To view the figures and tables associated with this article, please refer to the flipbook above.
When it comes to designing tall buildings, Kevin Aswegan, principal at Magnusson Klemencic Associates (MKA), is up for the challenge. A co-author of the book, Design and Performance of Tall Buildings for Wind, Aswegan has worked on buildings as tall as 65 stories and as the leader of the firm’s Performance-Based Design Technical Specialist Team. He is also an industry expert on seismicity and a member of MKA’s Earthquake and Wind Technical Specialist Teams. STRUCTURE reached out to Aswegan to discuss his structural engineering career path and focus.
STRUCTURE: In terms of code development, what changes would you like to see in the next 20 years?
Aswegan: More Performance-Based Design. I’ve been lucky to be involved in building code development for my entire career, dating back to my research in graduate school, which included writing code language for the seismic linear response history analysis procedure now in ASCE 7. Unfortunately, code development moves at a glacial pace. Given the abundance of complex issues our society is facing, our building codes need to more explicitly adopt and promote Performance-Based Design approaches to encourage creative solutions to our challenging problems.
STRUCTURE: What unique challenges did you face when undergoing the first application of the ASCE Prestandard for Performance-Based Wind Design for the ATX Tower? Was there a lot of resistance from the city jurisdiction?
Aswegan: There are many challenges inherent to being the first to utilize a new design methodology. Because the Performance-Based Wind Design approach had not yet been “stress tested” on a real project, the challenges for ATX Tower were primarily technical. For example, we built a detailed nonlinear analysis model for the structure and subjected it to five different simulated windstorms. To do this, we needed to understand the real-life behavior of low-seismic coupling beams and shear walls when pushed beyond their elastic range. We also faced computational challenges. Despite using our fastest computers, the analysis for the five records took several weeks to run! Helping us through this effort, we were fortunate to have worked with collaborative building officials within the City of Austin’s Development Services Department, along with a great combination of owner, architect, and peer reviewers.
STRUCTURE: You are involved in multiple organizations. Do you have goals you would like to achieve within each of them?
Aswegan: Although I’ve been involved in multiple organizations, my primary focus throughout my career has been with the Structural Engineering Institute (SEI) of the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE). This has included SEI’s Tall Buildings Committee, Performance-Based Design Committee, ASCE 7, and helping plan the annual Structures Congress. My primary goal across these efforts is to help SEI lead and elevate the profession, such that we attract new, talented young engineers into structural engineering and continue to demonstrate the value of our profession to our clients and the public.
STRUCTURE: In your previous roles leading the Performance-Based Design Technical Specialist Team (TST) and Earthquake TST within your office, are you getting a lot of participation and excitement from the younger engineers? Can you discuss your role as a mentor or leader for this program?
Aswegan: Absolutely. Our TSTs serve as internal groups for our subject matter experts to meet and stay ahead of industry developments. For example, we have TSTs for Concrete, Steel, and Timber, which are involved in Building Code development for their respective structural materials, as well as educating our staff on technical topics. We find that this is a great way for younger engineers to develop expertise in an area they find interesting. The TSTs also promote mentoring opportunities across project teams, giving younger engineers and senior leaders opportunities to connect outside of day-to-day work. In my role leading several of the TSTs, I have had the opportunity to personally mentor and see amazing growth from many of my colleagues with whom I would otherwise not have the chance to meaningfully interact.
STRUCTURE: In this post-COVID world, there seems to be a large push for remote work. In conversations, you mention that MKA “believes very strongly in a single office model.” Can you expand on that idea and discuss MKA’s collaborative office nature?
Aswegan: For MKA’s entire 100-plus-year history, we have resisted the urge to open offices across the world, favoring instead an approach where our expertise is primarily concentrated in one office in Seattle (which is made easier because Seattle happens to be an incredible place to live and work!). This “single office” model has allowed us to attract and retain a pool of very talented engineers who enjoy collaborating in person, while also creating an atmosphere that is much more effective for mentoring and coaching younger engineers. The post-COVID world has reinforced for us the importance of being in person, where we find that we are more social, collaborative, efficient, and productive.
STRUCTURE: You have been working at MKA since 2013 (congratulations!). When did you experience the most growth?
Aswegan: Thank you! The responsibilities for the roles at MKA are generally on a continuum, and we work to continuously grow and get better all the time. For me personally, a point in my career where I grew the most was when I started to manage projects and had to think hard about the big picture in addition to the detailed design. This included considering not only the technical design, but also project schedule, work plans, and communicating with the client.
STRUCTURE: You have buildings in many different places with different jurisdictions. Have you found any place more challenging than the others?
Aswegan: Generally speaking, I have found that the building officials in nearly all jurisdictions are invested in helping projects succeed, and that the best approach is to treat the jurisdiction like a partner and collaborate openly. With that said, the most challenging areas tend to be those with the trickiest combination of environmental hazards, soils, and existing conditions. The Bay Area jumps to mind, given the soil conditions and high seismicity.
STRUCTURE: Graduating from Virginia Tech and then moving/working in Washington—how was the transition? Did you have any previous experience with the West Coast?
Aswegan: Born and raised in Virginia, I had never been to the West Coast until I started interviewing for jobs during grad school. The transition was relatively seamless (although my family in Virginia might disagree!). I was committed to moving to the West Coast and working for MKA specifically to focus on earthquake engineering and performance-based design. It helped that many of the other engineers at MKA are also transplants, so there is a built-in network of colleagues who are growing together and facing the same life changes.
STRUCTURE: Throughout your career, who have you relied on as a mentor and/or advisor? Any words of wisdom that you still hold on to today?
Aswegan: I have had the benefit of many amazing mentors throughout my career, both within and outside of MKA. As it relates to professional organizations and building code development, no one has been more influential than John Hooper. He has provided guidance on my involvement in various professional initiatives and is often the one who has to talk reason into me when I attempt to volunteer for too many things. Other key mentors at MKA have included Sean Clifton and Ron Klemencic, both of whom have taught me the importance of asking “why” and appreciating that to be a successful structural engineer, we must understand the perspectives of everyone else on the project team (developer, architect, contractor, etc.).
STRUCTURE: Do you have any advice for students considering engineering as a profession? What kept you in engineering after so many people seem to be considering leaving?
Aswegan: Structural engineering is not always an easy job, but it is a very rewarding one. In my career, I have worked on projects that have taken me from Toronto to Austin to San Francisco to Shanghai. There is nothing more exciting than seeing a project come to life, and when a TV show or movie shows the skyline of a city I’ve worked in, I will pause and point out my projects to friends and family! Structural engineering is a broad field, and my advice to students considering the profession is to stay open to new opportunities. Early in your career, it may feel like you are drinking from a fire hose, but the knowledge and experience you gain will pay off later.
STRUCTURE: What has been your greatest challenge on a project, and how did you overcome it?
Aswegan: One of my first buildings as a Project Manager was not only a new project type for me, but it also utilized a structural material with which I was relatively unfamiliar. On top of that, it was a large structure on a fast-track schedule. This was a significant challenge for me as a young Project Manager, requiring many hours and sleepless nights. Ultimately, my colleagues at MKA served as a great support mechanism, stepping up to knock out key design tasks and then helping review shop drawings and RFIs. It was a great example of a true team effort. ■