Where are all of the master tradesman? 18

[curiousmechanical]

Hello Everyone,

Background:

I have been working as a mechanical design engineer at a small (<100 employees) OEM for a little over four years now. During this time, I have observed a disappointing trend and would like to hear other engineers’ thoughts on the matter.

Description:

While in college, I imagined a working life analogous to that of any apprentice. I pictured a world filled with experienced tradesman - engineers who have mastered their skills after many years of experience. I was truly looking forward to working alongside such people and I was eager to learn all that I could.

Upon entering the workforce, I eventually learned that few engineers have actually mastered their trades. In fact, more shockingly, many seem to lack even the most basic fundamental knowledge and skills. I find this very disappointing. In addition, I have also noticed a trend of sloppy and poor workmanship.

Intermediate Questions:

Why have so few engineers mastered their trades? Why don’t people care about quality? Why don’t people seem to take pride in what they do?

Theories:

I have noticed that quality is a falsely claimed priority. Companies like to say that they “take pride in producing a quality product,” but I have trouble believing them. Not when engineers are told “I don’t care [that the design is incomplete or of poor quality] just release the drawings.” Deadlines and managers pressure engineers to get work done as fast as possible. Quantity seems to be valued in the real world, not quality. Aside from self-respect, there is no incentive (or time) for an engineer to master his or her trade.

Closing Questions:

Is this lack of master tradesman common in engineering? Are there any environments where the quality workmanship of a master tradesman is valued over the high volume/sub par output of the average engineer?

Thank you for reading my rant! I look forward to reading your feedback!

 

[graybeach]

I also work in power and we too are hemmoraging the old guys. But IRstuff has a good point. The engineering world has always had its human frailties. Dagny in "Atlas Shrugged" bemoans the lack of good engineers to design and build her new railroad line, and that was written in the 1950s.

 

[ajack1]

I think this thread could just as easily been why are teenagers so unruly these days? We all tend to see the past through rose coloured glasses.

Certainly things have changed, technology is moving at a pace that only the Industrial revolution and WW2 came close to creating and look at the side issues with them. People travel more these days and a job for life is a thing of the past. Is someone with 45 years experience in one field now seen as a master or a dinosaur with 4.5 years experience 10 times over?

People’s expectations are far greater and generally formal education is rated above experience, not sure if that is good or bad.

Still when you look at some of the structures being built, be they buildings, bridges, tunnels etc, the progress in air travel and space travel, the type of cars we all drive, the progress in micro-biology, robotics, computer software and hardware and many other disciplines are we really getting it that wrong?

Things are different now to they were in the past and I am sure they will change in the future, but there are now as there always were and always will be good, bad and average in all walks of life.

 

[oldfieldguy]

Pat P--

"If my previous comments lead anyone to believe that one must have an engineering degree and be certified by a professional association to be an engineer, that most certainly was not my intent."

Thanks, buddy... I resemble that remark.

old field guy

 

[patprimmer]

As did Henry Ford I think.

Regards
Pat
See FAQ731-376 for tips on use of eng-tips by professional engineers &

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

for site rules

 

[mtu1972]

Before I get into my comments I want to say that I really enjoyed these postings and was interested in seeing that these problems affect the many different engineering disciplines.

I have been doing structural engineering of buildings and structures for 36+ years, ranging from single family residential to mid-rise hotels and office buildings to mining and manufacturing facilities. Both with greenfield projects and the renovation of existing buildings.

Entering the workforce with a BS degree I felt that there was so much that I did not know. My first job was with a small commercial building consulting firm and the Owner and the senior engineer mentored me through the design process and drawing preparation requirements. I would not be the engineer I am today without them. One real eye-opener was my first annual review where I learned how my inefficincies affected the bottom line on projects I was associated with.


My first job change was to a design-build industrial contractor. The structural department in our branch office had about 30 people. For my first assignment I was teamed with the most senior drafter. It was never said, but I was sure that he was asked to report on my abilities. We never worked together again. I moved onto the mid-level drafters and eventually to the new hires. That system seemed to work very well for everyone as new employees were introduced to the companies standards and methodology by the people they were directly working with.

Subsequent jobs allowed me to be project manager and structural engineer of record for numerous building projects. I completed a MS degree later in my career as part of my plan to stay current.


Fast forward to my present job with a medium sized industry specific consulting firm. On a current project, a young CAD drafter with a 2-yr technical degree and less than 2 yrs of experience ignores my directives and develops the drawings as he thinks they should be. Granted he knows CAD better than I do, but he is a novice when it comes to preparing construction documents. I find it hard to believe that so much practical knowledge can be imparted directly through any college program.

I just can't imagine working for an engineering supervisor with that level of experience, and probably even more confidence.



GJC

 

[MechEng2005]

I wonder if part of the issue has to do with separating engineering from the others involved in a project?

You can learn to determine the deflection of a platform using theory in school. However, if you are 50 feet in the air on a platform, you realize how important a 1/2" deflection is, even if the stresses are nowhere near a failure.

I have learned a lot from getting my hands dirty. Do any of you who have been in engineering longer feel that engineer's hands are cleaner than in the past?

-- MechEng2005

 

[controlsdude]

Getting your hands dirty?

As a controls engineer I have the problem of always being the last person onsite. Sometimes coming to the conclusion that its really a mechanical problem. Point is when I have determined that the mechanical engineer should make a visit, it takes an Act of God to get that mechanical engineer out in the field.

So as far as my point of view I think the mechanical engineers never seems to get there hands dirty. Just my biased opinion. Yes, I do get my hands more dirty being last onsite on startups.

 

[Twoballcane]

I think that is the point of the labs and senior design projects that you would have as an undergrad. This was to teach you to mix your theory with the real world. You should continue this practice once you get into the real world. My job is analysis, but I temper that with doing test. You really get an appreciation especially when something fails.

I do feel it is up to the individual. Funny enough, there are mechanicals that are not mechanically inclined, but yet design mechanical equipment. I guess like electricals who are not good at soldering electronics together, but yet they design CCAs. So I guess if the person is more mechanically inclined, these are the people who may appreciate getting their hands dirty to get a better understanding of their design.


Tobalcane
"If you avoid failure, you also avoid success."

 

[IRstuff]

In many cases, soldering, even if you wanted to, isn't an option, since the assemblers need to be certified to do the work. Moreover, even then, I wouldn't be able do most of the soldering because I can't even resolve the leads without mondo magnifiers.

TTFN

FAQ731-376

 

[KENAT]

I sometimes wonder if the hands on thing doesn't get exagerated, there are so many processes etc. that to have mastered all of them would make you 50+ before you started.

Plus fundamental aptitude as IRstuff says, I have fat fingers and the shakes, manipulating some of the small stuff we have here is a night mare for me. However the dextrous production staff down stairs etc. do this just fine. Does this mean I shouldnt' ever spec a screw smaller than about #6. Obviously it is a warning that it may be a bit fiddly but ruling it our completely because I can't do it is OTT.

Things like welding & soldering are others, one thing to have a basic understanding and maybe do a little as a hobby etc. but expecting to be really good at all the combinations & variations, I doubt it.

Or maybe I suck more than I ever realized due to my relative lack of hands on experience, hmm...

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

 

[MikeHalloran]

If you don't go out in the field yourself, you can waste days trying to make sense of pressure data taken with liquid filled gages that still have the shipping plugs in the bodies, or Magnehelics with too many plugs in them, or stuff like that. I.e., you have to _see_ the physical test apparatus, installed and operating.

Sometimes, to do that, you have to do the wrenching and recording yourself, so the techs can go on a service call and bring in more money than it costs to have you out there.

I could do without installing an exhaust pressure tap while the turbo is spooling up, though.



Mike Halloran
Pembroke Pines, FL, USA

 

[Twoballcane]

A while back, the union had a strike, so they had the engineers trained to do some of what they did. For me, they sent me off for solder training in which I still have my certificate. It made no sense to me why they picked a Mechanical to do soldering, but I went anyway, hey I soldered pipes for my pluming at home.

MAN!! There is a lot of finesse to doing this and I give the techs a node of appreciation. Just to be hunched over a CCA and wielding a hot iron in one hand and a lead of solder in another and not burn the electronics while soldering takes an art form. I was so glad that the strike ended before they sent me to the line. QA would be having a fit!


Tobalcane
"If you avoid failure, you also avoid success."

 

[zdas04]

On my first pipeline job I did the design, Project Management, and On-site Supervision. I only needed to do On-Site Supervision once, but I did need to do it once. After that project I had On-site Supervisors that dealt with the ongoing logistics, but when they called and said "I'm out of Pipe" I was in a position to instruct them on: (1) why it was their job to make sure that the project never got held up by materials delivery; and (2) how to determine the who, what, when, and how of pipe delivery. Had I not done the job once, some of these guys could have blown smoke up my pant legs and I wouldn't have known the difference.

Also, my time in the mud made me able to design doglegs, leg-offs, and pigging facilities that both met the design criteria and were also "constructable". If I hadn't seen the guys struggling with an awkward design it wouldn't be as important to me.

David

 

[IRstuff]

My previous company's position was that PCBs were mechanical, so the ME department did board layouts.

TTFN

FAQ731-376

 

[patprimmer]

I agree with those who say in effect, you don't need to be able to do the tradesmans or technicians job as a fully skilled operator, but you do need the experience of working in their environment, even if only as their laborer so you understand when they are blowing smoke and so you can avoid making their job more difficult than it needs to be and you can avoid extra costs in construction or maintenance by maybe investing a little more in design or materials for a net gain in final cost.

Regards
Pat
See FAQ731-376 for tips on use of eng-tips by professional engineers &

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

for site rules

 

[MechEng2005]

I did not intend to say that the valuable experience was from engineers being able to do all the work (including machining, welding, etc). I guess that's a risk of using a cliche ("getting your hands dirty").

However, in some things the field experience can be a much better teacher than sitting at a desk. A younger engineer once put anchors for a machine as close as possible to the machine. Good idea to try to not make the footprint unnecessarily large. However, after watching the installation contractor that couldn't put an drill the holes for the anchor bolt in straight because there wasn't enough clearance around the drill, it became apparent that maybe a little larger foot print is a minor issue.

I think a "master engineer" should design things that are as easy to build, install, etc. as possible. It's a lot easier to make things easier for others when you know how they do their job.

When I'm in the field, I personally do only minor hand-dirtying work. Maybe hold a small plate that needs to be welded while the welder tacks it on and that sort of thing. I haven't welded, but I certainly know the benefit of having locating pins for something that will be field welded and needs to be positioned at all accurately.

-- MechEng2005

 

[Twoballcane]

I have three words that will help before you send to manufacturing or test...prototype, prototype, and prototype. Once you actually put something together physically and move around it, things that you did not see in cad will be evident in the prototype. Managment has always tried to drop this step to save money, but if I feel that we need one especialy if my name is on it to past some crazy thermal, vib, and shock requirment, I demand a prototype to be built for pre qual.

Tobalcane
"If you avoid failure, you also avoid success."

 

[KENAT]

Twoball, my place is almosts opposite. Our Engineering Director seems to think you build lots of prototypes and don't bother too much with trying to predict much in advance what will happen or avoid problems etc, just get to the prototype quickly. So long as you learn something from each failure. To me this takes you back to being just a tinkerer or inventor.

A big part of Engineering to me is to be able to at least partially predict how things behave in advance, to reduce (or in the case of things like buildings & bridges) eliminate prototypes (or whatever your industry calls them at different stages).

So I think you do spend a decent amount of time & effort up front using tools like analysis (both classical and CAE), CAD reference resources, experience of colleagues/consultants etc and then prototype.

lus for one offs or even low volume stuff, prototypes aren't an always option. Yes you can tweak the finished item from the nominal design but major changes are often out of the question.

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

 

[Twoballcane]

Wow Kenat, I would run if your company is blindly designing with out the up front analysis. I have been called into projects where they did not do the analysis first because in somebody’s mind said "oh this shouldn’t be to bad" (famous last words) and wonder why they fail at the shake and bake test. And, this is where I get my bonuses. My group comes in and we start to quantify the temperatures and dynamics. I come up with the analysis and correlate with the data. Then start tweaking the design by analysis (instead of tinkering around) to pass the test. Once the mods are put in and the unit passes, the program manager is overjoyed. Chaching another certificate of appreciation (with a nice dollar value) on the wall.

Tobalcane
"If you avoid failure, you also avoid success."

 

[Twoballcane]

Oh also, one should only go up to two… three at most prototypes. If more, then there are some serious design issues.

Tobalcane
"If you avoid failure, you also avoid success."