Over engineering

[mad_planter]

Blah Wah Bla Bla Bla

Engineers are stupid.

Blah Wah Bla Bla Bla

If only the stupid engineer who designed that part would have made the gusset stronger, it wouldn't have broke.

Blah Wah Bla Bla Bla

The tractor that broke in two should have been built with a frame. The stupid engineer that agreed with greedy accountant to not have a frame is personally responsible for the fact that the loose bell housing bolts caused the casting to crack.

Blah Wah Bla Bla Bla

If my son becomes an engineer, I will disown him.

Blah Wah Bla Bla Bla

Not only are engineers stupid, they won't listen

Blah Wah Bla Bla Bla

The transmission should be stronger. Those guys are idiots.

Blah Wah Bla Bla Bla


........ This song could go on for days. I can see the spiritual chant of the anti-engineers in the medicine lodge, with sage smoke billowing up, clearing their mind so that they can see visions of perfect devices in the cloud. The college educated drawing and sculpture artists could have a viewing port into the lodge, sensing the visions of the designs through telepathy, rendering them in 2D and 3D.

Final design adjustments could be made by reading the entrails of field mice.

The religion of "common sense" is just that(a religion). It is practiced by those who choose to not spend the time to actually evaluate problems.

In the first parable(it is unlikely to be an actual event), why didn't the operator suggest his solution when they had the problem? Did he not care? Are you saying that every "engineer" who walked through the facility failed to listen? Was the operator so disinterested in the company's performance that he didn't know there was an issue(The fix was easy)? Was it only laziness that drove him to apply his deep intellect to the obvious and easy solution to the problem?

You all illustrate why people choose to become anything but engineers. Only the most foolhardy and idealistic purse the profession. School would have been so much easier(and socially entertaining) if I had just skipped calculus, engineering physics, transport phenomena, etc. etc. I could have simply gotten an art/business/sewing degree, and used common sense to design things.

It makes one chuckle(or something that sounds similar).

Chris

No offense, but there is truth to that "story". Everyone views problems from their perspective. A Engineer with huge amounts of training to solve such problems is going to see things differently than a operator. That operator never had the option to solve the problem in a complicated manner because such a choice was beyond his training. So he solved it within his abilities;

The same thing goes for designing a machine. Most engineers are not going to look at their design of engine and say "what if I had to change the oil filter" What if I have to change the heater hose, etc, etc. But if you bring in a mechanic who doesn't design engines, just works on them. He's going to see things from his perspective; Namely that getting to the oil filter is a pain in the butt and how on earth am I going to change that heater hose if it breaks?

If "some" engineers recognized that (and I don't think all engineers are arrogant" different perspectives can be useful, they would be able to create far better designs. Sadly often their physics, math, etc, etc training make them think that they are far more qualified than lesser beings and there is nothing to be gained be worrying about what such people think or might contribute.

 

[Brad_Blazer]

There is something to the concept and few engineers ignore the opinions of the operators. That's why many plants have a "Kaizen" system where workers submit continuous improvement suggestions. I was touring the BMW plant in SC recently and they mentioned that one of the workers earned a bonus from a particularly effective suggestion. It was enough for him to buy a house.

 

[rtimgray]

I usually look at it this way - most of the time, the engineer will get a project at least 90% or more correct; however, after it's installed or completed, all the Monday morning quarterbacks and armchair engineers, who couldn't imagine the scope of the project prior to it's installation, now have the opportunity to nitpick anything that the engineer missed.

No, the operator could not research available options, contacted multiple vendors, prepared documents for Capital spending approval, executed purchase orders, conduct design reviews, factory acceptance testing, shipping, installation, contractor preparedness, start-up, training, spare parts, etc...but man, can they complain if you install the phone on the wrong side of the conveyor.

House designers can suffer from the same problem - people can look at a set of plans and complain about what they don't like, but they have a pretty tough time creating a "perfect" set of plans from scratch.

For the record, the gizmo that the folks needed in the OP's apocryphal story is called a checkweigher (often combined with a metal detector in food and drug appliccations) and it usually incorporates a reject mechanism (air blow off or mechanical reject).

But it's still so much fun to blame everything on engineers because its obvious that the janitor always has a better idea.

 

[DANOCHEESE]

WHats the joke about NASA They spent two million designing a pen that would write upside down in space. The russians used a pencil It is all about the problem in engineering or the opportunity

 

[dynasim]

Is a pencil as good as a pressurized ball point pen in space? Perhaps they could have spent 2 million dollars developing a light weight pencil sharpener that completely eliminated graphite and wood dust(which would likely be catatrophic in older space vehicles, given that graphite is conductive).

Thank you for illustrating my point precisely(that common sense isn't obvious and you have to look at a problem in detail).

It probably cost 2 million dollars because it was government funded, and the government has been repaid handsomely(in taxes from the production of those pens--this is an assumption)

So, now there is "truth" in the parable of the blow hard(even though it isn't likely true). Perhaps some could come up with some "real" examples that we could discuss(the pen situation is a start) I could give you first hand accounts of the application of "common sense" that would make your toes curl. There is a thread on the TSA where people spouted "common sense" solutions to the TSA's "failures". I suggest reading it, as it illustrates just how irrational the appliers of "common sense" can be.

Chris

Repeat the chant:

Blah Wah Bla Bla Bla

Engineers are stupid and useless.

Blah Wah Bla Bla Bla

Oh, to be rid of them

Blah Wah Bla Bla Bla

 

[MikeD74T]

Anybody think some engineers are just a little bit touchy???? :laughing: MikeD74T

 

[mad_planter]

The two responses above kinda illustrate my point. I will never understand the ego and defensiveness that comes out when "the arm chair quarterbacks" make comments.

Oh, and FYI I am a engineer.

 

[dynasim]

Actually, I am one of the most popular engineers at the facility that I am currently at(among the operators). I recently moved to a policy of confronting the offensive. The religous philosophy displayed is killing us as a society. With "common sense", you can rationalize any behavior you like.

Anybody think that some people are offensive?

Chris

 

[dynasim]

Intentionally offensive.

 

[Mace Canute]

From Authorized Web Seller Fisher Space Pen Co. - Company

Here's a little history about the Fisher Space Pen Company.

In the 1950's there were dozens of ballpoint models, and nearly every one took a different cartridge. In 1953 Paul Fisher invented the "Universal Refill" which could be used in most pens. It was a good seller, since stationery store owners could reduce their stock of assorted refills.

Not content, Paul continued to work on making a better refill. After much experimentation he perfected a refill using thixotropic ink-semisolid until the shearing action of the rolling ball liquefied it-that would flow only when needed. The cartridge was pressurized with nitrogen so that it didn't rely on gravity to make it work. It was dependable in freezing cold and desert heat. It could also write underwater and upside down. The trick was to have the ink flow when you wanted it to, and not to flow the rest of the time, a problem Fisher solved. Fisher's development couldn't have come at a more opportune time. The space race was on, and the astronauts involved in the Mercury and Gemini missions had been using pencils to take notes in space since standard ball points did not work in zero gravity. The Fisher cartridge did work in the weightlessness of outer space and the astronauts, beginning with the October, 1968 Apollo 7 mission began using the Fisher AG-7 Space Pen and cartridge developed in 1966.