TC231 HW#1

I post my first Technical Writing HW here, just for record.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Introduction

The paper “Limitations in the Back-Analysis of Strength from Failures” is written by Rick Deshamps and Greg Yankey, and published in the April 2006 issue of Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering. This paper is classified as a professional article whose readers are usually experienced engineers or researchers. Background knowledge about the geotechnical engineering and back-analysis is needed for readers who want to review this paper.

The main topic discussed in the paper focuses on the arguments of back-analysis application, which is commonly used in geotechnical engineering. Simple explanation of the back-analysis method is described at the beginning of the paragraph. The authors addressed the problems they would like to evaluate in the Instruction section. A review of causes that influence the results of back-analysis was provided. Three cases and related studies are supplied to support the concerns the authors stressed in the paper. In the end, the authors reaccentuated the results expressed in the previous case study sections to conclude that back-analysis is reliable only when the model and all assumptions are reasonable and accurate representations of the real system.

This article analysis will evaluate Deschmamps and Yankey’s paper according to the issues of technical writing: content, organization, style, tone, layout and illustration. A brief conclusion is presented at the end of this analysis.

Content

The audience of “Limitations in the Back-Analysis of Strength from Failures” was expected to have enough knowledge in geotechnical engineering field. The authors included content without too many definitions about the terminology. The goal of the paper was well addressed in the Introduction section. Back-analysis was the main idea throughout the whole paper. Specific scopes were outlined by authors and narrowed down to seven influence factors. Not each factor was extracted and evaluated in this paper. The authors only selected three major factors to illustrate by three real case studies. The summary of the findings from this paper was developed at the end of the paper.

Abstract, reference list and few definitions of terms are applied in this paper. Abstract is put in front of the paper to give the readers a brief review of the content. Reference mentioned in the paper is listed as a tool to let readers decide where to find further or related information. This paper is lack of sidebars and appendices which are not allowed in this journal.

Another important view of this paper is the writing approach. Problem definition is an important research process which helps the researcher can identify the challenges and has readers understand what difficulty the authors try to solve is. This paper is a good example to explain the problem definition approach. The authors gave a brief overview of the back-analysis in the beginning. Then the problems authors wanted to discuss were clearly addressed right after. This approach is efficient and useful for readers from specific science field. Readers can catch up the main ideas quickly and have concise outlook in mind.

Organization

Since this is an article from the professional journal, guidelines of preparing a journal paper are well established by the editing committee. The authors followed the rules of editing, and the organization was made to easy to follow-up. Whole paper can be divided into four major sections: introduction, influence factors, case studies and conclusion. This paper was well organized based on these four sections. The authors developed the content adherently to each section. Listed description and discussion were used in the paper when authors wanted to address the influence factors. An example of this is in the section of “Factors that Influence Interpreted Shear Strength during Back-Analysis” (pp. 532).

The heading in each section is suitable. White space of this paper is reduced to a limit state. But the space is well arranged to make a clear overview. The length of each paragraph is proper to readers. Also, the authors effectively applied the skill of topic sentence. Topic sentences are usually put at the beginning of each paragraph. Overall, the organization of this paper is well produced according to the edit guidelines.

Style and Tone

As other professional journals, this paper’s style is more specific and serious than common column articles like newspapers and magazines. The sentence length of the paper is longer than that in general articles, and the sentence structure is precise. High ratio of phrase-to-clause is observed here. Definitions of professional terms are not common, since the audience is expected to be researchers with same and enough knowledge as the authors. Passive voice is the obvious tone in the whole paper. An example of definition and passive tone is found in the first sentence at Introduction section (pp. 532): “Back-analysis is an approach commonly used in geotechnical engineering to estimate operable material parameters in situ.”

Conciseness of the sentence and paragraph is another feature commonly found in this paper. To effectively sketch the ideas, authors made an effort on word choice to concise the sentence such that more discussion and explanation can be addressed within limit paragraph. An example of this is the sentence in the summary: “Finally, it is important to remember that all assumptions that are conservative in design are unconservative in back-analysis.” (pp. 536) Here authors used ‘conservative’ and ‘unconservative’ in same sentence to describe the concerns and conflicts of back-analysis.

Layout and Illustration

The authors’ layout of the article is well suited for the specific audience. The integration of illustrations and text is fitting for readers. One can find the corresponding figures or tables when they are mentioned in the text. The arrangement of the figures is quite good because most of the graphs are placed either on the top or bottom margins of the paper (Fig. 1 and 2, pp. 533). So the text is settled in the middle of the paper. Readers can easily compare each figure and not lose direction while reviewing the content.

The physical outlook of the paper, including the margin widths, line length, spacing and white space is well-defined in the editing guidelines. The authors just followed the rules to place the text, tables and pictures. In this paper, table is used only once to summary the results (Table 1, pp. 533). The figures are also well organized to present the problem profiles. But there is a flaw of line in each figure. Since the paper is published in white-and-black color, some lines in the figure are hard to identify such that readers may lose point at some moment. These defects can be improved by transferring the color into white-and-black base before submitting to the editing committee.

Conclusion

Experienced engineers and researchers are expected to be the audience of the paper. This paper is prepared according to the firm editing rules from the journal editing committee. The authors organized the article by the rules, and applied an excellent writing approach: problem definition process. The main idea is often addressed in each section. List is used as a tool to outline the factors relating to the main idea. Clear description and supplement of case studies support the idea of this paper. Figures and tables are applied to summarize the important results and findings. The color of the lines shown in each figure is the only weakness in layout. Overall, this journal article is a good example for technical article analysis. Authors not only provided convincing facts but also represented a well-prepared article type.