Choosing the right structural engineer is particularly important when a building has been damaged, is showing signs of movement or deterioration, or needs a practical repair solution.
Not all structural engineers do the same work. An engineer who spends most of their time designing new buildings may have very different experience from one who regularly investigates existing structures, identifies the causes of damage and develops repair recommendations.
Before engaging a structural engineer, here are ten questions worth asking.
1. Does the engineer regularly investigate this type of structural problem?
Structural engineering covers an enormous range of work, from new residential buildings to bridges, industrial structures, commercial buildings and forensic investigations.
Experience in one area does not necessarily translate into expertise in another.
If you are dealing with cracked masonry, building movement, corrosion, storm damage or deteriorated structural framing, ask whether the engineer has investigated similar problems before.
More importantly, ask what their investigations typically involve. Do they examine the evidence, consider alternative explanations and recommend practical solutions?
An engineer familiar with the particular problem is more likely to recognise what matters and avoid unnecessary investigation or repairs.
2. Who will actually inspect the structure and form the engineering opinion?
When engaging an engineering consultancy, find out who will be doing the work.
The person attending the inspection may not be the person preparing or reviewing the final report. That is not necessarily a problem, provided the responsibilities and supervision arrangements are appropriate.
Ask who will inspect the building, who will assess the findings and who will take professional responsibility for the engineering conclusions.
For a difficult structural investigation, relevant experience and engineering judgement can be just as important as the inspection itself.
3. Will the engineer investigate the cause or simply describe the damage?
This is one of the most important distinctions in structural investigations.
Describing a crack is relatively straightforward. Explaining why the crack developed, whether it is significant and what should be done about it requires considerably more engineering judgement.
For example, cracking in a masonry wall might be associated with footing movement, thermal movement, inadequate restraint, corrosion of embedded steel or a combination of factors.
Repairing the visible crack without understanding its cause can result in the same problem returning.
A good investigation should consider the available evidence, identify plausible causes and explain which conclusions can reasonably be supported.
Where the evidence is insufficient, the engineer should explain what further investigation is needed rather than present an assumption as a fact.
For more on this approach, read our article on investigating structural damage.
4. Does the engineer understand how the existing structure works?
Investigating an existing building involves more than identifying damaged materials.
The engineer needs to understand how loads travel through the structure, how elements interact, what provides restraint and stability, and how deterioration or alteration may have affected the original structural system.
A damaged timber member, for example, cannot always be assessed in isolation. Its connections, supports, load-sharing arrangements and relationship with neighbouring members may be important.
The same principle applies to reinforced concrete, steel and masonry structures.
An engineer who understands the structural behaviour can make better decisions about what needs to be repaired, strengthened, replaced or left alone.
5. Can the engineer distinguish structural damage from cosmetic or pre-existing deterioration?
Not every crack indicates a serious structural problem, and not every visible defect is related to the event that prompted the inspection.
This distinction becomes particularly important in insurance investigations, building disputes and assessments following storms, fires, flooding or impact damage.
An existing building may already contain shrinkage cracks, previous repairs, corrosion, weathering or movement-related damage.
A recent event may cause new damage, aggravate an existing condition or have little connection with the observed deterioration.
The engineer should assess the evidence carefully and avoid assuming that all visible damage has one cause.
Independent assessment is especially valuable where different parties have competing views about the cause or significance of damage.
6. What information will the engineer need before reaching a conclusion?
A site inspection is often only one part of a structural investigation.
Depending on the problem, useful information may include:
- Original architectural and structural drawings.
- Photographs taken before and after the damage.
- Previous engineering or building inspection reports.
- Construction and renovation records.
- Maintenance and repair histories.
- Information about rainfall, flooding, impact or other relevant events.
- Survey measurements, testing or monitoring results.
- Access to concealed framing, connections or other structural elements.
Sometimes the available information allows a reasonably confident conclusion. In other cases, further testing, opening-up work or monitoring may be necessary.
Ask the engineer how they intend to approach the investigation and what limitations may affect the conclusions.
7. Can the engineer develop a practical repair solution?
Identifying the cause of damage is important, but it is often only half the job.
For many building owners, builders and insurers, the next question is more important: what should we do about it?
A structural engineer who regularly works with existing buildings should be able to consider practical repair options, taking account of the structure, access, construction sequencing, temporary support and the condition of adjoining elements.
Replacing an entire structural system may sometimes be necessary. In other circumstances, a targeted repair or localised strengthening may provide an appropriate solution.
The best option is not necessarily the most extensive. It is the one that adequately addresses the engineering problem while considering constructability, durability and the consequences of the work.
Ask whether the proposed engagement includes repair recommendations, repair design or simply an assessment of the existing condition. These are different scopes of work.
Our construction engineering advice page explains how engineering input can assist when unexpected structural problems are discovered during building and repair work.
8. What will the engineering report actually contain?
Before accepting a quotation, establish what you will receive.
An inspection, a brief advice email, a formal engineering report and detailed repair drawings are different services.
For a more substantial investigation, a useful engineering report will generally address the relevant observations, evidence, assessment, conclusions and recommendations.
Depending on the scope, it may also identify limitations, alternative explanations, further investigation requirements and recommended repairs.
Consider who will use the report. A building owner may need to understand the problem and make a repair decision. An insurer may need an opinion on causation and the extent of damage. A builder may need details that can be translated into construction work.
If the matter involves a legal dispute, the report may need to satisfy additional requirements concerning independence, evidence and expert opinion.
A well-written report should make the engineering reasoning understandable, not simply present a conclusion without explanation.
9. Is the engineer appropriately registered, experienced and insured?
In Queensland, professional engineering services are subject to the Professional Engineers Act 2002. The Registered Professional Engineer of Queensland (RPEQ) system is an important part of the regulatory framework.
Where registration is required, check that the engineering service is being provided or appropriately supervised by a suitably registered engineer working within their competence.
You can check an engineer’s registration through the Board of Professional Engineers of Queensland.
It is also reasonable to ask about professional indemnity insurance. The firm should hold cover appropriate to the services it provides and the requirements applying to its work.
Registration, insurance and relevant experience are separate considerations. A professional qualification alone does not establish expertise in every type of structural problem.
10. Can the engineer explain and defend their conclusions?
A sound engineering opinion should be based on evidence and reasoning, not on which party has engaged the engineer or which outcome would be most convenient.
Ask how the engineer deals with uncertainty, conflicting information and alternative explanations.
Can they explain why they consider one cause more likely than another? Can they identify the observations that support their opinion? Will they acknowledge when the available evidence does not permit a definite conclusion?
These questions matter in ordinary building investigations and become especially important in insurance and legal matters, where the opinion may be challenged.
Professional independence does not mean an engineer will always reach the answer a client wants. It means the client receives an opinion supported by the available evidence and sound engineering judgement.
Choosing the right structural engineer is about more than the fee
Engineering fees matter, and it is reasonable to ask for a written fee proposal setting out the scope, deliverables, exclusions and basis of charging.
However, two quotations may cover very different levels of investigation and engineering input.
A lower-cost inspection that only describes visible damage may not provide the information needed to make a repair decision. Equally, not every problem requires a lengthy investigation or an extensive report.
The important thing is to match the engineering service to the problem.
For difficult structural matters, good engineering advice should help establish what has happened, what it means and what should be done next.
Sometimes that means recommending substantial repairs. Sometimes it means identifying a limited, practical intervention. And sometimes it means explaining why the observed condition does not justify major structural work.
The value lies in making the right engineering decision.
Structural investigations and repair advice from Cornell Engineers
Cornell Engineers is a Brisbane-based structural engineering consultancy established in 2003.
Our work focuses on investigating damage, cracking, movement, deterioration and other problems affecting existing buildings and structures. We provide independent engineering opinions and, where appropriate, practical recommendations for repairs and rectification.
We work with insurers, builders, commercial and industrial property owners, professional consultants, solicitors and selected private property owners.
We do not simply investigate what has gone wrong. We work out how to put it right.
Learn more about our structural engineering services or contact Cornell Engineers with a description of your structural problem, photographs and any relevant reports or drawings.