Definition of an Engineer 26

[Ashereng]

I recently brought my little ones to my office, to see where I work.

They have only seen me "colour" my drawing, and working on my computer at home, and seem to think that engineering consists of:
1) drinking a lot of coffee (yes, I am cutting back)
2) colouring (I do a lot of back checking and review)
3) surfing the web (I do a lot of design and sizing on my computer)

However, this descripton aside, how would you describe/define engineering to a group of Grade 10s? I don't mean the specific type of engineers, like a piping engineer works on a project to bring oil from Alaska to Texas, but more generic

What does an "engineer" do?

"Do not worry about your problems with mathematics, I assure you mine are far greater."
Albert Einstein
Have you read FAQ731-376 to make the best use of Eng-Tips Forums?

 

[2dye4]

Doctor : One who heals people.
Lawyer : Reader of contracts.
Pharmacist: Dispensor of medicines.

Doesen't seem complete does it??
In fact most people do these things themselves to some
degree. They heal themselves, study credid card applications, pick pain relievers.
Most people also engineer things. Build shelves for
the laundry room, table for the patio, design entertainment
center, pick accesories for their computers.

So a definition based on the work done is insuffecient to
qualitatively demark a profession.

It is in fact a certain competency in particular studies
that define the professional not what he does.

Engineer - Physics,Materials,Applied Math.

 

[Ashereng]

Doctor : One who heals people.
Lawyer : Reader of contracts.
Pharmacist: Dispensor of medicines.

So, what is your 3-4 word definition of engineer?

"Do not worry about your problems with mathematics, I assure you mine are far greater."
Albert Einstein
Have you read FAQ731-376 to make the best use of Eng-Tips Forums?

 

[Quantum50]

2dye4: I must disagree. I've worked with lots of inexperienced engineers whom are precise well beyond the requirements. This is wasteful in terms of resources. An engineer must meet the requirements while optimising the given resources. This nearly always involves compromise of requirements (just how far beyond the minimum acceptable) and resources. Precision is just as susceptible to this compromise as other design criteria.

No businessperson wants to pay more (overhead) than is necessary (impacts profit). Nor should he, frankly.

 

[2dye4]

First
I must apoligize for forgetting the basic question.
I believe I am caught up in the attempt to define
engineering
in order to seperate it in some meaningful fashion from
anybody who is just handy with tools.
The poster wanted to know how to describe the work to
a group of 10th graders.
I will try an answear to that question.

Engineers study how to best use resources to make
usefull things by applying the study of physical science and
math.

ashereng: Engineer: Builder of stuff

Quantum50:
I am afraid I don't what your critique is meant to convey.
You describe a person who wastes time on issues that have
no monetary benefit to the overall design. Sort of a person
lost in the corners of a design and missing the big picture.
I see nothing in my definition of an engineer that would
correlate with this idea. In my experience it is the
people lacking real skills as I defined them, that waste
the resources and time in a project by lacking the ability
to analyze with insight the problems at hand.

 

[mechatronic]

Ashereng, agreed .. .

The Engineering is about application of Science ,

Science is study of nature and arriving at conclusions based on what is proved / observed repetitively in various places and times and people who are invloved in this are sceintists

Engineers apply science , they are application oriented while scientists are study oriented , again it does not mean Engineers dont study

When I said "assembly" probably I should have added more - assembling or bringing some thing together or correlate the knowledge ...

Process Engineers as you say bring desired effects , to do that they need to some way or the other the above exercise ..

Having said that, if some Engineers are bringing some novel solutions , again they are doing the same exercise .

(improving some thing by applying science)

Again I must agree these are my understanding , and expression of any understanding needs very good command over langauge which I lack

secondly you must agree " words are necessary evils"

 

[Quantum50]

Sorry, 2dye4. I didn't include the reference to my "critique". It was when you asserted that ".... precision is the engineers currency." I simply disagreed.

 

[aardvarkdw]

Engineers apply knowledge to the end that they may affect a change in the physical world.

 

[0707]

"Engineers are also dreamers and whenever men dream the world jumps and keeps on running, like a colour rubber ball in the hands of a child".

A.GEDEÃO (Portugal)

 

[KENAT]

Anyone know what happened to the thread on How to improve myself that related to this question, it was titled something like 'I don't get it' about who gets to be an engineer. Was it deleted for being off topic?

Seems like a chicken egg situation.

Which comes first?

Defining who is an engineer would help to define what an engineer was.

Vice Versa defining what an engineer is would certainly help define who was an engineer.

I'm inclined to think 'what an engineer is' should come first but am not totally sure.

Seems everyone skews their definition of engineer depending on what their specialty is, or even on their qualification/experience/background.

Perhaps only a suitably knowledgeable non engineer could define it? However given we’re supposedly a secretive profession where would be find such an individual who wasn’t tainted by their own perspective?

 

[SnTMan]

Boy, this one really has legs.

I like aardvarkdw's descripition the best so far. Not too wordy, does not mention science (engineering is often ahead of science), and includes shaping the physical world.

A star.

Regards,

Mike

 

[SnTMan]

Pardon, should have said "mentions knowledge, but not science". The best engineers I have worked with, degreed or not, knew nearly everything about SOMETHING.

Mike

 

[Supercar1]

I have read the whole thread. Now I am fully qualified to tell you guys who you really are.

An Engineer is someone who:
- Has an engineering education,
- Applies math, science and technology,
- Creates and designs things.

and who may have optional attributes, such as:

- Creates things that are cool
- Makes sure things are done, takes charge, takes responsibility
- Problemsolves/troubleshoots
- Uses precision calculations and rules of thumb
- Learns and stays up to date with technology
- Browses Eng-Tips.com and drinks coffee.

Catchy slogans or sleek one-liners do not come to mind but I think they are not needed.

On the topic of "Designers" vs "Engineers" in the US. Most of the US "Designers" are computer draftsmen with no engineering education. They, however, can design things just like engineers. That does not mean they are engineers though. Also, it does not mean that engineers cannot be considered designers in a broader sense of the word.

Do we need a certification, PE and such? I think large companies have taken care of that already. It is not possible to get an engineering job to make cars, planes and trains without a degree. Sure, you can make a car and sell a few of them and call yourself an engineer. Like it is possible to mix some concoction of herbs and chemicals and sell it to cure health problems. Then you can call yourself a doctor. Until you get caught. Doctors may have the same problem too when someone with a PhD in English calls himself/herself a doctor. But do they care? They know that those doctors won't practice on their sick clients, so why should we care about TV installation engineers?

Sure, if TV installation jobs were the only ones that were available then we would be all up in arms about who has the proper qualifications and who gets to do this important job of TV installation. But luckily this is not the situation in most places. My condolences to the person from the Caribbean, it seems to be a major concern there.

 

[KENAT]

Interesting input on Designer V Engineer.

All of the drafters/designers/engineers I worked with in the UK who didn't have a degree did have considerable education in the form or apprenticeships/trade school (HNC/HND) etc.

I've come across at least one guy here in the US whose only formal training was apparantly drafting no real engineering.

Maybe that is part of the difference.

On the topic of the definition though, Supercar I like your attempt but I've known Engineers who spent most of their time analysing/testing other peoples designs, not so much designing them themselves. Whilst part of the development process is this really 'creating and designing'?

 

[Supercar1]

I think that the 'creating and designing' part is crucial. Even the verb 'to engineer' means to create and to design.

On the other hand, I am a Test Engineer myself. So now what should I make out of this definition?! LOL! You've got me here.

My excuse is that I have an *ability* to design the things that I test. But is this the case with all test engineers? Could a guy be a testing authority, an experienced and knowledgeable engineer, but have no clue how the thing is made and how it is working? I bet not. I think you have to know what it is in order to analyze and test it. How it is made, how it should not be made, how it works and how it may fail. So maybe we should change it to "Has knowledge and ability to design and create things”?

 

[engrom]

Engineer - Champion of Build, Maintain, Revamp!!!

In Hindu mythology: Creator (Lord Brahma), Preserver (Lord Vishnu) and Destroyer (Lord Siva) could all be considered as Engineers!!!

 

[EddyC]

An engineer creates a design on paper/CAD, predicting the proper function, before the item is brought into being. A layman builds something by trial-and-error, and we find out if it functions properly afterward.

 

[aardvarkdw]

EddyC,

From personal experience, I beg to differ with you. Our engineers spend enough time reworking things that they designed that it all amounts to trial and error. I have found that a layman usually has a more vested interest in designing something that will work the first time as they have fewer resources with which to experiment, whereas an engineer is getting paid resonably well to try out more unusual ideas in an attempt to do something better that often times does not meet with expectations.

 

[Supercar1]

Right after college, after a few months on the job at a big OEM, I had a chance to be interviewed for a mini-promotion. Everyone knew each other, and as it often happens, the outcome of the interview was already pre-determined, no matter how the interview would have went. But nevertheless, they had to go through the motions to show some fairness to everyone and to fill the position properly.

One of the questions was of a behavioral type. Something like what would I do if I had a disagreement about some engineering problem. I said, well, engineering problems are simpler than most other problems -- you just apply the right formulas, do the math and the answer is clear. End of argument and disagreement. They looked at me and at each other and then either rolled their eyes or smirked. I failed badly.

Not only did my answer was too simplistic, but it also demonstrated my novice understanding of the engineering process used in that department. Obviously, if there is a disagreement, then a simple answer us usually not sufficient. But also, those engineers rarely had to do any engineering calculations in their jobs. So suggesting that some problem could be solved by simple math was like heresy to them. Later I found out that some of those guys did not even know the simple engineering formulas that the text books had about their gadgets. Many of them never had to open any text books to learn do their jobs -- just beat on the supplier until the damn thing works. Unfortunately to some, and fortunately to others, this is often the essence of engineering at the OEM level.

 

[mechatronic]

Supercar, you have very nicely explained the situation prevailing across the industry you exposed to . The similar condition applies to various Engineering industries - operating plants to consulting companies.Dependence on supplier is maximum where equipment are supplied "packaged" to suit the project / plant

You are very right in saying giving straight answers will never be sufficient to bring out "complex" problems existing in various departments.

 

[prost]

Ever walk around a big hotel, notice a guy wearing the tag "engineer" with the hotel's name on his shirt? This would be a facilities engineer, the guy that keeps all the huge HVAC and other equipment running. I haven't been able to decide--is he the real engineer because he gets his hands dirty (like college educated engineers used to have?) and fixes real problems in real time, or am I the real engineer because I have a few engineering degrees and can make some fancy pictures and graphs, but never actually touch the thing that I am designing/analyzing?