Collaborative Reporting for Safer Structures (CROSS)’s Post

"Design engineers should know, or have readily to hand, standard results for simply supported and fixed end beams so that deflections, reactions and load effects from computer models can be checked quickly and easily to ensure the results are of the right magnitude" If there is a 'standard result' why do we need calculations? eg, isn't that what the TRADA joist etc. tables were for?

Brilliant report. A lecturer of mine always warned the the class on the dangers of becoming "Push button engineer" over reliant on software for calculations. I think the line " *danger thrives at interfaces*" is one that any auditer, Assigned Certifier or Principle Designer needs to be aware of especially for transitions between primary and secondary designers.

Interesting report. I have acted both as project engineer and as a steelwork subcontractor's engineer to design connections. When working for a steelwork subcontractor I am often given incomplete information. It is dangerous under such circumstances to make assumptions and I frequently spend a lot of time chasing other parties for missing information before I can complete my work.

Very interesting (although scarcely surprising) report. In my lectures, I often stressed the importance of verifying FE analysis results with hand calculations. Dr Mariateresa Lombardo Ing CEng MICE would even present the outcomes of deliberately flawed FE models, and many students did their best to justify the results, trusting the software more than their engineering intuition. These were among the most impactful lessons we delivered to our students!

One of my reports (submitted a few to CROSS now - great resource). In this instance the structure wasn't difficult, a single storey new build, forces weren't great. I performed a hand check on the forces provided and chased the loads down the building as a sense check more than anything. There was a massive over reliance on software here. FE models should be used to verify design assumptions, if you don't know what you should be expecting from the model, then you shouldn't be using them. I submitted this mainly due to the attitude of the director who tried to bully us into designing to their forces or risk taking on full design responsibility - rather than just review the thing. They clearly hadn't performed a DSL2 check on the design and it showed. Lessons there for clients as well in reviewing competency documents of consultants. Organisational competency (i.e. checking their own work) is so important now with the changes we're seeing in the Building Control industry.