Recommended Reading on Engineering and Architecture

Billington, D.P.. "Robert Maillart's Bridges; The Art of Engineering" (1979)Collins, Peter.  "Concrete:  The Vision of New Architecture, A study of August Perret and his Precursors" (1958) Cross, Hardy.  "Engineers and Ivory Towers" (1952) Galileo, "Dialog Concerning Two New Sciences" Gorden, J.E.  "The New Science of Strong Materials" (1976)   Kahn, Louis "Conversation with Students" Nervi, Pier Luigi.  "Structures" (1956) Palladio, "The Four Books of Architecture" Thompson, D’Arcy Wentworth.  "On Growth and Form" (1917) Viollet-le-Duc, Eugene-Emmanuel.  Lectures on Architecture in Two Volumes (1872) (1987) Vitruvius, The Ten Books on Architecture Billington, D.P., The Tower and the Bridge" (1983) Fuller, Bucky "Critical Path" King, Ross.  "Brunelleschi's Dome" Macaulay David. "Mill" McCullough, David. "The Great Bridge" Rand, Ayn.   "The Fountainhead" Rasenberger, Jim.  "High Steel"

Petroski, Henry. "Remaking the World"

Recommended Reading on Engineering and Philosophy

Addis, William.  “The Evolution of Structural Engineering Design Principles”  Addis, William. “Free Will and Determinism in the Conception of Structures” (1997)         Bulleit, William “Uncertainty in Structural Engineering”  (2008)        Goldman, Steven “The Social Captivity of Engineering”  (1991) Goldman, Steven “Why We Need a Philosophy of Engineering” (2004)      Goodman, Richard "Karl Terzaghi: The Engineer As Artist"    Ferguson, Eugene.  "Engineering and the Mind’s Eye" (1993) Florman, Samuel.  The Existential Pleasures of Engineering (1976) Hartoonian, Gevork  "Ontology of Construction" (1994) Petroski, H., "To Engineer is Human" (1992) Rice, Peter  "An Engineer Imagines" Torroja, Eduado “The Philosophy of Structures” Vick, Steven.   "Degrees of Belief"  (2002)

,

Engineering is Synthesis, not Analysis

,

Engineering is synthesis (evaluation of design options).   One particular framing system is chosen not because it is the truth, but because it is as close as the designer can get.   That is enough to discover that one system is better than another. You see, structural design is really not objective, not close. There really isn’t one answer; there never has been. The problem is that design is perceived that way and has an objective truth assigned to it.  Once you abolish this misconception, the creative possibilities are limitless.   See my article "Twilight of the Idols" in Modern Steel Construction Magazine for more on synthesis and an example design problem.

,

Engineering is Constrained Invention

,

It could be constrained by forces of nature or analytical techniques to describe nature.   It could be controlled by local construction methods, material availability, or an engineer's own ingenuity.   A design can be borne by art and uncertainty as much as it can be borne by science and certainty.   Anyone who doesn't know this is not an engineer.  Isler created the thin concrete shell, a pillowcase shape, when he viewed burlap hanging over rebar.  The artist Kenneth Snelson developed the tensegrity by playing with sticks and strings.   The artist, Ai WeiWei created the bird's nest form used for the Beijing National Stadium for the 2008 Olympics by looking at one.  Bucky Fuller created the geodesic dome through sculpture and play.   He fooled around with stuff like triangles made out of spaghetti, not math.   The inventor Theo Jansen is the master of amazingly lifelike kinetic sculptures without math or science.  Math and science rarely contribute to the creation of the design (there are very few exceptions).    So why are we engineers not making stuff in school?   Who knows!

Fillet welds instead of CJP welds

In many cases it may be is less expensive to use a double sided filet welds instead of a complete joint penetration (CJP) groove welds.   A fillet weld, like a CJP weld, can be sized to develop the full strength of the connection plate in either shear or tension.  When the Engineer of Record indicates a CJP weld (for example a flange plate of a moment connection), it is possibly for the fabricator to successfully substitute of fillet weld.   We have found that the easiest way to do these calculations is to have the fillet weld size expressed as a fraction of the plate thickness (such as W = 5/8t for shear tabs).  The table below summarizes the different configurations and allows the user to easily determine the fillet weld size to use instead of specifying a CJP weld. Table:  Fillet Weld Size to replace a CJP Weld

• Settings >> Advanced >> Code Injection >> Footer