Help! I'm Sick of CAD. 8

[Wrightguy]

I'm in my mid thirties, married with two kids and have been doing nothing but Cad work for 10 years in the structural side of things to make a living.

I'm considered a technician. I've been going to engineering school at night (1 class a semester) and have 7-8 classes left mostly humanties and water/civil classes. Strength of materials, concrete, steel, structural analysis, soil are all behind me. (Senior standing in school)

I watch as each new engineer comes to work with half the knowledge I have. (Don't get me wrong, some are very bright and will succeed and become those people we admire the most.)

My question is this.....

Does it make sense for me to sit for the EIT exam and leave my current position as a tech and strive for a more design oriented engineering job now or wait it out.

I think I have CAD burnout... and I understand that CAD is an important tool in the design process.. however I would like to see if anyone else has been down this road and can share their insight and wisdom.

Thanks in advance.

MJ

 

[GregLocock]

That was my point, I guess. I have had to solve a PDE twice in the 19 years since I left uni and fortunately one was one that we solved there. Now I have mathcad and leave all the tricky stuff to that! (Not strictly true)





Cheers

Greg Locock

 

[whyun]

Only real design course I took in college was reinforced concrete design. I have a very diligent but unfocussed student who took multiple levels of analysis courses and dynamics. In hind sight, I should have taken a steel design course and timber design courses. Masonry design was not even offered if I remember correctly.

All the design related knowledge I've learned over the years is from work experience. I see many who want the easy way out, who are not passionate about engineering and wanting to just get by being mediocre. It sickens me. Your success will come with your passion and desire to learn. Ask questions, point out the errors made by your peers (in a tactful manner), and never be afraid of taking criticism from others as long as they are constructive.

I am beginning to sound like an old f*rt... I will stop here today.

Good day.

 

[JAE]

I haven't been by this forum for a while and when I saw the title - WOW!

I've got very strong opinions on CADD (autocadd in particular) as used by structural engineers.

I just had to let one of my CADD guys go as we were slow. However, we'd been struggling with CADD issues for some time.

I don't know exactly where we are going as an industry but I do know the following:

1. AutoCADD (and other cadd programs) have gradually become very complex programs that require a lot of training to use. The software vendors have a vested interest in continually updating their software to require firms to buy buy buy more.

2. The software vendors make it much more complex than it really has to be as they try to be all things to all people in ONE PACKAGE. This requires firms to buy buy buy more training on a continual basis. Years ago, once you learned how to draft, you were good to go. No more.

3. CADD operators (designers is the term used above) spend so much time learning the intricacies of CADD that they fail to learn the basics of engineering detailing or design. I once told the guy I let go, "If you are a CADD expert, you're not doing your job."

4. CADD intricacies have become so prevalent that a huge effort must be used to get out drawings without mistakes. We had a four story building go out a while ago and everything looked great on the screen. After printing 20 sets we noticed that a set of concrete columns that occurred only in the basement were drawn on the roof framing plan. It seems some layer script was screwed up and the column layers were turned on for that level and shouldn't have been. THE MORE COMPLEX THE TOOL, THE MORE LIKELY ARE THE MISTAKES.

We've begun a process to reduce all complexity in the way our cadd drawings are put together. Its just a tool but its a tool that can grow into a monster if you do not manage it effectively.


My rant is now over.

 

[Wrightguy]

JAE

I agree. Cad has gotten complicated. I havent even touched on the question of the speed of cad.

Anyone who uses cad knows that it takes the same amount of drafting time to draw today than 30 years ago. Just the revisions can be quicker and the math more accurate and the documents can now be e-mailed to someone around world in few seconds. These are two traits that are real handy today because we are in such a hurry to get drawings out on the street we make mistakes that require addendums or the like. Also, some of the kids coming out of school today need the help with the math like I need help with the spelling, grammer and long sentences......


anyway....

I'm with you..I think we need a little less dependence on computers and more thinking about how we build better, stronger and a more effiencient enviroment to live in.

Having said that....

I think I'm going to move my career track away from computers as a way of life to computers as a tool to help me do my real job....engineering.

What do guys think? Any Cad guys out there disagree with me???? Just Bring it.

 

[GregLocock]

I don't entirely disagree with you, but...

In the auto industry the primary advantage of CAD (to my mind) is that the packaging work can be done in much greater detail than is practical with manual methods. The availability of accurate geometry at all times during a vehicle program is also of great benefit to those of us in the CAE world.

So I think of CAD as being the first step in a useful direction, rather than an efficient or inefficient tool in its own right. Does that make sense?

Cheers

Greg Locock

 

[strokersix]

In my company (agricultural equipment OEM) CAD is absolutely essential. Solid models are used from initial concept development all the way through assembly floor documentation and marketing product brochures. I'm not saying we don't have problems with the system because we do. It's inconceivable that we could accomplish the work we do at the pace we are doing it without CAD.

I agree with some of the above posts that engineering is best done by engineers and detail design and drafting is best done by CAD experts. Of course engineers need enough CAD expertise for concept work and CAD experts will be well served to have an understanding of engineering concepts. It is just too much to expect an individual to be a good engineer and a CAD expert at the same time. Similarly, finite element and other analysis activities require specialized knowledge and dedicated personnel to achieve meaningful results.

In response to the initial post: While an engineering degree would provide the most career flexibility, and I recommend completing your degree, you will likely be considered inexperienced by potential employers as an engineer for several years. Perhaps you should consider specialized CAD training, such as structural analysis? That might be a more direct career advancement.

Pro/E is the CAD system we use.

Mike

 

[whyun]

Nice posting from JAE which I can relate.

It does not make business sense to provide AutoCAD training at a structural firm, especially if the size is small to medium. There are trade schools that train young kids how to use CAD. once they've become an expert at it, they can market their skill practically anywhere, including a structural firm.

All structural firms shall employ a seasoned drafter from the old days who can practically draw up the building without an engineer's input. He shall train these young CAD experts in structural concepts and detailing practices. Also, there should be one CAD veteran who establishes CAD standards such as symbols, layering and so on. He shall train the yound CAD experts in understanding the company-specific application of CAD software.

Everyone should be motivated individuals who are fast learners. I guess all except the seasoned drafter, who just has to be available to teach everything he knows.

I do agree that there are too many updates on the softwares. In order to maintain market share, structural firm must keep up at least with 3 of it's major clients (buy the latest version they have).

So long are the days when we can say "package is in the mail". Computer and fax machine are definite technological advances but a huge drawback sometimes. That's another topic.

Cheers.

 

[Wrightguy]

Whyun,

I love your input on what the cad department should look like. Its a good model and everyone should follow it.

The same could be said about the engineers in the office.

MJ

 

[whyun]

Thank you Wrightguy~ It's good to hav someone on my side. What I've expressed is just the ideal I'd been trying to attain for many years but it is not as easy as I make it sound. It doesn't hurt trying though...

Quality drafters and engineers are hard to find.

Good night

 

[DrCool]

Wrightguy...Finish school and get the degree!
It will be nice to have engineers experienced in CAD burnout and can relate to it.
I'm an old Board drafter that transitioned to AutoCAD and then on to Pro E. Initially with AutoCAD,I spent half my day battling with the program, the computer, recovering files, replacing dried out plotter pens that crapped out half way through a 10 minute plot, etc. Then just as I got all the bugs worked out and technology was catching up and once again as fast as I was manually, we change to Pro E and we have to learn the game all over again.
As an engineer, I hope you will appreciate the fact that "design" for the most part, is an artistic talent and no matter what tools are used, the numbers and formulas should be crunched by one side of the brain and the sexy lines drawn by the other.
To avoid burn out, I spent as much time as possible in the shop. I learned from the fabricators and they learned from me. This is where the CAD comes in handy..."quick changes" based on input from the guy's trying line up the holes. Line on line looks good on the tube but seldom happens in real life.
Good luck!
Bill Kay

 

[Wrightguy]

DrCool,

All I can say is Yep!

Thanks,
MJ

 

[voltair]

Can any of you seriously imagine what life can would be like today without CAD, whether package? CAD packages are merely tools that are being made more sophisticated by the day simply because the hardware they run on is being made more powerful. Why not use the tool available to it's maximum potential.
I believe design engineers are using CAD today because they can produce good results from the various packages available, especially if they are computer literate. CAD pakages today do more than simply draw lines on paper. They combine drafting with analytical tools such as finite element, so some engineers prefer a hands-on approach. However, design engineers should not be full time CAD operators no more than they should have been full time drafsmen in the old days.

 

[source]

Wrightguy, you'll get there. I was also a late bloomer. But once I finished school I had to learn Pro/E from scratch with no trainning given. It took me 4 months. I know about CAD burnout, because I've dealt with it for the last 10 years. I'm a BSME from the consumer product industry, but recently have taken time off to compose myself. Hang in there, I know project management awaits you if you can stammer the politics that goes with it. Unfortunately for me the company politics I had to deal with was too much.
Good luck
Source

 

[TheTick]

I usually let old threads lie, but since we're on this one again, I thought I would share....

Tomorrow I am going to a graduation party for a friend of mine. After 10 years as a UG CADslinger, he finally finished his BSET.

The shortest road can go on forever if you don't keep on a-walkin'

 

[whyun]

I have observed that structural engineering field is the only field that makes a clear distinction between engineers and drafters. (Correct me if I am mistaken)

I have noticed that all architectural firms have new graduates on the CAD stations drawing up window schedule and such. Also in the mechanical (building related - HVAC/energy etc) engineers are on the CAD stations.

Why not the structural??? Structural engineers are, in my opinion, least familiar with the AutoCAD program. Even so, I plan on having my engineers perform engineering duties only (with hand drawn solutions) and drafters learn more and more about the CAD advancements. Anyone have any opinion on this?

Good night.

 

[TheTick]

I have the reverse problem as the author of the original post of this thread. I LOVE CAD! Especially the freaky organic surfacing stuff. Can't get enough. Last time I was on the job hunt, I found that the BSME was actually a liability, as CAD work, no matter how sophisticated, is considered "technicians' work".

 

[Wrightguy]

Well lets face facts. We seldom see four letter words like "love" in these threads. Thanks to TheTick for that one even though he's sick puppy for liking CAD.

At least he & I love what we do. Cheers to you Tick!

 

[ichibansan]

Wrightguy-

Get the remaining required coursework, get your FE, and get your PE. I admire a person that is willing to sacrifice a little short term gain for long term dividends. If you follow through on this, you will not regret it. However, as others have alluded to, it's not a walk in the park. But it is worth it. Just bust your butt. Put in the required studying and hammer those tests. More action, less talk. I like it!
----------------

Now on the Cad versus engineering discussion:

The thing about it is, dealing with Cad operators/technicians can be tricky. My opinion of a Cad Technician (I disagree that they are designers, at least in my line of work) is as follows. The tech should have a basic understanding of structures or whatever it is he/she is drawing. But, at the end of the day, a draftsman draws pictures representing an engineer's design. That's what it boils down to. Don't get me wrong, I love a cad person with some experience that is familiar with how something is actually built and understands the fundamental concepts behind why, say, a reinforced concrete beam has rebar on the tension face, or why a footing has to be 6x6 instead of 5x5 for uplift purposes. This in my opinion should be the extent of it. Cad technicians should be great at what they do - drawing through the utilization of a powerful computer program - and they should be satisfied with that. If not, do what Wrightguy is doing. I can't tell you how many times I've had experiences with cad people where it is clear that they have a tad bit of an inferiority complex, not because of how I deal with them, but because they themselves feel like they are smarter than we give them credit for. The fact of the matter is, if you are a draftsman, you are not a designer, and you need to be comfortable with that. If you are not comfortable with that, then change it by advancing your career skills. Do not bellyache about less pay and less respect, because it is useless. If you feel so "woe is me" about being a "lowly" draftsperson, then change it. If not, sit down and draw what I tell you to draw and make changes that I tell you to make. That's just how it is.

We need draftspeople. We need engineers. We do not need draftspeople trying to impersonate engineers, or vice versa. If you are an ambitious type person with high goals set for yourself, you will most likely not be satisfied with drawing other people's designs your whole life. If you are, then that's great, and it certainly is nothing to be ashamed of, it just takes a certain personality-type.

The bottom line is: simply know your role in the entire process and either come to terms with it, or change it. I commend Wrightguy for wanting to change it, because it's obvious that he feels like he has potential that is thus far untapped.

 

[TheTick]

Maybe I should rephrase: I love DESIGNING on CAD. In mechanical, it is more possible to get a design engineering job where one does most of his own CAD.

The paradox of drafting and detailing is this: if a person is talented and competent enough to be a great draftsman, then he is talented enough to move on to greater things.

I noticed the civil field has a much more layered structure, separating engineering from design from drafting.

All this machinery making modern music can still be open hearted.

 

[Binary]

I'm with you Tick. I, too, love designing with CAD - always have. It's almost like playing video games.

To me, one of the real values of parametric modelers is that it makes more sense for an engineer to take the design from start to finish.

In machine design, I've never found it to work well to have a designer or draftsman try to do anything besides detail a drawing. Perhaps I've just not worked with good designers but my experience has been that it doesn't save me much time, especially if I can use a parametric modeler and we've got a good library of parts.