Dr Julian De Voy, BSc, PhD, CEng, FICE

Expert QuestionS & AnswerS

What kinds of cases or matters do you most often work on, and what makes you the right person to handle them?

I often work on the forensic investigation of failed or failing steel or concrete structures. Projects I have worked on include buildings, bridges, marine structures, water treatment, renewable energy, and railway infrastructure. I have more than 30 years’ experience as a structural design engineer and have carried out inspections, designed and supervised material testing programmes, carried out structural assessments, written expert reports and testified on these types of structures.

What is one assumption people commonly make in your area of expertise that is wrong, and what is the actual reality?

The most common mistake I see is assuming real-world structures behave exactly as predicted by computer models or laboratory tests. Highly accurate models are costly and time-consuming to create and are often unnecessary because modern design codes use simplified assumptions to ensure safety. As a result, many people believe that any design that is not code compliant is automatically unsafe. In reality, non-compliance does not necessarily mean a structure is unsafe.

Tell us about a recent case or project where your specific expertise made a measurable difference to the outcome.

I was appointed as an expert in a dispute concerning the partial structural failure of a mixed-use development with an in situ reinforced concrete frame. The claimant sought demolition and reconstruction of the entire development. Through analysis of an extensive testing programme, I demonstrated that the issue was limited in scope and related to concrete quality rather than construction. As a result, the claim against my client was dropped.

What questions should clients be asking when they’re vetting an expert in your field, and what answers should they be looking for?

In my opinion, clients should appoint an expert with a sound understanding of the principles of structural mechanics and materials science. Extensive relevant design experiences is highly beneficial; clients should beware the professional expert who has never designed anything in the real world. The importance of the ability to communicate complex ideas in a way that is easily understood by lay readers is often underestimated.

What separates a strong engagement in your area from a weak one, from your perspective as the expert?

In my opinion, engineering expert opinion is often requested later in the process than it should be. Early emphasis is often on quantum and delay, without an appreciation that in construction projects, these issues are almost always driven by engineering decisions. Early engineering involvement, to allow time for investigation and testing if required, combined with a clear definition of the issues, often results in a more successful outcome.

Back to top