Episode 2 of Structural Stories is live.
This one hit differently.
Jesse Light has been a structural engineer for over two decades. He started as a mechanical engineer, worked at Orbital Sciences, and then spent years figuring out why structural engineering software — built by different companies, for different purposes — never talks to each other. And why all those hand-offs between programs were where errors lived.
Cole Fowler came up differently. SML was his first job out of college. He learned to code in MATLAB at ASU, joined a firm that actually let him fix the things that annoyed him, and ended up building automation tools that changed how SML competes.
Together, they represent something rare in the AEC industry: a structural firm that treats software as a strategic advantage, not just a toolbox.
What we talked about:
We met at an NCSCA event where Jesse was presenting SML’s automation systems to his peers. The conversation that followed led to our collaboration — and eventually to this episode.
Here are a few things that stuck with me:
On what “automation” actually means for a structural firm: Jesse described watching data flow from one software to another — RISA 3D to MathCAD to Excel and back — and realizing that every hand-off was a place where a tired brain could drop a decimal. His solution was elegant: build a pipeline so the engineer’s job is engineering judgment, not data entry. As Cole put it: “I don’t want to be checking numbers. I want to be solving engineering problems.”
On what happened when SML started working with Genia: The first ADU project we did together took time. We built the standard carefully. The second was faster. The third was faster still. Jesse described going from 20 hours → 10 hours → 5 hours across three iterations — not between projects over a year, but within the same engagement. The AI system locked in a methodology; the engineers refined it in real time.
On how a licensed SE maintains engineering control with AI-generated designs: Cole’s answer was reassuring in its clarity. The building code dictates the equations. Genia’s system isn’t inventing new structural logic — it’s applying the same code equations, consistently, every time, in a format that makes checking fast. Cole compared it to when FEA software first came out: experienced engineers still ran hand calcs alongside it to validate. Same discipline applies here. “Your AI tool is far faster [than an EIT], but I would still have to vet all that information.”
On FTAO design and real dollar savings: This was one of the most concrete moments in the conversation. Force Transfer Around Opening (FTAO) lateral design lets engineers use the full wall assembly — openings and all — as a shear wall, rather than designing around them with dozens of individual hold-downs. Removing 12 hold-downs from an ADU isn’t abstract. Each one costs hundreds of dollars in hardware, labor, and inspection. In some cases, the engineering fee pays for itself just in hold-down savings.
On AI and the careers of young engineers: Cole introduced a phrase I hadn’t heard before: cognitive surrender — the risk that engineers stop trying to interpret results and just let the AI do the thinking. His view: as long as you’re engaging with the output, building intuition, understanding what you’re seeing, using AI to iterate faster is just another step in the evolution of the profession. “It’s really no different with each step in technology. It’s just one more tool in our tool bag.”
Listen to the full episode: Spotify | YouTube
Structural Stories is Genia’s podcast featuring conversations with structural engineers, builders, and construction leaders on how AI is reshaping the way we design buildings.
→ If you build homes, design structures, or run a structural firm and want to explore what working with Genia looks like, reach out here.
