Plant operation and maintenance

[redlinej]

Hello,

In my opinion in plant operation and maintenance there are three set of engineering/technical personnel.

1.The engineering manager who never spent a day in the field/plant.
2.The engineering guys/engineer who engineer, plan,design,implement and commission the plant (electrical engineer/technician , mechanical engineer/technician,civil engineer and the plc programmers).
3.The guys who maintain the plant on a day to day basis.Do preventive maintenance and troubleshoot all the problem that the plant encounter.(electrical technician/engineer,mechanical engineer/technician).

Now I know a lot of you guys are senior in your field so you can answer my question professionally.

Do you think any of the above mention technical personnel is superior to another or everyone is superior in his/her own field?

 

[ScottyUK]

The guys in group 2 can do the work of groups 1 and 3. The reverse isn't usually the case, although it does sometimes happen.

 

[Skogsgurra]

I think that's a very nailheadhitting answer!

That's why guys like you and me are so popular!

Gunnar Englund

http://www.gke.org

--------------------------------------
Half full - Half empty? I don't mind. It's what in it that counts.

 

[flexoprinting]

I'm in position 3 and would consider this chain of command appropriate, however I have more respect for position 2 than 1. Managers have a tendency to be optimistic with timelines and unrealistic with budget, (kind of a pain in the assignment) ;-)

Chuck

 

[controlsdude]

But number 2 is hardly there only during the commissioning phase and if the number 1 and 3 can not solve the problem, they call number 2 back in to tell him to fix his stuff. Its not number 1 and 3 stuff until number 2 fixes it. Then the stuff returns to number 1 and 3 possession.

 

[jraef]

This might be an unpopular opinion, but there is value in #1. #2 would have no time to do justice to projects and commissioning etc if they are bogged down in meetings and report generation / interpretation. there bis nothing worse you can do to an Engineer in terms of his engineering value that to make him a keyboard banging desk jockey.








"You measure the size of the accomplishment by the obstacles you had to overcome to reach your goals" -- Booker T. Washington

 

[Parchie]

@jraef,
I guess the ugly ones who had been holding number 1 makes your opinion unpopular! But an engineering manager doesn't need to be the know-it-all guy, IMHO. He just have to know how and whom to pull strings around him, being surrounded by Subject-Matter Experts! Let's say he's the conductor of an orchestra; it's chaos without him around!

 

[crshears]

Hmmm, no mention of Group 4 people who actually operate the plant, monitor its behaviour on a continuing basis, point out any negative change in conditions that Group 3 needs to know about, or design deficiencies that Group 2 needs to address...

Once had to operate a liming system for pH corection manually, since if the automatic lime feed was enabled it fed the lime in far too quickly for it to dissolve, and the whole sump would cake up solid - and I knew this would happen because somebody once enabled the auto feed and the whole thing caked up solid.

I found it caked up; the defect was reported; staff with the necessary chisels and acids went in and cleaned the system out, following which the sytem was returned to service on manual control.

Design defect was reported to engineeering; engineer came down, said there was nothing wrong with the system, and the operators didn't know diddly-squat. Operators were forced to again place system in service on auto, and the whole thing caked up...again.

Thankfully, only a very very few of the engineers I've encountered in the course of my career are like that.

CR

"As iron sharpens iron, so one person sharpens another." [Proverbs 27:17, NIV]

 

[controlsdude]

Group 4 blames number 2 for everything that goes wrong in plant for the duration that number 2 walks in the door, even if he/she is just standing there.

 

[low1]

I'm in group 3, and have spent time in group 2. I worked in an engineering technician capacity for a few years (actually temporarily doing eng tech duties right now), but found I really didn't enjoy sitting in front of a computer all day. I much prefer getting my hands dirty; turning wrenches, ripping apart breakers, testing big equipment. I also really enjoy digging into older excitation and governor systems, JVC/JLC, etc. Being an electrical technician gives me my ideal mix of technical and "grunt" work.

In my opinion, all are necessary, but, as with everything else, there are good examples and bad examples of each. I've worked with some very top-level engineers who were extremely easy to get along with and effective in their position, and I've worked with some of the most ignorant, self-centered and self-absorbed people I've ever met. I've also worked alongside amazing technicians as well as people who have no business even being near a screwdriver.

I'll just add to your list that in my experience, there is a noticeable difference between engineers who have never done anything besides engineering, and those that spent a number of years in the trades before going back and getting their degrees.

 

[Multikraai]

Until about a year ago we had only level 2 and 3. BTW, I'm in level 2 Electrical and Instruments. Now we have level 1 added and everything that ran smoothly before that came to a grinding halt. Please explain what the benefit of adding level 1 is to our organisatin.

 

[redlinej]

Thank you guys for your constructive reply. I currently have two jobs and I am #3 in the day job and #2 in the part time job(working for my self).I must say that the only thing #2 have over number #3 is that most of the time #2 have trade secret because they are either OEM or work closely with them.As for #1,I think that these engineer just want to be manager and don't really care about the technical stuff,this is my opinion.

 

[JSPRINGS]

Its appropriate when the group 2 grow to be group 1 as they know or have seen what they say.

But as such it wouldn't be often possible for an engineer to manage and an operator to engineer.

Normally in plants, the Engineers wont be the same engineers who built the plant, but would be efficient in calculated troubleshooting.

The operator gains his skill over time with experience may a time as much as the engineer.

But a managers job, if done properly, requires a lot of predictions and calculations. Something that should be acquired by one or be well trained into one.

I fall in the 2nd category.

I work with my operators and managers. Superiority would be there, but seldom practiced. Or seldom cared for.

That being said. I can't claim to know exactly how an operating company works , as i am in Engineering / Designing Plants, not just running them.