Switch to Civil Engineer - Transmission Design 1

[dutchie]

Hi everyone,

Looking for a little advice. I am currently a civil/structural engineer with good experience in commercial/industrial design. I am interested in making the jump into a utility and working as a civil engineer. The type of work out there seems to be primarily transmission design work for the structures.

Just wondering what type of things I should be looking into to get the experience I would need. Are the structural skills gained when designing buildings and so on going to be transferable to this field. Any comments or suggestions. I realize there is a lot to know, but just a prod or two in the right direction would help me on my way.

dutchie

 

[Ron]

Code nuances are bit different than buildings, but not significantly so. If you have structural design experience, you should be able to do this type of design without a great deal of difficulty.

 

[MikeDB]

Dutchie,
Glad to see you are keeping your options open and that you are looking into the utility field. I am a civil engineer and have worked in the electric utility industry since 1977. I think that historically this field has been dominated by EE and has not been a glamorous "high-tech" career. However I find it to be very stable employment with a higher average pay than most civil/structurals in other industries. It also seems like utilities and consultants are recognizing that a lot of the work is civil, not electrical, and starting to hire more CEs. There are two companies in my home town looking for just that.

For the pure structural work there are foundations, transmission line towers, substation structures, transmission and distribution poles, lots of things in power plants, and some control building work in substations. There is a lot of other work that is civil, such as surveying, grading, drainage, construction, etc.

Ron mentioned the Codes, but I think this is a major diference/factor. I find that most building structurals don't know squat about line design and most line designers don't know squat about traditional structural work. I failed the Illinois Structural Engineering Exam years ago -- there was not one transmission tower question on the exam. I think it will be easier to make a transition to utility work than it would be to switch from utility to the building side.

The statics and math is the same (free body diagrams still work), but the rest is different. Utimate strength design instead of ASD or LRFD, although we are starting to move towards LRFD. The codes are very differnt, NESC vs. IBC. The software to assist you is very different. Foundations are subject to very high overturning moments, something not even discussed in the advanced foundation course I took and most programs don't handle.

Most of the training for this type of work is on the job training. There are a few short courses available and there is a lot of reference material available through ASCE standards and government bulletins.

Please let me know if you have any specific questions or if I can be of further help.

 

[dutchie]

Thanks MikeDB,

One question, the program PLS-CADD seems to be high on the hitlist of a lot of the positions advertised. I have visited the website, and to me it looks pretty impressive. I have a fair bit of experience with structural design software (Robot and STADD) and thought that taking one of the one week PLS-CADD courses would probably set me on my way. Any particular thoughts on PLS-CADD.

As for the other things you mentioned, I work in Canada, where we use limit states design, very similar to LRFD. I have also worked with ultimate states design on occasion. I have also done a fair bit of foundation work for signs and poles, which generate overturning moments as well, although not as high as what your referring to I am sure. So, all in all, it sounds like this may be very doable.

The one thing that we don't see in building design very often is the vibration (not the right word I don't think). What I'm referring to is the effect of the swaying transmission lines on the towers and poles. I suspect fatigue would then play a large role. I would be interested in whatever reading you might suggest would help explain the portion of the design which deals with the loading the transmission lines transfer to the supports.

I suppose while I'm asking, I may as well go for broke. In the event I am successful in obtaining an interview, what key points do you think should be raised that would demonstrate to the potential employer that this transition would be possible (supposing of course that my skills are up to par)?

Happy New Year to all,

dutchie

 

[MikeDB]

dutchie,
The PLS software line is widely used and becoming an industry standard. Their TOWER, POLE and CAISSON programs are very user friendly and better adapted to electric utility work than any other structural program I have tried. I've only been using the PLS-CADD for about 2 years. It is a very powerful tool with a lot of bells and whistles -- and a lot of pit falls. Because of the pit falls, I think one needs a good grasp of how to do things before they learn PLS. You would not attempt to fly a plane just because it has auto-pilot, you'ld get flying lessons first. I'ld let the company pay for the training after the hire, besides they spend very little time on the structural side of it.

Vibration is a concern, but primarily for conductor damage, not structure damage. There have been some cases of structure damage, but mostly on thin tension only elements (high l/r).

Structure loading is basically Statics 101 and knowing the code. I don't know what the Canadian equivalent to the National Electric Safety Code is, but that would be a good start for you. I also don't know what government publications might be available on the subject. In the US the Rural Utility Service publishs a lot of good information. If there is not a Canadian source try:

http://www.usda.gov/rus/electric/bulletins.htm

They have a brand new transmission line design manual in pdf form, Bulletin 1724E-200.

As for the interview, just be honest. You may know more about the structural aspects than the guy interviewing you. The modeling and computer skills are still applicable. The summation of the forces still equal zero or it's moving. If you know someone in the business, perhaps through an engineering organization, perhaps you can visit with them and learn some of the lingo and present concerns. Look at trade magazines like T&D or Electrical World. Research the company before the interview via their website or annual report.

Good Luck

 

[dutchie]

Thanks for taking the time to provide your insights MikeDB.

I agree, training would be a responsibility of the company. And you are right, represent what you are and let them make a decision whether or not I would be a good fit.

I like the comment "all forces equal zero or it's moving" So simple and so true. You have given me some great insight, I will post again if I come across anything else.

Once again, thanks

dutchie

 

[SperlingPE]

i worked for a structure supplier before and during college. I also worked 6 months for this company after graduation. Fairly stable industry. On the supplier's side, I think the industry suffers from up and down time. The down time got me. I liked the pace of the building industry.