The Silent Symphony: Conceptual Planning in Structural Engineering

Before the first brick is laid, before the first column rises from the earth, and long before the foundation is dug, a building begins in silence. Not in concrete or steel, but in thought. In vision. In the quiet conversations between architecture and structure, between aesthetics and safety, between dreams and reality. This is the realm of conceptual planning—the soul of structural engineering. It’s not just a technical phase. It’s where the deepest questions are asked and the hardest choices are made. It’s where engineers become philosophers, negotiators, artists, and guardians of public trust. It’s a time when structural engineers also think like architects, contractors, project managers, and owners, apart from their role as structural engineers. And if we do it right, it’s where buildings begin to breathe.

Ask anyone to describe a building, and they’ll likely talk about its façade, its height, its function. Rarely will they mention the invisible framework—the skeleton that holds it all together. But that skeleton doesn’t just happen. It’s born out of a thousand decisions, each one balancing competing demands. There is a growing tendency to hide and conceal the structural elements as if there is something to hide. These structural elements must add to aesthetics. These elements elevate the confidence of the owner and users.

Recently, I delivered a 45-minute online lecture on “Conceptual Planning & Designing of Structural Systems for Buildings.” For those who couldn’t attend, I’ve shared a 45-minute recording at the end of this blog. I hope it sparks thought, reflection, and perhaps a shift in the way you look at buildings—not just as structures, but as conversations between vision and reality. The audience's response and their questions prompted me to write this blog post. This piece is mainly focused to buildings. At the conceptual stage, structural engineers are not just solving equations. We’re orchestrating complexity. We’re holding together threads that span disciplines, values, and visions. And each thread matters. Let’s unravel them.

Architectural Intent: Respecting the Vision

Every building begins with a dream—often the architect’s or the Civil Engineers. A vision of form, space, light, and experience. As structural engineers, our first responsibility is to listen. Not just to the drawings, but to the intent behind them. What story is this building trying to tell? What emotions should it evoke? How does it want to live in its environment? Respecting architectural intent doesn’t mean getting to dictate by it. It means engaging with it. Challenging it when necessary. Supporting it when possible. Trying to accommodate if we can. Get it modified if required. And always, always seeking harmony between form and function. That’s what buildings are meant for.

Structural Integrity: The Skeleton Must Stand

If architecture is the skin, structure is the bones. And bones must be strong and ductile. Structural integrity is non-negotiable. It’s the promise we make to every person who walks into a building—that it will stand, safely and reliably, for decades to come. That it will resist wind, earthquakes, time, and neglect. That it will not betray its occupants. But integrity is not just about strength. It’s about resilience, redundancy, and grace under pressure. It begins with choices made at the conceptual stage—about load paths, framing systems, lateral stability, and more. There are several well-established, well-documented, and tested structural systems to choose from. We must understand their mechanisms, advantages, disadvantages, and behavior under different loadings, geographical, and geological conditions. Only then can we choose the most appropriate system for our building. This is the core domain of structural engineers.

Aesthetics: Beauty in Beams and Columns

Let’s be honest—structural engineers don’t always get credit for beauty. But we should. There is elegance in a well-proportioned structural element, poetry in a slender column that defies gravity, and drama in a cantilever that stretches into space. These are not just technical feats—they are aesthetic statements. When structure and architecture dance together, the result can be breathtaking. Think of the Sydney Opera House, the Guggenheim Museum, or even a simple footbridge that curves like a ribbon. These are structures that speak, and they speak because someone cared about beauty. Of course, we are building real structures, but we structural engineers must also think like artists. If we do so, our structural planning is bound to be inspirational and creative. Creativity and imagination are not the sole domain of architects.

Safety and Functionality: The Non-Negotiables

Some aspects of design may be compromised to some extent if needed, but not safety. Safety is sacred. Functionality is fundamental. A building that cannot serve its purpose, or worse, puts lives at risk, is not a building—it’s a failure. At the conceptual stage, we must ask hard questions. How will people move through this space? What happens in an emergency? Are exits clear, accessible, and sufficient? Is our structural system restricting it? While architectural planning will address these concerns, we as structural engineers must enhance them. The structural system chosen at the concept stage must retain or enhance functionality. Our structural system should be adequate to resist loads likely to act on it during its service life. Although detailed engineering shall be done later, we must have a clear answer to the question: Will the structural system be robust enough to handle unexpected loads? These are not just technical questions. They are ethical ones. Because behind every beam and column is a human life.

Durability and Life-Cycle Cost: Thinking Beyond Day One

Too often, buildings are designed for the day they open—not the decades they must endure. Durability is about materials, exposure, maintenance, and aging. It’s about choosing systems that won’t just survive but thrive. And it’s about cost—not just the cost to build, but the cost to maintain, repair, and eventually replace. At the conceptual stage, we must think long-term. What materials will resist corrosion, fatigue, and wear? What systems will minimize maintenance? What design choices will reduce future costs? We must think beyond initial costs. The structural system chosen at the conceptual planning stage must be one that leads to the least life cycle cost (LCC). This is not just good engineering. It’s good stewardship.

Sustainability: Designing for Tomorrow

We live in a time of climate crisis. Every building we design is a statement about the future we want. Sustainability is not a checkbox; it’s a mindset. It means choosing materials with low embodied energy, designing for energy efficiency, minimizing waste, and maximizing reuse. But it also means asking deeper questions: Can this building adapt to changing needs? Can it be disassembled and reused? Can it coexist with nature? What materials, technology, or processes should we choose for our structural system that are less energy-intensive and have a lower carbon footprint? At the conceptual stage, these questions must be front and centre. Because every decision we make today echoes into tomorrow.

Codes, Provisions, and Site Constraints: The Invisible Rules

Every site has its own story—its soil, its climate, its regulations. And every building must listen. Codes and provisions are not obstacles; they are the distilled wisdom of generations. They reflect lessons learned from failures, disasters, and innovations. Furthermore, it is mandatory to follow the applicable standards. At the conceptual stage, we must be aware of the standards that will govern the design at the detailed engineering stage and plan the structural concept accordingly. Codes protect lives. Site constraints—like topography, access, and zoning—shape what’s possible. Geotechnical aspects of the site suggest the type of foundation system to choose and how to protect or maintain the slopes. We need to be conscious of factors like waterlogging or high water tables. At the conceptual stage, we must embrace these constraints, work with them, and sometimes even challenge them. Because great design is not about ignoring constraints. It’s about transcending them.

Material Choices and Constructability: From Vision to Reality

A design is only as good as its ability to be built. Material choices affect everything—strength, weight, cost, sustainability, and aesthetics. Steel, concrete, timber, composites—each has its voice and must be chosen with care. Constructability means thinking about how things will be assembled. Can this beam be lifted into place? Can this joint be welded safely? Will this formwork hold? What should be the sequence of construction? How will Phase 2 of the building connect with Phase 1? Is the detailing of joints implementable? Is concreting possible in heavily reinforced members? Are the chosen materials available at a reasonable cost at the site, or should we consider alternatives? Do we have the manpower and expertise to execute the work at this site for the proposed structural system? Do we need to consider something else—precast, prefab, or cast-in-situ? At the conceptual stage, we must think like builders. Because if it can’t be built, it doesn’t matter how beautiful or strong it is.

The Systems Approach: Seeing the Whole

I always believe we must have a systems approach in our design and construction. Essentially, a structure is interwoven with elements or components in a pre-decided manner with specific relationships and is expected to deliver the desired output when subjected to predetermined inputs. All buildings are essentially systems. The structural system is one of the major subsystems of the building. Each structural system will have different elements, their interconnections and properties will also differ, and hence their efficiency and performance will vary. Buildings are not collections of parts; they are systems—living, breathing systems. A systems approach means seeing connections. How does the structural system affect HVAC? How does the façade influence thermal performance? How do material choices impact acoustics? Each aspect of building design will be reflected if we conceptualize the building as a system. It will give a holistic picture. It is very important for structural engineers to embrace this approach to develop comprehensive and critical thinking processes. It is a must at the conceptual planning stage. It also suggests that structural engineers need to have a basic understanding of disciplines other than structural engineering to be good designers. It means collaboration between engineers, architects, contractors, service engineers, and owners. It means trade-offs, compromises, synergies, and coherence. A building that feels whole and works as one. Sadly, most structural engineers work in silos.

Poetry in Concrete and Steel

When we stand before a skyscraper touching the sky, or a humble home offering shelter, we rarely think about the invisible framework holding it all together. But to me, that framework is poetry. Poetry in concrete and steel. In tension and compression. In choices made and risks taken. Conceptual planning is where this poetry is first written. Line by line. Beam by beam. Dream by dream. Because in the end, we are not just designing structures. We are designing trust. Safety. And the future itself.

MANOJ MITTAL-AUGUST 23,2025|NOIDA

© This blog post is the intellectual property of MANOJ MITTAL. Unauthorized use or reproduction is prohibited.