What kind of civil engineering program does not include applying calculations to make construction drawings? I wouldn't have valued such an education highly. It should definitely include making various construction drawings that are then reviewed by someone who is a specialist, where an expert assessment is made so that the student receives feedback on whether the calculations made can work in practical work on a construction site. You can't start building first and then make the drawings based on that; the first thing you need to have to start building is approved drawings.
The school system/job market we have today was never intended to function as it currently does, and therein lies the majority of your problem.
2-year engineering high school graduates would manage production/service and repair, 4-year engineering high school graduates would design. Civil engineers would "think big," come up with new ideas, and, most importantly, verify that the high school engineer's designs were mathematically correct. Those with research training would develop new technologies.
In practice, everything has shifted one step down (and the engineering high school programs have been completely destroyed) so everyone is frustrated and has an education that is not adequate for the job they are actually doing. For most, it works after a few years on the job when they have learned what they should have learned before entering the job market in fields they shouldn't be working in. This is also the reason that salary formation on the engineering side looks the way it does. Most are overqualified for the job they are actually performing, and this applies across all engineering disciplines. After 10 to 15 years, the knowledge is there, or they have become managers or salespeople...
2-year engineering high school graduates would manage production/service and repair, 4-year engineering high school graduates would design. Civil engineers would "think big," come up with new ideas, and, most importantly, verify that the high school engineer's designs were mathematically correct. Those with research training would develop new technologies.
In practice, everything has shifted one step down (and the engineering high school programs have been completely destroyed) so everyone is frustrated and has an education that is not adequate for the job they are actually doing. For most, it works after a few years on the job when they have learned what they should have learned before entering the job market in fields they shouldn't be working in. This is also the reason that salary formation on the engineering side looks the way it does. Most are overqualified for the job they are actually performing, and this applies across all engineering disciplines. After 10 to 15 years, the knowledge is there, or they have become managers or salespeople...
You should not be stressed by this. Many, perhaps most, three-year or longer education programs result in theoretical knowledge in the form of a broad, but not very deep, toolbox. Whether this is right or should be reformed is another question.
I myself studied at KTH and worked after that, later moving into healthcare. To mention the latter - Nurse education programs are generally so theoretical that despite internships, they are expected to learn most practical skills in their first employment. For example, wound care. Doctors are somewhat of an exception, but then remember that 3 out of 5.5 years are internships (packed with theory on top). However, this is not the case for doctors from the rest of Europe (and they have a much longer journey before they can manage on their own).
I emphasize, therefore - it was not intended that you would be able to manage on your own immediately after graduation. Even if your profession lacks a formal apprenticeship system (doctors - general practice, specialization), it will be necessary in practice.
I myself studied at KTH and worked after that, later moving into healthcare. To mention the latter - Nurse education programs are generally so theoretical that despite internships, they are expected to learn most practical skills in their first employment. For example, wound care. Doctors are somewhat of an exception, but then remember that 3 out of 5.5 years are internships (packed with theory on top). However, this is not the case for doctors from the rest of Europe (and they have a much longer journey before they can manage on their own).
I emphasize, therefore - it was not intended that you would be able to manage on your own immediately after graduation. Even if your profession lacks a formal apprenticeship system (doctors - general practice, specialization), it will be necessary in practice.
I am eternally grateful for your advice!F FruB said:Glad my little contribution was appreciated.
Regarding BH90, I probably can't say which part is more important than the other. I have a company-tailored drawing handbook that I use if something needs refreshing. But spontaneously, installations, remodeling, and construction might be something you won't use directly. But I don't think you should sit down and stress-study drafting techniques aimlessly. You've probably learned some basics at school, and you'll learn the rest as you work. Use BH90 or the company's drawing handbook for help when you're uncertain. (The companies I've worked for have had BH90 either in book form or digitally, so don't rush out and spend a lot of money.) You can also ask a colleague for a reference drawing to glance at during the creation process.
Regarding the knowledge level in building physics, it's not bad if you have some understanding of dew points, diffusion, convection, etc. It will help you in your development, but requiring a newly graduated engineer to perfectly craft building details isn't reasonable in my world. Usually, as mentioned, you start in one of the previously mentioned 3D programs with modeling. After that, it may be suitable to proceed with manufacturing drawings of steel or prefab elements or maybe floor plans and main sections.
The difference between BH90 and AMA is that one, BH90, is a handbook in drafting techniques. It exists so that all drawings created in Sweden look the same. A cross in a square/circle, for example, always means a hole. If everyone did their own thing, it would be very difficult to work on a construction site.AMA Hus, on the other hand, is a compilation of rules for how building works should be carried out. For example, how high up you should apply waterproofing for it to be considered moisture-proof.
When you're drawing building details as a newly graduated engineer, I'd say the most common procedure is for someone older and more experienced to sketch solutions on paper for you to draw up. It's good if you think a bit and try yourself first. Don't let yourself be pressured into responsibility you're not ready for. If you find yourself in a situation where you're doing details independently, ask a lot of questions and ensure someone thoroughly reviews your work. Point out your uncertainty so that the reviewer does a more comprehensive job. Don't hold on to your questions until the last minute; be clear early on if you're struggling with the task. That way, there's still time to implement measures. And most importantly... everyone makes mistakes. Bring it to the surface. The sooner a mistake is discovered, the better, so even if it feels tempting to hide an error, it's always better not to.
Regarding the CAD work, I think that's where you learn the most. It's kind of unavoidable if you want to manage a project independently. It's when you're drawing, for example, a junction between a roof and a wall that you see the problems. You're forced to think about things you wouldn't otherwise confront, and that's what helps you grow. As I said before, remind your boss occasionally about your desire to do calculations. It happens now and then that someone only does calculations, but that's very rare these days. You stagnate a bit and become reliant on others to draw for you. Your goal should always be to master all parts of a project and work independently. Then we're talking career steps and extra money in the pay envelope, but you also make yourself more indispensable to the company, which is good in times of crisis.
That was a little joke about studying Eurocode. But if you have nothing better to do, go ahead.
Four employees are quite a small team, but with the right people, it can work out really well. They're probably trying to expand, and more people might join soon. Wasn't it a newly opened office, which might have other offices in Sweden or abroad? Then there can be a lot of collaboration with colleagues elsewhere. As long as you've been honest about your qualifications and they're reasonably experienced, it'll go well. Otherwise, you can always change jobs.
Also, try to maintain a healthy level of working hours. It's easy to want to prove yourself when you're new, and you can easily overwork yourself in this industry. Peaks in workload are reasonable in connection with deliveries, but if it becomes a type of normal state, it's time to change, which can be challenging once you're in the "he-always-steps-up box." Then it might be time to look elsewhere.
Right now, the job market looks quite bleak due to the situation with corona. I was on several job interviews in the spring, but they had to halt all recruitment processes when the situation with corona worsened. Unfortunately, it hasn't gotten better since then. Almost no companies are hiring now, and when they do post a job ad, about 150 people apply for the same position. So now I'm applying for every job available, even those I'm totally uninterested in. So, I have no other choice than to take whatever job I get, even if I'm not happy with it. It's better than being unemployed and twiddling my thumbs on the couch at home. Right now, I was lucky to find this little company. There was no ad; I just happened to find them on LinkedIN and sent a spontaneous expression of interest. Just an hour later, I was called for an interview. The company is a startup with only four employees and an office in Gothenburg. They’re not larger than that. I still think it can be fun because you are someone there. In a big company, you're nobody. You're just another one among thousands of others. But here, I would be 20% of the entire company haha. It would also be amazing if the company became big in the future and I was one of those there when it was a startup. Otherwise, I see greater responsibility as a way to develop quite a bit compared to having a mentor beside you at a larger company who tells you when to pull your pants up if you understand what I mean.
I am not the one responsible for the structure of the education. The program seems to be quite reputable with employers after all. All civil engineers who have completed the program have no problems in the workforce, so it doesn't seem to be a significant issue. As many have previously written, you learn most on the job and not in school.B Bengt Svejdur said:
Last edited:
I myself have only gone through 8 years of primary school but still ended my professional life before retirement as a maintenance engineer in the aerospace industry at Saab in Linköping, which I could do through internal training in blueprint reading (though not design) and demonstrating significant knowledge after 20 years as an assembler/technician on airplanes. Much of it involved understanding drawings from the design department when, for example, it came to bending pipes, which sometimes revealed flaws with design engineers when it couldn't be done as they had intended. So practical learning naturally also occurs in construction out at the workplace, but you might not be able to catch flaws in the design blueprints when half the building is complete if, for example, the strength calculations have not been checked and approved.B byggingenjören97 said:
Damn that's nice! Of course, practical experience is valuable! That knowledge is unbeatable. It goes both ways, though. There are things you can't just learn practically. For example, how to do the calculations. That's where engineers come and save the day. Everyone has their roles. Everyone lacks knowledge in some way. A builder wouldn't understand anything if I started talking about the finite element method with him. That doesn't mean it's bad or that he's not knowledgeable. When it comes to house construction, you can't start building if the calculations haven't already been checked and approved. You calculate first. Then when everything is clear and approved, etc., you build. That's why you can't find mistakes when construction has already started. It happens very rarely and would be an extremely big blunder by the company if it occurs.B Bengt Svejdur said:
How do you know this, you who have not worked? Errors in calculations and drawings occur, despite internal and external reviews. Both small, slightly larger, and "catastrophic" ones. The latter don't happen often, but they do happen...B byggingenjören97 said:
Last edited:
Yes, that's why I mean that during education it must include creating construction drawings based on the calculations the student has made, which are then reviewed by a specialist so that the student gets feedback that they are thinking correctly, all to avoid as many mistakes as possible, we are just human so mistakes can still happen, but it's good if they are eliminated as far as possible.B byggingenjören97 said:
Yes, but that's what I mean too. I did an internship at a big company for about half a year where I talked to calculation engineers daily about their work, etc. Of course, errors can occur, but as you said, they are small errors. The more serious the error, the rarer it is to happen. There are guidelines to follow when working.R roli said:
When we calculated, we received finished construction drawings to base our work onB Bengt Svejdur said:
We never created construction drawings ourselves. It was more like "This is what the construction looks like for the exterior wall/roof/basement wall. Check if there's a risk of moisture damage." Then we sat down and calculated the moisture flow, etc., and then drew a conclusion based on that.The first thing that must be assessed on a construction drawing is the strength calculations both in terms of snow loads and wind loads for what is to be built. If it doesn't hold, then it doesn't matter to calculate the moisture flow and the risk of moisture damage.B byggingenjören97 said:When we calculated, we received finished construction drawings to work from
That sounds too good to be true. It may be rare to have calculation errors. But planning a house is so much more than calculations. And believe me, there's probably not a project where there isn't some form of error in the designed documents. Even if there are quality systems and guidelines, errors can be made.B byggingenjören97 said:
Welcome to reality
Member
· Blekinge
· 10 117 posts
This thread is approaching philosophical levels. There are few things as challenging in our society as the meeting between theory and practice, yet they are so important. Theory traditionally has status. Practice is something the cat dragged in. Much of the practical elements cannot be theorized. A wall should be feasible to build regardless of its building physical properties. Solutions that recur facilitate many actors. One can read @Fru B's insightful (and well-written) posts many times.
AMA (first published in 1950) and BH 90 (has many older predecessors) are efforts to systematize and standardize to facilitate the work of many. However, they have no theoretical intentions and are examples of constant adaptations. According to my experience, important steps in development often involve entrepreneurial efforts and sometimes regulatory requirements. I wish I could write about designer efforts, but it's hard to find examples.
AMA (first published in 1950) and BH 90 (has many older predecessors) are efforts to systematize and standardize to facilitate the work of many. However, they have no theoretical intentions and are examples of constant adaptations. According to my experience, important steps in development often involve entrepreneurial efforts and sometimes regulatory requirements. I wish I could write about designer efforts, but it's hard to find examples.
Yes, I already know that. I'm not that stupid haha. We have studied strength theory.B Bengt Svejdur said: