Structural Engineering most difficult subjects 1

[surval]

I'm an undergraduate and I'm thinking of studying Structural Engineering in graduate school, so I want to be prepared for the worst subjects. As an undergraduate I have these:

*Elemental Theory of Structures

*Mechanics of Materials

*Structural Anlysis

*Concrete Structures

*Structural Design

*Matrix Structural Anlysis

In graduate school I'll have this coming:

*Advanced Structural Analysis

*Continuum Mechanics

*Finite Element Analysis

*Structural Dynamics

*Advanced Concrete Structures

*Advanced Steel Structures

*Foundation Design

Please, any help is welcome, but I want to be able to conclude in which subjects should I focus more.

Thanks!

 

[hokie66]

Dynamics is difficult. I am not sure what "Continuum Mechanics" means. But focus on all of your subjects, one step at a time.

 

[msquared48]

Dynamics was for me, but it was very interesting too. Trouble was that the target was always moving...

Mike McCann, PE, SE (WA)

 

[JedClampett]

Anything with matrix in the title.
Never did figure those buggers out. Good news, I don't think it hindered me.

 

[KootK]

I vote continuum mechanics and FEM which are pretty intertwined. It's worthwhile too in my opinion. The machines are taking over and it pays to know what they're up to. Additionally, you likely won't have much of an opportunity to hone that knowledge outside of school.

I like to debate structural engineering theory -- a lot. If I challenge you on something, know that I'm doing so because I respect your opinion enough to either change it or adopt it.

 

[mtu1972]

Agree that Finite Elements, Matrix Analysis and Structural Dynamics are all difficult yet extremely important. Depending on where you are located, the Structural Dynamics may emphasis seismic activity. Dynamics related to equipment vibration, etc. may also be pertinent.

You could also look for classes related to Project Engineering/Management as they will add value as your career progresses.

gjc

 

[GregLocock]

Personally I always found FEA theory a complete bore and didn't bother to study it for my structures II paper, even though it was 25% of the marks. As I have learnt since unless you are writing FEA code then the many ridiculous assumptions you make in building a solvable model will far outweigh any 5-10% errors due to element formulation. There again I correlate my FEA models, which would appear to put me in a minority.

Cheers

Greg Locock


New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

 

[medeek]

I never thought I would touch matrix analysis or use all of the matrix mumbo jumbo I learned in linear algebra courses until I decided to code my own matrix analysis program for a truss analysis program. When you actually put it to work it is really quite fascinating what it can do. However, even after going through the process of writing the code and understanding step-by-step how to get the information back out of the matrices it still makes my head hurt to think about it too hard. I also find with really in depth topics you tend to forget all of the nuances when you leave it alone for a few months, but I'm sure it all comes back when you dive back into it.

Personally, I think it is really important to be solid with your fundamentals, statics, free body diagrams, that sort of thing. Codes are also important but they are continually changing and evolving and over the course of ones career they will probably change quite significantly, at least based on the changes that have occurred over the last 25 years. Hence, I would probably spend less time fretting over the codes and the bookkeeping type of stuff.

Recently, I've been taking more time to get out on these job sites and actually see first hand how well what I've specified on paper is translating into actual construction. I think a hands on approach is important, and I am a firm believer that it can make you better at what you do.

A confused student is a good student.

 

[asixth]

Response Spectrum Analysis.

 

[dsweet1984]

If you are wanting to practice structural engineering my vote is for structural dynamics which will help you with seismic design. Then I would recommend the advanced structural analysis, concrete, steel and foundation design.

 

[Archie264]

“Continuum Mechanics” is the mechanics of a continuous medium, i.e. a continuum. The entire course consists of placing theoretical forces on kidney-bean shaped objects and chasing it out using 3-D differential equations and matrices using only letters and Greek symbols; no actual numbers. When I took it the professor introduced it as “the most useful course you will never use.” That’s professorial logic for you. It is, of course, useful if you plan on pursuing your PhD, plan to write structural analysis software, or are fascinated by theoretical mathematics. If, on the other hand, your goal is to become a practicing engineer, don’t waste your time with it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuum_mechanics

On that last point my recommendation is to take as many design classes as possible. With the undergraduate classes you listed you have enough theoretical background to be a practicing engineer; the more knowledge of design practices that you can get, the better for you.

As for “Advanced Structural Analysis”, that could mean many things. If it’s another theoretical finite element class then my recommendation is to skip it, for the reasons noted above. Also, you already have a course in matrix analysis under your belt so that box is checked. If the course is a *practicing* finite element class wherein you work with software to solve actual problems, well, that might be worth taking. But if you did some of that in your matrix class then, again, that box is checked. If the course is, effectively, advanced mechanics of materials or advanced structural analysis (as the name suggests), then that would be a good course. But nothing’s as useful as actual design classes, in my opinion.

Overall that course selection looks excellent. My recommendation is to consider replacing continuum mechanics with something more useful (unless you are, indeed, interested in the theory) and to take no more than one additional finite element class. And by “additional” I mean additional to the matrix class you’ve already had. So, if “Advanced Structural Analysis” is a FEM class then it is superfluous.

Overall, though, that’s quite a good selection of courses you have. Good luck.

 

[BUGGAR]

Most difficult and with the highest complexity: Concrete anchor design.

 

[canwesteng]

Finite element analysis is a must - you're going to use FEA programs, if you don't understand how they work it's just another black box, numbers in numbers out. Getting stuff wrong creates errors of more than 5-10% like Greg suggested, it can be as bad as being 100% off. Dynamics is good too. Anything that helps you learn solid fundamentals is good - you'll find in real life codes are east to follow, change often enough, and there are enough of them you aren't covering them all in school anyway.

 

[Sawbux]

If they have any courses in Wood or Masonry design, take them. Otherwise you'll have to do it on your own later. There are a lot of nuances in both of them that differ from steel and concrete.

 

[haynewp]

Dynamics is likely the most difficult in terms of grasping concepts. When I was in grad school, the instructors of any analysis class made the subject as hard as possible to keep up their ego I think. Like giving you ridiculous sized matrices and amounts of homework. The top grad schools will load you up as much as possible, where a single class can have 30 hours of work a week depending on the instructor. Check around for how much time is expected a week per class before you sign up for multiple ones at the same time.

I would take all the classes you list in graduate including foundation design if that is what it actually is, and not a soil mechanics class like my "foundation design" class turned out to be. I might switch continuum mechanics for an additional concrete class if available.

 

[CCox]

All of the graduate school classes are very valuable. I took the classes you mentioned in graduate school and have routinely benefited from them. Doing a thesis also really helped me learn to work independently. It was a good transition between undegrad and the working world. Plus, it's generally funded for you.
I agree with everyone regading the importance of the analysis classes. In consulting, you have to rely on computer programs to be competitive and profitable, but you need to make sure you know what you are doing.
I look back at the course material of the "hard classes", and they are much easier to comprehend ten years removed from school.

 

[GregLocock]

Yes but the 'getting stuff wrong' is not what will be covered in a typical theory of FEA course.

Cheers

Greg Locock


New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

 

[manstrom]

Differential Equations. I still don't understand what I learned.

When I am working on a problem, I never think about beauty but when I have finished, if the solution is not beautiful, I know it is wrong.

-R. Buckminster Fuller