When Is It Worth Separating the Structural Design Scope in a Large-Scale Investment Project?

Date of last update: 30.06.2025

In large-scale investment projects, every decision about how design work is organized can directly impact the schedule, budget, and construction process. This applies especially to structural design. Although a single design office or multidisciplinary team is usually responsible for the overall project, there are cases when it makes sense to separate the structural scope and hand it over to a specialized provider.

From the perspective of a project or construction manager, this might sound like a complication. But in reality, it is often a conscious decision that brings order to the process, reduces risk, speeds things up, and improves documentation quality.

Table of contest:

1. Why Separate the Structural Scope at All?
2. What Do the General Contractor or Site Manager Gain?
3. Common Concerns – and How to Address Them
4. Real-World Example
5. How to Do It Right

You can read this article in 5 minutes.

Why Separate the Structural Scope at All?

There are several valid reasons, each grounded in real-world practice:

1. The complexity of the structure exceeds the main designer's expertise:
   This happens often – architectural or general design offices may have their own structural engineers. But when dealing with complex steel structures, support frameworks for production lines, adaptations to existing foundations, or redevelopments, the in-house team may lack the necessary expertise. In such cases, a specialized structural engineer is needed. The existing engineer might take on the task, but learning takes time, increases the risk of mistakes, and divides focus.
2. Speed and flexibility are required during design:
   Investors sometimes change concepts during planning; additional loads emerge, and production line layouts evolve. It helps to have a structural partner who works quickly and independently of other disciplines.
3. The project needs to be “unblocked”:
   In industrial projects where time is critical, the architectural team may not keep up with structural design, especially since it is rarely a top priority for them. Separating this scope allows key documentation parts to be developed in parallel rather than waiting for a complete version.
4. The building has an existing structural context:
   Modernization, expansion, or adaptation often involve incomplete base documentation and require expert analysis of load-bearing capacity and interactions with the new structure. This goes beyond just “pasting” elements into a model – and is better handled by external consultants with specialized skills.

What Do the General Contractor or Site Manager Gain?

For the general contractor (GC) or project manager (PM), the benefits of engaging an external structural engineer are very tangible:

• Better communication: A company focused solely on structures will agree on details faster, respond to changes quicker, and deliver answers directly.
• Shorter decision paths: No need to go through full project office structures – you speak directly to the engineer making the decisions.
• Execution-oriented documentation: Structural designers specialized in industrial investments (like METIB) design with assembly, prefabrication, and accessibility in mind – not just compliance.

Years of experience help specialists anticipate challenges that architects or even contractors might miss. This lowers investment costs and reduces the risk of collisions or surprises on-site.

Competency is key: collaborating with modern structural firms that use advanced design systems helps eliminate or reduce cross-discipline errors. Working in a BIM environment means conflicts are detected earlier – not on the construction site – and BIM viewers allow investors to monitor the project effectively.

Common Concerns – and How to Address Them

“It'll be a mess if everyone works separately.”
Not if responsibilities are clearly defined and inter-discipline coordination is strong. METIB works in a full BIM model with IFC data exchange. Our model is integrated with the master model – not isolated. Progress is trackable in real time.

“It’s more work to coordinate everything.”
Quite the opposite. With a direct technical contact and knowledge of construction realities, responses are faster and more accurate. The site manager speaks to someone who understands their world – decisions are made faster, and issues resolved in real time.

“What if something doesn’t align with the rest of the project?”
That’s why we work from the beginning, not from a finished drawing. We adjust the structural design as the architectural concept evolves.

Real-World Example

In one industrial project, METIB designed a support structure for technological installations in a facility that was already partially built. The main design office was unable to analyze the existing structure or adapt to unusual dynamic loads. Thanks to our experience, we designed a steel load-bearing system that fit the hall geometry, avoided installed equipment, and could be fully prefabricated. Importantly, the time from commission to final execution design was just 14 working days.

Project: Roof structure over tram tracks and stops at Rondo Reagana in Wrocław

• Location: Rondo Reagana (Plac Grunwaldzki), Wrocław
• METIB Scope: Steel structure workshop design + assembly plan
• Geometry: Ellipse 51 × 79 m; height 4 m (main structure) + 6 m (additional level)
• Main Elements: 28 box columns 350 × 200 mm; elliptical beams 450 × 350 mm; roof made of rectangular tubes
• Technology: Modeling and detailing in Bocad; input data from AutoCAD 2D
• Design Time: ≈ 2 weeks modeling + 1 week execution drawings

Highlights:

• Separated structural scope (roof) removed from general design package
• Fast turnaround: full model and drawings delivered in ~3 weeks
• Smooth coordination: 3D (BIM/Bocad) workflow integrated with architecture and MEP

We have many such examples – smaller structural scopes in large investments, redevelopments, temporary structures, auxiliary structures for machinery installation, foundations for non-standard loads. In each case, one thing was key: rapid action based on practical construction knowledge, not just theory.

How to Do It Right

Separating the structural design scope shouldn’t be random. It should be planned:

1. From the start of the design process: This allows parallel work, not reactive fixes.
2. Fully integrated into the BIM model: We’re part of the team, not working in isolation.
3. With clear responsibility definition: We take on well-defined scopes – no unclear risk boundaries.
4. With open communication with the GC or site manager: That’s essential for documentation that’s useful, not just formally approved.

Separating the structural scope in a large project is not a complication – it’s a method to organize chaos. When time, reliability, and predictability matter, assigning this part to professionals with industrial experience may be one of the smartest organizational decisions you can make.

Instead of worrying that something might fall out of sync – ensure that every piece of the process is under the right expert's control. METIB does exactly that: we take responsibility, deliver documentation, and cooperate so that the design is not just compliant, but ready to build.

If you’re working on a project where the structure is gaining urgency, becoming more complex, or simply needs special attention – let’s talk. It may be easier than you think.