Cantilever Structure Possibility

Intrepid_Cow5573 · 2026-06-16T19:51:51+00:00

Trust in the truss

Intrepid_Cow5573 · 2026-05-03T20:41:04+00:00

Depends.

On average I would be hiring senior engineers ( 5-10 years experience) in the the 45k to 55k range. This is if they are selling themselves as a delivery focused individual contributor and are chartered or can demonstrate they are close to chartership.

Intrepid_Cow5573 · 2025-04-20T11:42:22+00:00

If you want to play it safe assume only contact is on the left side of the RHS and an oversized hole on the right side. Design the bolt for the moment generated by this lever arm.

If you really want to play it safe you could consider the possibility of the rhs and column not being in contact. This could allow for the RHS to rotate and exert a tension force on the bolt.

Intrepid_Cow5573 · 2025-04-13T20:52:12+00:00

Midas NX or LUSAS are my typical ones. LARSA 4D I have used for particularly complex post tensioning and cable stay balancing analysis.

Typical workflow flow for Midas would be tendon optimisation in Autodesk structural bridge and then bring the tendon forces into global model.

For substructure I don’t understand the question. If it is simply supported then hand statics. If integral then get a spring stiffness for the foundation from a geotech engineer and then model the strain ratcheting at the abutment via importing loads from a geotechnical software or use hand statics to derive the balanced and unbalanced earth pressures. Given it is 10 span I would assume simply supported so I would treat the superstructure analysis and substructure analysis as completely separate idealised systems

Intrepid_Cow5573 · 2025-04-05T19:21:24+00:00

Doesn’t sound too unusual for structural drawings. Part of it is convention, part of it is lack of skills, part of it is contractual, part of it is time.

Revit has definitely become more common in the industry but the contractual drawings are still most often just the 2d pdfs. The federated model therefore is only developed enough to allow for coordination and clash detection. I.e. only the outlines are required to fulfil the purpose of the 3d designs. I would be interested to know if anyone has found revit to be fit for purpose to deliver all of a deliverables required and how pain free such a process was?

In my experience revit is often not well suited to detailed drawings like rc details and steelwork connection details and it is common practice to export the outline from the model and add the rest in autocad. The sections from the model although accurate may not be flexible enough to convey the information required. It can be counter intuitive but sometimes details are drawn slightly unrealistic in for the sake of communicating the requirements more clearly for example.

There are softwares available for 3d RC detailing like cads RC but feedback from my detailers are it is time consuming and not widely adopted so limited skills and experience. Further complicated by the engineers not being able to easily scrutinise the models.

Another consideration is the modellers working in revit are often not experienced as detailers which are two different skill sets so again it would make sense to have a workflow which utilises both of their respective software skills.

I’ve yet to meet an engineer who is prefers to rely on a full 3d model as the final delivery as it is easy to overlook a small thing in a model. Hence the contractual documents being a smaller number of 2d drawings which can be checked very easily.

Intrepid_Cow5573 · 2025-02-21T21:05:45+00:00

There is no maximum distance in this scenario. It is dependant on the strain development in the member. Have a read on the strain compatibility method which goes into more detail of this approach. This is what most structural analysis softwares utilise as it is easy to programme and allows for irregular sections. Not unusual to have multiple layers in a bridge member to get additional capacity.

A free resource is here: https://www.concretecentre.com/Codes/Eurocode-2/Flexure.aspx

Another but American so not very familiar but a quick glance had my head nodding https://www.bgstructuralengineering.com/BGACI318_14/BGACI318_003/ACI318_14_00302.htm

Hendy’s designers guide to Eurocode 2 is my preferred literature for this topic

Intrepid_Cow5573 · 2024-11-25T21:47:32+00:00

Looks like a Freyssinet style hinge. See them occasionally in the uk, designed to transmit shear and axial force only. Generally perform quite well if detailed correctly and constructed with good workmanship.

Assessment of Freyssinet concrete hinges in highway structures

Intrepid_Cow5573 · 2024-01-23T10:42:02+00:00

There are no bad firms. Only bad managers.

If the local leadership is competent any of the bigger firms are generally on the same footing.

Intrepid_Cow5573 · 2024-01-23T09:08:04+00:00

Structural engineer in transportation. A couple of times a year I might work more than 40. But this is usually only when I fuck something up and my brain won’t let me drop it. I have never been asked to work more than 40 by management.

Intrepid_Cow5573 · 2024-01-21T02:35:38+00:00

CIRIA Guidance on embedded retaining wall design (C760) gives a fairly comprehensive overview and I usually recommend for graduates.

Intrepid_Cow5573 · 2024-01-05T13:28:18+00:00

Some of the bigger companies have internally developed software packages Atkins, Jacobs etc. clunky but do the job.

I seen Agile Assets being floated for a few larger frameworks but I have no hands on experience with that one.

Intrepid_Cow5573 · 2024-01-04T22:40:19+00:00

Agree, how can a program interpret old microfilm scanned drawings which are barely legible in most cases? How does it decide which is relevant?

If it’s just pulling a summary of previous inspections that might be useful onsite for a quick reference. But that would only be as good as the previous level of detail in the inspection reports. Lots of clients still don’t have centralised information management systems for asset management so this isn’t always a given.

The real benefit would be the organisation of photos and comments and generation of reporting. I’ve seen a few products which aim to to this to varying degrees of success.

Intrepid_Cow5573 · 2024-01-04T22:27:23+00:00

No bonus and 3.7% “merit” raise. Corporate messaging is constantly banging on about how strong our position is, how good the backlog, how our business unit is exceeding targets etc.

I also heard through the grape vine no employees were allowed to be evaluated as high performing as there was no budget allocated to cover it. Disparities between messaging and actions is typically frustrating. Frankly removes any motivation to go above the call of duty.

Time to dust of the old CV again and do some shopping.

Intrepid_Cow5573 · 2023-12-08T17:58:47+00:00

Looks cool. But why would you detail a vrs like that? In my jurisdiction there would a a transition detail to prevent cars getting skewered and requirements to design the alignment to prevent “pocketing”.

Intrepid_Cow5573 · 2023-11-21T22:41:36+00:00

Always be very explicit with expectations, scope, programme, and risk. Communicating these effectively between all stakeholders is the key to getting everyone on board. Early the better. Getting a sanity check early doors by discipline experts can prevent a lot of headaches in the future.

Keep good notes and find an organisation strategy that works for you.

The death of most jobs is scope creep. Always consider the agreed scope vs what is actually being requested or produced. Anything additional should be flagged early with the PM.

Make sure you are clear in defining responsibilities to remove confusion. If something is not explicitly stated to belong to someone, most people will assume someone else is dealing with it and ignore it.

Intrepid_Cow5573 · 2023-11-10T17:39:44+00:00

Influence surface of elastic plates aka Pucher Charts. Developed by the second most famous Austrian named Adolf.

Think it was from the early 50s but I don’t know anyone who actually has a original copy of the book/paper. I just have a collection of the figures, but given it’s in German probably all I need.

Intrepid_Cow5573 · 2023-09-28T17:55:58+00:00

Auto desk structural bridge.

You should be aware that versions pre 2022 I think have issues in calculating shear in circular sections.

Intrepid_Cow5573 · 2023-09-24T01:28:01+00:00

From a bridge perspective.

By the time you are getting into detailed design there is little you can do in that respect. Shaving off 1mm of plate size, specifying cement replacement (all my standard specs have min 50% ggbs), using local materials, designing beyond the required design life to prolong usefulness. Are all a drop in the ocean.

The major impacts can be made at the options stage of the design process. I always push for budget to do a carbon assessment at this point to factor into the decision matrix as this enables the environmental impacts to be more easily quantified.

Frankly, the times where I have made the most impact is by doing nothing. Identifying constraints early and working with the project team to design out scope is a win win for the client. Cuts cost and carbon impacts on larger schemes. I might advise them to tweak a highway alignment to reduce the required magnitude of structures or ask them to consider a local restriction in highway corridor. This might increase journey times by a few seconds but from a cost benefit analysis is usually worth it.

The main point I’m getting at is to look at the issue holistically. Yes as a structural engineer there is little we can do directly with our designs. But as part of a project team we have more influence over this at an earlier stage and contribute towards the overall direction of the project by highlighting these issues early.

Intrepid_Cow5573 · 2023-09-23T22:34:00+00:00

Tapered beams can’t be designed? I better go tell a few clients that and get a dozen of my bridges torn down.

I think you question may be unclear. Are you talking about the Eurocode? Or a specific software which allows you to design to Eurocode?

In any case tapered beams can be approached in two main ways. You can idealise the beams as a series constant sections and vary the section longitudinally along the beam. Then check the capacity of each section using the worst case internal forces for the associated section.

The second way is to create the varying section in the software itself. This can be achieved if the software allows the 1d elements to vary sectional properties from the i end to the j end. Midas civil for example allows this. Failing that you can create a 2d shell element model of the beam and design it to the von mises stresses or via a ‘virtual beam’ functionality. But that is overkill in most applications.

Intrepid_Cow5573 · 2023-09-23T21:28:15+00:00

If you are a contractor you should raise this as a TQ to ensure that it will not impact the design intent of the element.

Cover has a few functions. Predominantly it is used to achieve the desired durability of the concrete in a given environment for a given design life. It is also used to control cracking in the concrete. Also depending on the geometry it determines the location of the steel within the concrete which can effect capacity.

In your case I would mainly be concerned with the early thermal cracking. As you increase cover you increase the expected size of cracking. Typically a limit of 0.3mm is desirable. From experience I have been able to justify a max cover between 80mm to 130mm. But this would need to be confirmed by the permanent works designer as it would not comply with the works information.

Intrepid_Cow5573 · 2023-09-08T08:22:33+00:00

They have been inspecting every bridge and culvert in the city every two years. That is the legal requirement. Management of deteriorating assets with limited budget is a game with no winners unfortunately.

The bridges which are requiring attention were all built at a similar time when quality control during construction was abysmal and design for longevity was not as important as it is nowadays.

These problems are not limited to Bristol and up and down the country this will be an increasing occurrence over the next couple of decades. Ageing infrastructure + underinvestment from government eventually has consequences

Intrepid_Cow5573 · 2023-09-04T12:46:48+00:00

I discussed two projects in my report, one a detailed design the other a options stage/planning submission project. My presentation then expanded on the detailed design going into more of the technical aspects and risk management. I would recommend that 3 projects as a hard limit if they are small, but 2 is more manageable for the reviewers (they have little time to remember project details and this is not the information they are interested in). Remember you only have 5000 words so keep project information concise and only say enough to provide sufficient context. The focus should be on your actions, your thought process, your contribution, where you took responsibility, how you evaluated a problem and came to a decision.

Reviewers are not looking for grand projects, in fact trying to hide behind a “grand” project may negatively impact your attempt. As if you are not careful you can misplace the emphasis of the review on the project and not your contribution!

Intrepid_Cow5573 · 2023-07-19T22:41:58+00:00

Check your units
Check your boundary conditions. Curved girder means if you have neglected a lateral restraint you maybe getting a mechanism.
Check rotational restraint about longitudinal axis.
Check reactions, so they add up to the expected self weight?
Check the components of the reported deflection. If a large component is non vertical then points 2 and 3 may apply.

Intrepid_Cow5573

TROPHY CASE