Basic Structural Education

Traditional design courses are based primarily on teaching students how to design structural components, i.e. beams, columns, connections, bracing elements, etc. Once the design of the different components is mastered, design projects can introduce students to the behavior and design of the full structure. These projects provide students with the opportunity to fully assimilate the design process. An approach has been developed by the author to provide some of the key benefits obtained from design projects earlier in the steel design course sequence.

Experience during the past two decades at the University of Connecticut has shown that students learn more about design when they explore the overall structural behavior in buildings and bridges. Carefully prepared, short assignments that are directed to the study of overall structural behavior increase the student’s interest in structural steel design. Since these assignments do not require the large amount of time normally needed for design projects, it is possible to explore a variety of building and bridge types and learn about the creative concepts needed to solve a wide variety of structural problems.

The assignments are based on short written components and back-of-the-envelope calculations. These assignments provide students with the opportunity to look at entire structures, whereas conventional course design assignments generally involve the study of individual members and connections. The assignments also provide a format for organizing and communicating specific information about load paths, framing approaches, different design alternatives and construction practices.

The focus of the written assignments and back-of-the-envelope calculations is to explore approximately how structures behave. Back-of-the-envelope calculations provide a way to get rapid estimates that are useful during different stages of the design and construction process. Engineers often need to develop preliminary designs using short, simple, approximate estimates for forces and resulting member sizes. In addition, all designs must be checked. Checking should not be done by repeating the full analysis and design process. Errors made in the original design process will likely be made in the repeat of the process. Checking should involve short, simple, approximate calculations. These short approximate calculations are often all that is needed to check full designs. Back-of-the-envelope calculations are also useful in developing alternative structural systems. In addition, they can be helpful when there are last minute alterations or when there are problems during construction.

“Writing Across the Curriculum”

Today, there are many efforts underway to introduce writing into student’s major areas of study. Freeman, et. al. (2000) note that the premise behind “writing-across-the-curriculum” is that students understand their subject better when they are required to write about it. This is because the writing process requires critical analysis. Writing can only be done correctly when a student fully understands what he or she is writing about. Through presentation of material in their area, students develop new ideas that provide them with the opportunity to be part of the dialogue in their field. The writing process helps them learn the language, formats and ways of reasoning in their field. This helps students prepare for their careers in which they will ultimately need to be able to write and communicate about their expertise to both engineers and non-engineers, notably clients and the general public. Thus, experience with writing is an essential component of the students’ learning process.

Bean (1996) notes that with writing assignments, students are transformed from passive to active learners, deepening their understanding of the subject matter. They learn to think in their own discipline, ask questions, conduct inquiries, gather and analyze data, and make arguments. While there is no one right way to integrate writing and critical thinking, the underlying premise is that writing is closely linked with thinking, and by creating an environment that demands good writing, we can promote intellectual growth. Students who struggle with their writing, struggle with the process of thinking about problems. In other words, writing engages students.

Writing-across-the-curriculum typically requires that students write in their upper division courses. Suitable courses include laboratory courses, courses with design projects and senior capstone design project courses. At the University of Connecticut, writing assignments combined with back-of-the-envelope calculations have been used in the senior-level steel design course. The course is the second steel design course in the undergraduate curriculum. The first course, required of all undergraduate students in the department, covers tension members, compression members, rolled steel beams and some simple connections. The second course covers beam-columns, bracing, composite design, plate girders and an extensive section on connections. The writing assignments are spread throughout the second course, and they typically have features related to the current design topic.

The main objections to adding writing assignments to engineering courses have been that the teaching of writing in one’s discipline can be demanding, and that it should only be done by teachers who are experts in the current theory, pedagogy and evaluation of writing. In other words, writing must be taught in English courses or technical writing courses under the direction of “experts” in writing. The author strongly objects to this view. Writing-across-the-curriculum is based on the premise that writing can and should be done in individual disciplines, typically by instructors in the discipline. The experience at the University of Connecticut and elsewhere has shown that it is not necessary to have experts from the English Department involved in courses in order to introduce writing projects. We need to remember that we have all had to learn how to write as engineers, and with some practical, realistic guidelines, we as engineering instructors can introduce writing assignments into our courses, and we can do this efficiently and effectively.

The author has developed a report for the American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC) to show other educators how they can use writing assignments with back-of-the-envelope calculations in steel design courses. Included are guidelines for developing writing assignments, guidelines for evaluating assignments, basic information on assessment techniques and reasons why steel design educators should include writing assignments in their steel design courses.

Summary

Writing assignments with back-of-the-envelope calculations have been proposed to get students to focus on the art of structural engineering, to look beyond the design of specific elements and connections. The writing assignments address the overall behavior of the structure. By using back-of-the-envelope calculations in conjunction with the writing, students learn how the structure behaves using short, easily managed assignments. The assignments typically require consideration of different structural approaches. Examples that have been successfully used have included comparison of the use of bracing versus rigid frames in tall buildings, evaluation of approaches used to cantilever exterior floor areas, and comparisons of cable-stayed bridges with suspension bridges considering suitable span lengths. The writing assignments with back-of-the-envelope calculations also provide a basis for further discussion of structural design in class. The primary goal of these assignments has been to provide an opportunity to explore the major aspects of structural engineering, without detracting from the normal course lectures and assignments that focus on the design of specific elements and connections.

Acknowledgements:
The writer is grateful to the American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC), who provided him with a grant to work on the report on which this paper is based. The response from students over two decades has provided much input into what is done at the University of Connecticut, and their comments have been invaluable. The writing assignments have greatly added to the author’s enjoyment in the classroom.