lOMoARcPSD|7297272

Civil Engineering Orientation pdf

Civil Engineering Projects (Mindanao State University - Iligan Institute of Technology)

StuDocu is not sponsored or endorsed by any college or university

Downloaded by cat buenafe (catbuenafe27@gmail.com)
 lOMoARcPSD|7297272

WEEK I – Subject/Course Overview and Requirements

WEEK 2 – Introduction to Civil Engineering as a Bachelor Program and as a
Profession
Bachelor's degree - Post-secondary degree awarded to an individual after
completion of undergraduate course work usually taking eight semesters and 120
credits to complete. Course work for bachelor's degrees is done at the
undergraduate level and is made up of general studies and major specific classes.
Bachelor's degrees are awarded in specific concentrations and are built on the
Bachelor of Science, Bachelor of Arts, or Bachelor of Fine Arts foundations.
Individuals pursue bachelor's degrees to further their education and career
advancement. A bachelor's degree may also be referred to as a baccalaureate.

TUP – Bachelor of Science in Civil Egineering

- Completed 195 units within eight (8) semesters
- Three (3) options professional course
o Specislization : Structural Engineering
o Specislization : Construction Engineering and Management
o Specislization : Water Resources Engineering

Read more: http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/bachelors-degree.html

Civil Engineering Profession

Civil engineers are highly trained professionals that provide technical services
throughout the world. Civil engineers are needed in big cities and small towns,
working in both the government and private sectors. Within the profession are
several major disciplines, summarized below.

Downloaded by cat buenafe (catbuenafe27@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|7297272

WEEK 3 – Civil Engineering Discipline and Its Fields of Specialization

Major Disciplines Within Civil Engineering

Transportation Engineering

Transportation engineers work to develop transportation systems that safely and

efficiently move people and goods. Transportation engineers design highways and
roads in both urban and rural areas and manage traffic systems to keep operations
functioning effectively. They also plan rail, air and waterway transportation systems.
Transportation engineers develop and incorporate new technologies to improve
transportation and maintain safety.

Geotechnical Engineering

Because nearly all of the built environment is ultimately supported by the ground,
geotechnical engineers are needed to apply their knowledge of soil and rock
mechanics in all civil engineering design. Work performed by geotechnical engineers
includes performing site investigations, designing shallow and deep foundations,
evaluating slope stability, conducting and overseeing materials testing, planning
tunnels, and designing soil/rock and other ground improvements.

Downloaded by cat buenafe (catbuenafe27@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|7297272

Structural Engineering

Structural engineers apply scientific principles to design building, bridges and other
structures to withstand the forces of nature and protect human safety. Structural
engineers are knowledgeable of how structures and materials behave under loads.
They design structures to perform their intended functions and be economical within
the constraints of building code requirements. Structural engineers typically design
structures made of reinforced concrete, structural steel and wood.

Environmental/Water Resources Engineering

Environmental engineers apply a vast range of technical knowledge to protect the

environment from human activities and maintain public health. The work of
environmental engineers includes the design of water treatment and wastewater
treatment plants, development of systems for handling non-hazardous and
hazardous wastes, development of pollution control measures and cleanup of
contaminated sites. Water resources engineers are involved in the planning and
management of facilities used to supply and transport water used for municipal,
agricultural and industrial activities. In addition, water resources engineers develop
facilities and methods to capture and store water from storms while avoiding and/or
minimizing flooding.

Downloaded by cat buenafe (catbuenafe27@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|7297272

CIVIL ENGINEERS of all disciplines can be found in companies and organization of

all sizes, in urban and rural settings, and in civilian, military, or government roles.

WEEK 4 – History of Civil Engineering

https://civilengineerthoughts003.blogspot.com/2013/08/the-history-of-civil-
engineering.html#.XUqeUOgzbIU

WEEKS 5 & 6 –Civil Engineering and Society and Other Profession

The role of the civil engineer in society: engineering ethics and major projects
By Prof Richard Ashley

Richard Ashley is a Professional Civil and Environmental Engineer, Director of

EcoFutures Ltd (http://www.ecofutures.eu/), Professor of Urban Water & former
Managing Director of the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council
funded multi-disciplinary Platform Centre, the Pennine Water Group (PWG) at the
University of Sheffield.
Introduction
A call was made by Prince Charles in his sustainability lecture (NCE, 2012) to revisit
the definition of civil engineering especially as he saw the profession playing a
crucial role in tackling future challenges such as climate change. It is now timely for
professional civil engineers to not be afraid to say what they really think to
government, clients and employers. The Profession firstly serves mankind and
everything we do needs to take a global perspective. However, personal fears may
be inhibiting an ethical stance for many.
Economic constraints and local interests have made it much more difficult for many
civil engineering professionals to adhere to the clear ethical principles of formulation
and adherence to a set of values or beliefs; a core component of social and technical
progress (Hodgkinson & Sohail, 2003). In this the individual needs to subscribe to
the corporate ethic, i.e. for the purposes of this discussion the rules, principles and
codes which are built around and define the ethics of the Institution of Civil
Engineers, irrespective of the individuals’ employment or professional practice
position. All professionals should regularly consider the ethics of their position and
the work they are involved in (Fan, 2003). Professional challenges, disagreements,
dichotomies and dilemmas are inevitable and taking an ethical view can help inform

Downloaded by cat buenafe (catbuenafe27@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|7297272

decision-making and be the source of technological development rather than a

constraint (van den Hoven et al, 2012).
The Civil Engineers’ work is defined by boundaries. Nowadays the two most
important of these boundaries are: (i) the working boundary, as an employee or self-
employed professional practitioner, and; (ii) the job boundary, where the scope, scale
and overall physical and temporal boundaries of the work in hand are set. In the
working context, the professional, however engaged, has a duty to comply with the
ethical and conduct standards set by the Institution (ICE, 2004; 2008) and have
regard for the wider standards expected notably by the Engineering Council. A
challenging requirement is that for the professional ‘to only perform services in
areas of current competence’ (Royal Academy of Engineering, 2011); especially
where there is innovation that inherently brings new risks and uncertainties into the
work.
There is a third boundary, that related to the information made available to the client
and how it may be constrained or presented in a particular way and to whom. In an
open system the information about the scheme, both locally and in a wider context
would be made available to the paying client and to society as a whole.
Professionals have a difficult task in deciding what information and how best to make
this available in a way that can best be understood in an increasingly complex world
where non-experts are struggling with the rapidly increasing body of knowledge held
by increasingly polarised experts who in turn, frequently disagree about the best
course of action (Naustdalslid, 2012; Laws & Loeber, 2010). This is a paradox, given
humanity’s growing ability to manipulate and change natural systems and requires
professionals who can recognise these challenges and rise above often too locally
focussed stakeholder interests.
The use of sophisticated computer models is perhaps the greatest change in the
engineers’ practice in the past few decades and making the functioning and results
from these models clear to clients, together with the correct range of uncertainties in
the analysis, is a major challenge when sharing information. This can lead to
decision making that is sometimes misguided where the form and amounts of
information provided have not been the most appropriate. This is illustrated by the
use of sewer flow and quality models to decide upon large investments in cleaning
up polluting discharges into the environment. These models typically have a
precision of within some 20% when applied to flow rates and volumes, but are
inaccurate when considering pollutant loads, with uncertainties ranging up to 200%,
with one commentator (Willems, 2008) suggesting that a random number generator

Downloaded by cat buenafe (catbuenafe27@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|7297272

would be just as useful. In England, consultants, regulators and sewerage

undertakers rarely if ever acknowledge these uncertainties, which with a changing
climate can only become greater in the future (Schellart et al, 2010). There is a
general need to reframe how such uncertainties are handled and presented
professionally if they are to be coped with appropriately in terms of the big
challenges ahead (Brugnach et al, 2008).
Whether or not the professional is an employee, as a professional, any service
should be delivered with integrity to ensure that the clients’ needs are met in the best
way possible; but at the same time to guide the client to understand better what is
really needed to solve a problem and take advantage of opportunities. At times this
may mean that the needs of the employer, where the professional is employed by a
private or public organization, have to be subordinated in the best interests of the
client. A professional in such a position has to try to ensure that the immediate client
(their employer) and the project client are both served well by their work as a
professional. Ideally this should also serve the needs of society. They also need to
be able to argue persuasively for their views and deal with the dilemmas arising from
alternative views and interests (Laws & Loeber, 2010).
In the early days of civil engineering as a profession, engineers were often
promoters of projects themselves, being responsible for fund raising and gaining
political acceptance for a scheme, thus serving the role of both client and
professional in ‘progressing’ society, where virtually any civil engineering works were
clearly of benefit to the wider social good. The boundary question arising from this is
‘who is the client’? When Tredgold in 1828 defined civil engineering at the time of the
establishment of the Institution he was taking a visionary stance that demonstrated
the vital role civil engineering endeavour had for mankind, as “A Society for the
general advancement of Mechanical Science, and more particularly for promoting
the acquisition of that species of knowledge which constitutes the profession of a
Civil Engineer; being the art of directing the great sources of power in Nature for the
use and convenience of man, as the means of production and of traffic in states,
both for external and internal trade, as applied in the construction of roads, bridges,
aqueducts, canals, river navigation, and docks, for internal intercourse and
exchange; and in the construction of ports harbours, moles, breakwaters, and
lighthouses, and in the art of navigation by artificial power, for the purposes of
commerce; and in the construction and adaptation of machinery, and in the drainage
of cities and towns”[1].

Downloaded by cat buenafe (catbuenafe27@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|7297272

Prince Charles’ 2012 sustainability lecture (NCE, 2012) underlined the urgency of
acknowledging and acting differently to address today’s and future challenges and
suggested that ICE had a central role in this but needed to refine its’ charter to alter
how civil engineering professionals see their role in order to align more with working
with the environment rather than ‘directing’ it. Especially as many historical civil
engineering projects had been deleterious to the environment, using up precious
non-renewable resources, and creating climate changing wastes: “engineers must
realise the importance of using lower carbon materials and more natural techniques”.
The view for a need to subtly change what civil engineering is had previously been
expressed in a 2003 ICE Council Task Group, where ‘directing’ was recommended to
be replaced with ‘working with’ and the word ‘society’ replacing ‘man’ in the Tredgold
definition. The sustainability charter (2003) and a revised definition of civil
engineering by Council in 2007 as “a vital art, working with the great sources of
power in nature for the wealth and well-being of the whole of society” indicated an
emphasis on the societal and environmentally sympathetic nature of civil
engineering’s mission. The Engineering Council, in their inter-institutional guidance
on sustainability (Bogle, 2010) re-emphasise the ethical dimension to engineering
endeavours and state six principles (engineers should):
a) Contribute to building a sustainable society, present and future;
b) Apply professional and responsible judgement and take a leadership role;
c) Do more than just comply with legislation and codes;
d) Use resources efficiently and effectively;
e) Seek multiple views to solve sustainability challenges;
f) Manage risk to minimize adverse impact to people or the environment
The guidance (Engineering Council, 2009) further elaborates on each principle. For
example, (b) includes requirements for the engineer to: look at the broad picture; be
prepared to influence the decision-maker for a project; identify options that take
account of global, economic, social and environmental outcomes; ensure that the
solutions and options are offered that will contribute to sustainability; be aware that
there are inherently conflicting and unmeasurable aspects of sustainability. Such
definitions, ranging from the fundamental tenets of civil engineering through to a new
view of engineering as a whole based on contemporary understanding of today’s
science and society’s needs, clearly place the boundary of civil engineering
endeavours as widely as possible no matter what the scheme. Nowhere in the
statements of principle, ethical considerations or other guidance is the definition of

Downloaded by cat buenafe (catbuenafe27@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|7297272

the ‘client’ constrained to mean the boundaries of the job in hand; rather it is clear
that the proper boundary is society and the environment as a whole.
Unfortunately, for many civil engineering employees especially in large
organisations, their ability to apply these principles is defined by their employer, who
may also be a public body, rather than the wider world or their own understanding of
professional ethics. The art of corporate social responsibility may or may not serve
the same principles as the professional civil engineer, as employer organisations in
themselves serve many masters, not least shareholders (Barry, 2003).
There can be major tensions as a result of the need to balance professional activities
between the various boundaries constraining, yet at the same time opening up, the
range of activities within which civil engineering endeavours are carried out – e.g.
designs for a new motorway bridge need to consider both the details of the bridge
itself in terms of strength, materials etc. and also at the same time, the wider
implications of traffic use in the future as well as the construction use and potential
depletion of resources and emission of greenhouse gases, as a wider more globally
impacting consideration. However, depending on the clients’ brief, whether or not
there is the need for the bridge in the first place may or may not be considered within
a wider societal and environmental perspective. Yet, it seems that civil engineers are
mostly able to balance their activities successfully avoiding transgressions of the
codes of ethics and professional conduct, especially where the professional is
working for a large organisation. McGowan (2012) reported that the majority of those
found guilty of professional misconduct by the Professional Conduct Panel of ICE
were either individual practitioners or part of a small consultancy and that the
misdemeanours concerned inadequate client communication or not keeping up to
date as regards practice. Given the complexity of today’s world and how best to
‘work with the great sources of power in nature for the wealth and well-being of the
whole of society’ envisaged for each and every civil engineering scheme, it is
surprising that more members of the Institution are not adjudged of misconduct or at
least of not performing ‘services in areas of current competence’.
The ethical challenge
Engineers have long been proud that they do what anyone can, but they do it better,
more efficiently and more cost-effectively. Civil engineers rightly can claim a special
place in ‘directing the great forces of nature for the benefit of mankind’. Self-
evidently the works done by our forebears almost always benefitted mankind, in the
widest sense as well as benefiting the immediate client (the one who paid).
Definitions of civil engineering also include references to ‘problem-solving’[2] often

Downloaded by cat buenafe (catbuenafe27@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|7297272

resulting in a preoccupation with ‘problems’ rather than opportunities by engineers.

Maximising the benefits and solving problems seem to be good definitions of what
civil engineers actually do.
Nowadays, perhaps more than in the recent past, the multiplicity of professions
involved in infrastructure and the built environment requires a new way of
collaborating and even a new type of engineer. The current problems and
opportunities that go with this require a move away from the traditional engineering
reductionism of complex phenomena into simple constituent elements in order for
society to apply traditional engineering skills to find practical solutions to problems in
nature such as climate change. Recognising the importance of the interface between
nature and society has never been more important than it is now and recent ideas
and guidance about ecosystem services are helping with this (e.g. Everard, 2011).
The new, or perhaps restated, boundaries to engineering need to help professionals
move away from the traditional engineering technocratic perspective in order to
include a wider range of knowledge, especially concerning societal values and
interests (Naustdalislid, 2012). In the past, large infrastructural schemes were
appropriate in which ‘big’ engineering converted natural resources into useful
artefacts and services. Now, minimisation of the use of resources is essential as is
reduction of emissions of any sort. Such moves also require the embracement of the
wider principles of engineering ethics to ensure societal and environmental needs
are fully met. Is it for example, enough to devise solutions to problems that do not
ensure that as wide as possible benefits and opportunities for society and the
environment are embraced, if that is what the client wants? The presence of
compelling legislation or regulations should not constrain the professional engineer
from doing things differently, ((c) in the introduction) although concerns about
innovations and their efficacy can rightly inhibit recklessness ((f) in the introduction).
The perceived sustainability of organisations themselves can constrain innovation
and the use of wider boundaries in engineering. When moving from one regime to
the next in terms of innovations in practice, it is not sufficient just to challenge the
technological paradigms; the institutions and the governance arrangements that
deliver the supplanted practices are also likely to need to be changed as well (Brown
et al, 2011). In the water industry, the stationary design and operational assumptions,
related to historically slowly changing external drivers (Milly et al, 2008) and the
continuing investments underpinning the large technical systems (asset
management) provide inevitable conditions for ‘technological entrapment’ (Walker,
2000) or ‘lock-in’ to perpetuating their use as the perceived ‘common-sense’

Downloaded by cat buenafe (catbuenafe27@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|7297272

approach; one enshrined in institutional cultures, such as held by the Environment

Agency in England (Palmer, 2000).
Examples of ethical dilemmas – or simply healthy professional disagreement
There is some evidence that today’s civil engineers are providing services to clients
with only limited challenges to the scope of the brief or are encouraging over-
engineering and not delivering value for money; clear examples of unethical
behaviour if true. Many schemes serve single outcomes for society, unlike the Dutch
Room for the River programme, where investing in ‘quality’ of the environment is an
integral part of the process of increasing the conveyance of river flows across the
country (van Herk et al, 2012).
Recent examples of potential complaints about unprofessional practices include
concerns about over-engineering of the completed A46 Newark to Widmerpool
improvement (Greenwood, 2012) and the proposed New Wear Bridge in Sunderland
(Wynne, 2012) and the viability and advisability of the proposed HS2 rail link (The
Economist, 2012). For every concerned correspondent there are invariably a number
of supporters of these schemes. While there will always be professional
disagreements about the best option to fulfil a particular societal need, it is the
ethical duty of all professionals to provide advice and information that is impartial,
well-balanced and using the best available knowledge. Civil engineers’ involvement
in these and other schemes usually begins only once the project has been decided
upon and not at the inception when it is decided whether or not the project is needed
at all. With the advent of the new National Planning Policy Framework 2012 in
England, the streamlining of the planning process is likely to result in fewer
challenges to big schemes (an intention of DCLG), seemingly contrary to the
promotion of localism through the Localism Act 2011. Should professional engineers
then simply press on with designing the best scheme for a client where there are
clear flaws in the original definition of the needs and requirements? Taking a societal
stance, perhaps the original definitions need to be reconsidered and an alternative
approach developed to fulfil the original need. Many of these schemes are claimed to
be ‘spending of money beyond all sense’ providing very limited benefits (Jenkins,
2012).
Big infrastructure schemes are seen as the bread and butter of civil engineering and
invariably as “vital to the Nation’s future” (Oliver, 2012). Principally, HS2 has been
lauded by the Secretary of State for Transport (NCE, 2012a) as building on the
Victorian railway legacy similarly to the plans for the proposed Thames Tideway
Tunnels, where the legacy of Joseph Bazalgette’s intercepting sewers in London has

Downloaded by cat buenafe (catbuenafe27@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|7297272

been used to promote the tunnels and for which the recently returned Mayor of
London stated that “future generations of Londoners will thank us for taking forward
this bold vision” (Water Active, 2008). How a ‘bold vision’ can be seen to come out of
an approach used 150 years ago is confounding. Elsewhere in the world, a green
infrastructure approach is being taken wherever possible (e.g. in Philadelphia,
Ashley et al, 2011) keeping storm water on the surface as far as practicable and
recognising it as a resource (Thurston, 2012). This approach has been shown to add
considerable additional benefits to urban life; some $3bn in Philadelphia from using
green infrastructure for 50% of the management of stormwater runoff. Achieving this
was not easy for the professionals concerned (CDM Smith consultants) who had to
fight many battles over more than 5 years to make the regulators and fellow
professionals understand the potential value of taking a green infrastructure
approach through retrofitting across the city. This required significant resourcing and
commitment at the highest level in the City of Philadelphia (Maimone, 2012).
In the London Plan 2011 (GLA, 2011), the Mayor wants to make the city one of the
greenest in the world, yet has failed to make the connection between continuing to
drain the city as it has always been drained by building the new sewer tunnels to
take the runoff, and the need for stormwater to be used on the surface to irrigate the
new green city especially at a time of water stress (Gard, 2012). Greening is not the
only opportunity in London provided by surface water. Blue-green cities where water
is evident help to cope with climate change and provide a wealth of water-related
multiple benefits including place making and quality of life (Digman et al, 2012).
Adopting a Philadelphia style approach in London is said to be too expensive and
too difficult and not ‘common-sense’ (Thames Water, 2011). The old ways are the
best ways and ‘we know they work’. They do when addressing a single problem, but
at what costs? We now know about environmental impacts from big infrastructure
and especially about the causes of climate change which many schemes have
contributed to in the past and traditional practices are known to be unsustainable
(White & Howe, 2004). We also know about the need to maximise value to society in
everything a civil engineer does – surface water can provide significant added value
and schemes that address only single problems as the London sewer tunnels do are
no longer affordable. Any competent professional should be aware of this.
The proposed London sewer tunnels illustrate the complexity of today’s problems
and the divergence in professional opinions as to how best to deal with these; they
also illustrate the conflict between best value for society and the immediate client. In
many ways the proposals are an example of the classical approach to civil

Downloaded by cat buenafe (catbuenafe27@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|7297272

engineering challenges (seen as a problem). The client, Thames Water Utilities is

acting on behalf of a wider client, London and UK society, and also contributing to
improvements to the aquatic environment by minimising the numbers and volumes of
combined sewer overflow (CSO) spills into the River Thames (Thomas & Crawford,
2010). There is a single problem, the solution to which is to construct new tunnels,
mainly beneath the river bed, to store excess overflow spills, which will then be
pumped back up for treatment. In Bazalgette’s day, the intercepting sewers were
self-evidently benefiting society and these sewers have provided healthy conditions
for the populace for decades, despite the doubters at the time, who were concerned
with the centralisation of sewage management (Allen, 2008; Charles, 2009).
Since the great public health revolution in the mid 1800s, where the key building
blocks of public health engineering were laid down, much knowledge about urban
drainage has been developed and the use of computers has facilitated more detailed
analysis than ever before of the performance of systems (e.g. Butler & Davies,
2011). This has provided new ideas and also the opportunity to test out, by computer
simulation, a wide range of options (Thomas & Crawford, 2010). At the same time as
confidence has risen regarding the ability to estimate rainfall, the way in which urban
hydrology functions and the potential polluting impacts on receiving waters of urban
runoff, emerging ideas have come to regard all forms of water as potentially
beneficial, especially where climate or weather variability is threatening supply
security (e.g. Howe & Mitchell, 2012). The growing knowledge about climate change
is clear that whilst there may have been a period in history where predictions of the
performance of urban drainage systems could be made with some certainty, this no
longer pertains and past records are scant indications of how rainfall and runoff will
behave in the future (Milly et al, 2008). Therefore professionals are faced with
chronic and significant uncertainties about the future and the way in which any new
infrastructure will perform, just at a time when computer models appear to provide
some certainty. There has never been a more significant period in history where the
uncertainty of analysis and the building in of adaptive flexibility into infrastructure has
been more important (Gersonius et al, 2012). Clearly in Bazalgette’s day there were
major uncertainties in environmental and other factors and good engineering
judgement had to be made to ensure that appropriate safety factors were included.
The difference today is that there is very little time and opportunity to act to avert the
coming impacts from climate change (as stated by Prince Charles) and yet
engineers and other professionals are failing to change the practices fast enough
that are known to exacerbate climate change and which fail to provide the resilience

Downloaded by cat buenafe (catbuenafe27@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|7297272

required to reduce future vulnerabilities in society (Naustdalslid, 2012; Gersonius et

al, 2012).
In London the amount of energy needed to pump the 39Mm 3/year of water from the
new sewer tunnels up some 60m is 15,000,000 kWh/year (Thames Water, 2005).
Despite this, no carbon footprint or carbon impact assessment for either the
operation of the tunnels nor for the construction has been undertaken or even
required by the client or by the overseeing department, Defra. This is despite Ofwat’s
(the water industry regulator) requirement for the water companies to report their
carbon footprints for the last asset management planning round in 2010. In 2010,
Thames Water opened a new 140Ml/day desalination plant in London to deal with
peak demands, given the go-ahead following “a victory for common-sense”
according to Thames Water’s chief executive (NCE, 2008).
The construction of the new sewer tunnel and desalination plant, represent a
substantial economic investment, in excess of £4bn capital, a substantial amount
which increases the value of Thames Water’s capital assets and hence their
capitalisation and attractiveness to investors. It ensures future ‘lock-in’ to the use of
these assets, even where the high energy demands of their use are likely to become
untenable for the future generations that the Mayor of London thinks will be thankful.
Resilience and adaptability to climate and other changes requires flexibility,
redundancy and the ability to abandon or ‘transform’ with ‘no regret’ responses that
are not working (Ingham et al, 2007; Blackmore & Plant, 2008). Large infrastructure
projects such as those in process of being built in London may have a place where
the degree of uncertainty about the future is low, but where there is substantial
uncertainty, responses need to be more inherently flexible, utilising a diversity of
responses, with abandonment or significant alteration, a clear option if necessary
(Evans et al, 2008).
This raises the question for London: why is a large sewage storage system being
built at the same time as a desalination plant, when the problem addressed by both
is stormwater? For the tunnel, it is too much stormwater overflowing from the
sewerage system; whereas for the desalination plant it is not enough water? Why not
utilise the stormwater near source to solve both problems as advocated around the
world (Centre for Water Sensitive Cities, 2012)? Ironically the new tunnel will have
no benefit for the increasing flood risk within London and this will require additional
measures; proposed by Thames Water (TW) as yet more large sewers, despite the
recognition by others that new sewers are no longer the answer to this problem (Pitt,
2008; Ofwat, 2009). It appears that the dominant regimes within which Thames

Downloaded by cat buenafe (catbuenafe27@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|7297272

Water and the professionals involved and the other agencies operate make this
approach the ‘common-sense’ one for all concerned.
It is not only engineers who are faced with potentially conflicting loyalties and
interests, environmentalists in particular have held significant sway over the
constraints within which engineers have had to operate for many years. Recently the
anthropogenic benefits accruing from environmental goods and services (known as
ecosystem services) have been acknowledged and, via a monetisation approach are
being used in benefit-cost evaluations (Everard, 2011). Nonetheless, environmental
scientists are also implicated in failing to take due account of the trade-offs between
one environmental improvement and another consequent impact (e.g. Sarewitz,
2004). There are ‘tendencies of a bipolar development within the environmental
movement’ (Naustdalslid, 2012) where some environmentalists are still pursuing
classical issues and nature protection, whilst others are concerned with the threats of
climate change. Often the activities of the former in addressing single issue
environmental protection policies lead to impacts in terms of adding to the climate
change problem.
The Tideway sewer tunnel is an example of this. The Environment Agency set the
standards and targets for compliance with the Urban Wastewater Treatment
Directive for the proposed sewer tunnels in London. In a Commission of inquiry
(Hammersmith & Fulham et al, 2011) evidence from the EA provided little scientific
and credible information about the relative amounts of oxygen and bacteriological
pollution arising from the CSO spills, wastewater treatment plant inputs, background
diffuse runoff from roads and other surfaces in London and coming from upstream
into the river reach. Questioning of the EA and Thames Water regarding the wider
energy use and carbon impacts of the tunnel solution went unanswered. At no time
were the marginal benefits of collecting spills from many of the overflows compared
with the high consequent increase in overall scheme costs. Nor were the
considerable modeling uncertainties made clear and linked to the benefit-costs of the
scheme. In fact the EA used an internal verification process to confirm the way in
which the final decisions as to which CSOs needed to be connected into the tunnels,
rather than an independent and publically verifiable process. Therefore, marginal
aquatic environmental benefits obtained by connecting certain overflows are now
being implemented at great expense and have been decided based on imprecise
computational models, with no attempt to illustrate to decision makers the
uncertainties and marginality of the value of doing this. As a result, high energy and

Downloaded by cat buenafe (catbuenafe27@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|7297272

carbon in use and embodied in the construction are adding to the drivers of climate
change.
Conclusions
“Given that engineers are… political actors…. the political and economic pressures
that engineers work under have the potential to complicate ethical choices” (Hillier,
2010) expresses a view that professional engineers do have choices. Being a
professional implies responsibility for conduct that extends beyond purely self-
interest (and beyond the interests of the employer when necessary) and beyond the
requirements of legislation or regulation (Fan, 2003). Ethics can be a positive force
for innovation by inspiring a re-shaping of our environment through ‘Value sensitive
design’ to meet conflicting demands and needs (van den Hoven et al, 2012).
In New Orleans, post-Katrina, the US Army Corps of Engineers are rebuilding the
defences much as before the 2005 disaster as there are limited options available
within the regulatory system (Jonkman et al, 2009). Such an approach is hardly an
ethical or professional one and it is arguable that any professional in such a role is
no longer a professional, but rather functioning as a technician (Schon, 1983). It is
the duty of a professional to push the boundaries; to attempt what has not been tried
before unless there is an unacceptable risk in a particular course of action. Even
Ofwat is calling for greater innovation by the water and sewerage companies in
England and Wales (Ofwat, 2012), although whether such innovation is envisaged as
going beyond competition exhortations is doubtful. In any case Ofwat’s approach to
ethics falls into the accounting trap. There is an implicit presumption that where the
WaSCs comply with the key indicators of performance then this de facto is an
indication of ethical compliance in terms of the provision of water services (Cavill &
Sohail, 2003).
Framing or habits of reasoning rooted in professional training, experience and in
organizational histories often become established in organisations and the
individuals that work in them (Laws & Loeber, 2011). These established frames
(taken for granted common-sense) are often difficult to reflect on and they define
what is normal, reasonable, feasible and justifiable in practice. Hence this makes it
difficult for individuals to make sense of complex cases and the action required in the
novel ways required to deliver sustainability or at least resilience. Given the
multiplicity of other reasons for promoting schemes such as the Tideway Sewer
Tunnels (increased asset value, capitalisation, profits to bank owners and lack of real
financial risks) there is a difficult task for the professionals involved to promote what
are self-evidently more beneficial solutions that are in fact opportunities to maximise

Downloaded by cat buenafe (catbuenafe27@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|7297272

the benefits from seeing the surface water ‘problem’ as very real ‘opportunities’. Of
course the use of SuDS, the associated costs and uncertainties, the disruption and
finally the staged benefits of gradual implementation are all difficult to quantify
(Ashley et al, 2010). But evidence from many other parts of the world shows that it
does work and can bring major enhancements to the urban environment (Thurston,
2012).
Simple comparators of costs for the mono-problem solution, showing that
conventional sewer storage is cheaper than the limited SuDS options investigated
(Thames Water, 2011) fail to take into account the full range of additional benefits
from the latter approach. These benefits will mainly accrue to society as a whole and
will take at least 10-20 years to come about. A period during which the gradual
introduction of SuDS can be tested and techniques improved. The latest expectation
for completion of the tunnels follows a similar timescale and delivers no benefits
during the period, only the disbenefits of construction disruption. Following such a
course also commits society to using the tunnels in some 20 years time and beyond,
when it may be prohibitively expensive or climate impacting to require such high
energy use.
In recent ICE papers looking to the future, Rogers (2012) argues that civil engineers
have “always addressed the core issues of sustainability, working for society within
the environment to least cost or greatest value”. That may be true in an ideal view of
civil engineering, however, recent evidence outlined in this paper for possible over-
engineering and missing opportunities for making the most of using surface water for
the wider benefit of society, suggest that there are many interpretations of
‘sustainability’ and what ‘greatest value’ may mean in practice. At a time of economic
stringency it is inevitable that a number of professional engineers will find
themselves working as technicians, unable to practice to the breadth and scope of
their calling, and carrying out duties that lead to solutions to problems that are not as
sustainable as they might be. A fear of upsetting employers or powerful clients by
expressing doubts about the scope, direction and scale of a scheme also constrains
any professional concerned about their own personal welfare and future (a moral
dilemma); resulting in the placing of personal interests before society’s; an unethical
stance but one in which the ICE or others are powerless to help. In a second paper,
addressing the future of the ICE (Foulkes, 2012) describes the Institution as highly
traditional and that radically new thinking is demanded to keep up with the demands
of the competitive world; necessitating changes that many members will not be
comfortable with. The new place for the Institution needs to be ‘credible, inspiring

Downloaded by cat buenafe (catbuenafe27@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|7297272

and sustainable’; a vision that requires a restatement of the ICEs’ ethical position
and a grasping of the challenge laid down by Prince Charles to work with rather than
controlling nature. In an increasingly demanding society, members and the Institution
itself will need to be confident in their ethical and moral positions if they are to truly
help society into a sustainable future.
References

Allen M. (2008) Cleansing the city. Ohio University Press. Athens Ohio. ISBN 10:0-
8214-1771-1
Ashley R., Stovin V., Moore S., Hurley L., Lewis L., Saul A. (2010). London Tideway
Tunnels Programme – Thames Tunnel Project Needs Report – Potential source
control and SUDS applications: Land use and retrofit options . (pub. Online as:
Thames Water. 100-RG-PNC-00000-900008 | Summer 2010 Appendix E Potential
Source Control and SUDS Applications. Annex 1: SUDS Evaluation for Example
Areas.
http://www.thamestunnelconsultation.co.uk/consultation-documents.aspx. [accessed
13-10-10])
Ashley R M., Nowell R., Gersonius B., Walker L. (2011). Surface Water Management
and Urban Green Infrastructure. Review of Current Knowledge. Foundation for Water
Research FR/R0014 May. 73pp.
Barry M. (2003) Corporate social responsibility – unworkable paradox or sustainable
paradigm? Proc ICE Engineeering Sustainability 156. Sept Issue ES3 paper 13550.
p 129-130
Blackmore J M., Plant R A J. (2008). Risk and resilience to enhance sustainability
with application to urban water systems. J. Water Resources Planning and
Management. ASCE. Vol. 134, No. 3, May.
Bogle D. (2010) UK’s engineering Council guidance on sustainability. Proc ICE
Engineering Sustainability 163. June Issue ES2 p61-63
Brown R R., Ashley R M., Farrelly M. (2011). Political and Professional Agency
Entrapment: An Agenda for Urban Water Research. Water Resources Management.
Vol. 23, No.4. European Water Resources Association (EWRA) ISSN 0920-4741.
Brugnach M., Dewulf A., Pahl-Wostl C., Taillieu T. (2008) Toward a relational concept
of uncertainty: about knowing too little, knowing too differently and accepting not to
know. Ecology and Society 13 (2) : 30
Butler D., Davies J. (2011). Urban Drainage. Spon. 3 rd Ed. ISBN 978-0-415-45526-8
Cavill S., Sohail M. (2003) Accountability in the provision of urban services. Proc.
ICE. Municipal Engineer 156. Issue ME4 paper 13445, p235-244.

Downloaded by cat buenafe (catbuenafe27@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|7297272

Centre for Water Sensitive Cities (2012) Blueprint for a water sensitive city. Monash
Unversity. ISBN 978-1-921912-01-6
Charles J A. (2009) Ribert Rawlinson and the UK public health revolution. Proc ICE
Eng History and Heritage. 162 Nov. Issue EH4. p 199-206

[1] Institution of Civil Engineers (Great Britain) (1870). Minutes of Proceedings of the
Institution of Civil Engineers. The Institution. p. 215 note 1.
[2] In Europe, problem solving and creativity are presented as important
competencies in the requirements for European Engineer (Eur. Ing.) designation
(FEANI, 2000).

WEEK 7 – Current Fields/Careers of Civil Engineering

o Structural Engineering

Structural engineers apply scientific principles to design building, bridges and other
structures to withstand the forces of nature and protect human safety. Structural
engineers are knowledgeable of how structures and materials behave under loads.
They design structures to perform their intended functions and be economical within
the constraints of building code requirements. Structural engineers typically design
structures made of reinforced concrete, structural steel and wood.

Structural engineering focuses on improving how we design and maintain

infrastructure systems. The research spans the fields of civil engineering,
mechanical engineering, and computer science.

Downloaded by cat buenafe (catbuenafe27@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|7297272

Dave Lattanzi, assistant professor and John Toups Faculty Fellow, is pioneering a
technique for bridge inspections using drones and 3-D modeling.

Our research interests include:

Virtual Robotic Bridge Inspection

The research team studies how to convert robotic inspection
information into virtual computer worlds that can be explored by a human
inspector. As robots become a more accepted as infrastructure inspection
tools, we must consider how a human will interact with the information
that robots capture. This is fundamentally a data representation problem.
To solve this problem, we use techniques adapted from computer vision
and virtual reality equipment. We hope this research makes the
hazardous job of bridge inspection safer for a human. Principal
investigator: David Lattanzi.

Structural Evaluation through Computer Vision

After a disaster, such as an earthquake, inspectors must assess the
integrity of all affected structures. Depending on the scale of the disaster,
the number of required inspections can range into the thousands, so rapid
assessments are vital. This project aims to develop a method of assessing
the integrity of civil structures by combining digital image analysis and
artificial intelligence. Fully realized, the proposed technology will enable

Downloaded by cat buenafe (catbuenafe27@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|7297272

post-disaster inspectors to rapidly and accurately estimate structural

damage using only a digital camera and portable computer. Principal
investigator: David Lattanzi.

Associate Professor Girum Urgessa is studying the response of submerged

structures that are subjected to underwater explosions.

Response of Structures Subjected to Explosions

The team investigating the response of structures that are subjected to short-
duration dynamic loads, such as air-blast, impact, fragmentation, and underwater
explosion. Research activities include the use of fiber-reinforced polymer (FRP)
composites for mitigating blast effects on buildings, penetration mechanics of
projectiles on concrete targets, developing predictive capabilities for characterizing
failure mechanisms in reinforced concrete slabs, and modeling the response of
submerged structures for underwater explosion. Principal investigator: Girum
Urgessa.

Extracting Finite Element Models from Images

The team studies ways of automatically extracting finite element models from
collections of images. Using a combination of structure from motion (SfM) algorithms
and 3D computer vision, we are working on ways to automatically recognize and
assemble structural components, followed by FE model generation and updating
based on damage detected in the image collections. The proposed methodology has
applications beyond post-disaster condition assessment, from routine inspection to
infrastructure management. Principal investigator: David Lattanzi.

Downloaded by cat buenafe (catbuenafe27@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|7297272

WEEK 8 – Current Fields/Careers of Civil Engineering

o Construction Engineering and Management

Construction Engineering and Management

This is all about the construction safety, specializing in injury prevention

strategies, hazard identification, risk management, and decision-
making using a variety of qualitative and quantitative data-collection, data-
analysis, and data mining methods.

Our areas of focus include:

Construction Safety
This research team explores injury-prevention strategies, hazard
identification, risk management, and decision-making in the construction
process. The group uses a variety of qualitative and quantitative data-
collection, data-analysis, and data-mining methods. They hope that by
empirically measuring construction workers' attention they can prevent
injuries on the job site. Principal investigator: Behzad Esmaeili.

Infrastructure and Construction Management

This research area encompasses accelerated construction of
infrastructure, lean and green construction, project management, public-
private partnerships, smart infrastructure, sustainable development, life
cycle analysis, and infrastructure asset management. Principal
investigator: Sam Salem.

Construction Informatics and Simulation

The research area focuses on enhancing the overall performance of
construction management through the integration of advanced data
analytics, complex system simulation, and artificial intelligence. The
research outcomes provide efficient and reliable decision support tools for
practitioners in the architecture, engineering, and construction (AEC)
industry. Principal investigator: Wenying Ji.

Downloaded by cat buenafe (catbuenafe27@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|7297272

Mason researchers are analyzing big data to find ways to reduce the number of
accidents and injuries on construction sites.

WEEK 9 – MIDTERM EXAMINATION

WEEK 10 – Current Fields/Careers of Civil Engineering

o Geotechnical Engineering

Geotechnical Engineering

Our research team works closely with government and industry within North
Virginia, and our research outcomes are quickly adopted into practice in
disciplines related to geo-engineering.
Our areas of expertise include:

Forecasting Landslides in Transportation Corridors

This research seeks methods to predict rainfall-caused landslides before they
happen. Our research team uses advanced digital elevation models, along with
storm and soil data, to develop a tool to save lives from this common natural
disaster. Principal Investigator: Burak Tanyu.

Geosynthetics in Reinforced Soil/Bridge Systems

Our research team collects data from a bridge in Virginia to
investigate the performance of geosynthetic reinforced soil/integrated
bridge systems. Our research will be incorporated into AASHTO LRFD
Bridge Design Specifications, ensuring that practicing engineers use best
practices in their designs. Principal investigator: Burak Tanyu.

Recycled Asphalt-Highway Systems

Recycling concrete into new pavement provides a less expensive
building material and diverts large quantities of construction waste from

Downloaded by cat buenafe (catbuenafe27@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|7297272

landfills. This research explores the maximum percentage of recycled

concrete that may be used in pavement design with sacrificing strength
and durability of the road. Principal investigator: Burak Tanyu.

Co-directors of the SGI Research Group Burak Tanyu and Kuo Tian at their lab on
the Fairfax Campus. The lab is equipped to conduct research related to evaluation
engineering properties of recycled materials, aggregates, and soils.

WEEK 11 – Current Fields/Careers of Civil Engineering

o Water Resources Engineering

Environmental and Water Resources Engineering

Environmental and water resources engineering explores the power of natural

wetlands and their vegetation to lessen the energy of storm surge waves to

protect coastal communities from sea-level rise during intense hurricanes .

Downloaded by cat buenafe (catbuenafe27@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|7297272

Our researchers use field data and computational models to focus on

sustainable solutions to coastal floods. Their areas of expertise include:

Associate Professor Celso Ferriera's research team focuses on developing and

promoting innovative water resources and coastal engineering ideas.

Field-based monitoring of Hurricane Storm Surge

We continuously monitor hydrodynamic conditions (waves, currents, and water

levels) in the Chesapeake Bay marshes, studying the impact of hurricanes and

Downloaded by cat buenafe (catbuenafe27@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|7297272

storms, resulting in more than three years of data to date. In addition to the
comprehensive hydrodynamic measurements, our research group routinely performs
surveys of bed morphology and vegetation bio-mechanic characteristics such as
biomass, stem height, diameter, and densities. Principal investigator: Celso Ferreira.
Numerical Modeling of Coastal Hazards

This research aims to extend our capacity to evaluate how marshes and coastal
wetlands can serve as a reliable green infrastructure for protection during extreme
weather and conditions that may be a result of future climate change. We
accomplish this by using a numerical modeling framework capable of representing
this process based on the measured data and state-of-the-art computational tools.
Principal investigator: Celso Ferreira.
Natural and Nature-based Defenses for Coastal Resilience

Nature-based defenses for coastal resilience are gaining popularity as an ecological

engineering approach to protect coastal communities against flooding and erosion.
There remains, however, a considerable gap in accurately determining whether
coastal communities can safely and cost-effectively rely on natural and nature-based
features for community resilience against flooding under a changing climate, leading
to significant inertia towards unlocking the potential of nature to increase society's
resilience. Principal investigator: Celso Ferreira.
Remote Sensing Techniques to Estimate and Monitor Hydrological Variables

This research applies remote sensing techniques to estimate and monitor

hydrological variables. This work can be applied to water resources management,
weather and climate prediction, as well as agriculture and irrigation practices. The
research activities range from the local, through studying the impact of green
infrastructure on storm water at the Fairfax Campus, to the global, using satellite
data to evaluate water resources in remote regions, such as High Mountain Asia.
The team seeks to improve real-time prediction of rainfall rates in case of extreme
events and help remote regions that can't count on local ground instruments, but
where environmental and health consequences of natural hazards can be
devastating. Principal investigator: Viviana Maggioni.

Downloaded by cat buenafe (catbuenafe27@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|7297272

Assistant Professor Viviana Maggioni and her team analyze satellite data to improve
the characterization of precipitation around the globe.

WEEK 12 – Current Fields/Careers of Civil Engineering

o Transportation Engineering

Transportation Engineering

Our researchers in transportation engineering develop mathematically-based

decision support tools for designing, operating, managing, maintaining, and

protecting the built environment.

Our areas of research expertise include:

Downloaded by cat buenafe (catbuenafe27@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|7297272

Transportation Systems

This research focuses on developing the quantitative and computational tools

necessary to assess the resilience of health care systems, school districts, university
campuses, government functions, residential buildings, and business districts during
natural disasters. The main question that the researchers address is: How resilient is
the community function that takes place in buildings, given their underlying
dependence on various interdependent infrastructure systems? The researchers
hope their findings will help guide state and local officials in improving, building, and
maintaining resilient communities in the future. Principal investigator: Elise Miller-
Hooks
Air Quality

Researchers use quantitative methods for transportation planning, air quality,

traffic operations, and traffic simulation using the techniques of transportation
systems analysis encompassing travel demand modeling, traffic simulation, network
analysis, and integrated transportation system (ITS) related modeling. Principal
investigator: Mohan Venigalia
Demand and Traveler Behavior

This research delves into how transportation users will respond to changing
prices and congestion on urban highway and transit networks. By using statistical
tools and regression/logit/probit modeling, the research team has created a
technically sound tool to evaluate policy options for congestion reduction in cities.
This practice-ready research can be used to address the increasingly overwhelming
problems of traffic congestion in large cities, including Washington, D.C., and the
megacities of the world. Principal investigator: Shanjiang Zhu

“We are at the cusp of a new future, and we need to think about how we might
do things differently. It is time to consider how to best use the current
infrastructure systems and to rethink how to build them from now on.”

— Elise Miller-Hooks, Bill and Eleanor Hazel Chair in Infrastructure Engineering

Downloaded by cat buenafe (catbuenafe27@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|7297272

For more than two decades Elise-Miller-Hooks has been applying concepts of
operations research to civil and infrastructure systems applications.

Downloaded by cat buenafe (catbuenafe27@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|7297272

Shanjiang Zhu (center) talks to guests in the John Toups Instructional Lab. Zhu
explores aspects of transportation informatics using big data in support of U.S.
Department of Transportation’s strategic goals. He provided data analysis of
transportation impact stemming from the opening of phase 1 of the Metro’s Silver
line.

Downloaded by cat buenafe (catbuenafe27@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|7297272

Mohan Venigalla is an expert in quatitative methods for transportation planning, air

quality, traffic operations, and traffic simulation.

WEEK 13 – Current Fields/Careers of Civil Engineering

o Environment and EnergyMiller-Hooks has been applying and
advancing concepts of operations research to civil and
infrastructure systems applications.

WEEKS 14 & 15 – Civil Engineering, Sustainability, and the Future

WEEKS 16 & 17 –Civil Engineering and Environmental Science

WEEK 18 – FINAL EXAMINATION

Downloaded by cat buenafe (catbuenafe27@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|7297272

Republic of the Philippines

PROFESSIONAL REGULATION COMMISSION
PRC is the agency that handles professionals in the Philippines.

Civil Engineering

Practice defined
The practice of civil engineering within the meaning and intent of this Act shall
embrace services in the form of consultation, design, preparation of plans,
specifications, estimates, erection, installation and supervision of the construction of
streets, bridges, highways, railroads, airports and hangars, portworks, canals, river
and shore improvements, lighthouses, and dry docks; buildings, fixed structures for
irrigation, flood protection, drainage, water supply and sewerage works; demolition
of permanent structures; and tunnels. The enumeration of any work in this section
shall not be construed as excluding any other work requiring civil engineering
knowledge and application.

Downloaded by cat buenafe (catbuenafe27@gmail.com)