The performance of hybrid structures is governed by the interaction between multiple structural behaviors occurring simultaneously. Global framing response, local shell behavior, operational loads, and process-induced actions influence one another, often in non-intuitive ways.

Key governing aspects include:

• Interaction between structural framing and supported equipment

• Load sharing between primary and secondary structural elements

• Sensitivity to operational, thermal, and maintenance-related actions

• Compatibility of deformations between connected systems

In hybrid systems, simplifying assumptions that isolate individual components frequently lead to incomplete or misleading conclusions.

Engineering challenges in hybrid structures often arise from fragmented responsibility and incomplete system-level understanding, including:

• Division of design scope between multiple disciplines or suppliers

• Inconsistent assumptions regarding load transfer and stiffness

• Difficulty defining governing load cases across operating scenarios

• Limited guidance in codes for coupled structural–process behavior

These challenges demand a system-level perspective rather than isolated component checks.

Problems in hybrid structures rarely present as isolated structural failures. More commonly, deficiencies manifest through:

• Incompatible deformations causing stress concentrations or leakage

• Progressive deterioration at interfaces between structural and process components

• Unexpected force redistribution following operational changes

• Latent deficiencies revealed during maintenance or equipment replacement

Such issues often develop gradually and may remain undetected until system performance is compromised.

Rezali supports hybrid structures by adopting an integrated engineering perspective that considers the full system rather than individual components in isolation. Emphasis is placed on defining realistic load paths, deformation compatibility, and interface behavior between structural and process elements.

Typical involvement includes:

• System-level structural modeling and assessment

• Evaluation of load transfer mechanisms between components

• Review of supplier and discipline interfaces

• Independent technical review of complex hybrid systems

Where appropriate, this section may include:

• Conceptual diagrams showing interaction between framing and equipment

• Simplified system schematics highlighting load transfer paths

• De-identified project photographs illustrating structural–process interfaces

Visuals should focus on interaction, not appearance.

Experience with hybrid structures consistently demonstrates that:

• System behavior cannot be inferred from isolated component checks

• Interface assumptions are often the governing risk

• Operational and maintenance scenarios must be explicitly considered

• Early system-level coordination reduces downstream uncertainty

These lessons inform Rezali’s approach to both new designs and independent reviews.

Even when primary systems are well understood, supporting and auxiliary structures can introduce disproportionate risk. The next section addresses secondary structures, where localized elements can govern overall reliability and safety.