huangyhg

switching careers from bridge to buildings or vise versa
i'm currently fresh out of school and currently on the job hunt. i don't know whether i want to go work for a bridge firm or building firm. i find both areas appealing.
my questions is, say i go work for a bridge firm for 5 years, how does that impact me possibly wanting to switch to building design firm later on in my career? should i expect decreased salary? would i be relegated to doing newbie jobs?
or how does this work vise-versa? is it the same dilemma? or is it easier to go from one field to another?
i would say there are a lot of transferrable skills.
my first boss started designing roads, then bridges, then eventually ran his own structural firm designing building for top end architects.
csd
the structural theories are certainly transferable. the biggest difference may be in the bureaucracies (building codes vs. dot鈥檚) and the personalities (architects vs. engineers). even if you did get assigned to 鈥渘ewbie鈥?jobs, with an open mind, the learning curve may be faster.
the most difficult adjustment switching from bridges to buildings would be the pace. bridge design is a slow steady process, building design is controlled chaos when compared to bridges. in my opinion, yeah the "mechanics" will transfer, however the tricks of the trade are very different.
the more variety that you can get in your career, the better. it will make you a much better engineer. the longer you stay in more type of work, the harder the transition to something else. decide what you would like your resume to look like and steer your career to achieve those goals.
i went from industrial to construction to commercial. these were big transitions but it opened up other opportunities with treatment plants and bridges.
check out this similar thread:
mh819:
we have engineers in our office who swithched over from bridge to buildings. both had about 5-8 years of bridge experiance. they have been doing fine with us for the past 2-3 years. initially they had some issues and were mentored like fresh graduates. now they have been handling projects on their own.
my graduate degree is in structural engineering. i have seen in school, structural engineering means mostly building design and aci codes and less bridge design and aashto codes. currently my work mostly involves bridges, so over the years i have learnt aashto codes. but, because of my education background, i know aci and building design concepts as good as aashto or bridge design.
but, eventhough, my work is related to bridges, after seven years of experince, i still feel i will be good if i move to buildings as well.
only thing i am lacking is the knowledge of current building design softwares and asce design codes. i guess, learning them may not be that time consuming? can any one comment on this?
asce 7 can be tough to learn for wind and seismic, but it can be done, especially if you have a good mentor. pay attention to the discussions on eng-tips. then you will have fun with aisc seismic detailing.
blake,
i assume you are talking of major bridge projects. small bridges, especially industrial ones (eg. mining or forestry) are every bit as fast paced in design as buildings in my experience, if not more so.
some of the major differences i see are standard practices, detailing and code specific guidelines. the only real theory difference i see is seismic for buildings versus fatigue for bridges.

__________________
借用达朗贝尔的名言：前进吧，你会得到信心!
[url="http://www.dimcax.com"]几何尺寸与公差标准[/url]