![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/il\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/Brian-Presidency-Head-shot-200x300.webp\")
<\/p>\nBrian Uy, the Sydney-based 105th President of the Institution of Structural Engineers (IStructE), who delivered his inaugural address \u2018Structural engineering: past, present and future\u2019 in January, has identified his key\u202fthemes for his presidential year as\u202fstructural efficiency and embodied carbon; technical competency and research; and registration and supervision<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Institution of Structural Engineers president\u202f Brian Uy. Portrait credit: Richard Gleed.<\/p>\n
In broad terms, those themes echo IStructE\u2019s recently released 2026\u20132030 strategy, Building the future together, which focuses on strengthening support for structural engineers through a \u201cpeople-first\u201d approach aimed at navigating an increasingly complex, digital and climate-conscious landscape. And they also align with Uy\u2019s commitment to reaffirm structural engineering\u2019s role in the community and as a community itself. \u201cIt\u2019s really about the profession \u2013 advancing the profession, supporting professionals and enhancing professionalism,\u201d he says.<\/p>\n
Structural efficiency and embodied carbon<\/p>\n
It\u2019s no secret that as a profession, structural engineering is dealing with some sizeable challenges \u2013 not least net zero targets, which mean decarbonising infrastructure has become an urgent priority. According to Uy, it\u2019s also one in which holistic, wide-ranging thinking should be encouraged.<\/p>\n
\u201cWith the big push to focus on reducing embodied carbon in the sector, a lot of the emphasis has been placed on materials, looking at individual materials and material substitution, for example, with concrete, cement replacement and so on. But I want to place more of a focus on structural systems. That\u2019s where a lot of efficiencies can be gained. It\u2019s about looking at the system itself and trying to choose efficient solutions.\u201d<\/p>\n
There are examples across many building methodologies, but one of the most obvious is the widespread use of flat concrete slabs, which account for about 70% of the embodied carbon in a building, he says.<\/p>\n
\u201cIf we look at trying to design floor systems more efficiently, going back to the way that early cathedrals were constructed for example, could be very impactful. With the vaulted, arch-supported roof structures that were used in the past, the material is in its best form because it\u2019s being compressed. However, if we look at modern flat concrete floor systems, we tend to put the concrete into tension, which means we need to add steel reinforcement. As a result, a lot of the concrete is inefficient; it\u2019s not being utilised.\u201d<\/p>\n
Uy believes new approaches that reduce carbon are essential learning for the engineers of the future \u2013 as are the skills and know-how required to efficiently calculate embodied carbon.<\/p>\n
\u201cRather than becoming a box-ticking exercise, it\u2019s critical that people understand and can quantify the decisions that are made efficiently, in terms of calculating things like embodied carbon. In fact, IStructE led the development of the embodied carbon calculator \u2013 The Structural Carbon Tool \u2013 which is now regarded as an important platform across industry.\u201d<\/p>\n
Thinking of decarbonisation holistically is key, but Uy \u2013 a Scientia Professor of Structural Engineering at the University of New South Wales and Honorary Professor of Structural Engineering at the University of Sydney \u2013 is also an international authority on materials, in particular high-performance steel and composite structures. As such, he sees his presidency as an opportunity to amplify understanding of that arena.<\/p>\n
One recent focus has been in high strength steels, which in Uy\u2019s words \u201care double the strength of the steel that was used on the Sydney Harbour Bridge\u201d and are now encompassed by Australian and New Zealand standards. Promising advantages such as longevity and the potential for new lighter designs, low carbon is another benefit of these materials.<\/p>\n
\u201cIf we\u2019re trying to reflect on embodied carbon, if you can double the steel strength, you may not always halve the embodied carbon, but it does go a long way to trying to reduce the embodied carbon in infrastructure.\u201d<\/p>\n
He adds that he and his team have also been looking at steels that are triple the strength of standard steel \u2013 over 1000MPa [megapascals]. \u201cThe traditional strength that we use is about 300MPa.\u201d<\/p>\n
Stainless steel is another area of interest. \u201cThere are some iconic projects that use it \u2013 such as the 81m flagpole at Parliament House, Australia in Canberra which uses 250t of stainless steel and is considered one of the largest stainless steel structures in the world \u2013 and we\u2019ve had a few wins in Australia and New Zealand standards. I chair a number of those, and we\u2019ve just introduced stainless steel, and the adjustments to designs that would enable its use. So, it allows designers to have that opportunity if they\u2019re starting to look at reducing embodied carbon and extending the design life of structures.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cI\u2019m also leading a project on bi-metallic steel where we\u2019re using a very thin layer of stainless steel or titanium on the surface, and the remainder could be a traditional steel. The reason for using that steel is that the overall cost would be lower, but you also get the high-performance properties of the stainless steel or the titanium at the extremities, which are good for corrosion resistance and fire resistance.\u201d<\/p>\n
With the concept of design for disassembly growing in importance, Uy is also motivated to explore the potential circularity of materials.<\/p>\n
\u201cThere\u2019s growing awareness that you\u2019re not just designing the structure for its as-built stage, you have to think about how the structure can be disassembled, which lends itself to the whole concept of reuse \u2013 for example of structural steel. If you deploy reused steel on a scheme, you can end up using about 1% of the embodied carbon of a standard scheme.\u201d<\/p>\n
With the big push to focus on reducing embodied carbon in the sector, a lot of the emphasis has been placed on materials\u2026but I want to place more of a focus on structural systems. That\u2019s where a lot of efficiencies can be gained. It\u2019s about looking at the system itself and trying to choose efficient solutions<\/p>\n
Technical competency, registration and beyond<\/p>\n
The evolution of materials and techniques continues to add momentum to engineering\u2019s own development as a profession and Uy\u2019s focus during his presidency will also be to support IStructE\u2019s continuing professional development (CPD) requirement to ensure that technical competence is maintained.<\/p>\n
\u201cOne vehicle for that is for professionals to engage in the latest research,\u201d he says. \u201cWe publish the Structures research journal as part of IStructE which members have free access to, so I\u2019m trying to encourage members to take advantage of that opportunity.\u201d<\/p>\n
Fostering competency underscores Uy\u2019s focus on registration for structural engineers, which he believes has a critical role to play in benchmarking best practice. To that end, Uy is also interested in driving forward the idea of a supervision model.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe concept aligns with registration, but more specifically it aligns with our CPD aims,\u201d he explains. \u201cI call it the proactive part of safety.<\/p>\n
\u201cWe already have Cross [Collaborative Reporting for Safer Structures], co-owned by the IStructE and the Institution of Civil Engineers, which has recently expanded into fire safety reporting in the UK with support from the Institution of Fire Engineers.<\/p>\n
\u201cThat\u2019s the reactive part \u2013 something goes wrong, we learn from it, we react and we inform the profession about it. The concept of supervision is to have engineers one-on-one talking to each other; to bounce off ideas about difficult technical issues and to seek advice to pre-empt those issues before they come up.\u201d<\/p>\n
As an educator and academic operating against a backdrop of emergent machine learning and AI, Uy continues to make his own contribution in support of the profession\u2019s technical competency. He still teaches hand methods \u2013 the traditional, analytical techniques used to calculate the forces, stresses and deformations in a structure using fundamental engineering principles.<\/p>\n
\u201cSome of the tech giants around the world have been talking about how important it is for the next generation to look beyond disciplines like coding and so forth, which will take care of themselves in the age of AI. But without the strong fundamentals, who understands how to check the outcomes of these digital tools?<\/p>\n
\u201cI\u2019m comforted by the fact that a lot of the big minds around the world think the same way, that without strong foundations, it doesn\u2019t really matter what digital tools you\u2019ve got. You still have to have that understanding of the science and engineering behind solving problems.\u201d<\/p>\n