Who needs engineers when we have software programs?
Today is the final day of Engineers Week in Ireland – an annual event organised by Engineers Ireland which celebrates the wonderful world of engineering. This week has prompted me to reflect on the changes in the profession due to technology. Software has transformed the way we work, but it is important to be mindful not to underestimate the value that engineers bring.
I find it difficult to imagine the engineering industry in 5-10 years due to the exponential change we see in technology. With the use of parametric software, it seems inevitable that anything that can be automated or digitised will be. However, I believe that software programs cannot replace the knowledge, creativity and human insight of engineers, and the added value this brings to projects. From a quote by Gerd Leonhard, ‘Great engineering does not happen by pure optimisation’.
We live in one of the most transformational times in human history, where technology is rapidly changing our lives and society. This is no different within building engineering, with the availability of numerous software packages for design, analysis, automation, coordination, and Building Information Management. In my experience, these programs allow engineers increased efficiency and accuracy in the design process. While the benefits of technology are exciting, the prospect that robots and software will do our work in the future evokes fear around loss of jobs and redundancy of engineers.
In my opinion, engineers must go beyond technology to define our value on projects. I believe to produce innovative solutions requires creativity, imagination and intuition; these traits are specific to humans. No two construction projects are the same. While software programs may be used as tools for design, engineering knowledge and experience is required to understand the physicality of construction.
For non-engineers to use engineering software with a black box approach would be irresponsible. The outputs are only as good as the user inputs, which requires an understanding of the underlying engineering principles and assumptions in the program. The outputs should not be utilised without interrogation and undertaking objective analyses.
I attended a presentation in Engineers Ireland by Tristram Carfrae on ‘Designing with Computers’. Using the example of the Beijing National Aquatic Centre, he illustrated the iterative approach required to design such a complex structure using finite element software. Numerous models were created of different scales and complexity to allow the engineers to experiment and understand the structure, as well as for cross-checking outputs. It is clear from this example that engineering design is very much a non-linear process requiring engineering knowledge as much as computers.
I believe that engineers need to embrace technology as it will change how we work in the future. In my opinion, engineers at college level need to be taught how computers work, the basics of matrix arithmetic and dynamic relaxation. Rather than presenting students with problems to solve where there is one answer, they should be challenged to explore structural behaviour, to experiment, and to think innovatively. Acquiring these transferable skills and knowledge is critical to allow engineers to adapt and respond in a digital world.
Theyve been saying this since the abacus, but you only get out what you put in....
Well presented piece on the ‘role’ of technology in the engineering world. Technology should be viewed as an accelerator tool to enhance the added value services engineers provide and future proof their space in a changing market. We at Rondo work with a variety of engineering professionals in the construction sector, and no software or piece of technology could replace the interaction, dialogue, site visits with contractors all with the view to deliver problem solving and buildable solutions.
Like the thought piece - on my phone it came up above an article on the 737-Max. Whilst the cause of the recent crashes of this new aircraft are not yet understood it is worth reflecting on the A320 crash in 1988. The computers on the aircraft stopped the pilots from making the changes they wanted in order to provide more thrust. We must remember that engineering is “Art and Science”. We work with the forces that exist within nature and learning to “feel” these forces and understand the limitations is as important as learning to create an algorithm. Remember that Thomas Telford started as a stone mason building arches - feeling the possibilities. This “feel” for the behaviour of structures allowed him and others to experiment and make the quantum jumps in engineering. I recall a great mentor once asking me to “imagine you are a brick”.....
How do you "teach" engineers common sense and intuition? Those capabilities need to be nurtured through time and support. Believing blindly outputs from software programs or even CAD drawings can be a minor problem, at the least, or catastrophic, at worst. We obviously need these aids, but also need to recognise when they are giving unreliable results
Technology is only an aid for a human But never an replacement.