and zero risk to the client by definition ?

I've no problem with providing anything the client wants - but generally speaking that optimization process is expensive - and doesn't necessarily realise into a cash saving during construction - and even if it does, that doesn't necessarily mean it's a saving to the client - it may remain in the contractors pocket

I've been a consulting engineer (not structural btw) for two decades - in the same way there are engineers and engineers, there are clients and there are clients

Someone mentioned the issue of Eurocodes versus "traditional" British Standards for design earlier. Eurocode allows for a significant amount of optimisation (and consequently a lot of design effort) compared to a BS approach - and that costs a lot of money in terms of design time - something a lot of clients don't actually recognise (particularly if they are not usually involved in construction)

I'm just trying to provide the counterpoint to Tony's view on this

Regards

Barney