Am I doing the right thing 19

[dvanommen]

I'm a new engineer at a small company which really isn't set up for engineering work. It's mostly a job shop, manufacturing parts that have been engineered by larger companies. They have been awarded a couple of contracts over the past decade, but there isn't a significant amount of experience doing internal engineering projects. I was hired in May after graduating from university, and I was brought into a project that was nearing the end of the design phase. Now it's going out for product certification testing. The CEO and lead engineer (who doesn't have any formal engineering training) is guiding me on this project. If we just focus on the project at hand, there are quite a lot of things he's doing and asking me to do that I don't feel ethically stable on. For example, our customer's approved qualification testing plan document specifically states that all of the units we send to be tested must be production quality units. However, most of the detail parts and subassemblies that make up the final unit are test parts that were made as design validation, not made through the proper methods of tracking material and parts used, having quality inspection buy-off on all stages of the process, etc. We're doing all that now, after everything has already been completed, which leads to a lot of guesswork (we can't verify hardware lot number, for example, so we just pick one that was ordered around the time we think the units were assembled). These certainly aren't production quality units to me.

Another example of this is minimum electrical clearance on electrical assemblies (for the same product I discussed above). We're performing high voltage tests at 1000 V through the unit to ensure there aren't short/open circuits anywhere. I calculated MEC based on IPC-A-610, and there is a part of the design which violates MEC for 1000 V. However, operating voltage is 200 V, and MEC isn't violated at that level. I was instructed to not worry about it because MEC is for operating voltage, not testing voltage, even though the document states "rated voltage" (which to me is whatever our tests run at) as the basis for MEC.

All of this comes down to us being late for certification testing. The unit was supposed to be sent for testing weeks ago, but that kept getting pushed back because of design changes and manufacturing. So it seems like instead of admitting fault and doing it right, the lead engineer wants to try to figure out a way around the system to make the incorrect design work.

Am I right to be concerned about all of this? I feel like the whole situation is unethical, but I don't have a very solid footing for making an argument against it to my boss. I keep getting told this is how it's done all the time in industry. Yesterday I told myself I was going to look for a new job. But I wonder if I'm being rash and getting worked up about nothing. Please share your advice

 

[JohnRBaker]

LOOK FASTER...

John R. Baker, P.E. (ret)
EX-Product 'Evangelist'
Irvine, CA
Siemens PLM:
UG/NX Museum:

The secret of life is not finding someone to live with
It's finding someone you can't live without

 

[TehMightyEngineer]

I'd also keep looking. Don't blow the whistle or burn any bridges yet, but something tells me your opinions wont be respected and that this will slow your engineering career progress at a minimum.

Ian Riley, PE, SE
Professional Engineer (ME, NH, MA) Structural Engineer (IL)
American Concrete Industries

https://www.facebook.com/AmericanConcrete/

 

[drawoh]

dvanommen,

By the sound of it, the nearest thing to a licensed professional engineer at your place is you. Trial and error is not the best way to learn engineering, especially if safety is involved. You are at the stage of your career when you want to be mentored by a professional you trust and admire.

What do the documents your customer is receiving say? If they say your system is rated to 1000V, then your boss is lying. If they say 200V, then your boss is not lying. I am a mechie, and I do not understand safety factors in the electrical world. Factors of safety are also sometimes called factors of ignorance. You, as a recent college grad, are ignorant.

--
JHG

 

[dvanommen]

Thank you all for your input so far. drawoh, you're right that I'm the closest thing to a licensed PE here. In fact, I'm the third current employee who serves as an engineer, and only the second employee who has formal engineering training from a university. Unfortunately, trial and error has been what I've done every day I've been employed here.

I recognize my ignorance in this matter. As you said, I need to be mentored by someone I trust. Unfortunately, due to conversations I've had with my supervisor (the ceo), I can't trust him. The only other engineer in the company is his brother, so how much can I trust him either?

I believe there are some points of reconciliation I've come to on the matter of the design of this particular product. However, the larger issue of trust looms. I can't work at a company where I don't trust the only other people who give me instruction in how to be an engineer. I've come as far as to draft a letter of resignation detailing my concerns, but I haven't sent it yet. It's a big decision to make, and I still don't know if it's the right decision. The product in question is going to certification testing tomorrow, and they've asked me to be the "quality and engineering signoff" on the test documents stating that the test is done per specification. However, I can't sign that document if I'm not comfortable with how the unit was manufactured.

 

[BridgeSmith]

I agree with JohnRBaker, look quickly for a new place to work. Possibly another bit of motivation to get out: I don't know where you're working, but as far as I know, anywhere in the US, you have to work under the supervision of a licensed P.E. to become a P.E.

 

[BridgeSmith]

I wouldn't sign the test documents unless the actual extent of the testing, the voltage that passed the test, etc. are detailed in the documents. If the way it was done is really ok, then it shouldn't be a problem to have it documented. Otherwise, you're potentially certifying a fraudulent document, which is not only an ethical problem, but legal one that could cost you much more than just a few paychecks.

 

[drawoh]

dvanommen,

Can you write up the document you are going to sign? I understand this is a professional engineering issue. You write up and state you observed assembly serial number 0012 on such and such a date, you describe the test and you describe the results. If the customer is looking at serial number 0155 sixth months later, they can read between the lines. This accounts for the near certainty that you are not in charge of production.

--
JHG

 

[dvanommen]

That is a separate conversation I'll have to have with the lead. As far as I understand it, these documents are already written, and I am simply signing "pass/fail" on the face of the document. I was already uneasy about being asked to be the witness to the test because I haven't been involved in the design of the unit save for the last few weeks, and I don't understand how the unit operates. I voiced my opinion that I'm not the best fit, but I was assured that someone with any technical understanding would be able to visually verify the test was set up and performed correctly.

 

[BridgeSmith]

"...I was assured that someone with any technical understanding would be able to visually verify the test was set up and performed correctly."

Perhaps you have too much technical understanding, which they didn't anticipate when looking for a scapegoat.

 

[TheTick]

So... why are you staying?

 

[BridgeSmith]

I would write an honest report, detailing the tests that were done, which units were tested, the outcome of the tests, etc. and sign that report, but I would not sign a fraudulent report. If they fire you for that, it'll be a slam dunk when you sue them for wrongful termination.

 

[BrianPetersen]

Don't sign the pre-written document. Sign your own version of it that tells it like it is. What that document needs to say, is up to you. It needs to be the factual truth, whatever that may be.

"Production quality" units doesn't necessarily mean "production" units ... just the "same" as the production units. In my world (automotive) that means dimensionally the same and made of the same materials etc but not necessarily built using the production tooling and automation equipment. If you need to state that in your document ... by all means. If you don't know a serial number, that blank gets filled in "N/A". If you know a range of serial numbers but not the exact one ... explain it. Tell it like it is.

 

[TehMightyEngineer]

I don't know where you're working, but as far as I know, anywhere in the US, you have to work under the supervision of a licensed P.E. to become a P.E.

If he is in aerospace as his title signifies then he really doesn't need a PE stamp, he needs to be a designated engineering representative under the FAA (AFAIK). Not sure what that entails but it's not under a state licensing board.

Ian Riley, PE, SE
Professional Engineer (ME, NH, MA) Structural Engineer (IL)
American Concrete Industries

https://www.facebook.com/AmericanConcrete/

 

[BridgeSmith]

That's interesting, TME. I didn't know it was that different in the aerospace industry.

 

[TheTick]

When you feel it necessary to write CYA diaries and disclaimers to protect yourself from your employer's actions, it's past time to go.

 

[TehMightyEngineer]

That's interesting, TME. I didn't know it was that different in the aerospace industry.

Yeah, that's why a lot of people grumbled about the fine for the guy who wrote a letter about traffic light timing to state licensing board and signed that he was an engineer (he never claimed to be a professional engineer or to be practicing engineering). There are plenty of industries where an engineer is not necessarily licensed by a state board (automotive and aerospace probably the most prevalent).

</tangent>

Ian Riley, PE, SE
Professional Engineer (ME, NH, MA) Structural Engineer (IL)
American Concrete Industries

https://www.facebook.com/AmericanConcrete/

 

[berkshire]

dvanommen
Are you producing ground support equipment ,or are you producing flight articles.

You say " Now it's going out for product certification testing." by whom ? The FAA or some other entity?

Is this going to be a part produced under a TSO ?
B.E.

You are judged not by what you know, but by what you can do.

 

[drawoh]

HotRod10,

In aerospace, there are Designated Airworthiness Representatives (DARs) to sign stuff off as safe. Unlike civil engineering, there is a lot of capability to test stuff before it gets used and trusted.

I have just finished a contract with a manufacturer of entertainment products. Stuff has been designed and rigorously tested, and is now being signed off on by professional engineers who either did the testing, or carefully watched it. They are trusting production to build what was designed. Here is a photograph of the cash register in the cafeteria.

--
JHG

 

[BridgeSmith]

Interesting how provisions for public safety are handled differently in various industries. I thought others were similar to civil/structural, but apparently not. I guess it makes sense to do things differently when you're producing many of the same item, unlike where we usually only produce a few (or one) of a particular design. Overall, the different approaches all seem to work fairly well, as the death rate from engineering failures is very low across the board.