Challenge
The architect defines the building dimensions, and the structural engineer must design the steel frame within those constraints. The work considers structural geometry and profiles, wind and snow loads, connection nodes, reinforcements and welds, as well as model detailing, production and assembly drawings, and calculation reports.
Manual engineering is not poor-quality work; its practical scope is shaped by the engineering time available. When each connection and its alternatives need to be compared against the structure as a whole, the practical number of calculations is limited by the workload. Engineers therefore often choose a sufficiently conservative solution instead of evaluating a wider set of alternatives.
Solution
The system automates much of the calculation and optimization work. It uses wind, snow and other load data from a Dlubal RFEM model to compare profiles, geometry and connection angles, with the aim of reducing structural and material weight.
The value is not simply performing the same calculation faster. The software makes it practical to systematically examine a much larger space of variants in their structural context—an amount that would not be practical to evaluate manually.
How it works
Analyzing equivalent connections in the Tekla model
Using the Tekla Structures API, the system analyzes the 3D model geometry, identifies geometrically equivalent connection nodes and groups them. It collects relevant loads from the occurrences of those nodes throughout the structure for calculation. The system then determines the required connection solution, including reinforcement, welds and profile requirements where applicable.
From calculation back to the model and drawings
The calculation does not end in a separate spreadsheet or report. Data from the calculated solution is used through the Tekla Structures API for model detailing, after which the system automates the production and assembly drawings.
Readable calculations for the engineer
The Mathcad API generates the engineering calculations and reports required for the project. The automation was not designed as a black box: an engineer does not need to read application source code to understand how a result was calculated. The calculation can be traced, reviewed and audited in the Mathcad environment; an engineer still manually reviews every model.
Results
Work that would take a five-person team several months to complete manually is processed by the system in a matter of hours. It also checks more calculation alternatives. The project information does not specify exact hours or a count of alternatives.
The system takes on the computational and repetitive processing workload, not the engineer’s responsibility. The engineer reviews and audits the calculations and model, preserving the engineering review and accountability required in the design process.