Four Lessons in Engineering Judgement, from a Decade Using Civil and Environmental Engineering Software

by Kimberly Lawrence, MSc

For the last decade, I have used engineering software - WaterCAD, ArcGIS, AutoCAD Civil 3D, and others - to design, analyse, and optimise water and wastewater systems. The tools have evolved; the principles of using them with professional intuition and accountability have not.

A tool that runs without error is not the same as a tool that has given you a defensible answer. Software returns a result whether or not the inputs reflect the project accurately, and the practitioner is responsible for the difference between what the screen shows and what the project needs.

Concepts and tool fluency go hand in hand. When either is missing, the cost shows up in the work - in inappropriate recommendations, underestimated scopes, and rework. Once a project is physically built, those costs are even harder to recuperate.

Before acting on a result, an independent check is essential. Options may include a hand calculation, a past project, or a different scenario run in the same tool. The check not need be elaborate but it must be appropriate and have a different basis than the original calculation.

Practitioners whose outputs hold up weave verification into the work - checking assumptions, units, intermediate values, and results against expectation. They know which questions the software can answer well, which it cannot, and when an answer is not yet ready to be acted on.

Tools evolve. Practitioners evolve. What carries through is the harder, quieter work - bringing expertise, judgement, and care to every output, whether the software makes it easy or not.

Kimberly Lawrence, MSc is a Dominican civil and environmental engineer working at the intersection of water infrastructure and emerging technology.