2014 - Reducing Errors When Using Structural Software

Structures Congress 2014 © ASCE 2014 2139
Reducing Errors when using Structural Software
Ryan Solnosky1, Ph.D., E.I.T, M.ASCE, Brian Quinn2, PE, Lisa Willard3, PE
1
Research Associate, Dept. of Architectural Engineering, The Pennsylvania State University, Email:
rls5008@engr.psu.edu
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Nanyang Technological University- Library on 11/11/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
2
President, SE Solutions, LLC, Holland, MI, Email: Brian.Quinn@FindYourEngineer.com
3
Vice President, SE Solutions, LLC, Holland, MI, Email: Lisa.Willard@LearnWithSEU.com
Structural engineering software continues to evolve through the addition of

more capabilities, interfaces with other software, and updated reference standards.
These are all for the benefit of streamlining the process of design in the hopes
significant time can be saved for structural engineers. However, with this increase in
capabilities comes an increase in the complexity of the software to the point of where
some people may conceive the software as a “black box”. Additionally, there is still a
lack of understanding in knowing how to confidently check the results. Defined
herein are specific steps that structural engineers can take to reduce the chance of
making errors and to simplify the process of verifying results via creating a “Software
Error Reduction Plan (SERP)”. In addition, a discussion on tips and steps to reduce
errors for integrating structural engineering software with BIM software will be
discussed.
Keywords: Structural Software, Error Reductions, Structural Engineering, Building

Information Modeling, Modeling
INTRODUCTION
Computer usage in structural engineering has been adopted since its

development in the 1960’s and continues to evolve as new methods and needs arise.
As computer capabilities have been enhanced dramatically, engineering analysis and
design capabilities have correspondingly increased (Carpenter 2005). With increased
capabilities of software platforms, there is the potential for a growing rise in the
amount of errors that can be introduced into the process, particularly without skilled
knowledge on the process and modeling topic.
Having a thorough understanding of how the various modeling methods and
techniques impact the results when using software is extremely important (Willard
and Quinn 2013a). Perhaps most importantly when talking about technology, it
should be known that computers and software are merely tools, and like all tools it
must be used in a craftsman like fashion (Powell 2008a-b). Software can be very
useful or potentially dangerous to life safety conditions or lead to excessive damage
to the building around the structure. All this depends on how the software is
approached within the lifecycle process. Supporting evidence for both sides can
include: increase productivity and efficiency, demands of/on the project, complex
codes, and complex shapes and/or structures.
Always keep in mind when doing computer modeling that the goal of
conducting modeling is to get useful results to help in making system decisions
(Powell 2006). Models can be developed to achieve various subjectively chosen goals
Structures Congress 2014

and the adequacy of models needs to be appraised with respect to these goals (Alvi
2013). Adding to this, computational analysis should be used as a means of validating
the behavior only after the engineer has developed a sufficiently comprehensive and
detailed vision of the structural system to permit analytical work (Luth 2011).
Engineers often face modeling and analysis issues when designing irregular and
complex shaped buildings as the simplistic notions and interactions are not enough
(Shin et al. 2008). Modeling and the associated interpretation of the results from each
analysis and design are not simple tasks. They can be complex even for structures
that have static loads and with linear response, even more so when dynamic and
nonlinear concepts are introduced (Powell 2008a). A major advantage in computer
utilization is the repetitive evaluation of parameters and variations used to narrow
down feasible systems (Carpenter 2005).
Knowing the structural domain scope that software encompasses, it is quite
clear that software can easily become too complex to effectively manage and utilize.
Beyond complexity, software has a growing variety of programs that are available.
With each type and vender updates are frequently made available for these programs.
Updates are critical as they provide solutions to internal glitches in software and
update code provisions. As a result, it is a precarious balance between increasing
productivity by using these tools while limiting the risk of errors when using the
programs.
This paper provides greater insight into errors and ultimately how to reduce
them across structural sectors. The focus will be twofold, the first is with analysis and
design software and the second is on Building Information Modeling (BIM) software.
Commonalities between the two sectors will first be discussed followed by specifics
on how they are applied to each.
REDUCING ERRORS IN THE STRUCTURAL DOMAIN
To understand errors and how to reduce them, one must understand the
software and the nature behind errors before they can be reduced or eliminated. Many
current practitioners and practitioners turned academics have provided strong
justifications as to how we should approach structural computing. They also have
provided warnings on what makes for these types of errors. To summarize Emkin
(1998), Krawinkler (2006), Luth (2011), and Powell (2008b) to name a few, the
following notions are paramount to being able to accurately represent a physical
project in a digital setting.
Comprehension of the Software:

1) Be able to recognize the pitfalls and limitations of software.
2) The modeler and engineer (if they are not the same) should "know" the
answer beforehand and merely use the technology to fine tune the solution.
3) Computational analysis should be used as a means of validating the behavior
only after the design engineer has developed a sufficiently comprehensive and
detailed vision of the structural system to permit analytical work.

4) Considering the diverse goals of models, no standard objective means for

evaluating models can be prescribed, and instead judgment is generally
necessary.
Comprehension of the Results:

1) Never solely trust the software and/or tool you are using as it is only as good
as its assumptions, the user skill level, and its inputs.

2) Always be cautious of computer results, particularly if they are not developed
by you.
3) You should never use computer results without extensive validation with the
first time you implement new software.
Knowledge of Buildings:
1) Modelers need to understand the process of how a building is constructed and
to realize how their actions affect the bigger picture.
2) The engineer can no longer rely on someone else to figure out his or her own
incomplete knowledge at hand when the information is generated.
Knowledge of Structures:
1) A deep understanding of structure principles based on material behavior,
system behavior, modeling techniques, analysis methods, design procedures
and codes, and error assessment are essential prerequisites of leveraging the
power of automation.
2) Sound engineering judgment and intuition around building principles, codes
and standards are necessary for safe and efficient results.
So, to prevent problems such as operator error and lack of knowledge about
software, a method developed by Willard and Quinn (2012a-b; 2013a-b) can be
adopted for structural based programs. This method intends firms and practitioners
develop a Software Error Reduction Plan (SERP). The SERP was first introduced in
2009-2010 through a series of articles were published in Structural Engineer
Magazine (SE University 2012). The documents provided key steps that could be
used to create a tool that would help in reducing the risk of errors while using
structural software.
When formulated correctly, the SERP can help significantly reduce the
chance of errors being made while also increasing the chance of catching any
problem areas that could arise. The four steps for a SERP include:
1. Select a “champion” for each program.

2. Educate your engineers, create a training plan.
3. Research and create written processes and procedures in your office for
software usage.
4. Perform internal reviews of software models.
As it will be discussed in the next section, a SERP can be critical to reducing

the errors and quality of computer modeling in a firm no matter sub specialty within

structural analysis and design. A breakdown of these categories is provided to

illustrate in more detail how a firm and individual can approach the topic of
generating the SERP.
In regards to BIM, there are similar parallel tracks for error reduction but they
are far less explicit and less well known. This is based mostly on the newness of what
exactly BIM is and its maturity. To paint clearer picture on practices, national codes
(National BIM Standard), agencies (e.g. GSA and USACE), and research
organizations (Penn State and Stanford) are developing guides and best practice
recommendations on how to implement BIM. Two of the more recent guides that
provide excellent reference into BIM usage and how to obtain accurate results are
from the Penn State Computer Integrated Construction Research Group.
The first guide is the BIM Project Execution Planning (PxP) Guide. This
document focuses a structured procedure for planning the process of how BIM will
be executed on a project (CIC 2009). The main steps are:
1. Identify high value BIM uses during project planning, design, construction
and operational phases.
2. Design the BIM execution process by creating process maps.
3. Define the BIM deliverables in the form of information exchanges.
4. Develop the infrastructure in the form of contracts, communication
procedures, technology and quality control to support the implementation.
The second guide is the BIM Planning Guide for Facility Owners. This
document helps in planning and integrating BIM throughout an organization and for
the lifecycle of the building facility through a BIM organizational strategic planning
and BIM project procurement planning (CIC 2012; Chunduri et al. 2013). Each of
these are discussed more specifically related to structural engineering later but they
encompass:
1. BIM organizational strategic planning.

a. Assessing the organization’s internal and external BIM status.
b. Aligning the organization’s BIM objectives by identifying the desired
level of maturity.
c. Define the BIM maturity level through developing a defined advancement
strategy developing BIM Organizational Execution Plan.
2. Implementation Planning
a. Establish the Team.
b. Design BIM Integrated processes.
c. Determine infrastructure needs.
3. BIM project procurement planning.
a. Select a project team.
b. BIM Contracts.
c. Develop a BIM PxP.
These basic components to the SERP, BIM PxP and BIM Owners Plan are
broadly similar. Each have the capacity to meet the needs of reducing errors within

both domain sectors through a common platform of identify the situation and
providing measures to reduce error.
Structural Analysis and Design Modeling
Analysis and design can be argued as the most critical topics to model within
structures as they determine 1) the structural system, 2) the behavior to the manmade
and environmental conditions it will see during the lifecycle and 3) identify the
capacity of the designs. These models are mainly based on the application of
structural mechanics (sometimes idealized), as well as models of structural elements
calibrated by lab testing (Alvi 2013).
Mistakes here can often be less obvious and have a greater chance of being
overlooked. Analytical methods often, whether directly or indirectly, are driving the
design to select systems and elements based on a wide variety of criteria. Early
methods in the lifecycle look at more holistic provisions and best practices to narrow
system possibilities. Many of these do not have strong data support in authenticity,
instead they focus on the designer experience. Some of the most common errors
observed by the authors in modeling analysis and design are listed in Table 1. As it
can be seen, the errors are quite varied.
Table 1: Common Errors Modelers Make

• Area usage for loading, connections types • Sufficient number of modes are being
and rigidity, bracing of gravity and lateral used to obtain correct response spectrum
systems analysis results
• Using the wrong code • Wrong loads
• Lack of communication across modelers • How and when P-δ and P-Δ handled
• Proper selection of supports and member • Proper element selection for beams, walls,
releases slabs and foundations
• Incorrect or misunderstood default • Assuming all relevant considerations and
settings limit states are automatically checked
• Any automated concrete cracking stiffness • The lack of the proper usage of the proper
assumed codes and corresponding equations
• Misunderstanding if analysis results are • Using and interpreting the wrong dynamic
sensitive to the geometry the element characteristics in the model
mesh
To reduce errors during analysis and design modeling, it is important to have

a good understanding of what is required in the programs that are being used to
conduct said analysis or design. This is where the previously mentioned SERP comes
into play.
The first two steps listed in the SERP (Selecting a Champion, and Educating
your Engineers) focus on making sure that engineers understand the capabilities and
limitations of the different software programs they may use. The notions listed in the
previous section directly tie into proper champion selections and ensuring adequate
education is provided. In addition to understanding what the program can do, it is also
important to make sure that checks are done throughout the modeling and design
process to ensure that the information is inputted properly and the output is what

would be expected for a similar building. Specifically looking towards educating,

four areas should always be considered in developing a training plan:
1. An advanced level user can be responsible for providing additional training to

others and be the expert on a project for that particular capability.
2. Ensure that each individual has at least a minimum level of competency with
the fundamentals.
3. Limited users should have the skills to understand of how to check and verify
design criteria and results.
4. In new versions of software, one individual should be responsible to
investigate and fully understand changes.
Checks and reviews are the focus of the third and fourth steps in the SERP
(Review and Create Processes and Procedures and Perform Internal Reviews of
Models). By establishing processes on a project for creating models, engineers have a
framework to start building their models. This can also be paired with checklists,
which would allow for the model to be reviewed ahead of critical steps to confirm
that certain calculations and requirements have been made or were accounted for.
While performing internal reviews of models, engineers have a chance, not only to
have another set of eyes review their model, but also have the opportunity to work
collaboratively, and learn new information that can be used on subsequent projects.
Areas and topics that can be checked and verified within models and results are
summarized in Tables 2 and 3.
Table 2: Common Topics for Steps Three and Four

Common items to document Areas to perform internal reviews on
Analysis criteria The design criteria
Building behavior criteria Applied loads
Design criteria Gravity beam and column design
Load determination Serviceability and constructability issues
Code referencing Lateral applied forces
P, V, and M diagrams Distribution of lateral forces
Deflections Equilibrium check at foundation
Animated deflected shapes
Table 3: Advanced Checks for Rigorous Nonlinear Modeling

• Local ductility demand in structural • Relationships of member forces to perfectly
components plastic strengths
• Degree of non-symmetry with respect to • Post-ultimate unloading characteristics of the
strength, stiffness, or mass system,
• Locations where deformation or energy • System over-strength ratios (reserve capacity
absorption capacities can be exceeded beyond first yield)
• Total and/or plastic rotations, shear • Contributions to sway from panel-zones,
deformations, curvatures, and/or strains connections, beams, beam-columns
• Comparison to the drift of the ideal elastic • Story lateral displacement and story shear
system envelopes,
• Number of plastic hinges • Cumulative inelastic deformations

Focused within reviews is the ability to interoperate the results given by the
software as blind agreement with software should never be trusted. These checklists
and internal reviews boil down to that engineers need to be able to rapidly assess the
overall performance of a building structure subjected to multiple actions. These
actions look at the net overall effect and localized effects. Tables 2 and 3 clearly
show the wide variability of items that should be looked at to provide a
comprehensive validation. With the reviews, interpretation skills are equally

important. Major critical interpretation skills include:
• Ability to distinguish important and unimportant aspects of behavior

• An understanding the behavior of the various components that make up the
structures
• Checking whether the analysis results are reasonable
• Identifying the cause when results do not look reasonable
• Picking the correct data to evaluate the results a critical especially as the
analysis becomes more complex
In general, Alvi (2013) recommends treating models as “guilty until proven

innocent”, that is to say always be skeptical and critical of outcomes. If an error may
be present in a model due to inconsistencies between the results and the
modelers/reviewers judgment and intuition, the following options may help to
identify what is the issue is if there is one (note that many are able to be done visually
as well as numerically):
• Explicitly identify:
o The assumptions underlying a model.
o Identify what a model leaves out.
• Conduct independent peer reviews and checks during and after model
development.
• Perform sensitivity studies of its parameters to check a model’s robustness.
• Perform equilibrium checks and test models with simplified load cases.
• Investigate discrepancies between results from different models of the same
structure until they can be explained.
Structural Building Information Modeling
While analysis and design is the “core” of engineering design, documentation

is also paramount to be accurate. We tend to think of BIM as the primary
documentation and communication tool to convey the design intent nowadays. As
such, industry focus is mostly on platforms such as Revit, or Microstation, or even
Navisworks though, is far more than just those platforms. BIM models are becoming
able to cross platforms with a common base model (CURT 2005). Those that are
being used for various studies are now becoming equally important to be error free in
their generation. Due to the nature of the complexities involved in building structures,
the value of implementing BIM throughout the lifecycle has several major barriers to

cross, most of which are error related such as: technical content, accuracy, and
inclusion and exclusion of material and also confidence in the modeler and the firm.
Recently, suggestions for successful BIM adoption have been presented in
books, reports, on the Internet, and at conferences and webinars. Often limitedly
discussed, however, is the need for good modeling practices in how to reduce errors.
This is particularly true with companies that have limited manpower, time, and
financial resources often do not know how to approach the complexity of BIM
modeling (Won et al. 2013). Companies that adopt BIM often find a lack of
understanding of the software and process that naturally leads directly to inherent
errors in the process and models. Typical errors observed can be found in Table 4.
Table 4: Common BIM Errors Modelers Make

• Lack of or false material properties • Wrong member shapes utilized/drawn
• Usage of standardized components instead • Members and connection are not updated
of actual components when designs change
• Different origin points for referenced • Utilizing an outdated version of a
model(s) referenced model
• Improper transfer of information from • Members are not drawn accurately to
other software dimensions given
• Wrong or lack of boundary conditions • Notes do not match material in the model
• Wrong or lack of decking, studs, and • The exclusion of soft clashes
camber physically represented
• Not referencing all necessary models
As previously mentioned, two guides exist that propose techniques to develop

effective skills and BIM implementation, the BIM Project Execution Planning Guide
and the BIM Planning Guide for Facility Owners. Placing the adoption of the guides
along with general BIM understanding into a structural context, around what is a
SERP, there are several major areas to reduce errors. Currently, tools have to fit the
atmosphere of the lifecycle and the needs of all involved engineering disciplines for
each particular task (Struck et al. 2009). As such, each potential BIM Use (what BIM
functions as) could have a unique SERP. Nonetheless there are commonalities that
should always be followed (Kreider et al. 2010).
To reduce errors during BIM modeling that could be used for analysis and
design or other uses such as sequences and detailing, it is equally important to have a
good understanding of what is required in the programs that are being used for your
situation. Now though, you also need to know how the models will be used by other
trades. Adopting the SERP steps help to simply the more detailed documents on BIM.
The first step is to select a BIM Champion who is technically skilled in all
relevant topics of structural BIM that the firm will conduct. Due to the wide scope of
BIM, several champions in critical areas (analysis and design, authoring of how and
what to model and when, and detailing) may be required. BIM champion(s) should
have the ability to answer other people’s questions and trouble shoot errors.
Furthermore, the champion(s) should have the ability to help in software purchases,
software updates, and contract languages for individual projects.
The second focus is on making sure that engineers understand the capabilities
and limitations of the different software programs they may use. Clear awareness of

the opportunities, limitations, and implications of what the models will be used for
need to be defined so that everyone knows what their efforts can alter. At each
different phase, the models may change in type and complexity which leads itself to
more errors. The difference though is not significant. Specifically looking towards
educating staff, two areas should always be considered in developing a training plan:
1) the type of experience needed by all members and 2) how the technology can
influence the work.
1. Type of experience needed:

a. An advanced level user can be responsible for providing additional training to
others and be the expert on a project for that particular use or lifecycle phase.
b. Individual(s) should be responsible to investigate and fully understand
changes in new versions of software effect results.
c. Ensure that each individual has at least a minimum level of competency with
the fundamentals of 1) modeling and 2) with the fundamentals of how a
building structural system goes together.
d. Limited users should have the skills to understand of how to check and verify
modeling results.
2. How the technology can influence the work:
a. Will BIM goals and objectives in the firm and on projects produce situations
that limit errors?
b. What are the collaboration procedures inside the firm and within the project
team that will impact modeling accuracy?
c. Does the technology infrastructure being implemented lead to errors?
d. Does the BIM process being conducted affect the outcome of modeling?
e. What model storage, naming, usage, reference, and division structures
produce fewer errors?
f. How is information transferred and who gets what?
To ensure that the information is input properly, the modeling of the data rich
attributes is critical. To grasp what information needs to be modeled, it is important
for the author and receiver of each information exchange transaction to clearly
understand the information content. The best way to ensure information is properly
modeled, it is recommended to step through each element type of the facility and
determine if 1) a visualization of that element would be beneficial and sufficient or if
2) additional data rich properties are required.
These decisions need made in each BIM Use at each lifecycle phase. An
example is if in Schematic Design (SD), material properties are not needed but in
Construction Documentation (CD) they are needed or if sequencing software doesn’t
require moments but analysis software requires them. This is associated with
developing a Level of Development (LOD) for each element type for each use and
each phase. AIA E202, AIA E203, and BIM Forum’s LOD Specification is a good
start for what is typical for structural systems (AIA 2008, 2013; BIM FORUM 2013).
These however only look at visual based information and not the rich data attributes
currently. Table 5 lists common areas to identify before generating a BIM model.

Table 5: Standard Modeling Areas to Identify and Agree Upon

Where to divide a model for separation Model complexity for phase
Model complexity for manipulation Structural LOD at each phase
How often to provide reference models Classification of updated/edited elements
Data rich attributes to include and ignore
To make these decisions effectively, the purpose of the information and how
it will be utilized should be understood. Most activities in the lifecycle either
consume and/or produce single or multiple information items. This information can
best be classified into three main categories to differentiate them. The first is Product
information where items that related to the building’s physical elements and
properties, the second is Feedback information where items related to the control and
decision making characteristics on the building performance, and the third is Process
Control information where items related to the restriction and control over how the
sequence of a set of activities is done. More information into this can be found in
Solnosky (2013).
Beyond understanding what the program and process can do, it is also
important to make sure that checks and balances are completed throughout the
phases. This is the last main critical step needing to be conducted on each model
frequently. The primary items to perform an internal review on are varied but they
have common themes among the different BIM uses. Common themes are listed in
Table 6.
Table 6: Areas to Perform Internal Reviews on BIM Models

Applied loading Who authored the contents
Resultant design forces Origin points for referenced model(s)
Connectivity of members Last update (version) of referenced model(s)
Proper insertion points Story level settings
Material properties Concrete cover
Beam and column shape properties Deck direction
Material volumes Steel headed shear studs and camber
To summarize, developing a SERP for BIM is embedded within other BIM

guides but based on the amount of information they convey, it is important to not lose
focus of those guides. For BIM to work, three primary things always need to happen:
1) the information has to be there at the time it is required, 2) information needs to be
in a form useful to others, and 3) information needs to be reliable. To make BIM
more efficient as a whole in the structural domain, the following should be considered
from a practicality standpoint:
• Use the software as it was designed to be used and don't use shortcuts purely
for the production of documentation.
• Embed all the data you can into your model, then use it.
• Check your model for consistency before issuing.
• Provide documentation to others on how your model is structured.
• Define the degree of precision (LOD and measurements) to your model.
• Insist on a robust coordinate base point.

CONCLUSION
Computers have forever changed the way in which engineering is conducted.

Software is still changing the way we conduct business and engineering through
being able to tackle more and more complex and challenging projects. When doing
such analysis and design with software, however, one cannot simply regard these
tools as absolute correctness nor should they rely on them without verification. It is
imperative that we comprehend that the objective of software is not to predict ‘exact’
behavior for a structure as all models are simplifications and abstract representations
of actual structures. Consequently, errors could always be present in the models
depending on the project and the modeler.
Errors, as it was mentioned, can always be present where software is used.
Methods nevertheless exist to limit them or isolate and correct them. These errors
span all domains of structural software from analysis to design to BIM. While the
details may be different, the overall goal and concept is relatively similar. Four
paramount steps exist within a Software Error Reduction Plan (SERP) to help identify
or limit errors on a project. They are: select a champion, create a training plan, create
software usage written procedures in your office, and perform internal reviews.
No matter who you are in a firm or your role as a structural engineer there are
embedded notions within SERPs that bring to light just what an engineer is and what
software is and most importantly how to manage it. It is always important to have
engineering intuition skills and software specific skills to conceive, check, and
understand the model. Information can then be taken and applied to where real
engineering comes into play in making specific selections for that project.
References
Alvi, I.A. (2013). “Engineers Need to Get Real, But Can’t: The Role of Models”,
2013 ASCE Structures Congress, May 2-4 Pittsburgh, Pa, 916-927
American Institute of Architects (AIA) (2008) “Document E202-2008 Building
Information Protocol”, American Institute of Architect
American Institute of Architects (AIA) (2013) “Document E203-2013 Building
Information Modeling and Digital Data Exhibit”, American Institute of Architect
BIM Forum (2013). “2013 Level of Development Specification for Building
Information Models,” AGC BIM Forum, 8/22/2012, pages 125
Carpenter, L.D. (2005). “Influences on structural engineering”, Struct. Design Tall
Spec. Build, 14, 419-425
Chunduri, S., Kreider, R., Messner, J.I. (2013). “A Case Study on Implementation of
the BIM Planning Procedures for Facility Owners”, AEI 2013, University Park,
PA, 691-701
Computer Integrated Construction Research Program (CIC) (2009). BIM Project
Execution Planning Guide – Version 1.1”, October 8, The Pennsylvania State
University, University Park, PA
Computer Integrated Construction Research Program (CIC) (2012). "BIM Planning
Guide for Facility Owners", 1.02 ed. University Park, PA, USA: The
Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA

Construction Users Roundtable (CURT). (2005). Optimizing the construction

process: An implementation strategy, CURT, Cincinnati, OH.
Emkin, L.Z. (1998). “Misuse of computers by structural engineers-a clear and present
danger”, Structural Engineers World Congress, SEWC’98, July 19-23, San
Francisco, CA
Krawinkler, H. (2006). “Importance of Good Nonlinear Analysis”, Struct. Design
Tall Spec. Build. 15, 515–531

Kreider, R., Messner, J., and Dubler, C. (2010). “Determining the frequency and
impact of applying BIM for different purposes on projects”, Proceedings of the
6th International Conference on Innovation in Architecture, Engineering &
Construction (AEC), June 9-11, University Park, pg. 381-392.
Luth, G.P. (2011). “VDC and the Engineering Continuum”, Journal of Construction
Engineering and Management, 137(10), 906-915
Powell, G. (2006). “Nonlinear dynamic analysis capabilities and limitations”, Struct.
Design Tall Spec. Build, 15, 547-552
Powell, G.H. (2008a). “Structural analysis: are we relying too much on computers?
Part I the problem”, Structure Magazine, 50-52
Powell, G.H. (2008b). “Structural analysis: are we relying too much on computers?
Part II the solution”, Structure Magazine, December, 20-23
SE University (2012). “Structural Engineer Magazine Articles: Creating a Software
Error Reduction Plan for your Office: last accessed: 11/20/2013,
http://learnwithseu.com/?p=541
Shin, M., Pimentel, B., and Grossman, J. (2008). “Practical Finite Element Analysis
Issues for an irregular reinforced concrete high-rise building”, Concrete
International, October, 71-76
Struck, C., deWilde, P., Hopfe, C.J., and Hensen, J.L.M. (2009). “An investigation of
the option space in conceptual building design for advanced building simulation”,
Advanced Engineering Informatics, 23, 386-395
Solnosky, R.L. (2013). “Integrated structural process model: An inclusive non-
material specific approach to determining the required tasks and information
exchanges for structural BIM”, Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Architectural
Engineering, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA
Willard, L. and Quinn, B. (2012a). “Tips for using diaphragms with analysis
software: Part 1”, Structural Engineering and Design, October 2012
Willard, L. and Quinn, B. (2012b). “Tips for using diaphragms with analysis
software: Part 2”, Structural Engineering and Design, December 2012, pages 1-3.
Willard, L. and Quinn, B. (2013a). “Tips for using diaphragms with analysis
software: Part 3”, Structural Engineering and Design, February 2013, pages 1-6.
Willard, L. and Quinn, B. (2013b). “Tips for using diaphragms with analysis
software: Part 3”, Structural Engineering and Design, February 2013, pages 1-6.
Won, J., Lee, G., Dossick, C., and Messner, J. (2013). “Where to Focus for
Successful Adoption of Building Information Modeling within Organization”,
Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 04013014(10)

2014 - Reducing Errors When Using Structural Software

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

2014 - Reducing Errors When Using Structural Software

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Structures Congress 2014 © ASCE 2014 2139

Reducing Errors when using Structural Software

Structural engineering software continues to evolve through the addition of

Keywords: Structural Software, Error Reductions, Structural Engineering, Building

Computer usage in structural engineering has been adopted since its

Structures Congress 2014

REDUCING ERRORS IN THE STRUCTURAL DOMAIN

Comprehension of the Software:

Structures Congress 2014

4) Considering the diverse goals of models, no standard objective means for

Comprehension of the Results:

as its assumptions, the user skill level, and its inputs.

1. Select a “champion” for each program.

As it will be discussed in the next section, a SERP can be critical to reducing

Structures Congress 2014

structural analysis and design. A breakdown of these categories is provided to

1. BIM organizational strategic planning.

Structures Congress 2014

Structural Analysis and Design Modeling

Table 1: Common Errors Modelers Make

To reduce errors during analysis and design modeling, it is important to have

Structures Congress 2014

would be expected for a similar building. Specifically looking towards educating,

1. An advanced level user can be responsible for providing additional training to

Table 2: Common Topics for Steps Three and Four

Table 3: Advanced Checks for Rigorous Nonlinear Modeling

Structures Congress 2014

comprehensive validation. With the reviews, interpretation skills are equally

• Ability to distinguish important and unimportant aspects of behavior

In general, Alvi (2013) recommends treating models as “guilty until proven

Structural Building Information Modeling

While analysis and design is the “core” of engineering design, documentation

Structures Congress 2014

Table 4: Common BIM Errors Modelers Make

As previously mentioned, two guides exist that propose techniques to develop

Structures Congress 2014

influence the work.

1. Type of experience needed:

Structures Congress 2014

Table 5: Standard Modeling Areas to Identify and Agree Upon

Table 6: Areas to Perform Internal Reviews on BIM Models

To summarize, developing a SERP for BIM is embedded within other BIM

Structures Congress 2014

Computers have forever changed the way in which engineering is conducted.

Structures Congress 2014

Construction Users Roundtable (CURT). (2005). Optimizing the construction

Tall Spec. Build. 15, 515–531

Structures Congress 2014

You might also like