Structural Editor
When people ask what a structural engineer actually does, it can be quite hard to explain.
Frequently used tropes include those of beam designer, keeper of complicated calculations, or an analogy involving a skeleton. There is truth in all of these, but whilst they get to some of the core tenets of what we do, they only represent about half the job.
So what’s the rest? I’ve come to think of the role as something like an editor. We join a project, and we begin with research the context - we understand what has been said and understood to this point, and where the problems lie. We challenge assumptions that have been made, and we spot opportunities to improve. We discuss those ideas; we listen to feedback.
And then it’s a long fettle: numerous tweaks to align, simplify and better communicate both a building and loads passing through it.
In design and on site, until the full contract is complete.
It’s the role of an editor in that we do not bring to the table the original idea or problem, but bring our expertise and experience to bear to optimise or solve it. We evaluate and refine. We ensure accuracy and consistency, strategic input and decision -making, then confirm the final product meets specific standards.
Our involvement is a much longer and a more nuanced role than many expect. Like a (good) editor, we are not there to exercise our own creative egos but to support, improve and make real the vision of the client and the whole project team. When we are able to edit fully and collaboratively, the results always speak for themselves. New-build or refurb, modern or historic building. Every project.
(And yes. We do the calcs too. LOADS of them. I couldn’t find a writing analogy for those.)