{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.015726681127982648, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0010845986984815619, 'mean_word_length': 5.127353266888151, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 1, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Structural Engineering – The Future?

As engineers, we are pragmatic and sufficiently flexible to adjust to changing circumstances. We think conservatively; our training in logical thinking enables us to resolve problems in a realistic and efficient manner. Like all of our species, though, we think of ourselves as unique and indispensible often operating oblivious to our own limitations and biases. In a reflective mode, we must question the place of engineers, especially structural engineers in say a generation from now. Conversations around this issue create a divide. Many assert our scope of work will be similar; the difference will be that we will do it faster, smarter and be more global in our work habits and reach for solutions. Others will focus on financial considerations or political factors that may control our work or global economies that will impact the pricing of and availability of materials. It is predicted that ‘new’ materials will proliferate and construction will become more refined and cost effective. Mulling over my more than 50 years as a practising engineer, I can say that whilst much has changed, the process of being an engineer remains fundamentally the same. In my time, computers may have replaced slide rulers, programs may have replaced Tables and CAD replaced using pencil and ink to create drawings. Computers however are still controlled by engineers and documents are still produced by drafting personnel. Structural engineers are still responsible for concepts from design to delivery. From beams, columns, flat plates and space frames, design engineers are still framing up building structures, checking documents and supervising work on site for conformity and compliance. My prediction is that the next 25 years will introduce a revolution in the way structural engineering occurs. Computers programs will be developed that will replace work in reasoning normally carried out by structural engineers and the ease, relative low cost and efficiency of this method suggest that future structural engineers are likely to have a vastly different role than is currently conceptualised. Thus, structural engineers may need to redefine their role and develop new skills. Of course, today it may be difficult to accept that a program can replace the work of an engineer in framing up a structure, but in reality, there is nothing magical about this aspect of structural engineering. Developing a reasoning computer program to establish the loading criteria may present some challenges but this too will be resolved in time and formulaic computer-generated responses may supersede the wisdom of experience. Both systems, man and machine, operate from a logical basis as the first reflects the necessary and highly variable architectural requirements and the second is enshrined in standard codes. Future engineers will need to deal with the tools available to their best advantage. For example, computers can design structural elements faster and possibly more efficiently than the average engineer. A significant benefit of this lies in the concept of heuristics in that the computer will store data, learn tasks and repeat routines and automatically pass benefits of design experiences onto another project, all inserted into a 3-D architectural envelope. Checking can also be computer driven with compliance requirements broadening across a range of other services and this independent checking program would replace our ‘certifying’ engineer. Complicating the picture is the seemingly neverending range of complex new materials coming onto the market. Areas such as reinforcement products are constantly being expanded and the old ideas of single use products are being replaced by a complex range of materials such as fibre, geo-fabrics and even basalt. Some new materials are ‘intelligent’ and these include steel that can strengthen under heat mode, timbers that are fireproof, with higher strength and deformation capabilities, and concrete with higher tension stress capacities. Another burgeoning arena is the increasing exposure to 3-D printing of complicated structures and the implication this may have for building size and fit out. A continuing focus on sustainability will mean that ‘smart’ buildings, that are both low cost and which also enrich the community, will become the norm. Buildings too will talk more to us and design will enable buildings to provide monitoring and feedback about issues such as overstressing, excessive deflexions and sway. This progress steps us forward to the notion of the manufacture of building elements which will positively compensate for either the loss of strength or being subject to excessive stress. Given not only the rapidity of these changes and the range and complexity of products and computer-assisted designs, the query emerges persistently about the human content in these processes. Is a structural engineer required in such a world? Would technicians, IT professionals and project managers be more suited to carry out all basic work that structural engineers define as theirs? One can muse that on the basis of these changes, the role of the future structural engineer may be oversight and coordination. There is precedent for this change, as this is not dissimilar to the approach which is now the norm in the supply of timber trusses for domestic work. Engineers may still have contact with the clients and be required to ensure the process unfolds smoothly and in an orderly sequence and that the end product achieves