| description abstract | A feature considered fundamental to the engineering professional practice is the preoccupation with substance. Form is not necessarily disregarded, but it remains only a function. This is in marked contrast to other, frequently more popular professions, such as architecture, where the organic blend of form and content represents highest achievement. The best engineering accomplishment is a design that functions perfectly, calling no attention to itself or the author. Commonly, the public praises a “world champion” structure, such as the Verrazano or Golden Gate bridges, both having enjoyed the distinction of being the world's longest spans for certain periods. Designers Strauss and Ammann, on the other hand, are not household names. Such is not the case in medicine, for example, where complete success (i.e., perfect health) is never in sight, but the steps in the right direction meet with public acclaim and personal recognition. The need to improve the engineering image has been frequently discussed by fellow practitioners; this paper merely draws attention to it. It is noted that if fame eludes engineers, they are not spared notoriety should their structures fail. Is it possible that the engineering style has remained anonymous by succeeding too often and too well? Use is made of a relatively limited engineering activity—bridge inspection. It deals with less‐than‐perfect structures and thus enjoys public attention. Under these unusual circumstances engineers evaluate and describe works of their own design numerically and linguistically. Their range of expression matches that of more than one professional style at a time. | |
