STRUCTURE magazine - December 2020

STRUCTURE DECEMBER 2020

NCSEA | CASE | SEI

special section: 18

EXCELLENCE IN STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING AWARDS

SOILS & FOUNDATIONS Guide to Soil-Structure Interaction Falling Through the Cracks Transforming a Vacant Jail

8 12 23

American Concrete Institute

Membership

Means Knowledge!

We Have the Resources You Need Join 30,000 concrete professionals in more than 100 countries— be a part of the premier global community dedicated to the best use of concrete!

Beginning January 1, 2021, ACI membership includes FREE access to all ACI University webinars and on-demand courses, plus UNLIMITED access to the Institute’s practices (including all ACI guides and reports) and symposium papers—providing members with unprecedent access to all of the Institute’s knowledge resources.

Combined with the many other benefits ACI membership provides—including substantial discounts, a monthly magazine, research journals, free shipping, and more— ACI membership provides you with the chance to save time and money while increasing your productivity and competitiveness.

Join Now at concrete.org!

ADVERTISER INDEX

Please support these advertisers

STRUCTURE

Aegis Metal Framing ..............................24

Hohmann & Barnard ..............................17

American Cast Iron Pipe Company ...........10

Integrated Engineering Software ...............25

American Concrete Institute .......................2

Keller - North America ..............................6

ASDIP Structural Software ..........................9

KPFF .....................................................4

The Citadel – Dept. of CEE ....................26

RISA ...................................................36

Concrete Reinforcing Steel Institute ............13

Simpson Strong-Tie ................................15

ENERCALC ............................................3

Subsurface Constructors, Inc. ...................35

EDITORIAL STAFF

Geopier Foundation Company.................22

Williams Form Engineering......................27

Executive Editor Alfred Spada

Erratum

®

MARKETING & ADVERTISING SALES

sales@STRUCTUREmag.org

Director for Sales, Marketing & Business Development Jose E. Mendoza, P.E. Tel: 312-649-4600 ext. 210 jose.mendoza@STRUCTUREmag.org

aspada@ncsea.com

Publisher Christine M. Sloat, P.E.

It was brought to STRUCTURE’s attention by an author of November’s Construction Issues article that a calculation used in the article (page 9) was incorrect.

The correct calculation is below, and the online article has been updated.

D = RP + 4 inches (for joist girders) D = 7.5 inches + 4 inches D = 11.5 inches (round up to 12 inches)

csloat@STRUCTUREmag.org

Associate Publisher Nikki Alger nalger@STRUCTUREmag.org

Creative Director Tara Smith graphics@STRUCTUREmag.org

EDITORIAL BOARD Chair John A. Dal Pino, S.E. FTF Engineering, Inc., San Francisco, CA chair@STRUCTUREmag.org

YOUR OPINION MATTERS! STRUCTURE magazine is always looking for Structural Forum (opinion) articles and Letters to the Editor. We preserve a page at the end of the magazine to print these types of articles, as space permits. Please send your pieces to publisher@structuremag.org. And don’t forget – post questions or comments on the digital versions of articles on the STRUCTURE website.

STRUCTURE looks forward to hearing from you!

Jeremy L. Achter, S.E., LEED AP ARW Engineers, Ogden, UT Erin Conaway, P.E. AISC, Littleton, CO Linda M. Kaplan, P.E. Pennoni, Pittsburgh, PA Charles “Chuck” F. King, P.E. Urban Engineers of New York, New York, NY Emily B. Lorenz, P.E. Chicago, IL Jessica Mandrick, P.E., S.E., LEED AP Gilsanz Murray Steficek, LLP, New York, NY

TOGETHER WE BUILD SOLUTIONS

ADVERTISEMENT–For Advertiser Information, visit STRUCTUREmag.org

Jason McCool, P.E. Robbins Engineering Consultants, Little Rock, AR

Excellence in Mass Timber Structures

Photo by Ben Benschneider

Catalyst Building • Spokane • Washington Seattle

Eugene

Irvine

St. Louis

Tacoma Lacey Spokane

Sacramento San Francisco Los Angeles

San Diego Boise Salt Lake City

Chicago Louisville Washington, DC

Portland

Long Beach

Des Moines

New York

4 STRUCTURE magazine

KPFF is an Equal Opportunity Employer www.kpff.com

Brian W. Miller Davis, CA Evans Mountzouris, P.E. The DiSalvo Engineering Group, Danbury, CT John “Buddy” Showalter, P.E. International Code Council, Washington, DC Eytan Solomon, P.E., LEED AP Silman, New York, NY Jeannette M. Torrents, P.E., S.E., LEED AP JVA, Inc., Boulder, CO

STRUCTURE ® magazine (ISSN 1536 4283) is published monthly

by The National Council of Structural Engineers Associations (a nonprofit Association), 20 N. Wacker Drive, Suite 750, Chicago, IL 60606 312.649.4600. Application to Mail at Periodicals Postage Prices is Pending at Chicago, IL and additional mailing offices. STRUCTURE magazine, Volume 27, Number 12, © 2020 by The National Council of Structural Engineers Associations, all rights reserved. Subscription services, back issues and subscription information tel: 312-649-4600, or write to STRUCTURE magazine Circulation, 20 N. Wacker Drive, Suite 750, Chicago, IL 60606.The publication is distributed to members of The National Council of Structural Engineers Associations through a resolution to its bylaws, and to members of CASE and SEI paid by each organization as nominal price subscription for its members as a benefit of their membership.

Yearly Subscription in USA $75; $40 For Students; Canada $90; $60 for Canadian Students; Foreign $135, $90 for foreign students. Editorial Office: Send editorial mail to: STRUCTURE magazine, Attn: Editorial, 20 N. Wacker Drive, Suite 750, Chicago, IL 60606. POSTMASTER: Send Address changes to STRUCTURE magazine, 20 N. Wacker Drive, Suite 750, Chicago, IL 60606.

STRUCTURE is a registered trademark of the National Council of Structural Engineers Associations (NCSEA). Articles may not be reproduced in whole or in part without the written permission of the publisher.

Contents D ECEM BER 2020

Cover Feature

18

NCSEA EXCELLENCE IN STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING AWARDS The National Council of

Structural Engineers Associations announced the winners of the 2020 Excellence in Structural Engineering Awards in November. For 23 years, the

23 TRANSFORMING A VACANT JAIL INTO A CLASS A OFFICE BUILDING

By Mark Forman, S.E., Brandon Horton, S.E., and Diana Gonzalez, EIT

The 225 W. Madison project provided the opportunity to resurrect and repurpose a decommissioned jail facility. The project transformed the jail into an open workspace, accomplished by enhancing the structural integrity of the original cast-inplace concrete structure, which also serves as the exterior skin.

Columns and Departments 7

By John Tawresey, P.E.

8

By Bret Lizundia, S.E.

the best and brightest in the Read an overview of the awardwinning projects.

Practical Solutions A Practical Guide to Soil-Structure Interaction

awards highlight work from structural engineering profession.

Editorial Time to Contribute and Make a Difference

12

Risk Management Falling Through the Cracks

By Ross J. Smith, P.E.

16 Response to October 2020 STRUCTURE Article

By Jason B. Lloyd, Ph.D., P.E., Robert J. Connor, Ph.D., P.E., and Karl H. Frank, Ph.D., P.E.

34

Structural Forum How Much Respect is Enough?

By David L. Pierson, S.E.

In Every Issue 4 26 28 30 32

December 2020 Bonus Content

Advertiser Index Resource Guide – Earth Retention NCSEA News SEI Update CASE in Point

Additional Content Available Only at – STRUCTUREmag.org

CASE Business Practices Creating a Culture of Recruitment and Retention By Jeff Morrison InFocus Staying Engaged and Effective While Working Remotely – Part 1 By STRUCTURE’s Editorial Board Publication of any article, image, or advertisement in STRUCTURE® magazine does not constitute endorsement by NCSEA, CASE, SEI, the Publisher, or the Editorial Board. Authors, contributors, and advertisers retain sole responsibility for the content of their submissions.

DECEMBER 2020

5

EDITORIAL Time to Contribute and Make a Difference

By John Tawresey, P.E., F.SEI, Dist.M.ASCE

I

t was a beautiful day in Seattle, with the bluest skies you have ever seen. On that day, I was at my construction site, waiting to pour the first building foundation. I retired in 2013 and converted my assets into constructing seven rental units. After 40 years of practicing structural engineering, I was confident that I could be my own general contractor. It should be easy on a small project.

While waiting, my phone chimed. It was Glenn Bell (Past President of the SEI Board of Governors). “John, I am calling you about the foundation.” How did Glenn know about my foundation? He could not know. He was 3000 miles away. I responded, “What foundation?”

He replied, “The Structural Engineering Institute Futures Fund (SEIFF). It’s a subset of the ASCE Foundation.”

Glenn asked me to join the Futures Fund Board. I did not even know it existed. Perhaps today you are in the same position, so read on!

I asked Glenn for additional information, and I learned.

The SEIFF was formed in 2013. A memo of understanding between the ASCE Foundation and the SEI Futures Fund was executed. It has interesting provisions favorable to SEI. • The ASCE Foundation will provide administration and support for fundraising activities.

• There will be no fees to the SEI or the SEI Futures Fund for Foundation administration and support of the SEIFF fundraising efforts.

Wow, a fund with no expenses! All of the contributions are for projects – what a deal.

I learned that funding requests could be submitted to the Futures Fund by making a proposal within four strategic areas: • Promote Student Interest in Structural Engineering, • Support Younger Member Involvement in SEI Activities, • Enhance Opportunities for Professional Development, and • Invest in the Future of the Profession.

Each year the Board receives proposals, with a June 1 deadline.

Not all submissions are funded. Sometimes the Board will suggest modifications to the request and fund accordingly. Realizing that the SEI Futures Fund has these strategic, forward-leaning attributes, I placed my name for consideration and was subsequently accepted.

That was four years ago. In the meantime, my rental foundations were completed. I finished the buildings and learned that being a general contractor is hard work and challenging.

Being a structural engineer is not easy, but it is a wonderful profession. In what other profession do you have the opportunity to do something different every day? Solving problems is fun, and our architect colleagues provide many opportunities. I am fortunate to have designed many structures and participated in many professional organizations. I recognize the necessity to give back, and, for all of us, the SEIFF provides the opportunity.

Being on the Futures Fund Board has been challenging. For me, asking for your support is harder than designing a masonry wall. But my discomfort is overcome by the good I know that support will do. Here are some of the activities previously funded that may help you decide to participate.

1) SEIFF provides scholarships for engineering students and young professionals to attend the Structures Congress.

2) Sponsored by the SEI Codes and Standards Division, SEIFF provides expenses for younger members to participate and be STRUCTURE magazine

2019 SEI Futures Fund Student and Young Professional Recipients of a Scholarship to the Structures Congress.

involved in standards meetings, giving them exposure to, and investment in, this crucial work of our profession.

3) Pursuing our goal of expanded global professional awareness and connection, the formation of the Global Activities Division of SEI received funding from the SEIFF and is now active in providing SEI with a more international perspective and involvement.

4) SEIFF has sponsored workshops for structural engineers to gather and discuss important issues facing our profession.

Sponsored events include workshops on the future of structural engineering education; workshops on sustainability and how structural engineers can meet the challenges of combatting changes to the global environment; and workshops on leadership training.

5) Sponsored by the SEI Local Activities Division, SEIFF has funded expenses to communicate important codes and standards changes to our members.

Many of these activities are continuing. New activities are funded for fiscal year 2021, including scholarships for the upcoming Electrical Transmission and Substation Structures Conference (ETS) and seed money to develop a database on claims against structural engineers.

Designing and constructing a resilient foundation is essential to the performance of our structures. Donating to the Futures Fund is critical to provide the foundation materials (growing financial resources) to support our community.

I support the work of the Futures Fund, not because I am on the Board but because I am passionate about the future promise of our profession. Indeed, that is why I joined the Board to begin with!

I am inviting you to join me and many others who believe our profession is only just beginning to catch a glimpse of its future.

Here’s what I would like you to consider – a sacrifice. Would you take the money you might spend on a good bottle of wine or a nice dinner out and instead gift it to support those who will follow us and one day lead our profession? Would you make that one simple investment decision? It is easy; you can contribute by visiting www.asce.org/SEIFuturesFund.

In addition, do you also have some ideas about how we, together, can improve our profession? If so, make a bold proposal to us, and let’s get to work on it! For submittal requirements, visit the website. Thanks for your ongoing commitment to the future of structural engineering – OUR profession.■ John G. Tawresey is a retired CFO of KPFF Consulting Engineers in Seattle, WA. D E C E M B E R 2 02 0

7

practical SOLUTIONS A Practical Guide to Soil-Structure Interaction

By Bret Lizundia, S.E.

S

oil-structure interaction (SSI) can make a substantial difference in how buildings behave during earthquake shaking and how they should be designed. Yet, there is relatively little implementation of SSI effects by practicing structural engineers.

Provisions are available in ASCE/SEI 7-16, Minimum Design Loads and Other Criteria for Buildings and Other Structures, and in ASCE/ SEI 41-17, Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing Buildings, that can be used to address SSI. However, they can be hard to follow, and limited guidance is available. To help engineers, FEMA has funded a project managed by the Applied Technology Council (ATC) and identified as ATC-144, which is nearing completion.

The output from this effort includes the development of a design guide of examples, entitled FEMA P-2091, A Practical Guide to Soil-Structure Interaction.

The design guide is intended to help practicing engineers know when incorporating SSI would be important and to provide examples of how to implement different SSI techniques. It describes situations where SSI effects can reduce or increase demands on the building or simply change the pattern of yielding in the foundation and superstructure.

It covers period lengthening, foundation damping, base slab averaging, embedment effects, soil flexibility, and modeling of basements, and it includes worked design examples for a two-story braced frame building and a 12-story concrete building.

This article reviews situations where SSI is important; describes the design guide's purpose, scope, target audience, and topics covered; and provides practical tips for effective implementation of SSI. The ATC-144 project also included an in-depth analytical exercise to explore and validate SSI provisions and the development of updates to the code provisions. These are not addressed here due to article size limitations.

Figure 1. The building on the left with a larger footprint will have a lower design base shear coefficient than the building with a smaller footprint on the right.

Figure 2. The building on the left with a deeper foundation embedment will have a greater reduction in the design base shear coefficient than the building on the right.

Situations Where SSI is Important The following situations show where SSI can make a substantial difference in how buildings behave during earthquake shaking and how design forces can be affected. Note that figures are taken from the forthcoming FEMA P-2091 unless otherwise noted.

Large Building Footprints Building footprint size has been shown to correlate with spectral demands, primarily in the shorter period range. The larger the building, the greater the reduction in short period spectral response. This is due to the kinematic interaction effects of base slab averaging (Figure 1).

Substantial Foundation Embedment Foundation embedment has also been shown to correlate with spectral demands, primarily in the shorter period range. The deeper the embedment, the greater the reduction in short period spectral response.

This is due to the decrease of ground motions with depth, which is a typical feature of site response (Figure 2).

High Structure-to-Soil Stiffness Ratios

Figure 3. A structure where soil flexibility will have a significant impact on the lateral displacement and fundamental period of the structure.

8 STRUCTURE magazine

When the structure is relatively stiff compared to the soil, foundation rotation can occur, adding to structural displacements and increasing or lengthening the fundamental period of the structure.

The increase in period can affect the associated spectral accelerations used in design. This effect commonly occurs in buildings with concentrated lateral force-resisting systems, such as reinforced concrete shear walls and steel braced frames, which are supported on localized foundation elements. Conversely, for buildings with wide, stiff foundations and relatively flexible superstructures, the impact of soil flexibility is typically relatively small.

Figure 3 shows an example of a concentrated cantilever shear wall and foundation system, where including soil flexibility will increase the fundamental period of vibration. The roof displacement of the shear wall itself is shown in the left as Δw. In Figure 3 on the right, the vertical flexibility of the soil is represented by a set of springs. During lateral displacement of the superstructure, there will be vertical displacement of the springs and foundation rotation.

The drift from rocking is shown in Figure 3 on the right as Δr. The increase in displacement correlates with an increase in the fundamental period for the structure.

Figure 4 shows the potential impact on changing the period in a response spectrum analysis. The period with the fixed base model is denoted as T, and the period with soil flexibility is denoted as T˜. Two cases are shown. In the short period case, the structure is very stiff, and the increase from T to T˜ results in climbing up the response spectrum and an increase in spectral acceleration. In the long period case, the structure is more flexible, and the increase in period results in a reduction in spectral acceleration. Figure 4 also shows the impact of foundation damping on reducing spectral response.

Figure 4. Significant impacts of period lengthening and foundation damping on spectral response (from NIST GCR 12-917-21).

Foundation Rocking Structures with concentrated coupled vertical lateral force-resisting systems can behave much differently when soil flexibility is introduced.

Figure 5 shows a nonlinear static (pushover) analysis example from the seminar slides that accompanied the FEMA P-2006 design guide.

In the fixed base model, the mechanism is buckling of the compression brace in the lowest story, and the brace is highly overstressed.

In the flexible base model, where vertical springs are located under each column, the braced frames rock, and the system has sufficient capacity to resist the demands. Note that, in the flexible base model, the ends of the beams linking the frames have higher rotations than they do in the fixed base model.

Details on the SSI Design Guide The overall goal of the design guide is to present information regarding SSI as implemented in code provisions but in an easy-to-understand, concise format targeted towards practicing engineers. The purpose of the design guide is (1) to help practicing engineers know when incorporating SSI would be important, and (2) to show examples of how to implement different SSI techniques.

The primary target audience for the design guide is practicing engineers who are familiar with seismic design using ASCE/ SEI 7 but who have little to no experience with SSI. A secondary audience is engineers who have some experience with some SSI techniques, such as using springs, but may need advice on other SSI techniques they have not utilized.

Scope and Organization The design guide covers the SSI topics in ASCE/SEI 7-16 Section 12.13 and Chapter 19. The focus is on techniques that practicing engineers can use. It is organized into the following chapters.

ADVERTISEMENT–For Advertiser Information, visit STRUCTUREmag.org

Target Audience

Figure 5. The significant impact of soil flexibility on a coupled braced frame system.

continued on next page

DECEMBER 2020

9

Figure 6. Two-story braced frame example in the design guide.

• Chapter 1, Introduction, introduces SSI terminology; covers the purpose, scope, and target audience for the Guide; and summarizes some key high-level advice on SSI implementation.

• Chapter 2, Situations Where SSI is Important, provides an expanded discussion of situations that engineers commonly encounter where SSI can impact the forces used in design and the way the structure responds to earthquake shaking.

• Chapter 3, Rule-of-Thumb Test for Inertial SSI Significance, describes a simple test that can be used at the start of a project when only very limited information is available to help determine if using SSI will be likely to make a difference in results. The rule of thumb is targeted at inertial interaction and does not provide information about the potential significance of kinematic interaction.

• Chapter 4, Base Slab Averaging, addresses how the interconnectivity of the foundation can help reduce the demands into the structure. It provides examples of common foundation and slabon-grade situations, and whether base slab averaging can be used.

• Chapter 5, Embedment Effects, discusses how foundation embedment can reduce the demands on the structure.

• Chapter 6, Foundation and Soil Flexibility, reviews different methods for adding vertical and horizontal springs to represent soil flexibility.

• Chapter 7, Period Lengthening, covers provisions for how soil flexibility leads to period lengthening in the structural response and the resulting impact on seismic demands.

• Chapter 8, Foundation Damping, shows how and when to apply two types of foundation damping – radiation damping and soil damping – that can reduce demands on the structure.

• Chapter 9, How to Model a Basement, discusses different accurate but straightforward analytical approaches to modeling basements.

• Chapter 10, Conclusions and Recommendations, summarizes key points regarding SSI discussed in the design guide and provides recommendations on revisions needed to code SSI provisions and further SSI studies that should be undertaken.

• Appendix A, Short Building Example, provides a detailed example of applying different SSI techniques for a two-story steel buckling-restrained braced frame building, shown in Figure 6. The building is founded on spread footings, and the equivalent lateral force method is used for design. SSI topics include implementation of soil springs, change in

ADVERTISEMENT–For Advertiser Information, visit STRUCTUREmag.org

10 STRUCTURE magazine

Figure 7. Twelve-story concrete building example in the design guide.

response mode, and reduction in seismic demands due to foundation flexibility, soil flexibility and damping, and base slab averaging.

• Appendix B, Tall Building Example, provides a detailed example of applying different SSI techniques for a 12-story concrete building that has a moment frame in one direction and a dual system with a moment frame and shear wall in the other direction. It is founded on piles, and the modal response spectrum method is used for design. It includes variations with and without a basement. SSI topics covered include reduction in design demands due to base slab averaging and foundation embedment, adjustments to demands from period elongation and foundation damping, and impacts of limitations imposed by ASCE/SEI 7-16 provisions. Figure 7 shows a plan and a section. Figure 8 shows the free-field response spectrum without SSI, the reductions that base slab averaging and foundation effects provide, and the minimum floor on allowable reductions.

associated deformation patterns, particularly for situations where foundation flexibility would lead to the rocking of shear walls or braced frames in the superstructure. This can increase shear and/ or flexural demands in certain structural elements relative to what would be evaluated from fixed base analyses.

• Effective shear wave velocity, vs , is a key parameter in several SSI equations and techniques. The effective shear wave velocity differs from the low strain shear wave velocity, vso, used for site classification in ASCE/SEI 7-16 Chapter 21.

Modifications are made based on soil type, site spectral acceleration, and the depth of importance. The design guide provides guidance on this subtle, important issue.

• There are several code provisions, both in ASCE/SEI 7-16 Chapter 12 and Chapter 19, that can limit the extent of SSI reductions that can be utilized. These restrictions may be discouraging the application of SSI and lack a strong technical basis.

• Although ASCE/SEI 7-16 is the standard that is referenced and used in the design guide examples, ASCE/SEI 41-17 has a similar set of SSI provisions. In some cases, ASCE/SEI 41-17 has more relaxed requirements and limitations regarding the use of SSI. The design guide highlights these differences.

Conclusion FEMA P-2091 will provide a helpful guide to practicing engineers on demystifying and simplifying the world of SSI. The design guide will be available for free on FEMA’s publication website later this year.■ An “SSI Terminology” sidebar and references are included in the PDF version of the article at www.STRUCTUREmag.org.

Bret Lizundia is a Principal with Rutherford + Chekene in San Francisco. (blizundia@ruthchek.com)

Tips for Understanding and Implementing SSI Based on experience in performing SSI analyses, the following general observations are offered. These observations are discussed in detail in the design guide.

• SSI is not that difficult to implement.

• SSI is typically iterative, so it may require additional rounds of analysis to converge on the final solution, as compared to a fixed base analysis.

• SSI typically reduces the seismic demands that are used for design. Still, there are unusual cases with site-specific response spectra where demands can increase because period elongation may lead to climbing up the response spectrum with increasing levels of spectral acceleration.

• Adding foundation flexibility to a model can affect how the building behaves in some situations and

Figure 8. Design response spectra for the 12-story example building.

DECEMBER 2020

11

risk MANAGEMENT Falling Through the Cracks

Unexpected and Unfortunate Events Leading to Structural Failures

By Ross J. Smith, P.E., LEED AP BD+C, CDT

T

he role of structural design professionals is often complex, starting early in the conceptual phase and continuing until after project completion. From the onset, they knead architects’ visions for space and form into a stable reality. Throughout, they are navigating imperfect sites they did not select, maintaining restrictive budgets they did not create, and meeting aggressive schedules they did not approve.

Nevertheless, structural professionals press forward to deliver successful structures meeting the owner’s needs and architect’s dreams. To consistently deliver reliable solutions, despite challenging circumstances, structural professionals rely on proven design processes to tactfully advance from concept to construction. Though no universally applicable workflow exists to capture the nuances of every design procedure perfectly, specific steps generally describe the typical process (Table).

These are the basic components over which the structural professional has some level of influence. When these steps are not completed or are hastily checked, problems may arise. The design process, or some iteration of it, applies not only to new construction but to evaluations of existing buildings as well. Proper assumptions, load applications, and inspections are still critical whenever structural review occurs.

Admittedly, an honest assessment reveals there are many other factors the designer cannot control or even predict. Structural professionals are sometimes forced to rely on: information they did not gather (others’ assumptions, site conditions, adjacent construction, water table, topography), processes outside their purview (material procurement, fabrication, delivery, site erection), as well as performance of trades (metallurgists, masons, steel and concrete contractors) and equipment (concrete vibrators, welders, nuclear density gauges) they do not oversee.

These factors fall between process steps, in the gaps where problems can occur beyond the designer’s influence and direct oversight, and could lead to failures the structural professional would not have anticipated.

A collection of real-world project examples is compiled here to illustrate the importance of each step and demonstrate the risks within the process. Each case study highlights the results of taking shortcuts in the design procedure, the effects of outside factors occurring between steps, or a combination of both.

gathered on the lawns around the steeple to attend free concert offerings from a 12-bell carillon housed within the tower. The idyllic tradition was recently Figure 1. Front elevation view of 1888 church bell cast into shadow when tower in Northern Michigan. caretakers noted the existence of cracks, localized spalling, and general masonry disrepair. Concerns led parish leaders to adopt the understanding that the tower was falling apart. The presumed culprit? Vibrations and other dynamic forces from the motions of carillon bells. This justification led leadership to suspend concerts, eliminate all carillon usage, close the facility, and begin planning for the demolition of the historic building.

In hopes of saving the building, concerned staff and community members sought an independent technical opinion from a structural design professional. Grade-level exterior inspections revealed a series of cracks that existed in the exterior brick masonry at windows, doors, and near building corners. Presenting at areas of expected stress concentration throughout the building, these cracks were common in masonry of this vintage and not related solely to structural behaviors of the tower.

Significant gaps between the exterior masonry wall of the tower and the perpendicular flying buttresses of the adjacent side aisles were observed from windows of adjacent structures. Previous reports and assumptions asserted these gaps were specifically attributable to the usage of the carillon bells.

Implementing some respectful skepticism of established assumptions, the structural design professional climbed several flights of stairs and a few seldom-used ladders, which afforded admission to the rarely accessed carillon belfry. One notable feature became immediately apparent. The aged timber structure supporting the bells was structurally isolated. Over a century ago, the original designer astutely determined to keep the support of the carillon independent from the surrounding masonry facade. This was likely more challenging and less efficient for the builders, constructing one frame inside the other, but allowed for two completely isolated structures. A second The Sounds of Silence critical observation was that the bells were permanently affixed in In Northern Michigan, a historic Catholic church stands at the center a stationary position, either by design or decades-old retrofitting. of a charming port town. Constructed in 1888, the church celebrates Instead of a bell rotating/swinging and sounding with an internal claparchitectural influences from the mixed Table of Design Procedure. per, the ringing of each bell is activated by German and Irish heritage of the original a side-mounted, electronically-activated Number Description parishioners. Highlighted among many hammer (Figure 2). Since they are stationstriking features is the iconic 170-foot ary, the bells do not create any significant 1 Gather available information bell tower, which looms over the town, dynamic forces within the tower. Further, 2 Establish assumptions offering a welcoming beacon to those whatever minimal forces are initiated are 3 Apply codes and loading scenarios arriving by land or by water (Figure 1). not transferred to the masonry walls due For decades, the tower has been the cento the as-designed structural isolation.

4 Select materials and member sizes terpiece for cultural events in addition Combined, these two realities painted the 5 Review shop drawings to being the original community center originally voiced concerns as potentially 6 Conduct periodic field inspections of worship. The community regularly costly misconceptions.

12 STRUCTURE magazine

Though this review occurred well beyond the original design timeline, the grasp of the current situation featured misunderstandings that led to significant problems. In this scenario, Step 1 of the “Design Procedure” was skipped or poorly executed and led to incorrect assumptions in Step 2. These assumptions grossly mischaracterized common masonry problems and led to misinformed decisions. The actual designer, of course, could not have been consulted, but grave consequences for a historic structure and the surrounding community were quickly unfolding.

As structural design professionals, it is critical to ask Figure 2. Left: View from the belfry where bells are observed to be permanently affixed and stationary. difficult questions, challenge the presented “facts,” and Right: View from the belfry revealing the bell support framing is structurally isolated from the tower take extra steps to physically verify the actual conditions.

Assuming the provided information is correct can be a mistake. Instead, statement of assumption was both enlightening and concerning, skeptical review and verification are often appropriate. considering the structure is within two miles of Lake Michigan, a Fortunately, in this case, the involvement of a structural profes- historically documented heavy snow zone. The designer contended sional furnished the church with a fact-based assessment and detailed that the fabric surface, structure’s slope, and arch stiffness collectively explanations regarding typical exposure-related masonry cracking and prevent snow from accumulating. Actual events and structure perforseparations due to long-term differential building movements. Armed mance suggested otherwise. Simply, snow accumulated on the roof with renewed insight, a phased masonry restoration program was caused expected deflection, which ironically allowed for additional initiated, the carillon restrictions lifted, and the community gathered accumulation and additional deflection (Figure 4 , online). around the spire once again to hear the bells ring.

In this case, the designer applied incorrect assumptions in Step 2 of the “Design Procedure.” The proprietary design/manufacture/install model was generically applied in a location susceptible to snow loading contraLet It Snow dicting the baseline assumptions. Anticipating the sloped segment of the An indoor tennis facility on the western fringe of lower Michigan arches would shed the snow before deflections led to improper application suffered snow-related damage during the unusually heavy winter of of the code-required loading in Step 3 of the “Design Procedure” and, 2013-2014 (Figure 3, online). Averaging 76 inches of snow annually, eventually, poor material selections in Step 4. The flawed assumptions the region recorded over 132 inches of snow and fewer warming/ were exposed when snow fell and accumulated, liberally selected materials thawing cycles during this season, thereby leading to more significant plastically deformed, and design parameters were unacceptably violated. overall snow accumulations. The preengineered structure was comprised of a fabric shell stretched over a series of structural steel arches, and was installed ten years prior. The shell reportedly exhibited visible deflections in several of the arches, causing the owners to close the facility and engage snow removal Over 990 pages and 140 worked-out examples services. During the following spring, providing the proper application of the 2019 a structural engineering professional Building Code Requirements for Structural was engaged to document the extent of Concrete (ACI 318-19) provisions for castdamage and provide a causation analysis. in-place concrete buildings with nonpreField investigation and deflection meastressed reinforcement. surements along the length of the frame segments found plastic deformation in Features: six of the nine arches, ranging from less » A simplified roadmap that can be used to navigate than 1⁄8 inch to as large as 5 inches. A through the updated ACI 318 requirements review of available proprietary informa» Step-by-step design procedures and design aids tion, followed up with lengthy phone that make designing and detailing reinforced conversations with the pre-engineered concrete buildings simpler and faster system provider, revealed the designer, manufacturer, original installer, and Download the FREE Rebar Reference App the presumptive repair contractor were for mobile devices! all the same entity. The manufacturer’s Featuring reinforcing steel data, published deflection criteria provided hook details, field inspection information, bar markings more stringent deflection criteria than identifier*, development lengths the governing codes. The technical repcalculator*, and more!

Shop CRSI at w w w.crsi.org resentative explained the arches were *in-app purchase required for all our popular publications! not intended ever to hold snow, and the restrictive deflection criteria were Use discount code STRUCTURE-2020 and receive 10% off the regular price of $199.95 non-member/ $149.95 member. intended to ensure snow accumulations on the fabric did not occur. That

The one-of-a-kind design guide you’ve been waiting for.

ADVERTISEMENT–For Advertiser Information, visit STRUCTUREmag.org

DECEMBER 2020

13

Figure 5. Partial view of framing and roof collapse.

As structural design professionals, it is imperative to revisit assumptions regularly, especially those used repetitively. Different locations and situations always require renewed attention and verification of previous expectations. In the end, this site narrowly avoided a collapse and instead only suffered the arch deformations. All arches with permanent deflections out of manufacturer’s strict tolerances were replaced, operational heating recommendations were refined, and the building management implemented removal instructions for any future snow accumulations.

A Series of Unfortunate Events

and nuts had completely pulled through their baseplates (Figure 6 ).

Other anchor bolt assemblies where columns were not yet placed were found with brand new square plate washers installed and corroded round washers discarded nearby. Clearly, material selection and field implementation had suffered and contributed to the event. A detailed review of the joists revealed numerous failed welds at the bearing seat angles as well as misplaced, oversized holes. Poor weld quality allowed shearing failures between joist webbing and the seat angle (Figure 7 ), leaving the entire seat angle perched on top of the column. Fabrication of the joists, particularly the quality of the welds, was now in question as well.

This case exemplifies the susceptibility of the gaps between steps in the design process. An extensive series of fabrication, delivery, installation, and erection problems compounded to cause a large-scale construction failure. Specifically, the flat tire impacted material delivery, which disrupted the steel erection sequence, which was exacerbated by a rainstorm.

All of these occurred somewhere well after Step 5 and before Step 6 and were outside the direct supervision and control of the designer. Step 4 may have been poorly executed by the designer, sizing washers that were too thin and/or too small. Oversized holes of poor workmanship, coupled with poor erection decisions, created a susceptible condition which exposed the washer issue and led to pull-through failures. In Step 5, the designer checked the shop drawing and expected a competent weld, and then reviewed the erection plan and expected the sequence to be completed with all the parts. Actions of others between the design steps were the letdown. Nearly all of these linked factors occurred outside of the purview of the structural design professional and amassed to create a significant failure.

Each of the steps of the design process is critical and requires refined attention on every project. Missing or poorly executing any step can lead to failures, property damage, and possibly loss of life. Disruptive factors or dismissive postures can lead to misunderstanding, misapplications, and improper assumptions. Even a flawless design execution is susceptible to hazards of unexpected complications, many outside the designer’s control. Designers must remain engaged, ask additional questions, be respectfully skeptical, and challenge both assumptions and provided information. Whenever possible, designers must regularly verify that expectations are met in the shop and the field. While these intentional engagements may require extra effort and may be perceived as finicky, the added value of catching and correcting potential mishaps provides a high return on investment. The structural design industry should embrace and reinforce the vision that additional engagement benefits all parties by reducing risks of failure, property damage, and the general occurrence of unfortunate events.■

A plastic molding and electrostatic plating company touting 50 years of manufacturing success and experience decided to support continued growth by adding a new manufacturing facility in Western Michigan.

A 40-foot-tall high-bay structure comprised of steel columns, connecting girders, and panelized joist assemblies was selected, designed, and rapidly constructed to expedite the opening, usage, and profitability of the expanded facility. With over half of the structure and roof deck in place, a construction failure occurred. The collapse damaged two 50- x 60-foot bays of steel framing and one completed bay of roof joists and decking (Figure 5). During post-event interviews, the steel erector admirably accepted responsibility and provided insight on some contributing causes leading to the collapse.

After erecting two new columns and girders spanning from the existing frame to the new columns, the bay frame was not completed with a tie joist linking the two columns. Instead, since it was nearing evening and raining, the work was stopped early for the day, leaving the two girders and their end columns unbraced. Rain evolved into a storm with high winds causing the unbraced girders and columns to enter a dynamic cycle of out-of-plane displacements, eventually culminating Ross J. Smith is a Principal with Wiss, Janney, Elstner Associates, Inc, living in failure at the column baseplate connections. Felled columns pulled and working in West Michigan. (rsmith@wje.com) down their respective girders, which pulled additional columns and a progressive, multi-bay failure ensued. “All because of the rain,” as reported.

An additional detailed account of the events was found to be equally significant. The erector later shared that the tie joist was not even on-site with the other frame components. The delivery truck with that specific component had suffered a flat tire, delaying the arrival and leaving the erection sequence disrupted. In their haste to stay on schedule, the crew elected to move forward, planning on a late arrival and a last-minute installation of the tie joist. The rain soured that plan.

Closer inspections of the debris field found oversized double holes in the column base- Figure 6. Close-up view of anchor bolt washers and Figure 7. Close-up view of joist seat, which has sheared off at suspect quality weld locations. plates and cupped round washers. Some washers nuts that pulled through oversized baseplate holes.

14 STRUCTURE magazine

Help your clients combat corrosion.

Stainless-steel fasteners for everything nature’s got.

No matter what projects you’re designing, we have the stainless-steel fasteners to help resist corrosion caused by moisture, salt, chemicals and countless other factors. From structural and wood screws to nails, our stainless-steel fasteners offer unmatched quality and performance. Protect every job — in every climate — with Type 304, 305 or 316 grade stainless-steel fasteners from Simpson Strong-Tie. To learn more, visit go.strongtie.com/ssfasteners or call (800) 999-5099.

© 2020 Simpson

Strong-Tie Company Inc. SSFAST20S

Response to October 2020 STRUCTURE Article

By Jason B. Lloyd, Ph.D., P.E., Robert J. Connor, Ph.D., P.E., and Karl H. Frank, Ph.D., P.E.

T

he October 2020 STRUCTURE article, Coating Preparations Reduce the Strength of Bridges,

presents information and opinions on potential problems with the fatigue resistance of steel bridges

prepared for coatings using grit blast cleaning methods. Some of the information in this article is misleading with unsubstantiated claims regarding the safety of existing and future steel bridges. These topics are addressed below.

Blast cleaning has been used in the coating process of steel bridges for decades. Shot and grit blasting techniques are approved cleaning methods used in fabrication shops, as well as field painting for new and existing bridges. The most common media used is a shot/grit mixture. The blast cleaning processes are regulated by state department of transportation specifications for bridge design or rehabilitation projects. These generally are consistent with the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Construction Specifications where it states in article 13.2.3.1 that blast cleaning “shall leave all surfaces with a dense and uniform anchor pattern of not less than 1 mil or more than 3 mils, as measured with an approved surface profile comparator” (AASHTO, 2017). The methods for removal of foreign material for surface preparation for liquid coatings generally also conforms to either the SSPC-SP 6 or SSPC-SP 10 preparation specifications with additional guidance provided by AASHTO/NSBA Steel Bridge Collaboration S8.1 (2014). Surface preparations for thermal spray coatings are performed in accordance Example large-scale fatigue test of steel bridge girders (Hebdon et al., 2017). with SSPC-CS 23.00/AWS C2.23/NASCE No.12, as well as additional guidance provided by AASHTO/NSBA Steel 58, 62, and 66% of the yield strength, respectively). The elevated stress Bridge Collaboration S8.2 (2017), specifying a surface roughness ranges accelerate the fatigue testing and help amplify the influence between 2.5 and 5 mils. of minor surface condition parameters. The reduction in fatigue life The opinions in the October 2020 article are based on the misapplica- caused by the grit blasting relative to the polished surface is expected tion of the work by Padilla, Velasquez, Berrios, and Puchi Cabrera of and an important consideration for machined components. the University of Venezuela, which was published in 2002. The cited The October 2020 article stated that grit blasting “significantly research is thorough and adept with an important field of application degrades the strength of steel bridges, endangering safe design.” listed as dynamic components of helicopters. We do not take issue This statement is based upon the reduction in the rotating beam with the research; however, we fully disagree with applying those specimens relative to a mirror-like surface observed by Padilla et al. results to steel bridge fatigue life design and safety.

However, the mirror-like surface commonly used in rotating beams The research by Padilla et al. (2002) included the comparison of tests is vastly different than the as-fabricated and as-rolled surface fatigue life of rotating-beam specimens having three different surface conditions of steel used in highway and railway bridges. The fatigue conditions; mechanically polished (described as “mirror-like”), grit design requirements in the AASHTO specifications are based upon blasted, and grit blasted with hard facing thermal spray coating. The full-scale girder tests with as-received mill scale surfaces (see Figure), specimens were made from SAE 4140 steel (which is not a structural as well as bolted connection tests with blasted and blasted-thensteel used in bridges) with a measured yield strength reported as coated surfaces (Fisher et al., 1983; Fisher et al., 1974; Fisher et approximately 127 ksi. The specimens were tested in a rotating beam al., 1970; Brown et al., 2007; Frank and Yura, 1981). The research apparatus and were subjected to reversed bending at very high stress is conclusive; fatigue resistance of all steel bridges is governed by levels. This type of fatigue testing is sensitive to surface condition welded or bolted connection details, not by minor surface condieffects and yield strength. Thus, it would be sensible for a researcher tions. This is particularly true at the low effective fatigue stress ranges to choose these relatively quick and affordable tests when wanting to experienced by in-service steel bridges, which, based on extensive observe the influence of different surface conditions on fatigue life for field testing experience of the authors, is typically only about 4 to a particular base material. The rotating beam tests were performed at 8% of the steel yield strength. Furthermore, the fatigue life of the high stress ranges, including approximately 69, 74, 79, and 84 ksi (54, rotating beam tests, performed by Padilla et al., greatly exceeded

16 STRUCTURE magazine

the fatigue life of steel bridge welded connection details that are used throughout the United States.

Extensive fatigue studies of bolted connections with blasted and blasted-then-painted surfaces have been performed (Brown et al., 2007; Frank and Yura, 1981). These studies showed that the coated specimens had a slightly higher fatigue resistance due to the reduction in fretting caused by slippage of the connection. The uncoated blasted surface fatigue life equaled or exceeded the Category B fatigue design strength for bolted connections. These large-sized bolted connections, which included both weathering and non-weathering steel and realistic surface preparations, confirmed the adequacy of the AASHTO specifications.

It must be kept in mind that the current AASHTO fatigue design specifications are derived from experimental data representing the 95 percent confidence limit for an approximate 97.5 percent survival for each detail type. Extensive fatigue data was accumulated over many years of testing to develop the AASHTO categories. The fatigue design curves statistically correspond, therefore, to the shortest lives experimentally observed for each category, which, of course, would have been governed by the most severe discontinuity. What resulted are AASHTO fatigue design curves representing the detail with the most severe discontinuity and predicting, with high statistical confidence, that it will survive the desired service life. This also means that a substantial majority of details in a given category will have longer fatigue lives than predicted by a design curve.

There is an extensive experimental database that was used to develop the AASHTO fatigue design provisions, which are based upon largescale test specimens having surface conditions, constraints, residual stresses, random flaw distributions, and welding procedures used for actual bridges. An extrapolation of rotating-beam fatigue test data for surface roughening to the fatigue behavior of some industries may be acceptable, but it is inappropriate for fabricated steel bridges.

Likewise, a claim that bridge designs are “in jeopardy” due to fatigue is egregious. The claimed reduction in fatigue strength has not been found in large-scale fatigue tests of bridge components nor in the observed excellent in-service fatigue performance of steel bridges over the past 45 years.■ References are included in the PDF version of the article at STRUCTUREmag.org.

Jason B. Lloyd is a Bridge Steel Specialist with the National Steel Bridge Alliance.

Robert J. Connor is the Jack and Kay Hockema Professor in Civil Engineering and the Director of the Center for Aging Infrastructure and S-BRITE Center at Purdue University.

Karl H. Frank is a Professor Emeritus at The University of Texas at Austin, the Chief Engineer at Hirschfeld Industries, Ret., and a Consultant.

ADVERTISEMENT–For Advertiser Information, visit STRUCTUREmag.org

ENGINEERED MASONRY SOLUTIONS H&B Powered by MiTek provides quality and innovative engineered masonry solutions including Thermal Brick Support Systems and Concealed Lintels.

www.h-b.com

DECEMBER 2020

17

23RD ANNUAL

T

EXCELLENCE

he National Council of Structural Engineers Associations (NCSEA) is pleased to publish the winners of the 2020 Excellence in Structural Engineering Awards. The awards were announced during NCSEA’s 28th annual Structural Engineering Summit, which was held virtually this year. A video of the presentation can be found on the NCSEA website. Given annually since 1998, each year the entries highlight work from the best and brightest in our profession.

Awards were given in eight categories, with one project in each category named the Outstanding Project. The 2020 Awards Committee was chaired by Carrie Johnson (Wallace Engineering Structural Consultants, Inc., Tulsa OK). Ms. Johnson noted: “We had two rounds of judging to allow the judges more time to focus

on each individual project. The preliminary round was performed

by NCSEA Past Presidents and the final round by NCSEA’s Northeast Coalition with engineer judges from Connecticut, Rhode Island, and Massachusetts. The judges had an enormous task of trying to determine winners. The level of challenges requiring innovation and creativity was impressive. The group of winning projects is outstanding.”

Please join NCSEA and STRUCTURE magazine in congratulating all the winners. More in-depth articles on several of the 2020 winners will appear in the Spotlight section of the magazine over the 2021 editorial year. Visit the NCSEA website (https://bit.ly/2IYbDb8) for more!

OUTSTANDING PROJECTS Category 2: New Buildings $30 Million to $80 Million

Category 1: New Buildings under $30 Million

ICE Block I

Casa Adelante

Sacramento, CA | Buehler

San Francisco, CA | Mar Structural Design

ICE Block I is one of the first projects in Northern California to utilize an exposed mass timber structure. The building blends three structural materials seamlessly: mass timber at the upper floors, concrete podium at the second floor, and steel Buckling Restrained Braced Frames. The fourth floor “mezzanine” provides expansive views through a glass curtainwall.

Casa Adelante is a seismically resilient, nine-story affordable housing project for low income seniors. The specially “tuned” reinforced-concrete building uses self-centering walls on a rocking mat foundation.

Lead extrusion dampers within the foundation control the seismic response. Th e building has been evaluated to have zero days of downtime for repair after a major earthquake.

Category 3: New Buildings $80 Million to $200 Million

Category 4: New Buildings over $200 Million

Washington, D.C. | SK&A

Los Angeles, CA | Buro Happold

International Spy Musuem

The International Spy Museum is a 130,000-square-foot, distinctively designed steel building. The design incorporates exposed, sloping columns along the south and west faces that are part of the building’s gravity load carrying system and support an intricate series of exposed steel monumental stairs and platforms and a sixty-foot-tall glass “veil.”

18 STRUCTURE magazine

The Academy Museum of Motion Pictures The project consisted of a museum plus a soaring spherical addition housing a 1,000-seat theater. The original steel and concrete structure required seismic strengthening in addition to its major renovation. For the 150-foot-diameter orb-shaped theater, an unusual base-isolation system allows movement 30 inches in any direction during an Courtesy of Alex Nye earthquake.

STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING IN

AWARDS

2020 PANEL OF JUDGES

Preliminary Round – NCSEA Past Judges Bill Bast, S.E., LPI, Inc.; Craig Barnes, P.E., CBI Consulting Inc.; Marc Barter, P.E., S.E., SECB, Barter & Associates, Inc.; Mike Tylk, S.E., TGRWA, LLC; Ron Hamburger, S.E., Simpson Gumpertz & Heger, Inc.; Barry Arnold, S.E., P.E., ARW Engineers; Ben Nelson, P.E., Martin/Martin; Tom DiBlasi, P.E., SECB, DiBlasi Associates, PC; Tom Grogan,P.E., Retired; Vicki Arbitrio, P.E., Gilsanz Murray Steficek LLP; Carrie Johnson, P.E., Wallace Engineering Structural Consultants, Inc.; Jim Malley, S.E., Degenkolb Engineers; John Joyce, P.E., Engineering Solutions LLC; Sanjeev Shah, P.E., Esq., Shajeev Shah, Inc. Final Round – NCSEA’s Northeast Coalition from Connecticut, Rhode Island, and Massachusetts Bassem Almuti, P.E., Cannon Design; Bruce Richardson, P.E., The DiSalvo Engineering Group; Craig Barnes, P.E., SECB, CBI Consulting; Erik Nelson, P.E., S.E., Structures Workshop; Graham Carr, P.E., Vital Structures, LLC; Han Xu, P.E., Thornton Tomasetti; James Fox, P.E., BVH Integrated Services; Kevin Chamberlain, P.E., S.E., Distefano & Chamberlain; Mark Rodriguez, DiBlasi Associates; Michael Fillion, P.E., S.E., Fillion Group; Rick Boggs, P.E., S.E., SECB, Fuss & O'Neill; Robert Kane, EIT, McNamara Salvia; Ben Nelson, P.E., Martin/Martin

OUTSTANDING PROJECTS Category 5: New Bridges or Transportation Structures

Category 6: Forensic / Renovation / Retrofit / Rehabilitation Structures < $20 Million

Dublin, OH | Endrestudio

Charleston, WV | WDP & Associates Consulting Engineers, Inc.

Dublin Link Pedestrian Bridge

West Virginia State Capitol Building

The Dublin Link Pedestrian Bridge was conceived simultaneously as a sculptural form, an efficient structure, and a dramatic experience for Dublin’s visitors and residents alike. Its features of the Eye of the Needle central pylon, sinuously curving deck, and unusual single-sided suspension method create a unique and structurally innovative Courtesy of Cory Klein bridge.

Repairs to address the structural deficiencies of the historic inner dome and interior supporting walls of the West Virginia State Capitol Building were designed to strengthen portions of the existing structure.

Supplemental supports preserved integrity while supporting the dome in place as the walls beneath were completely removed and rebuilt.

Category 7: Forensic / Renovation / Retrofit / Rehabilitation Structures > $20 Million

Category 8: Other Structures

Los Angeles, CA | Arup

Mackinaw City, MI | Ruby + Associates, Inc.

Google Spruce Goose

By rehabilitating and seismically upgrading the existing timber Spruce Goose aircraft hangars to current code requirements, the buildings have been transformed into a modern office. Retrofits included the use of up to 52-inch self-tapping wood screws, heavy steel (multi-tier) braced frames, and steel tie rods to limit deformations under seismic loads.

Mackinac Bridge Paint Platforms Unique platforms allowed for removal and collection of original lead-based paint and repainting of the Mackinac Bridge’s towers.

Traveling along cables, davit-like “outriggers” supported two-story movable structures to paint the towers’ upper portion. A second platform, consisting of steel box trusses, was used for the struts connecting the tower legs.

DECEMBER 2020

19

AWARD WINNERS CATEGORY 1: NEW BUILDINGS UNDER $20 MILLION

Wagner Education Center Seattle, WA | KPFF, Inc.

The Wagner Education Center establishes a new front door for the Center for Wooden Boats. The dramatically exposed structure, simple yet evocative materials, and energy-efficient design solve the challenges presented by a limited budget and restrictive site.

CATEGORY 2: NEW BUILDINGS $30 MILLION TO $80 MILLION

Apple Park Visitor Center

Cal Poly Pomona Student Services Building

A large column-free space dominates the Apple Park Visitor Center. The extremely transparent building is enclosed by a twenty-foot-tall perimeter glazing system and covered by a thin curved carbon-fiber roof deck. The building utilizes a novel post-tensioned steel roof structure.

The 138,400-square-foot Student Services Building is comprised of two structures separated by a spacious breezeway. A streamlined, undulating roof serves an essential role in passive solar design. The engineer’s process decreased costs, increased construction speed, and delivered a sustainable campus icon.

Courtesy of Bill Timmerman

Cupertino, California | Nabih Youssef & Associates

Pomona, CA | John A. Martin & Associates, Inc.

North Surrey Sport & Ice Complex Surrey, BC, Canada | StructureCraft Builders Inc.

Courtesy of Calvin Owen Jones

This new 134,000-square-foot complex features three ice arenas with curved, long-span hybrid-timber roofs and provides venues for lacrosse, basketball, and trade shows. Centrally located near transit, the building is part of an effort to rejuvenate this up and coming area.

CATEGORY 3: NEW BUILDINGS $80 MILLION TO $200 MILLION

Charles Library, Temple University

University of Michigan Biological Sciences Building

The architect’s vision demanded a dynamic and innovative structural system, employing a combination of large cantilevers and long-span arches. The 4-story library features a building-wide green roof, a 3-D printing workshop, an automated book storage and retrieval system, and more.

Integrating science education with innovative research space and an interactive museum, the vision was to bring science to life by putting active research on display and encouraging interactions between scientists and visitors.

The design encourages visitors to explore science in new ways.

Philadelphia, PA | LERA Consulting Structural Engineers

Ann Arbor, MI | SmithGroup

CATEGORY 4: NEW BUILDINGS OVER $200 MILLION

W Hotel Tower

New Stanford Hospital

The 41-story W Hotel Tower caters to every need. The structure incorporates North America’s largest use of a seismic design innovation recently pioneered by the Engineer of Record. The combined success of the architecture and structure makes the W Hotel Tower an outstanding example of contemporary building design and construction.

The base-isolated New Stanford Hospital represents the latest in seismic resiliency technology, one of the first to use Triple Friction Pendulum isolation bearings.

A base-isolated steel moment Courtesy of Bruce Damonte frame structure was designed for Functional Recovery performance following a major seismic event.

Bellevue, WA | Cary Kopczynski & Company

20 STRUCTURE magazine

Palo Alto, CA | Nabih Youssef & Associates

CATEGORY 5: NEW BRIDGES OR TRANSPORTATION STRUCTURES

707 Fifth - Manulife Place Pedestrian Bridge

LaGuardia Airport Pedestrian Bridge B

707 Fifth – Manulife Place Pedestrian Bridge’s elegant structural system, known as a suspended lenticular truss, improves connectivity within the downtown core. The new link provides a seamless connection to adjacent buildings while managing subgrade conditions, installation sequences, and non-structural Courtesy of Tom Harris coordination.

Relying on concourse islands to increase efficiency and trim years off the construction schedule, and using cutting-edge parametric optimization, 450-foot-long bridge trusses were proposed that surpassed vibration requirements.

Construction-staging strategies minimized cost and facilitated erection with precise deflection predictions.

Calgary, Canada | Skidmore, Owings & Merrill

East Elmhurst, NY | HOK

CATEGORY 6: FORENSIC / RENOVATION / RETROFIT / REHABILITATION STRUCTURES < $20 MILLION

First Unitarian Society Meeting House

Napa County Historic Courthouse

The under-designed center-hinged arches of this National Historic Landmark settled significantly over the years. Pierce Engineers designed a pretensioned coldformed/steel hybrid truss that could be installed to take load off failing trusses without the use of shoring to transfer load.

The jail portion of the Napa County Historic Courthouse was demolished in 1977. A new Administrative Annex was built as infill between the remaining Courthouse and the Hall of Records buildings to create a single-occupancy space between the three separate structures.

Madison, WI | Pierce Engineers

Napa, CA | ZFA Structural Engineers

28 Liberty Street

New York, NY | Shmerykowsky Consulting Engineers

Renovation of the sub-cellar floors included a new inter-floor escalator opening connecting five floors.

This involved the simultaneous removal of two axially-loaded floor framing members on two levels and the redistribution of their axial loads via a new double truss system.

CATEGORY 7: FORENSIC / RENOVATION / RETROFIT / REHABILITATION STRUCTURES > $20 MILLION

Yotel

Stanley A. Milner Library Renewal

Yotel San Francisco, a survivor of the great 1906 and Loma Prieta earthquakes, required a full seismic retrofit. Engineering challenges included designing to high forces, strengthening the frail existing structure within tight spaces, and rising to unforeCourtesy of BAR Achitects seen construction challenges.

The transformation of the existing monolithic concrete façade was accomplished through a complex truss system that cantilevered from the existing structure to transform the building’s shape.

Other features included a new lateral system, a reading ramp, and enhanced open spaces.

San Francisco, CA | Holmes Structures

Edmonton, Canada | Fast + Epp

CATEGORY 8: OTHER STRUCTURES

Coastal Wall at Northwestern University

Cayton Children's Museum Courage Climber

Northwestern University’s Ryan Fieldhouse and Walter Athletics Center required an innovative solution. To maximize available land, the team created “virtual” land by cantilevering the building to Lake Michigan’s edge. SmithGroup designed a curved coastal wall to withstand dynamic waterfront conditions.

To evaluate the complex geometric shape of this 1,500-square-foot tensile structure, a parametric form-finding tool was utilized to assess the distribution of loads with the use of a non-linear mesh of cable elements. The building’s roof was also strengthened to Courtesy of Paul Vu accommodate the climbers.

Evanston, IL | SmithGroup

Santa Monica, CA | Holmes Structures

DECEMBER 2020

21

Geotechnical Engineer: Chung & Vander Doelen Engineering Ltd Structural Engineer: Stephenson Engineering Ltd General Contractor: Reid & DeLeye Contractors Ltd Geopier Installer: GeoSolv Design/Build Inc.

GEOPIER IS GROUND ® IMPROVEMENT Geopier rigid inclusions were installed in soft, compressible soils to support a 12-story condo with 2-levels of below grade parking.

Geopier rigid inclusion systems enable you to: • • • •

Improve variable fill soils in place Replace deep foundations Control settlement Increase soil bearing capacities

REQUEST FEASIBILITY ASSESSMENT 800-371-7470 • info@geopier.com www.geopier.com/feasibilityrequest

TRANSFORMING

a Vacant Jail Into a Class A Office Building

By Mark Forman, S.E., Brandon Horton, S.E., and Diana Gonzalez, EIT

F

ormerly the Madison Street Jail, constructed in 1985, the 225 W. Madison project in Phoenix provided an opportunity to resurrect a decommissioned jail facility and re-purpose it through adaptive re-use as a Class A office building. Maricopa County, the facility owner, chose to re-use and adapt the existing building, resulting in approximately $70M in savings. The 278,775-square-foot building project completely transformed the jail into an open workspace. This was accomplished by enhancing the structural integrity of the original cast-in-place concrete structure, which also serves as the exterior skin.

DLR Group provided planning, architecture, structural engineering, MEP engineering, interiors, and construction administration services.

The design challenge was to transform a secure, closed, and fortified structure designed to separate individuals from society and completely reinvent it as an open, welcoming workspace with daylight and views.

Project overview before (top leftt) and after (bottom) – Adaptive reuse Other firms assessed the building, and the recommendation was to at 225 W. Madison, formerly Madison Street Jail in Phoenix, AZ. “tear it down.” Instead, DLR Group took a more creative approach… reuse! By not tearing the space down, the project reused 2.1 million reinforcement and floor height adjustment allows office workers to pounds of steel and saved 65 million extra pounds of concrete (16,633 view the city out their window while sitting at their desks. These two cubic yards) from being sent to the landfill. concepts were critical to making this project feasible and saving the The structural team was tasked with designing the rehabilitation building from the wrecking ball. of the Madison Street Jail into an office building. The re-designed Maricopa County attorneys needed access from the adjacent South building offers modern offices with panoramic views, a bridge to Courts Tower to the adjacent courthouse. A pedestrian walkway bridge connect to the adjacent courthouse, and an outdoor rooftop garden that connected the two buildings was necessary. County attorneys no located on the 5th floor, transforming the 34-year-old building into longer have to walk blocks from leased offices to the courthouse. The something that brings “a breath of fresh air” to the area. new pedestrian bridge will connect 225 W. Madison with the Superior What drove the creativity of the structural engineering team was Courts Complex at the court level, not only saving time and money the desire for an integrated, highly useful, open space for Maricopa but improving staff security. An elevation change between buildings County. From a code perspective, the project changed the occupancy required a built-up, sloped concrete detail. The structural systems of use of the building, which in turn required evaluating the loading each building required a series of expansion joints to act independently for the new occupancy. and avoid adding lateral load to the new building or the South Courts Since the mezzanine was demolished and cell walls, beams, and slab Tower. The slab-on-metal deck was stepped across an expansion joint. were removed, this left unbraced columns in the A concrete slab over geofoam created the sloped open space. The design analysis involved recreatwalkway. Part of the bridge is on top of an existing the entire structure of the existing building ing pedestrian walkway. Inside the South Courts in analytical models, ensuring each beam and Tower, an atrium opening was infilled to provide column was strong enough to handle the new a landing and walkway from the new bridge. loads. All columns, beams, and slabs that did Carbon fiber wrapped beams, columns, and not meet the load requirements were reinforced slabs were used to meet structural requirewith carbon fiber or traditional steel methods. ments. The carbon fiber reinforced polymer The existing building had 6-inch-high slit wrap improved the existing strength of the windows at a sill height of 7½ feet that provided cast-in-place concrete members. One of the no views and very little natural light. This chalspecific challenges for the design occurred when lenge was solved by opening-up the concrete a column needed to be reinforced but was locked spandrel panels to 2½ feet high throughout in by an exterior wall. To accomplish a full wrap the complete perimeter of the building. That for force transfer and adequate reinforcement, was just the first step to bring in the light. embedded ties were used to anchor through the Since this would leave the window height too wall and connect to more carbon fiber wrap on high to be useful to look out (5½ feet), a twothe other side. This allowed for full reinforcefoot-high access floor was installed. This dual Carbon fiber polymer wrap used in shear and ment even though the column section was not approach of window height adjustment with moment reinforcing applications. clear or open all the way around. continued on next page

DECEMBER 2020

23

Old inmate recreation yard re-purposed to a rooftop garden.

Implemented carbon reinforcement and traditional steel reinforcement methods to accommodate load that is double the existing design.

The carbon fiber was less labor-intensive than traditional steel reinforcement methods. Although traditional steel reinforcement methods were used, a large percentage of reinforcement was achieved by carbon fiber. DLR Group used special carbon fiber reinforcement at concrete beam-to-column connections. The reinforcement was used to increase the moment capacity of the connection. Special carbon fibers were bonded together and adhesive-anchored into the column, and then splayed about the top of the concrete beam where they were attached more conventionally.

The old interior stairs were removed to utilize the entire interior floor space for usable square footage. The most prominent exterior feature is the exterior steel braced framed stair towers. The towers are supported by a concrete retaining wall and include piers and mat foundation on deep drilled shafts.

The heaviest load in the new occupancy of the building is a rooftop garden consisting of planter areas, large trees, and built-up soil. Previously,

this was only a lightly-used inmate recreational area. The increased load difference between these two occupancies required steel beam reinforcement to shorten the span of the existing slab, as well as carbon fiber reinforcement for some of the slabs and the columns below the rooftop level.

The highest form of true sustainability is to re-purpose an existing facility. The Madison Street Adaptive Reuse project is evidence of the environmental and societal benefits creativity and structural ingenuity can provide.■ The Project Team for this article is included in the online article.

All authors are with the DLR Group in Phoenix, AZ. Mark Forman is a Project Manager. (mforman@dlrgroup.com) Brandon Horton is a Project Engineer. (bhorton@dlrgroup.com) Diana Gonzalez is an EIT. (dgonzalez@dlrgroup.com)

ADVERTISEMENT–For Advertiser Information, visit STRUCTUREmag.org

AEGIS PREFABRICATED WALL PANELS Factory-Built, Delivered Ready to Install Material Takeoff Direct from Steel Engine™ Engine ™ Model Strict Tolerances for Precision Construction

314-851-2200 www.aegismetalframing.com

24 STRUCTURE magazine

www.iesweb.com Intelligent structural design. Down to earth value.

Call 800.707.0816. Save 10% using PROSPER at checkout.

EARTH RETENTION guide ASDIP Structural Software

ENERCALC, Inc

Phone: 407-284-9202 Email: support@asdipsoft.com Web: www.asdipsoft.com Product: ASDIP RETAIN Description: An advanced software for quick and efficient design of cantilever, restrained, and counterfort retaining walls, either supported on piles or on soil. See immediate graphical results, and condensed or detailed reports with exposed formulas and code references. Save design time and let ASDIP handle the math complexity.

Phone: 800-424-2252 Email: info@enercalc.com Web: https://enercalc.com Product: Structural Engineering Library/ ENERCALC SE Cloud/RetainPro/ ENERCALC 3D FEM Description: The time-saving earth retention modules engineers have used in RetainPro for 30+ years are now part of the Structural Engineering Library. SEL subscribers now receive access to both cloud and installed-on-your-computer use with a single, economical subscription that includes all of our software: Structural Engineering Library, RetainPro, ENERCALC 3D FEM.

The Citadel, Civil & Environmental Engineering Phone: 843-953-7678 Email: timothy.mays@citadel.edu Web: http:// citadel.edu/civil Product: Graduate Studies Description: 10-course MSCE (non-thesis) concentrating in structural engineering and 4-course structural engineering Graduate Certificate. Fully online, student-centered curriculum focused on design. Visit website or contact Timothy W. Mays, Ph.D., P.E. for more information.

ENERCALC

IES, Inc. Phone: 800-707-0816 Email: info@iesweb.com Web: www.iesweb.com Product: IES QuickRWall Description: Design retaining walls? Try QuickRWall and generate 16 pages of hand calculations and sketches of your design. You simply specify the wall, soil conditions, and other loads. Get instant feedback on pass/fail status, see details of all checks. Start making money on your designs with QuickRWall from IES.

RISA

HY-TEN,INC Phone: 714-231-7986 Email: msavicky@hy-tenusa.com Web: www.hy-tenusa.com Product: HT Couplers Description: We supply rebar couplers and heads.

All meet type two requirements and are approved

by ICC and the City of LA. Our HT.LT positional coupler has the ability to travel over 1 inch.

Listings are provided as a courtesy, STRUCTURE is not responsible for errors.

Phone: 949-951-5815 Email: benf@risa.com Web: www.risa.com Product: RISAFoundation Description: Designs retaining walls, two-way mat slabs, spread footings, grade beams, and pile caps all within an open modeling environment.

With synchronized load transfer from RISA-3D and RISAFloor models, foundation design has never been easier. Punching shear checks, rebar design, and international codes make it the smart choice for engineers.

ADVERTISEMENT–For Advertiser Information, visit STRUCTUREmag.org

Earn your M.S. in Civil Engineering NOW OFFERED ONLINE

• Enroll in one of the first civil engineering programs offered in the nation • Earn a master’s through a ten-course, design-focused structural engineering curriculum • Obtain a graduate certificate in structural engineering in only four courses

“Our courses are focused on practical topics that students can use immediately in their engineering practice. I look forward to working with you and developing a course plan and timeline that is best for you.”

Timothy W. Mays, Ph.D. P.E. Program Advisor

Learn more at citadel.edu/civil

26 STRUCTURE magazine

EARTH, ROCK and CONCRETE ANCHORING TECHNOLOGY

WILLIAMS FORM SUPPORTS YOUR TOUGH PROJECTS Ground/Concrete Anchors ■ Post-Tensioning Systems ■ Concrete Forming Hardware ■

Williams Form has been a leader in anchoring technology and concrete forming systems for nearly a century. Today, we manufacture a comprehensive line of anchors, post-tensioning systems, micropile and concrete hardware. Our construction products are used in successful foundation, excavation and stabilization projects throughout North America.

LOCATIONS: ■

Belmont, MI

■

Portland, OR

■

San Diego, CA

■

Collegeville, PA

■

Golden, CO

■

Kent, WA

■

Lithia Springs, GA

■

London, ON

williamsform.com 616.866.0815

NCSEA NCSEA News

National Council of Structural Engineers Associations

NCSEA Past President Susan A. Jorgensen: Remembered for Her Dedication to SE Licensure and Her Infectious Smile

NCSEA Past President Susan (Susie) A. Jorgensen, P.E., SECB. F.SEI, F.ASCE, passed away Saturday, November 14, 2020. Susie served on the NCSEA Board of Directors from 2014 to 2020, assuming the President role from January to April 2020. At the state level, Susie helped establish the Structural Engineers Association of Nebraska (SEAON) and served as its president, in addition to serving as a director of the Structural Engineers Association of Colorado (SEAC). Susie was a past-chair of the NCSEA Structural Licensure Committee and advocated and supported structural engineering licensure while serving as chair on the Structural Engineering Licensure Coalition (SELC). In 2014, NCSEA honored Susie with the NCSEA Service Award for her work for the betterment of NCSEA to a degree that is beyond the norm of volunteerism, and for making a clear and indisputable contribution to the organization and therefore to the profession.

“Susie served as my quiet confidant and advocate,” said current NCSEA President Emily Guglielmo. “Her leadership and vision will guide NCSEA leaders for decades to come. We will honor her by carrying on her legacy of licensure, leadership, and passion for structural engineering.”

Susie had 30 years of professional experience and held professional registrations in 18 states. At the time of her passing, she was the Quality Control Manager for Studio NYL in Boulder, CO, and a Senior Structural Engineer for Integral Engineering in Centennial, CO. Prior to these roles, Susie was President of Prairie Smoke Engineering, LLC, in Highlands Ranch, CO, and Senior Susie in 2019 with fellow BOD members: Jon Schmidt, Structural Project Engineer, Vice President, Managing Principal, and Director Emily Guglielmo, Bill Warren, Stephanie Young, Ed Quesenberry, Rick Boggs of Operations for the Denver office of Leo A. Daly. She had gained structural engineering design experience working with consulting firms in Colorado, North Dakota, and South Dakota after earning her degree from the South Dakota School of Mines and Technology.

Susie’s passion for the profession came from a young age as she was introduced to civil engineering by her mother and to her alma mater through her uncle. She owed her involvement in the profession to the encouragement she received from friends and family, and believed that encouragement and support needed to be passed on to younger people in order to grow the profession further.

Susie was a vocal advocate for structural engineering licensure and the value that structural engineers provided to the world.

“It was a joy to serve NCSEA with Susie over the years, first on the Structural Licensure Committee and then later on the Board of Directors,” said current NCSEA Past President Jon Schmidt. “She was a tireless leader and a good friend, a blessing to me and to all who knew her.”

In her down time, Susie enjoyed cooking with her husband (who is also a professional engineer and geologist), quilting, and spending time with her family. Susie was loved and respected by many and will be remembered for her tremendous dedication to the industry, her infectious smile, and her affinity to cut a rug on the dance floor.

Susie with her husband, Steve.

Resources to Improve Racial Equity in the Profession

In accordance with the Call to Action released earlier this year, NCSEA is working to identify and eradicate behaviors that perpetuate racism and inequality within our profession. NCSEA partnered with a strategic diversity and inclusion practitioner to develop a series of webinars that introduced attendees to diversity, equity, inclusion, and discussed ways to begin developing multicultural organizations via inclusive policies, programs, and practices. To further impact these efforts, SE3 has developed a library of resources with regards to engagement and equity within the structural engineering profession. Each month, the committee curates a series of articles, audio-visual and digital media to facilitate self-education in matters that affect our professional practice as structural engineers. These resources are available for you at www.ncsea.com/resources/dei.

28 STRUCTURE magazine

News from the National Council of Structural Engineers Associations Congratulations to the 2020 Young Member Summit Scholarship Winners!

Each year, NCSEA awards Young Member Scholarships for the Structural Engineering Summit. Applicants submit an essay (or video) answering one of three prompts. The best submissions are chosen and awarded complimentary registration to the Summit. Congratulations to this year's recipients who all attended the 2020 Virtual Summit. Visit www.ncsea.com to read the essays that sent them there!

Danny Preut

John Gervais

Danny Preut is a member of SEAONC, and an Engineer-in-Training II with Martin/Martin Consulting Engineers in Larkspur, California.

John Gervais is a member of MNSEA, and a Structural Engineer at Ericksen Roed & Associates in Saint Paul, Minnesota.

Pricilla Nguyen

Richard Kirchner

Pricilla Nguyen is a member of SEAONC, and a Design Engineer at Degenkolb Engineers in Emeryville, California.

Richard Kirchner is a member of MNSEA, and a Structural Design Engineer, EIT, at BKBM Engineers in Minneapolis, Minnesota.

Young Member Group of the Year Announced

Congratulations to the Young Member Group of the Minnesota Structural Engineers Association (MNSEA) for being named the 2020 Young Member Group of the Year! The Young Member Group of the Year was announced at the YMGSC's Virtual Reception, where they also honored the YMG of the Year finalists and the scholarship winners. Young Member Groups from five SEAs were named finalists before the winner was chosen. The runners-up were the: Structural Engineers Association of Northern California (SEAONC), Structural Engineers Association of Georgia (SEAOG), Structural Engineers Association of Illinois (SEAOI), and Structural Engineers Association of Massachusetts (SEAMass). These groups were honored for providing a benefit to their young members, member organization, and communities.

Visit www.ncsea.com to read more about the successes of this year's YMG of the Year Winner and finalists!

NCSEA Adds Support to AISC's Student Bridge Competition

AISC's Student Steel Bridge Competition is an annual competition that challenges student teams to develop a scale-model steel bridge. The teams determine how to fabricate a bridge and then plan for an efficient assembly under timed construction at the competition. The bridge must span approximately 20 feet, carry 2,500 pounds, and meet all other specifications of the competition rules.

Students may have questions about how to put together a written report and how to best convey the important information about the design and construction sequence of their bridge project. Teams also might need technical assistance with their design. This is where NCSEA comes in. As a supporting affiliate of the Student Steel Bridge Competition, NCSEA will assist by pairing our members, practicing structural engineers, with student teams to provide mentorship and guidance. If you are interested in supporting a student team, email lbaran@ncsea.com.

NCSEA Webinars

Register by visiting www.ncsea.com.

December 10, 2020

December 15, 2020

Bruce Brothersen, P.E., S.E., and Walter Worthley, Jr., P.E.

Erik Kneer, S.E., LEED AP BD+C, and Megan Stringer, S.E., LEED AP BD+C

Retrofitting of Existing Buildings with Steel Joists

Sustainable Structural Design: Strategies That Can Make a Big Impact

Courses award 1.5 hours of Diamond Review-approved continuing education after the completion of a quiz.

DECEMBER 2020

29

SEI Update Learning / Networking

NEW Free Download: Performance-Based Structural Fire Design: Exemplar Designs of Four Regionally Diverse Buildings using ASCE 7-16, Appendix E SEI/ASCE received an exclusive $230,000 research grant from the Charles Pankow Foundation to develop and publish the state-of-the-art exemplar procedural guidance to properly execute a performance-based structural fire design (PBSFD), complying with the nationally adopted standard Minimum Design Loads and Associated Criteria for Buildings and Other Structures, ASCE 7-16, Appendix E – Performance Based Design Procedures for Fire Effects on Structures, with guidance contained in Structural Fire Engineering, Manual of Practice 138. Performance-Based Structural Fire Design includes the analysis of four regionally diverse, protected, steel-framed building designs by design teams from four leading structural engineering firms: Simpson Gumpertz & Heger (SGH), Magnusson Klemencic Associates (MKA), Thornton Tomasetti (TT), and Walter P Moore (WPM). The design teams worked closely with a panel of academic advisors from four institutions: University at Buffalo, Oregon State University, Johns Hopkins University, and University College London (previously with the University of Maryland).

Part I includes an overview of the methodology, a description of the project’s design procedures, and summaries of each design team’s analyses, results, and conclusions. Part II includes four design team reports that further document and detail the evaluation of the design scenarios.

These exemplar designs demonstrate the most significant benefit of PBSFD, which is its explicit process to confirm structural system performance under fire exposure. This is a valuable resource for new building project stakeholders, including building officials, fire marshals, or the appropriate Authority Having Jurisdiction (AHJ) for final approval.

The project would not have been possible without the financial support to the Charles Pankow Foundation from the following project sponsors: AISC, ASCE Industry Leaders Council, ArcelorMittal, and MKA Foundation. Access from www.ascelibrary.org, www.asce.org/SEI, and the Charles Pankow Foundation.

SEI Virtual Events www.asce.org/SEI/virtual-events Civil Engineering Source is your one-stop destination bringing together industry news, career and management articles, Society news, job postings, and practitioner-focused technical updates.

Join the discussion with leaders on Performance-Based Design #SEILive on YouTube – Wednesday, December 2, 12:30 pm US ET https://rb.gy/1ncb0j

Looking for a smarter news brief? Get the personalized news YOU need!

Our new AI-driven smart newsletter, Civil Engineering Source, delivers an individualized news brief to your mailbox five days a week. Content is customized to your interests as the AI-engine learns your preferences. Sign up today for your free subscription at source.asce.org/subscribe.

Find us online at source.asce.org.

#ASCESource

Errata 30 STRUCTURE magazine

SEI Standards Supplements and Errata including ASCE 7. See www.asce.org/SEI-Errata.

If you would like to submit errata, contact Kelly Dooley at kdooley@asce.org.

News of the Structural Engineering Institute of ASCE Advancing the Profession

Welcome to the SEI Futures Fund Board

Linda M. Kaplan, P.E., M.ASCE, is excited to join the SEI Futures Fund Board and continue to serve the Structural Engineering Community. Linda’s first interaction with the Futures Fund was in 2012 when she attended SEI Structures Congress in Chicago as one of the first Young Professional Scholarship winners. This opportunity launched her ongoing involvement with SEI and many friendships. She is looking forward to helping the Futures Fund advance their strategic initiatives, particularly through activities that promote and support young professional and student engagement. Just as the Futures Fund helped her get involved, she hopes to help more young professionals grow their careers and challenges the structural engineering community to seek these opportunities.

Over the past ten years, Linda has been involved with SEI in many ways. She first got involved nationally when Structures Congress was being planned in Pittsburgh, as the chair of Younger Member Activities for the conference.

Linda is a Past Chair of the SEI Young Professionals Committee, Past Chair of the Aesthetics in Design Committee, and Current Chair of the Steel Bridge Committee. She also serves as one of SEI’s representatives on the STRUCTURE magazine Editorial Board. Linda is a Past Chair of the Pittsburgh Chapter and has remained on the local board since 2010.

Linda is a project engineer with Pennoni, working in Pittsburgh, PA. She specializes in transportation structures, with experience designing highway, rail, and pedestrian bridges.

Linda has a Bachelor’s in Civil Engineering from Carnegie Mellon University (2007) and a Master’s in Structural Engineering from Lehigh University (2010). She is co-author of the book, Bridges... Pittsburgh at the Point... A Journey Through History.

Give to the SEI Futures Fund to support and invest in the future of structural engineering. www.asce.org/SEIFuturesFund

Membership

Thank you to 2020 SEI Sustaining Organization Members Alfred Benesch & Company – Elite Member

Boswell Engineering International Code Council Schnabel Foundation Company

Simpson Strong-Tie Walter P Moore

Join SEI as a Sustaining Organization Member to reach SEI members year-round, and show your support for SEI to advance and serve the structural engineering profession. www.asce.org/SEI

Order Your Bridges 2021 Calendar today!

Bridges 2021 celebrates the awesome combination of art and architecture that is the cornerstone of great engineering. These civil engineering masterpieces inspire photographers, too! Every photo in the calendar was selected from entries to ASCE’s Bridges Photo Contest, and all winning photographers are identified. $13.95 | 2 for $20 + shipping/handling https://bit.ly/38ofLM9

SEI Online

SEI News Read the latest at www.asce.org/SEINews SEI Standards Visit www.asce.org/SEIStandards to view ASCE 7 development cycle D E C E M B E R 2 02 0

31

CASE in Point Did you know?

CASE has tools and practice guidelines to help firms deal with a wide variety of business scenarios that structural engineering firms face daily. Whether your firm needs to establish a new Quality Assurance Program, update its risk management program, keep track of the skills engineers are learning at each level of experience, or need a sample contract document – CASE has the tools you need!

CASE has several tools available for firms to enhance their internal policies and procedures – from office policy guides to employee reviews.

Tool 1-1 Create a Culture for Managing Risks and Preventing Claims Tool 1-2 Developing a Culture of Quality Tool 1-3 Sample Policy Guide Tool 2-2 Tool 2-3 Tool 2-5 Tool 2-6

Interview Guide and Template Employee Evaluation Templates Insurance Management Structural Engineering Job Descriptions

Tool 3-2 Tool 3-5

Staffing and Revenue Projection Staffing Schedule Suite

Tool 4-3

Sample Correspondence Guidelines

Tool 5-2 Tool 5-3 Tool 5-5 Tool 5-6

Milestone Checklist for Young Engineers Managing the Use of Computers and Software Project Management Training Lessons Learned

CASE Popular Guideline Updated!!

CASE 962-D: A Guideline Addressing Coordination and Completeness of Structural Construction Documents

CASE has released a comprehensive update to its popular Guideline Addressing Coordination and Completeness of Structural Construction Documents. The guideline will assist the structural engineer of record (SER) and everyone involved with building design and construction in improving the process by which the owner is provided with a successfully completed project. Their intent is to help the practicing structural engineer understand the importance of preparing coordinated and complete construction documents and to provide guidance and direction toward achieving that goal.

This guideline focuses on the degree of completeness required in the structural construction documents (Documents) to achieve a “successfully completed project” and on the communication and coordination required to reach that goal. They do not attempt to encompass the details of engineering design; instead, they provide a framework for the SER to develop a quality management process.

The coordination and completeness of Documents vary substantially within the structural engineering profession and among the various professional disciplines comprising the design team. The SER’s goal should be meeting both the owner’s and the contractor’s needs by producing a complete and coordinated set of Documents. Owners and contractors generally understand that some changes will occur because they realize that no set of Documents is perfect. The SER must focus on completeness, coordination, constructability, and reducing errors to minimize potential changes.

An overall comprehensive update was done to the document to keep up with best business practices and current industry standards.

You can purchase these and the other Risk Management Tools at www.acec.org/bookstore.

And the Scholarship Winner Is… The CASE scholarship, administered by the ACEC College of Fellows, is awarded every year to a deserving student seeking a master’s degree in an ABET-accredited engineering program. Since 2010, the CASE Scholarship program has given over $34,000 to engineering students to help pave their way to a bright future in structural engineering. CASE strives to attract the best and brightest to the structural engineering profession, and academic support is the best way to ensure our profession’s future.

The 2020 winner, Amanda Kalab, will graduate in May 2021 with a Master’s degree in Civil Engineering, with an emphasis on Structural Engineering, from Washington State University. She was honored at the recent ACEC Virtual Fall Conference and will be honored locally through ACEC/Washington.

32 STRUCTURE magazine

News of the Coalition of American Structural Engineers Structural Engineers Weigh-in!

During the recent ACEC Virtual Fall Conference held over October 28-30, CASE hosted a structural engineering roundtable that convened people from firms around the country. Participants tackled issues facing the industry, such as what role SEs play in creating fabrication drawings, ethical and risk implications of off-shore work, and dealing with short and long-term outlooks during the pandemic.

Participants talked about the need for firms to make a conscious decision to get into this area and have experienced personnel. A firm just having the software is likely not enough, and the firm should have a robust QA/QC program. In terms of off-shoring work, several firms say they have had moderate success with this. However, some only do it for BIM modeling, not for engineering, since they cannot find local talent that can do the work. Firms with offices overseas that have this work run it out of those offices and treat it like a regular office with a full staff. And some firms outsource work to former employees who have re-located elsewhere. All agreed that it is best to get multiple references when trying to choose a firm to outsource to and deciding what sort of work will be outsourced.

In looking at short/long-term outlooks, participants agreed on the “cultural bank” withdrawal being done and that it will need to be replenished. Several firms’ commented that it would be sometime in 2021 before all offices are back to near-normal employee levels. Others commented that they may not ever go back to 100% in the office all the time but may schedule some “mandatory” days in the office with the rest being at home. Many agreed on the challenges mentoring and collaborating with staff have been, while a few noted that they were re-writing policies on working at home. In terms of expenses, many said that areas like travel and entertainment within their budgets had been reallocated to more technology resources for employees to continue being remote.

All participants agreed going forward that there will be some “hybrid” model that will meet all options. Firms will need to look for additional training on how to facilitate that with more ease.

ACEC Coalitions will be hosting a two-day seminar in late February to further explore some of these areas and more. To get the latest information, go to www.acec.org/coalitions/upcoming-coalition-events.

NEW – Strategies for Developing a Respectful, Diverse, and Inclusive Workplace Culture Employers are under significant scrutiny for the environment that exists in their workplaces. In recent years, #MeToo, systemic racism, gender inequality, generational differences, and negative behaviors in the workplace have posed enormous challenges for managers that, if ignored, can result in lack of engagement, attrition, and lawsuits.

This course is designed to help those in management positions learn how to address these challenges by developing a culture of respect and inclusion. When respect thrives in the workplace, so does an engaged staff commit to excellence.

This four-module course combines the scheduling ease of video learning and the immediacy and intensity of a live classroom.

• Access recorded lectures anytime via computer, tablet, or smartphone • Attend weekly live discussions with the instructor via WebEx Meeting • Work together on small group assignments Participants will earn a minimum of 8 PDHs too!

The program begins on January 25, 2021. Only 40 Seats Available Register today at https://education.acec.org/diweb/catalog/item?id=6096116

Follow ACEC Coalitions on Twitter – @ACECCoalitions.

DECEMBER 2020

33

structural FORUM How Much Respect is Enough?

By David L. Pierson, S.E.

I

am a structural engineer and quite happy with who I am. Call me a simple guy. I grew up in a small town, and I was happy.

I went to public schools, played little league baseball, and learned the value of hard work from a dad with a solid work ethic. It was not until much later in life that I learned my family lived well below the government’s established “poverty line.” Nobody told me, so I did not know we were poor. I did not know I was supposed to be miserable.

Now here I am working at a job I really love.

It is only when I read articles in engineering magazines or when I listen to speakers at engineering conferences that I learn that I am not adequately respected and that I am not sufficiently compensated for what I do.

When I hear someone say that Structural Engineers do not get the respect we deserve, I wonder what exactly that means. The statement implies that there is a proper amount of respect that we should have. Who established that benchmark for “adequate respect,” and how does someone know if the benchmark is or is not being met? In our society, there is a pernicious virus that is attacking the fabric that holds us together, what some call the “Entitlement Mentality.” Every time we decide that we are entitled to anything beyond that which we are willing to work for and earn, we promote the growth of this virus. So, are we saying that we are “Entitled” to more respect? Or ought we to simply earn it, as we expect others to earn it? Robert Herjavec (of “Shark Tank” fame) stated it well to an entrepreneur seeking his investment, “Here’s the truth about life. You don’t get what you think you deserve – you get what you earn.”

One of the common ideas I hear bantered about is the concept that Structural Engineers save lives – as if this needs to be recognized by society so that others will respect us more. I suppose that this idea may help some engineers feel better about themselves, but what does it really mean? The reality is – we do not save lives in the same way that Doctors save lives. The way we save lives is much more akin to how a Truck Driver or a Farmer saves lives. Without food, I would die, and much of the food I need comes from farmers, delivered to the grocery store by truck drivers. Farmers and Truck Drivers each provide vital services for our economy, and if they do not do their jobs correctly, people could die. Ditto for Structural Engineers. But 34 STRUCTURE magazine

“

Love of Structural Engineering, not fame or wealth, should be your motivation for choosing this profession for your career. Once that choice is made, go earn your fame and wealth.

an average engineer makes quite a bit more than an average farmer or truck driver.

Which brings me to the most often heard topic of discussion at professional society meetings – the inadequacy of compensation for Structural Engineers. And then I see some of these same individuals and organizations out lobbying youth to choose engineering as a profession. The first question is this – who gets to say what the “Right” compensation is for Structural Engineers? If you do not think the free market ought to decide, you probably should not practice in the United States. And if you believe that the free market and capitalism are the best way for our services to be valued, then why in the world would you lament that fewer students are choosing engineering as a profession. Basic Economics was part of the core curriculum for us in college, correct? Is the Law of Supply and Demand not sufficiently clear? I know this – when I graduated from USU, I could have commanded a much higher salary had I been the only graduate that year. And some of my smart peers who chose Accounting or Computer Science may have become Engineers instead.

One positive thing I see happening at the national level of our Engineering Organizations is the push to raise the barriers to entry into our profession. The push for more education requirements is a straightforward way to keep less-qualified people from becoming licensed engineers. Unfortunately, at the same time, there is a movement in some states to remove professional licensing requirements, which would be a step backward for the engineering profession in the United States.

Ironically, I did just learn some very interesting things about Switzerland and Structural Engineering. During a discussion with an Engineering Professor from Switzerland, I asked how hard it was to get licensed as a

Structural Engineer in his country. He told me that in many areas of Switzerland, they do not have licensing. Stunned, I asked what qualifications were required by the Building Department when applying for a building permit. He said little to none. Sometimes you must show evidence of a degree from a recognized school of Engineering, but often that is all they want. He thought it was strange that we would rely on the government to regulate this. He said several times, “In Switzerland, engineers have the responsibility to do what is right. They have the right to do engineering, and with that right comes the responsibility to only do what they are qualified to do.”

It seems that, in Switzerland, engineering practice is based substantially on reputation and honor. Owners and Constructors only hire engineers they trust and, therefore, the Design Professionals essentially self-regulate.

It seems they embody ethical standards similar to those we espouse – but like the ancient Hebrews, their word is their bond.

It sounds like the engineers in Switzerland have earned quite a bit of respect.

I wish I lived in a country where that worked, but our culture is obviously much different from Switzerland. I would not advocate for no governmental licensing in the U.S. As I tell my students, “Stiffness Attracts Force.”

That, of course, is vitally important but irrelevant to this article. I also tell them, “Love of Structural Engineering, not fame or wealth, should be your motivation for choosing this profession for your career. Once that choice is made, go earn your fame and wealth.” Auf Wiedersehen■ David Pierson is a Vice President at ARW Engineers in Ogden, Utah. He is also an Adjunct Professor at Utah State University. (davep@arwengineers.com)

DECEMBER 2020

STRUCTURE DECEMBER 2020

Bonus Content

IN FOCUS Staying Engaged and Effective While Working Remotely – Part 1

By STRUCTURE’s Editorial Board Members

The article represents a collaborative effort by members of the STRUCTURE magazine Editorial Board. Text enclosed in quotes denotes personal experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic.

O

ver the past nine months, the engineer position has transitioned to a

primarily remote-work model as firms have responded to the COVID-19 pandemic. As staff juggle family risk factors and dependent obligations, the remote-work model adapts to workers’ needs and lessons learned. Many firms had already integrated some degree of remote work to support work/life balance and family needs; the firms and individuals that took advantage of this previous experience were better positioned to expand to a 24/7/365 proposition.

For those that had always worked in a traditional office environment, the transition was a leap into the abyss. Most engineers probably had a few thoughts and expectations of what it would be like to work remotely for a few weeks, or a month at the longest, during the “flattening of the curve” phase but, for the most part, perceived it as a temporary inconvenience. However, as health officials nationwide started worrying about second waves, spikes, and spreads, what started as a temporary option morphed into a situation with no specific end in sight and one that required more thought-out plans.

The Editorial Board wanted to share some lessons learned from the current situation and to provide a few ideas for making firms more resilient and adaptive when all or most staff is working remotely.

While we hope not to have another pandemic anytime soon, other situations, social pressures, or local needs may make some form of remote work a more permanent arrangement in the future.

Regardless of personal or political beliefs and circumstances, good engineers grow and adapt. Learning how to stay engaged and effective while working remotely, should it be necessary, is critical to personal success and firm success. We hope you find our observations helpful.

Please send a message to the Editorial Board if you have any additional lessons to share with our readers.

Logistics Engineering is a business; whether staff is working in an office or working from home, the business needs to find work, execute that work, and get paid. The success of an office is dependent on all three of these activities working efficiently and cohesively. Before the COVID-19 lockdown, most of these activities were performed in the office where managers, engineers, and administration staff could

REGARDLESS OF PERSONAL OR POLITICAL BELIEFS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, GOOD ENGINEERS GROW AND ADAPT. STRUCTURE magazine

LEARNING HOW TO STAY ENGAGED AND EFFECTIVE WHILE WORKING REMOTELY, SHOULD IT BE NECESSARY, IS CRITICAL TO PERSONAL SUCCESS AND FIRM SUCCESS. collaborate and communicate face-to-face and quickly resolve issues. “It is more difficult doing so remotely because the three groups are working in ‘silos,’ and important issues can get neglected.”

Most offices have an established reputation and business profile that clients recognize and align with their needs. Clients expect to contact their engineers as easily as before and to have their needs met in the same manner. Maintaining this profile in the work-fromhome environment is critical to assure clients that they can rely on the same quality of service and innovation they have always received from their engineer of choice.

There may be an additional level of disconnect if your client is accustomed to calling the main office number and hearing the voice of a well-known receptionist. When the office building is closed, that may not happen, either because the position is not as available as before or calls are not forwarded to the receptionist but are redirected to the engineer. Businesses should discuss options with the receptionist and/or office phone service provider. It would be optimal if, when the office number is called, it transfers to the receptionist wherever they are working from during regular business hours. Make sure that the receptionist can effectively and efficiently transfer calls as they always have done.

It seems like most engineering offices now have their staff working from home, except for essential activities like servicing IT equipment and picking up the mail. In many cases, a few workers go to the office to perform these functions. It is equitable to seek volunteers for this assignment and respect that staff can have concerns or fears that they will be exposed to the virus. It is important that a system is developed to get mail to the person who needs it. It is not uncommon to see a massive pile of mail – magazines, letters with bills and payments, etc. – piled up on a table and left undistributed.

Management Maintaining company culture is critical. Each firm has its own way of operating, communicating with clients, communicating internally, performing work, learning, celebrating successes, and handling challenges and difficulties. These unique attributes are what makes the firm what it is and distinguishes it from other firms.

Since working remotely is something that most managers have not been trained to do, it takes a lot of learning, experimentation, and flexibility to maintain the culture as best you can.

Engineers are trained to solve problems, and they function best as part of an organization that works closely together to achieve an optimal outcome. “One of my engineering colleagues who married a ballerina told me once that she appreciated her husband’s ability to follow instructions, like discipline demanded in ballet.” Working

from home limits the natural sharing of instructions, feedback, and collaboration that every engineer needs to succeed.

Management and senior staff should schedule regular meetings to connect and walk through what their teams have been working on; this is especially critical when working with younger or less experienced engineers. “The frequency of meetings depends on individual projects and the experience of team members. Experienced project managers will appreciate hearing from every team member. Sometimes you don’t know what you don’t know, so these meetings will uncover issues that need discussing and create learning opportunities. Sometimes, young engineers can be afraid to speak up. When they do proactively contact their managers, take advantage of the opportunity.” Having a set time to review tasks and planned approaches to the work provides for feedback and clarification to avoid rework and frustration. The process is a great learning experience for younger engineers and a support mechanism for all the staff involved who may feel disconnected.

Regular calls with the entire staff are also valuable for individuals to report on their billable work and marketing and administrative activities. “Urban Engineers of New York conducts daily calls at 8 am each day, and each project manager is asked to give a report. When a project manager is not available, the staff engineer is asked to report on the work. This call provides a regular opportunity for staff to hear about proposals, the status of projects, and administrative activities like executing contracts, sending invoices, and collecting money. The success of this call is astonishing. Urban Engineers has seen almost 100% participation in these daily check-ins over the last seven months.”

Some large, complex projects and proposals require extensive collaboration that is difficult to achieve when working from home.

“Team and Zoom meetings provide a platform for collaboration, but the technology limits the exchange of information and ideas: it is flat, 2-dimensional, and singular. Multi-discipline projects require the coordination of several documents and references.” There can be a distinct advantage in certain circumstances to strategically bringing technical staff to work together in person. When this occurs, the DECEMBER 2020 BONUS CONTENT

office must be a safe space that adheres to CDC recommendations and local health department mandates for COVID-19, including screening personnel, strict mask protocols, social distancing, proper ventilation and filtration, and aggressive cleaning. If done right, the benefits should outweigh the risks.

Staying in the Loop If you live in an area where your office can continue to operate much as it did before COVID, and only specific personnel work from home (e.g., self-quarantine, high-risk individuals, etc.), remember to keep them in the loop. “Out-of-sight, out-of-mind can hurt when they find out they were the only ones not to get the memo handed out in an impromptu meeting at the office, or they are the only ones on a conference call not getting the joke about what happened in the office last week. Working remotely necessarily brings some degree of isolation but feeling like an outsider in your own company should not be part of the bargain. Avoid making general statements that ostracize or belittle people who choose to work remotely. There are still lots of unknowns, and their choice has to be respected.”

Maintaining Learning Continuous learning on the job is fundamental; creating opportunities to share information, either top-down or laterally between coworkers, is more difficult when working remotely. Older engineers can probably remember important lessons learned at work that happened spontaneously, in a casual conversation or when eavesdropping, and turned out to be more useful later in their careers than knowledge gained in formal seminars or lectures. Some things just seem to “stick.” For the most part, young engineers learn by doing and observing what is going on around them, the kind of over-the-shoulder learning that is typically unscheduled. They need the most attention of any group in the firm.

By now, most firms have probably fully integrated one of the branded meeting technologies. It is essential that older engineers aggressively use real-time screen sharing tools available in these programs, to pull up plans, quickly sketch out concepts, and create interactive teaching moments with young engineers. Rather than send a marked-up set of drawings or an edited letter back to the young engineers, senior staff should use screen-sharing technology to create the same review and learning experience as would have been experienced face-to-face in the office. “The back-and-forth discussion is really key. Don’t be afraid to tell a few stories, since these can be valuable. You won’t even see the rolling of eyes and the here-he/she-goes-again look!”

In addition to maintaining technical education and development, it is important to include soft skills as well. Lynda Gratton and Andrew Scott, both of the London Business School, published an article in the Harvard Business Review (November 2016) titled What Younger Workers Can Learn from Older Workers, and Vice Versa. Takeaways from their survey of over 10,000 people point to issues that may be

exacerbated in the current work-from-home paradigm (italic text in the bulleted list is from the 2016 article): • The study report noted, There is no doubt that for many people in their thirties, the demands of work can be tough; some have young children to care for, bosses to impress, clients to serve. Faced with these many demands, they report having little control over the way they work, the hours they work, and their capacity to craft new ways of working. This puts stress on their families and vitality. It is no surprise that they say they are more exhausted than older workers. When working from home, those issues are spotlighted because frustrations and long hours are front-andcenter for the family.

• The financial literacy of younger workers, in general, is limited, so learning how to handle money and finances helps in the workplace (proposals, contracts, negotiations, etc.)… Involving young engineers in the details of projects and business financials should not be overlooked when working remotely.

• When we look at long, productive lives, it is clear that…the development of relationships and networks is crucial at any stage…Those over the age of 50 are simply maintaining their current network and failing to build new networks. As a result, their networks will become increasingly homogenous and static.

During this pandemic, face-to-face interaction has been basically halted. It can be difficult and daunting to create strong relationships and networks via email and video conferencing.

WHILE WORKING REMOTELY, IT IS IMPORTANT TO TAKE RESPONSIBILITY TO REACH OUT TO COWORKERS TO MAINTAIN RELATIONSHIPS.

STRUCTURE magazine

However, younger engineers seem to be more productive with networking, and doing it with technology may be easier for them. This might be an opportunity for young engineers to train the older staff!

It is important to make sure that remote interactions do not just focus on the immediate technical needs of a project. Regular conversations on broader topics and soft skills are just as important and essential to employee engagement and development.

Relationships According to the HR firm Paychex, Given the time spent together, it’s possible that the people you share an office with can become more than just coworkers. These relationships formed through work can have a major impact on how satisfied people are in the workplace. They can

also affect how comfortable employees feel coming into the office each morning, how productive they are throughout the day, and how happy they are in their chosen career. This camaraderie is impacted when staff works remotely. In a survey of 1,011 full-time workers, Paychex found that (italic text is from the survey report): • Job satisfaction and willingness to ask coworkers for advice or help on the job is positively correlated to the number of office friends.

• 70% of respondents felt that office friendships had a positive impact on the work environment and strengthened the workplace in terms of teamwork.

While working remotely, it is important to take responsibility to reach out to coworkers to maintain relationships. “Simple efforts can increase your sense of camaraderie with peers and how supported you feel in your role. When appropriate, management should also seek opportunities to facilitate virtual socialization among staff. Virtual activities can include happy hours, trivia events, or other similar activities that promote social engagement among staff. These social events should not be mandated but offered for those staff seeking such an outlet.” If local health rules permit, try getting together in person in small groups just to say hello.

Relationships with clients are just as essential as those with coworkers. “It is as important as ever to make sure your clients know you are engaged and still have their interests and projects as priorities. Respond to emails in a timely manner. Share your cell number with important clients, even if you typically do not like them contacting you directly.”

Another alternative is to have calls to your office number forwarded to your cell phone to maintain the privacy of your cell phone number. Conversely, it is probably more acceptable now than before to contact clients on their cell phone if permitted, even when it is not critical or particularly important. It is best to ask them what they are comfortable with. “Don’t forget to update your greeting to include what you consider ‘work hours,’ so the caller knows when to expect a return call.”

Talent – Where Will We Live?

healthcare, and reduced office/rental expenses from a business perspective. Keep an open mind! Engineering will lead our society in this new normal by discovering new ways to work and live, just as this profession has done for other historical events and challenges.

The same goes for hiring. Most firms hire locally and recruit from local universities unless they have the reputation and reach to go farther afield. But if working remotely is acceptable, then maybe new hires work remotely, opening recruiting to previously untapped sources.

Some serious thinking will be required about getting these remote hires to be part of the team and take on the company culture, but it will certainly be worth considering for the right hires.

Empathy Management must understand the additional stress that staff is experiencing and help them navigate the work-from-home situation.

Remember that an engineering firm is really nothing without its people. Staff with children may need additional help since, besides work, they are serving in the role of an assistant schoolteacher. Burnout is real. Do not get caught blindsided by asking your staff generic questions like, “How are you doing?” Probe with more revealing questions such as “What has been the biggest hurdle for you lately?” Offer help by asking, “What can the business be doing to make your life easier and less stressful?” Virtual happy hours may sound like a great idea but, after a long day of work with considerable time spent on video conferences during working hours, another hour on the computer may seem more like work than fun.

Also, recognize the impact of pay reductions, due to furloughs and other situations, on the lowest-paid employees who are also likely to have the smallest financial resources. It is easy to forget that the income and wealth accumulation of senior staff and management often exceeds that of hourly staff and younger engineers just getting a start in the industry. When speaking with staff, particularly hourly staff, put yourself in their shoes. You might want to avoid talking about the new car you bought, the home addition and kitchen remodel you are considering, and leisure activities that the staff cannot partake in because of time or financial restraints. Even in the best of times, some people may not want to hear about your trip to your cabin in Montana or a little R&R along the coast to clear your head, but in a pandemic, think twice about these discussion topics.

Conclusion COVID-19 has severely impacted the engineering profession.

Companies have lost work, employees have been laid off, and our physical movements have been restricted. Some believe that corporate performance has not been impacted, others disagree. Society may be getting used to working-at-home, and voluntary remote-work options may be deemed useful for some businesses in the future. Time will reveal the impacts of the forced work-from-home model, good and bad.

Society will ultimately rebound, but our lives will be different. Until the verdict is in, we need to work remotely as well as we can.■

When thinking about working remotely, most people still think about continuing to live in the firm’s geographic area. It has not been long enough for people to consider selling their homes and moving farther afield. But the natural question will eventually arise about really working remotely, like in another state or country. Once a physical link with the office is broken, what is the limit, or better yet, is there a limit on where the staff lives?

“More progressive firms may find that they can retain key staff by allowing them to locate around the country Watch for Part 2 of this series on working remotely in a future issue or the world and take advantage of a 24-hour workof STRUCTURE magazine. In the interim, please send your comments, day and the consequent benefits.” Making site visits observations, and experiences to RemoteWork@STRUCTUREmag.org. or meeting in person with clients could be off the table. There could be substantial savings in salaries,

DECEMBER 2020 BONUS CONTENT

CASE business practices Creating a Culture of Recruitment and Retention

By Jeff Morrison

R

ecruitment and retention of new engineering and technical staff are always challenging for structural engineering firms, and this challenge seems to be ever-increasing.

Millennials and Generation Z often place a higher value on benefits related to company culture, work environment, flexible working hours, and work-life balance compared to previous generations. By 2025, 75 percent of the workforce will be Millennials and Generation Z. A firm’s success now and in the future will be closely tied to how well they can meet the needs of these younger employees.

The downturn of the economy after the Great Recession in 2008 drove both experienced engineers and those who may have otherwise entered the profession to other fields. Studies have shown that this staffing issue is likely to only become more challenging in the future.

Other technical/STEM fields that are more popular in the mainstream culture are often seen as more desirable. These companies are constantly in front of the younger generation considering their college majors and making career choices. It is critically important for our industry to share what we do with elementary, middle, and high school students to interest them in structural engineering as a rewarding career choice.

The Millennials, generally those born between 1981 and 1996, and Generation Z, generally those born between 1996 and 2012, are considered the first “digital natives,” with technology and social media having always been a significant part of their lives. They have been comfortable working with technology in many forms

75

%OF THE WORKFORCE BY 2025, WILL BE MILLENNIALS AND GENERATION Z. from an early age. These generations are also considered creators, innovators, and entrepreneurs with strong opinions and a strong desire to be heard and have a meaningful impact with their employers. Creating opportunities for these employees to feel open to making suggestions and contributing to innovation will provide a deeper level of engagement.

These issues greatly influence where these employees want to work and how long they ultimately stay. Those in company leadership need to understand these different values and mindsets to recruit and retain these younger employees successfully. It is critically important to a firm’s future and growth to be able to recruit high-quality employees and to be able to keep those employees for the long term. We all understand that a very significant investment of time and financial resources are put into the training and development of young engineers. As such, minimizing staff turnover can significantly impact efficiency, profitability, and a firm’s culture.

The initial hiring phase is crucial. Finding the best fit for the company’s values, culture, and environment will provide the highest likelihood of future success and long-term happiness for both the employee and employer. It is often beneficial to involve

multiple people and phases in the interview process to best determine an individual’s fit and be open and honest with the position’s expectations. Often it is not fulfilling the technical skills that proves to be most difficult but instead finding the best fit based on office culture, work environment, and expectations.

The Table is intended to highlight/brainstorm ideas in several broad categories and use it as a template in evaluating a firm’s current benefits and methods used for the recruitment and retention of employees. This can be a starting point to decide which of these benefits best fits a firm’s environment, culture, current staff, and future employees. The list focuses on benefits beyond the typical benefits of salary, insurance, retirement, and profitsharing. These other benefits are often less costly; however, they are greatly appreciated by staff and serve to provide significant returns on investment related to company culture, work environment, and building a team atmosphere.■ Jeff Morrison is Vice President and Senior Project Manager with Lynch Mykins in Raleigh, NC, and a CASE Toolkit Committee member. (jmorrison@lynchmykins.com)

Table of potential “added benefits” for today’s firms.

WORK ENVIRONMENT

Modern, Open, and Unique

Varying Work-Stations/Places

Office

to Work Within the Office

WORK-LIFE BALANCE

Flexible/Remote/Work from

Flexible Hours

COMPANY SPONSORED EVENTS

Regular Company Socials/

SOCIAL MEDIA/ INTERNET PRESENCE/ TECHNOLOGY

Active Social Media Presence,

TEAM ATMOSPHERE DIVERSITY

Diversity Well Represented Within

Accepting and Valuing

Truly Open to New Ideas and

the Company at All Levels

of All People

Ways of Working and Thinking

STRUCTURE magazine

Home Options Team Building Activities

Outdoor Spaces

Lab/Modeling/Virtual Reality/Gaming Areas/Onsite Snacks/Food/Drinks

Gym Memberships, Fitness/Health

Unlimited/Liberal PTO Policy/Paid Family

Coaching, Financial Planning

Leave/Sabbatical Leave

Company Retreats/Vacations

Charity/Volunteer Work, Sponsor Groups of

Outings

Interest to Employees Modern Website

Up to Date Design Software/Tools

Laptops/Tablets Provided to All Employees

Tools for Collaboration Between

Culture of Continuous

Culture of Everyone Pitching in

Frequent Professional Development

Employees and Clients

Coaching, Teaching,

When Needed

Opportunities, Company Sponsored Team

Involve All Staff in Posts

and Learning

Sports (Softball, Basketball, Soccer…)

Encourage/Seek Diversity in Hiring Practices

DECEMBER 2020 BONUS CONTENT