Appendix 5

Prof I M May
"The teaching of structural analysis"

The teaching of structural analysis

The teaching of structural

analysis

Ian M May
Available at
www.theovearupfoundation.com

Professor of Civil Engineering

Heriot Watt University
Edinburgh

The teaching of structural analysis The teaching of structural analysis

“The volume of “stuff” that now apparently
has to be included in the curriculum is a
major obstruction to being able to bring
focus on the engineering fundamentals
and give width beyond engineering”.
Michael Glover (2008), Arup,
Institution of Structural
Engineers, Gold Medal Address
• There has over the last twenty years been
a significant growth in the use of software
for structural analysis.
• This has meant that there has been
(should be?) a change in the teaching to
take into account the requirement to
validate software results.

The teaching of structural analysis The teaching of structural analysis

• This allows us to concentrate on structural So what should we be teaching?

behaviour rather than teaching a variety of
methods that can applied by hand to
complex structures.
• I don’t think this is necessarily happening
yet!
• An awareness that real structures don’t
necessarily behave in the way in which we
model analyse and design them!
 The teaching of structural analysis The teaching of structural analysis

• Heyman has analysed a propped cantilever

elastically using practical sizes. A second
analysis assuming a settlement of span/1333
changes the support moment by 14.5%.

Hambly’s Paradox
Figure taken from Burland J “Interaction between structural and geotechnical engineers”
The Structural Engineer, 18 April 2006
Figure taken from Heyman “Theoretical Analysis and real world design” The
Structural Engineer 19 April 2005

The teaching of structural analysis The teaching of structural analysis

One of the main findings of the Steel

Structures Research Committee in the
1930s was that the stresses in full-scale
real structures bore little relationship to
elastic stresses!
However, we still need to provide practical
safe structures!
Figure taken from Heyman “Theoretical Analysis and real world design” The
Structural Engineer 19 April 2005

Heyman’s observation

The teaching of structural analysis The teaching of structural analysis

Model Calculate Review Review

Practice Model

Define the requirements Verify the results

Set up the data
Establish the model Interpret the results
Run the model
Validate the model Sensitivity analysis

Estimate the outcomes Re-validate Calculate

Education

3 components of structural analysis

Practice v Education
 The teaching of structural analysis The teaching of structural analysis

Calculate Education: Training - Learning to

Learning to think follow procedures

Model Review
Model Calculate Review

A shift is needed in the way

structural analysis is learned Education v Training

The teaching of structural analysis The teaching of structural analysis

I believe there should be less emphasis on

• Traditionally University structural analysis the number crunching.
courses have concentrated the number
Does carrying out hand analyses aid ones
crunching – and still do!
structural understanding?
• The difficult bits are the modelling and the
I believe it does not.
verification and validation.
• To model, verify and validate requires
knowledge of structural behaviour – and
experience helps.

The teaching of structural analysis The teaching of structural analysis

“There is a deeply held belief that it is by doing
hand calculations that understanding of the
behaviour of the system develops. This belief is
not sustained by either evidence or logic. The “The human mind is seldom satisfied,
evidence is that employers find that graduates,
despite having had considerable experience in and is certainly never satisfying its
doing hand calculations for structural analysis, highest functions, when it is doing the
tend not to have a good grasp of structural work of a calculating machine”.
behaviour. The logic is that grinding through the
calculations following an algorithm can be James Clerk Maxwell 1831 - 1879
achieved with little need or even, in many cases,
potential for understanding of behaviour.”
Iain MacLeod, 2009
 The teaching of structural analysis The teaching of structural analysis

What knowledge/skills do students require? – To be able to choose an appropriate method

– To appreciate material models, eg elasticity,
plasticity, ductility and brittle behaviour.
– To have an understanding of collapse
including instability.
– To be able to model relatively simple
structures in order that they can be analysed.
of analysis.
– To appreciate the limitations of the models
they propose.
– To be motivated to challenge all outcomes -
the requirements, the model, the results

The teaching of structural analysis The teaching of structural analysis

How do we teach modelling, verification and
validation?
The best method may be to set problems in
which the analysis – the number crunching –
can be carried out by computer.
For example:
Analyse using suitable software a series of
beams of varying length with and without
shear deformations.
Then validate and explain the results.
Graham Powell – who was Professor of
Structural Engineering at the University of
California, Berkeley, has suggested a
series of 7 of these types of exercise of
increasing complexity.
He also suggests integrating structural
analysis and design.

The teaching of structural analysis

Where from here?

• We need to teach the fundamentals so that students are

able to:
understand structural behaviour
model unusual cases – eg sculptures, unusual geometries,
assessment of structures
understand the background to design guidelines.
• We need to teach modelling and validation:
these are more important than the number crunching
• We need to re-think our teaching.
• Analysis and design must be integrated in the learning
environment.