Stress/structures engineer - specialised too early?

[StructuresDan]

Dear fellow Engineers,

I have been looking at the forums on this site for quite a while now and have decided to sign up and pose a question. Well, to be honest I'm seeking some advice really!

I graduated from the University of Manchester (UK) with a First Class Degree in Mechanical Engineering (MEng) in 2000. After a short period working in London as a software developer I decided I wanted to return to Engineering and found a position as a Structures Engineer working in Military Aerospace where I have been for the past 7 years. I am now a Senior Structures Engineer at the age of 31 and have also undertaken (and completed) a Cranfield MSc in Aircraft Engineering and recently gained Chartership with the Institution of Mechanical Engineers. I've enjoyed my career to date and have had many opportunities to develop and have done fairly well in my field.

The problem is that I have found myself becoming quite specialised in my role within the company (as a fatigue/loads monitoring engineer) and have some concerns that I may be becoming too "specialised". Within the company the work is beginning to dry up and as such I have naturally started looking for opportunities elsewhere. Although all of my experience to date has been in the aerospace industry I am considering a move to the petrochem/oil and gas/nuclear world as a pipe stress engineer (preferably contract). I have made efforts, but given the current climate it has proven difficult to demonstrate that I am capable of doing these roles when most, if not all of them, require experience.

I believe that these industries offer more opportunities and stability and hence would give me the opportunity to be challenged and develop further as a structures engineer.

The questions on my mind are:

1. Am I seen as a suitable candidate for re-training?

2. Which industry offers the brightest career? Aerospace, petrochem, oil and gas or nuclear?

3. What I can do to help me on my way? (e.g. put myself on a Caesar course, familiarisation with pipe codes etc)

4. Given the current climate, am I better staying in a permanent role for the time being, while at the risk of becoming even more specialised?

I feel that I am at the crossroads of my career. Any comments, advice, similar stories from other engineers would be very well received.

Many thanks for your time.

Kind regards,

Dan

 

[ScottyUK]

Aerospace is very cyclic, especially the defence sector;

Nuclear is vulnerable to the whims of politicians and the ramblings of tree-huggers;

Petro-chem is taking an absolute battering at present (i.e. the Wilton complex on Teesside could close completely given the current rate of attrition - not good at all in the UK)

O&G has a good future world-wide but North Sea resources have maybe 30 years left. Mind, they said that 30 years ago...

Have you considered power? There's a lot of new build coming along in the next few years, whether it be gas, coal or nuclear. If you have any rotating plant experience then ideal but there's a recruitment crisis (and that is the correct word) in the power industry and has been for a few years now.


----------------------------------

If we learn from our mistakes I'm getting a great education!

 

[Lion06]

Why is it that it's only good to "specialize" if you're a doctor or a lawyer?

 

[KENAT]

Well, I graduated a year before you in the UK and worked in Defence there till 03 (well a little into 04 but that was from here in the states).

Always seemed like the sky was the limit for a decent stress guy, we only had one direct/permanent guy who was completely overworked most of the time. We'd get contractors but none where anywhere near as good as him, due at least in part to product familiarity.

Maybe that's changed now or maybe you're just looking in the wrong places.

So I'd say you didn't specialize too early though a year or two of more general engineering at the start of your career may have been usefull/be usefull.

Also, a lot of the structurs guys, like the one I just mentioned, were older and looking to retire. Defence didnt' really recruit much in the 90's in the UK at least so there's a bit of a gap in people with 10-20 years of experience. With all those folks retiring or moving to management, I'd have thought that even if aerospace/defence as a whole goes down a bit, decent stress engineers will still be in deman.

Here's a bit of a question for you, are you a real stress guy or an FEA jockey? By the sounds of it for some of what you do FEA may be the only way to approach it but in other sectors being able to back it up with "hand calcs", at least to verify approximate values is a requirement. So, brushing up on your classical calcs might be an idea if that's not your strong suit.

You may want to send your resume to Portsmouth Aviation, not sure they're hiring but they're a fairly small place with a wide range of work in defence. Might get you a chance to work in some other areas.

KENAT,

Have you reminded yourself of faq731-376 recently, or taken a look at posting policies:

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

What is Engineering anyway: faq1088-1484

 

[westheimer1234]

you just missed the boom.. it was like 3 years ago until 4th quarter of last year..
all major companies (fluor, jacobs, kbr, bechtel, etc..)
were hiring and training..

i highly doubt any major company will hire/train you right now.. even senior engineers are out of job right now in the petrochem/refinery/oil and gas industry =(

i miss that boom. guys with 5 years experience get $75/hr
give or take $10


0were hiring and training..

 

[jenniferwhite]

Hi Dan,

Seems to me you are in a classical situation for an engineer that is competent and interested in his/her job. You progressed quickly, went through the effort of getting more education and now find yourself feeling "pigeonholed" into you field of expertise.

This is a common occurrence. However you need not despair.

You are an experienced professional that has a significant amount of tools and experience behind you but still very early in your career. Therefore you are very desirable for employers.

They will expect you to have the energy of a recent grad but a significant amount of experience that will make you more productive and useful.

In your case because you work with analysis the career path to excellence does call for a narrow focus and many years of experience in that field. The best analysts in most design teams are usually the ones within 5 years of retirement.

If you think that this career path is not for you did you consider other opportunities within your organization? For example in project management, project leadership, engineering design, thermal analysis, or other areas where your skills can be put to use?

In this economic environment it may not be trivial to find an employer that will train, so internal options may be a best path for a career transition.

However you can always try to apply to other industries highlighting you experience and career progression. With a well crafted resume and cover letter you will look like an attractive candidate for the reasons above.

To answer your questions:

1. Am I seen as a suitable candidate for re-training?

I believe so.

2. Which industry offers the brightest career? Aerospace, petrochemical, oil and gas or nuclear?

Depends immensely on the location. If you are willing to relocate and where to.

3. What I can do to help me on my way? (e.g. put myself on a Caesar course, familiarisation with pipe codes etc)

Certainly helps. At least to have familiarity during interviews.

4. Given the current climate, am I better staying in a permanent role for the time being, while at the risk of becoming even more specialised?

Look internally first, there may be options you did not consider. May also want to discuss this with your HR manager.
If you have proven yourself they will want you to go
somewhere else within the company and not lose you.

Best of luck.
Jenn

 

[pennpiper]

StructuresDan,
Some background:
I spent more than 45 years in Process Plant (Refineries, Chemical, Power, etc) Piping Engineering and Design.
My experience ranged from entry level to Piping Department Manager and included some related assignments into Materials Management, Field Engineering, pipe fabrication shop Engineering Manager and Software Development.

During my years I worked with a lot of Pipe Stress Engineers (PSE) and as the manager, I was responsible for their hiring, training, assignment and performance.

The average Engineering/Procurement/Construction company piping department there will be:
70% Piping Designers
10% Piping Material Engineers
7% Piping Material Control
6% Pipe Stress Engineers
7% Department Manager & Staff

The large percentage (90% to 95%) of all the PSE that I came in contact with (on the job or as Manager) were very good to great. The balance were not worth having on the staff.

The reason the good Pipe Stress Engineer is good and the bad Pipe Stress Engineer is bad are related.

The good ones got to know the designers and worked with them.
The good ones could read drawings.
The good ones took the time to understand the design.
The good ones knew how to suggest alternates that might solve the problem.
The good ones would teach the designers how to avoid stress problems.
The good ones knew and understood that all the stress analysis in the world does not make a bad design good.
The good ones knew how to be a team player.

I hope that if you decide to go into Pipe Stress Engineering this will be of help to you.