Tribal Knowledge 4

[CrabbyT]

Every now and then, I wonder how structural engineers of the previous generation used to approach the same problems that we face today. I feel like I'm losing bids on jobs because I'm somewhere between 20 - 40 years old and I lack the tribal knowledge that allows someone to design structures efficiently. For instance, someone that I work with recently decided to hire a retired structural engineer who can do things cheaply and efficiently, and who has no concept of what it takes to make a CAD drawing.

Do you guys have any books you would recommend? Or documents? I was looking in an old book I have called "determinant structures" and thought this might be a decent thread to start.

If you have recommendations, could you post why you like those? For instance, if you like a specific chapter for some reason, note that?

I'll kick it off.

I really appreciate Blodgett's weld book. I found the chapter that has section properties for welds to be very useful.

 

[Settingsun]

The 8th post at the link below has a paper by Russell Fling attached. He was an engineer from 1949 to the 1980s or 1990s (I guess), so 'previous generation'. The paper talks about how to save design time.

https://www.eng-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=362746

Fling also has a book available to borrow from archive.org that has a good chapter on preliminary design. The quality of the prelim design has a direct influence on the speed/efficiency of the detailed design.

The essence is simple: don't sweat the small stuff. Think back to what took/takes you a long time and, if the influence on the design is small, avoid doing it from now on. Just adopt the larger design from simplified calcs and move on. I know people worry about losing clients to leaner designers but the fact is the clients don't know and have short memories. They'll be back if you kept to schedule and are still cheap the next time. The rare exception to this rule is a client who stands in the way of your stated goal, so let them go elsewhere and pin down a competitor with their stringent demands.

I know a few engineers like the one you mentioned and they operated that way. They also had a limited engineering library and would never be on this forum. They don't overthink engineering - just the basics.

You could also try to break out of commodity engineering. Government and infrastructure clients often have heavy non-price criteria for awarding work.

 

[ALK2415]

Dear Friend,
really feel your pain. Never quite though. our profession loves the curious person, persistent and patient ones !
Learning is never ending process / to last day of ourlife we keep makes mistakes and learn new lessons ...
Still though others should not sell Themself cheaply. Old guys (like me) will diminished soon or later.
YouTube has endless free Structural lessons on Design-Analysis-Drafting, always Master the trending softwares in your place (even if you pay for them to learn them quickly.
In my opinion BIM is the best course to start with, meaning how to integrate Buildings services (Electrical and Mechanical) with such knowledge BOSS will never loss you kind of multi-task engineer/employee.
here some examples of Dr. Thomas Leslie Link

 

[WARose]

Every now and then, I wonder how structural engineers of the previous generation used to approach the same problems that we face today.....Do you guys have any books you would recommend? Or documents? I was looking in an old book I have called "determinant structures" and thought this might be a decent thread to start.

I am a structural engineer who started practicing in about the mid-90's.....and I think I learned the most about how things were done in previous generations by looking at old calculations for existing buildings. This is not to mention older steel & concrete texts that those calcs referenced. One old (but fav) of mine is some of George Winter's texts on reinforced concrete (I got one of them from 1972).

 

[dik]

If you're closer to 40, then you likely have the experience to determine the most effective framing system to use for a structure. I learned a long time ago, it's not the 'tightness' of the design that usually determines the cost, but it is the system of framing utilised that does that. With experience also comes the best way to estimate the cost for the work and you price your work accordingly... use a slightly sharper pencil, if you really need the work. Things will fall as they will.

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

 

[271828]

As steveh49, don't spend a lot of time on the small stuff. The problem is that early on, you don't know what qualifies as "small stuff." As far as I can tell, the only remedy to that is practice.

After you've designed hundreds of composite beams, you'll know what size you should get from the calcs, so you'll be able to calc something quickly and move on. I don't want a guy right out of school "designing fast." He or she needs to be verifying lots of results, asking questions, etc.

 

[JedClampett]

Blodgett is good. I remember buying it for about $7 in 1976.
Design in Structural Steel by Lothers is a sleeper.
Foundation Engineering by Peck Hanson and Thornburn.
Reinforced Masonry Handbook by Amrhein

 

[human909]

In my experience (which is mostly steel), the best approach to economic design is adopting the KISS principle in fabrication and erection.

Generally this doesn't mean a structure that is highly efficient from an engineering perspective. It isn't a structure that is as light as possible nor one with minimum excess capacity. It means simple connections, simple framing and functionally thought out in context of the intended purpose of the structure.

For me what has helped me significantly is directly talking to fabricators and erectors. And I don't mean the companies, I mean the guys who do the welding or who are up in the basket bolting steel together. It is labour that makes up the majority of the costs.


The same applies to other materials. In the case of concrete reducing formwork requirements and complicated details can be more beneficial to reducing the total mass of concrete.