Computer-aided design (CAD) systems allow engineers to create three-dimensional animated models of projects. This enables engineers to "build" skyscrapers, bridges, power plants, airports, or any other projects from the ground up. By enabling engineers to perform countless "what ifs" in a very short amount of time, these CAD models cut the time and cost of designing projects to a fraction of what they once were.
Today's structural engineer, for instance, can call up a structure on a computer screen and instantly highlight the structure's stress contours or member flexibilities. In this instance, preprocessors automatically generate the mesh that represents the floors and bays of a building. The engineer merely types in the physical boundaries and number of repetitious features. Sophisticated algorithms evaluate thousands of simultaneous equations computing the forces that individual structural members must resist. Post-processors then automatically select steel and concrete member sizes based on design codes and least-weight and least-deflection criteria-all in a matter of minutes.
To use another example, geographic information systems (GIS) combine mapping with database components to create computerized base maps with as many as 100 layered levels of information. Engineers use these intelligent maps to call up graphic "looks" at underground pipelines, sewer systems, street networks, harbors, even the above-ground and underground infrastructure of entire cities. To appreciate the impact of GIS, consider that the system recently completed by Southern California Gas Co. covers 41,000 miles of gas pipeline within a 23,000-square-mile area; the system replaces 27,000 maps once maintained manually.
Obviously, an entire book could be written describing the benefits to engineering of CAD, GIS, and other computer technology such as artificial intelligence and expert systems. But by the time that book would be published it would already be largely obsolete. Needless to say, computer literacy has become as important to engineers as math and science literacy.
The Contributions Of Civil Engineers To Society
As scientific knowledge and the technical application of that knowledge continue to expand, society's demand will increase for professionals with the expertise to translate this vast accumulation of data into practical solutions. A hallmark of the civil engineer is her or his ability to formulate designs and solve practical problems, while using available resources in the most efficient way. This ability, gained through education and experience as well as personality traits, makes the civil engineer one of the most versatile of all professionals, both now and in the future.
Although employers seek candidates with skills as diverse as computer expertise, management, hydrology, earthquake engineering, and customer relations, civil engineers are considered qualified candidates for each of the ads.
Most civil engineering projects of the future, environmental concerns will go hand in hand with issues such as cost and feasibility. And although politics have always played a role in civil projects, future civil engineers will likely be held more accountable for the social consequences of their proposals. Over the past few years, community activists, environmentalists, and other citizen groups have forced halts to highway projects, waste incinerators, residential projects, and waterway projects that twenty or thirty years ago would have proceeded purely on their financial or political merits.
The social and environmental constraints that civil engineers must work with now and in the future should not be condemned. In some cases, good projects will be scrapped because of misplaced concerns. In other cases, projects will be scrapped because they are ill-advised or because the harm they would cause the environment or community would far outweigh their benefits.
Obligations
When called upon to evaluate the potential effects of a project, engineers are expected to apply the full range of their experience and expertise toward providing clear and unbiased information for the nontechnical participants in the project. These may include project owners, developers, elected officials, or the residents of a community.
In many instances the engineer's choice is as simple as what method or material will achieve the desired objective at the lowest cost. In other situations the engineer's choice will be more difficult. Sometimes an engineer is called upon to weigh the benefits of a project against the value of another asset, often an intangible. The asset may be a neighborhood, a wetland, a river, or a scenic vista, to name only a few.
For instance, a fast-growing airport may badly need a new runway. In support of their need, airport officials can cite not only business benefits (accommodating more flights in and out of the airport) but also human safety issues. A new runway would ease the "stacking up" of incoming flights waiting for landing space. Likewise, the new runway would be longer than existing runways, giving jumbo jets a greater margin of safety as they land. However, residents of the community adjacent the south end of the airport-the preferred site for the runway-have mounted a protest against the project. An alternate site on the north end of the airport would require the destruction of several acres of wetland just outside the airport, which local and state environmental groups argue should be protected. Meanwhile, the mayor of a nearby city has commissioned studies promoting the economic benefits of building a new airport instead of expanding the existing one.
Engineers caught in the middle of this controversy, or a similar controversy, may be hard pressed to remain objective. Yet their role is not to decide which option is right or wrong. An engineer may be asked to design a runway along the south end of the airport with and without an adjoining buffer wall to minimize noise, and then to compute the additional cost of a buffer wall. Another engineer may be asked to design an elevated runway on piers along the north end of the airport to minimize destruction of the wetland. Typically, final decisions about controversial projects are made by the political players-the mayor, the governor, the city or county office of aviation.
But engineers are consulted every step of the way, and these engineers often walk a political tightrope. If your engineering firm's client is the nearby city lobbying to build a new airport, it would be difficult to tell your client that such an airport would be far more expensive than earlier estimates indicated. Likewise, if your firm's client is the existing airport, it would be difficult to confront your client with the reality that a runway on piers would still destroy the wetland, or that a buffer wall would not markedly reduce noise levels.
Yet two of the engineering profession's most valuable assets are honesty and impartiality. Those potentially affected by a project, from the President of the United States down to the residents of a city block, must trust that the technical experts-the engineers-are providing sound data upon which to weigh decisions. An engineer who fudges his or her findings to please a client or for financial gain is disregarding the ethics of the entire engineering profession, as well as not working for the enhancement of human welfare. These ethics may conflict with another of the profession's basic principles, which is to faithfully serve employers and clients.
However, engineers who perform unethically or dishonestly on behalf of employers or clients create a whole series of problems. These engineers compromise their own integrity. They expose themselves, project owners, even their own employers to potential lawsuits. Their actions result in projects that may be unnecessarily expensive, threatening to the environment, perhaps even dangerous to public safety.
