OBSERVATION

Two secretaries are sitting facing visitors from behind a large counter.

As a person leaves the office, he remarks to the secretaries “Make a great day!”

Noticing from a distance they simply responded without even looking up, I heard them say “Hey, same to you!”

Later, I asked the secretaries what it was that the visitor said to them.

They said “Have a great day!”

When I told them what I heard him say, one spontaneously replied “Well, we heard what we expected to hear.”

More to come on this topic. For now, watch the clip  Cool Hand Luke

Engineers Week, as a public awareness campaign, is especially enjoyable, because the work of building public awareness is uniquely accomplished through authentic interaction between engineers and children, young people, educators, and other adults who guide and influence students of every age.

Though effective in their own right, billboards, ads, flyers, social media, and even well-delivered speeches are no match for the ability of engineers, through hands-on activities, to make civil engineering tangible for kids with curious minds. The reason for this is simple: Confucius said, “I hear and I forget. I see and I remember. I do and I understand.” Students who have the opportunity to “do” engineering have the opportunity to make stronger connections between what they learn and how it applies to the world in which they live!

Congratulations to everyone who participated in and helped make Engineers Week so successful again this year. Be sure to look at the celebration in review on our website. And keep posting stories and photos of your successful outreach events.

Don’t have time to make a separate post? Tell us a great outreach story below.

Something of an argument as played out between engineers who feel that extra hours (+40) are necessary to do the job, and engineers should accept the long days provided that they are adequately compensated. A second faction, has argued that overtime is not a foregone conclusion if engineers spend their time efficiently. Besides, there are more important things in life, like spending time with your family. Full disclosure: I find myself leaning toward the latter argument, however, there was a time in my career where I was unfazed by 50+ hour workweeks. My suspicion is that many people participating in the LinkedIn discussion would admit to a similar change-of-heart over time.

I believe that there has been a substantial oversight in the discussion. While we’ve debated whether all time spent at work is spent on work, we have not given similar consideration to whether time spent outside of work has a bearing on work performance or the profession. Although, my work hours have declined in recent years, my time spent considering professional issues has probably increased. I’ve used more time away from the office to participate in several ASCE committees and regularly contribute to this blog. A couple of years ago, I began working with a local artist on some concepts for a solar power generating art installation. I’ve also taught structural engineering classes at a local university and mentored prospective engineers. I have found all of these activities to be personally fulfilling and ultimately beneficial to my profession. Had I spent that extra time in the office, I may have earned my employer some extra fee, but the real value of those hours would not have been realized.

Another concern of mine about working long hours is the time lost for unconscious contemplation and creative exploration. Numerous studies have shown that creative breakthroughs require unstructured time for the mind to relax. The new book, Imagine by Jonah Lehrer, cites the science behind creativity and implores readers to take time out. It’s also important for engineers to practice some right-brain thinking by participating in art, music, or other creative hobbies. I’ve also recently dabbled in meditation, and I can confirm that there really is something effective in the act of clearing your mind of thought.

How do you spend time outside of work? Have you ever had an “ah-ha” moment after walking away from a problem? When are you at your most creative? Please share your comments below.

Way back when I entered the workforce, in 2004, most drawings were being drafted in 2D CAD. At the time, my company wasn’t yet using paper space in AutoCAD to set up drawing sheets. 3D modeling was very cumbersome and seldom delivered to the client. On the analysis front, finite element programs were widely used, but their graphic user interfaces were still pretty difficult to use. My first employer primarily used a 2D analytical program, so we were required to set up multiple 2D models with corresponding boundary conditions in order to approximate a 3D structure. There was virtually no link between analytical models and the CAD files used to create construction documents (CDs).

Building information modeling promised to change the industry, and it has. Modeling in 3D is commonplace, both for analytical models and for CDs. Although BIM hasn’t quite lived up to the hype about seamless transfer between the two model types, most of the software packages can at least transfer a DXF type file with centerlines back and forth. We still not reliably able to transfer all the load and modeling data between models, so iterative chances still require a lot of work in both models.

Lately, many of our architectural clients have begun using a 3D modeling program called Rhino. I first used the software in college to design my ASCE concrete canoe. It has long been used by industrial designers because of its ability to draw complex non-linear shapes. This gives architects a lot of freedom to model buildings that would have been unheard of in the days of hand drafting. It also makes structural engineers jobs a lot more difficult.

Modeling such complex shapes typically requires finite element analysis (FEA) of shell elements. We’ve had to learn how to use Rhino to manipulate architectural models for import into our analysis models. This has required an education in the differences between solids, surfaces, and polylines and a trial-and-error process of figuring out what the analysis program can handle. Often we’ve found that the shells are too complex for the analysis programs to automatically mesh. Subdividing the structure into many small elements is a basic principle of FEA. Most of the time, the built-in Rhino tools could do the job.

All this manipulation is incredibly time consuming, and every time you go back into the model to make a small geometric change there’s a serious risk of creating some type of discontinuity that will mess up the analysis. Then some architects introduced us to a Rhino plug-in called Grasshopper. Grasshopper is like a graphical programming language for manipulating the drawing tools in Rhino. Since Grasshopper was developed explicitly for Rhino, it integrated Rhinos built-in tools with the power to automate model generation. Savvy Grasshopper programmers can use the tool to automatically construct near-complete structural building models by “turning” a few input dials, like number of stories, bay spacing, story height. You can even program in rudimentary calculation so member sizes update accordingly with increasing spans.

Initially, I used Grasshopper for the basic purpose of rationally meshing complex surfaces. On a particularly ambitious project planned as part of a city-in-the-sea in Dubai, the architects on the team helped us develop a Grasshopper routine that would automatically generate an external diagrid structure around the swooping surfaces of a 50-story hotel building. It would have taken us weeks to draw in the structure manually; we only had days before a structural concept needed to be presented. I was able to take the diagrid generated by the architects and import it into my analysis program, SAP 2000, and estimate the member sizes. Later we exported the data back out to Revit Structure, input the designed sizes in the 3D model, added some floor trusses, and delivered a rendered isometric view of the structure for inclusion on the architect’s presentation board

I have since used Grasshopper to auto-generate a complex space frame structure. We had been working with architects on a plan to put a new glass-clad ballroom on top of an existing 8-story podium. However, because of the space usage below, we were extremely constrained in the location of new columns to support the roof. As the deadline for a concept design approached, we struggled to find a viable solution. The idea of a space frame came to me, but I was nervous to present such a solution without doing my homework. I quickly generated the geometry in Grasshopper and exported it my analysis program, RISA 3D. The next day I had a solution ready to present to my boss and the client.

The future of generative modeling is very exciting. Imagine writing a custom algorithm for a project that allows the architect to see, in real time, how their decisions impact structural efficiency. Engineers with my company have created such a model based on data about the embodied carbon in common building materials. Their program will show the optimal efficiency for a generic building, then the design team to change the parameters to see how revisions to column placement, restrictions on floor depth, or increasing the number of stories might impact the sustainability of the building.

Rhino is also testing its own BIM functionality. This would allow additional member information, like material thickness, to be tagged to surfaces and lines. I’ve seen a demo where this functionality is combined with Grasshopper and a FEA program to perform a real time structural optimization. You could literally have the program cycle through forms and member properties to find the optimal design. I can imagine a future where structural engineers spend most of their time writing front-end algorithms and checking output, while the iterative design process is outsourced to the computer.

This is a scary though to some, but perhaps no worse than existing doubts about the current reliance on canned computer analysis programs. Anyway, there’s no doubt that computers will never have the creative ability to solve problems like humans, right? Well, some engineers are experimenting with genetic algorithms that attempt to implement such creative thought. In some cases an evolutionary process is applied where seemingly random outcomes are introduced, compete, and grow until a superior solution is found.

Seeing how far the profession has come in just my first eight years in the business, none of these far-fetched ideas seem beyond the realm of possibility. It’s slightly discerning to think of all the new programs and skills I’ll have to learn in order to stay on top. Consider also the new vocabulary developing for sustainable design plus all the traditional stuff a structural engineer needs to know. Lifelong learning, you bet.