What should new engineers know? 10

[ERE]

I teach in a mechanical engineering technology program of a large university. As part of our Continuous Quality Improvement process for accreditation, we have been discussing what skills our graduates should possess as they leave our institution. Our program emphasizes applied design and many of our graduates are employed as designers and engineers.

As practicing professionals with a wide range of experience and education, I am interested in your opinion of what engineering graphics skills and abilities a graduating mechanical engineering technology student should possess? Please don't limit your comments to graphics standards and GD&T when responding.

Thanks in advance for you comments.

Ed

 

[ewh]

DReimer has touched on a pet peeve of mine, poor understanding of dimensioning methods. It' one thing to have the wrong line weights or dimension lines crossing extension lines, but where the dimension are taken from and how the tolerances stack up significantly effect the final product. A pretty drawing does little good if the parts don't work as intended. You may get lucky if the tolerances fall the right way, but you should try to ensure that the part will work regardless of which way the tolerances fall. It is disappointing that more effort isn't expended to teach these concepts, as they are very important and shouldn't have to be learned on the job.

 

[ctopher]

My pet peeve also. I'm tired of "baby sitting" drafters, designers and engineers on this "basic" knowledge.

Chris
Sr. Mechanical Designer, CAD
SolidWorks 05 SP2.0 / PDMWorks 05
ctopher's home site

FAQ559-1100
FAQ559-716

 

[drawoh]

DReimer,

I agree with you very strongly. Personnel departements are obsessed with CAD expertise, and not at all interested in drafting skills.

The problem is that people overestimate the difficulties of running CAD, 3D or otherwise, and underestimate the difficulties of engineering and drafting. If it were my choice, a new designer would not get in the door unless they understood drafting, including GD&T. Unless the job was a two week contract, I would not worry about their CAD.

I learned to use AutoCAD about ten years ago. Now I am on SolidWorks, and the AutoCAD is marginally relevant. Ten years from now, I do not know what I will be using. Is CAD training really worth a semestor or two at college, and is it more worthwhile than GD&T?

An engineer or technologist designer should have no problems figuring out CAD software. They will be figuring it out in the context of producing proper working drawings, which is that much better.

I hate working with CAD operators.

JHG

 

[Heckler]

drawoh,

You have opened up another issue. Most HR departments do not really understand the day to day engineering details to really tell the difference when scanning resumes'. It seems easier to pick out key words like Pro/e, SolidWorks, Catia, MasterCAM, and such. I have a little skills test I give to candidates which touches on GD&T and mechanical drawings. But then the flip side - I worked with this engineer several years ago who didn't have much CAD experience when he started. The company sent him to numerous CAD training classes but it just didn't sink in....he was constantly corrupting data on a daily basis. I spent so much time one on one that I had trouble getting my own work finished. I hate working with arrogant engineers it gives the profession a bad name.

Best Regards,

Heckler
Sr. Mechanical Engineer
SW2005 SP 2.0 & Pro/E 2001
Dell Precision 370
P4 3.6 GHz, 1GB RAM
XP Pro SP2.0
NIVIDA Quadro FX 1400
o
_`\(,_
(_)/ (_)

Do you trust your intuition or go with the flow?

Read before you write faq731-376

 

[ewh]

OK now, drawoh. I am a CAD designer. I consider myself a designer first, but my experience with the software has presented me with much more more opportunity than I would have had without it, so I am a CAD operator second. Please don't paint us all with the same brush.
I agree that a course on CAD software isn't nearly as important as dimensioning and tolerancing (the softwares change so frequently), but they do give the student a grasp of solid modeling, which can transfer between systems and, as you posted, they should have no problems figuring out a specific software.

 

[Tunalover]

monkeydog-
In answer to your question, I say no. Would you call someone who passed the bar exam without going to law school a lawyer? I wouldn't!


Tunalover

 

[Heckler]

I don't think you could pass the BAR or the PE if one didn't have a complete understanding of the topics within the respective fields. I think you're a little hung up on the differences.

Best Regards,

Heckler
Sr. Mechanical Engineer
SW2005 SP 2.0 & Pro/E 2001
Dell Precision 370
P4 3.6 GHz, 1GB RAM
XP Pro SP2.0
NIVIDA Quadro FX 1400
o
_`\(,_
(_)/ (_)

Do you trust your intuition or go with the flow?

Read before you write faq731-376

 

[monkeydog]

Tunalover,
Let me see if I have this straight. You believe that an ET graduate that passes the PE exam can call him/her self an engineer. But when the same graduate passed the FE exam, they have not demonstrated basic skills.
I think you have demonstrated a rather narrow minded view point of the ET programs.

 

[McLeod]

In Florida, ET graduates can't even take the FE or PE exams. The state requires applicants for the FE exam to be at least in their senior year of an ABET-accredited program. To take the PE exam, applicants have to be graduates of such a program.

I just checked a few sections of ABET's list of accredited programs, and did not see a single ET program listed.

A degree alone does not guarantee competency, but it should be required as a bare minimum for professional pursuits. Engineering is less rigorous in this regard than law, medicine, architecture, or even accounting.

In answer to Ed's original question, here are some areas that are as neglected as they are critical:

- Mechanical tolerance analysis, including designs with geometric controls.

- Technical writing, esp. test protocols, reports, and analyses.

- Good solid modeling and FEA practices... NOT just how to use the software! For CAD, this means knowing the correct order for features (fillets, chamfers and other treatments last), making sure that profiles are fully constrained, etc. For FEA, this means an thorough understanding of model verification and validation.

- Engineering graphics - they should be familiar with the ASME standards (and how they differ from the ISO standards), understand the diff. btw third angle and first angle, and know the various ways that drawings can be misinterpreted (e.g., failing to show dimensioned features in true profile views) and how to avoid them.

 

[ctopher]

I 100% agree with McLeod.
If engineers do not have these skills, these days most are just CAD operators.

Chris
Sr. Mechanical Designer, CAD
SolidWorks 05 SP2.0 / PDMWorks 05
ctopher's home site

FAQ559-1100
FAQ559-716

 

[Heckler]

McLeod,

The reason why you did find an accredited technology program with that link is because it's for engineering programs. Try this link

http://www.abet.org/accredittac.asp

Best Regards,

Heckler
Sr. Mechanical Engineer
SW2005 SP 2.0 & Pro/E 2001
Dell Precision 370
P4 3.6 GHz, 1GB RAM
XP Pro SP2.0
NIVIDA Quadro FX 1400
o
_`\(,_
(_)/ (_)

Do you trust your intuition or go with the flow?

Read before you write faq731-376

 

[McLeod]

Heckler,

The instructions for the Florida exams refer specifically to "an engineering program accredited by the Engineering Accreditation Commission of the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (EAC/ABET)". Given that the technology programs are accredited by ABET's Technology Accredication Commission (TAC), I doubt that they qualify under Florida law.

 

[monkeydog]

Way back on May 29th the orginial poster (ERE) stated that his students were taking the FE exam, and passing at the same rate as "classical" engineering students.

ERE,
Based on the off topic discussion (since you only were asking regarding improvement to your engineering graphics curriculum), I would suggest that you continue to strongly encourage your students to take the FE exam.

 

[Tunalover]

ERE-
Can you refer us to the actual study showing that the MET students pass at the same rate as ME students? Is that specific to one state or nationwide? I'd really like to see the hard facts (published by a reputable organization) supporting your statement.



Tunalover

 

[Tunalover]

ctopher-
A GOOD engineer can do everything a technician and designer can do and more. In small companies, where they can't afford to fill those roles with three different people, engineers are often forced into them by necessity.

McLeod is right in stating that the degree does not give many skills having true real world value.

When I received my undergrad ME degree, I entered the workforce thinking I knew everything. I quickly realized that I lacked some of the skills listed by McLeod. I quickly learned them on-the-job, however, as is expected by many degreed engineers (although as I grow older I increasingly recognize how little knowledge I have in the grand scheme of things!).

The bottom line is this: our curriculum was too packed with science, math, general university requirements, and analysis to give us many practical skills. Our schooling provided us with lots of theory and gave us a broad, high-level way of thinking. Most importantly, many of us picked up the academic skills enabling us to learn MUCH more (practical stuff included).

The engineering managers I've come to know prefer classically-educated engineers even if they are more expensive and (initially) lack many rote skills. Provided they can avoid over-analyzing things, these guys quickly gain these skills on the tube, in the shop, in the lab, and on the production floor.








Tunalover

 

[ctopher]

I believe it is time for engineering schools to catch up with the real world. Also schools in general. Times have changed.

Chris
Sr. Mechanical Designer, CAD
SolidWorks 05 SP2.0 / PDMWorks 05
ctopher's home site

FAQ559-1100
FAQ559-716

 

[Tunalover]

ctopher-
I hear you! There have been rumblings in the academic community about increasing the programs from four years to five years to do that very thing (although many do the "four year" program in five years). Talk to the PhDs who decide what goes into the programs of study!



Tunalover

 

[ctopher]

The problem is, if it is changed to 5 years, there will be less engineers ... cost goes up.
IMO, I think someday a 4 year degree will not be specific and if you want to go into engineering, it will be specialized and require maybe 2 more years.
Or, the world will be so computerized, a eng degree will be less important. Time will tell. Probably not in my lifetime.
I am teaching my kids to pick a profession that will always be needed, like medical for example. My son is interested in Forensic Science. I don't want them in Engineering, not very stable.

Chris
Sr. Mechanical Designer, CAD
SolidWorks 05 SP2.0 / PDMWorks 05
ctopher's home site

FAQ559-1100
FAQ559-716

 

[GregLocock]

I can see why the academics would push for longer degrees, but I really struggle with the necessity for it.

On the one hand, I use about 50% of my final (third) year's content. However, asking around, that puts me in a tiny minority, most would reckon that their final year was too academic.

Also, I believe I did far too much maths, not by choice.

On the other hand we had 5 afternoons a week of labs/tutorials, and 5.5 mornings a week of lectures, for the first two years. That is quite a load, and was only practical because the tax payers in the UK were exceedingly generous (in retrospect).

On the other other hand we only had 24 weeks of the above schedule a year.






Cheers

Greg Locock

Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.

 

[ERE]

As far as I can tell, the NCEES only publishes pass rates for graduates of EAC/ABET accredited programs NCEES Pass Rates The pass rates I mentioned earlier are anecdotal... discussions with MET and ME faculty at my university and with faculty from other universities.

A majority of our MET students who take the FE exam pass it... I have no hard facts to support my position. Forget about that... my point all along is that in any field of study - engineering, medicine, law, business, liberal arts, whatever - you have some really good graduates, some not so good graduates and a bunch of people in between. I do not believe you can generalize and say that all ME graduates are better than all MET graduates. All ME programs are not alike nor are all MET programs alike. Every program has their own emphasis and goals. Frankly, I think it is time to let this discussion comparing METs to MEs to die... some of the positions stated are not going to change - and that is okay.



Ed