Expertise · Independent Practice
Katherine Shayne Yee practises structural engineering independently in the Philippines. An operating facility was having alignment trouble, and the natural place to look was the equipment. Treating it as a structural question first is what the account below is about, along with a rule about errors that applies to her own drawings as much as to anyone else's.
In Katherine Shayne Yee's own words.
"Good engineering is not about never making mistakes; it is about having the integrity to recognize them, the responsibility to address them, and the commitment to keep finding better solutions."
I believe that being a structural engineer is, above all, about being a problem solver. Engineering goes beyond calculations and computer models. It requires understanding the real problem, asking the right questions, and having the courage to raise concerns when something does not seem right. I believe it is part of my responsibility to challenge assumptions when necessary, review both my own work and the work of others objectively, and make sure that engineering decisions are supported by sound principles rather than simply accepted because a software result says they are correct.
If I identify an error, whether in another design or in my own, I believe the right thing to do is to raise it, correct it, and learn from it. I am hardworking and willing to go the extra mile, whether that means spending more time validating an analysis, learning something new, or going into the field to better understand the actual condition of a structure.
One project that strongly shaped my engineering judgment involved an existing operating facility that was experiencing alignment issues during operation, which raised concerns about whether the supporting structure could be contributing to the problem. Rather than treating the issue purely as an operational or equipment concern, I approached it from a structural perspective by reviewing the available information, inspecting the structure firsthand, and developing an analytical model to understand its actual behavior.
I examined the load paths, structural movements, member demands, and critical assumptions, and compared the analytical results with the conditions observed on site. Where something did not appear consistent, I raised questions, revisited the assumptions, and carried out additional checks to ensure that the conclusions were properly supported.
What made the experience meaningful to me was that the objective was not simply to prove whether the structure was adequate, but to help identify the real source of the problem and provide the project team with a technically defensible basis for their next decisions. It reinforced my belief that good engineering starts with asking the right questions rather than immediately looking for an answer.
Sometimes the problem presented to an engineer is only a symptom, and our responsibility is to investigate further, validate our findings through analysis and independent checks, and distinguish what is structurally significant from what may originate elsewhere. That experience strengthened my confidence in using engineering judgment not only to solve problems, but also to bring clarity to complex situations.
Q. You were in the Top 5 of the MIDAS Structure Awards in 2023. What did that make you notice?
It made me notice how much I had grown as an engineer, which meant more to me than the recognition itself. What started as learning how to use an analysis tool gradually became learning how to use it to explore structural behavior, test my assumptions, and approach increasingly complex engineering problems with greater confidence. That shift, from simply using software to produce results to using it as a tool for understanding, has had a lasting influence on the way I practice structural engineering today.
Katherine Shayne Yee tells us when a problem arrives, it is worth asking first whether that framing holds, and then comparing what the model says with what the site actually shows. The next time a problem reaches you already labelled, what would you check before accepting the label?