![]() |
Re: American Inventor
Quote:
In the above case effect would be a 10 (death of user), so for this to be a viable product the occurence would have to be very low (under 1 part per 10 million, or ~2) and the failure detection would have to be almost flawless (also ~2). Neither of these are likely. Most automobile companies work with DFMEA numbers under 80. |
Re: American Inventor
Odd, I actually liked ths show.
I like the show, partly because I think Doug Hall is awesome, and I also like seeing all the wierd stuff people think of. I'm interested to see how people develop these inventions with the aid of $50,000. Now to respond to some things: About the lack of technically complex/ engineering based inventions. Keep in mind who is watching the show. Most of the general public does not have a technical or engineering background. Many FIRSTers like technical things, heck we build robots for fun so of course we want to see something like a segway. Remember though, that just because an invention is some complex marvel of engineering doesnt mean it will sell to the general public*. Remember the KISS principle. After seeing the sand bag shovel, my dad said I should design a dump truck that does it automatically. I stopped for a second and thought about this. The shovel does the job fine, costs less, and would be easy to transport and use. A dump truck would cost a lot more money, be hard to transport, and would require some training to use. Why make something more complicated than is has to be? Think of the Segway. Many FIRSTers love the segway because the engineering that went into it is amazing, it's a sweet ride, and Dean invented it. What does the general public think? My parents, and most of my peers at school, dont see the point to it. To them the Segway is merely a fancy scooter that just isnt worth the money. As far as people not understanding "engineering". Sure, many of them didnt have an engineering degree, so they arent engineers. It doesnt mean they dont understand the engineering process. I'm sure the shovel guy went through tons of revisions of his shovel to make it the most comfortable and ergonomic he possibly could. To me, that's still engineering. Would I call him an engineer? No, but that doesnt mean he doesnt know how to go through the engineering/ design process. * About the general public I highlighted earlier in the post. This TV show is made with a target audience of the average joe. Therefore, the inventions have to tailor towards the general public. Many highly technologically driven products are not made for the general public, but for government use, or other companies. Again, look at the segway; it's biggest customers are the postal service, law enforcement, and amusement parks. All of these inventions have to be something the general public can 1) understand, 2) relate to, and 3) want to buy. This also relates to the judges. Only one judge has an engineering background; Doug Hall (chemical engineering actually, he went to UMAINE). The other 3 are business/ advertising and marketing experts. Why only one technically competent judge? Because again, techincally complex isnt a factor in whether not an invention will sell. The judges are supposed to find products that could be successful and sell. That's why the judges are all marketing based. The general public isnt going to look at these products through the eyes of an engineer, so it wouldnt make sense to have engineer judges. Yes, at some point, many of these inventions would have to be reviewed by engineers to make sure they are safe and such. I'm sure that 2 person bike will have to go through a panel of mechanical engineers before it ever hits shelves, but the marketing people have to make sure it will sell before all that time and money is invested in that process. Lastly, about the boy. I agree with Ken and Doug Hall. Being on the show could mess up his life. He has a promising future right now, and he should stick with it and become an engineer. He did say he was 14, thats the max target age of FLL, so he's almost ready for FRC. The nearest FRC team to him should find him and invite him to a regional :D Sorry about the long post. |
Re: American Inventor
The show is prety dumb but atleast its not just glorifing singing dancing and sex-apeal
|
Re: American Inventor
I think the judges were asking some silly questions, such as "What does this invention mean to you and your family?" and "How much money have you spent on this invention?". I don't think that whether or not someones invention is produced should be based on how much was spent on the product or what it means in the life of the inventor, it should be based on the innovativeness and usfulness of the product.
What if the guy who came up with the idea for the paperclip went in front of those judges? "It's used to hold pieces of paper together." "How much have you spent on this product?" "...Well...I bought a piece of wire for about a dollar two ninety eight but that's it..." "Well what does this invention mean to you?" "Uh, nothing really. I just thought it was a good idea..." "You're just trying to sell a bent piece of wire. Get out of here." |
Re: American Inventor
Quote:
We learned from John Henry, a well desinged machine will outrun an army of humans anyday. Quote:
A good engineer can take a design concept and get the design correct with the first prototype. Thats engineering. All the design work happens with pencil and paper, or on a CAD system. Building a 100 prototypes until you get one right is tinkering. |
Re: American Inventor
Quote:
|
Re: American Inventor
Quote:
Tinkering is still a useful practice, though....and necessary for some projects. |
Re: American Inventor
Quote:
and our fee is doubled :^) |
Re: American Inventor
Also to end those discussion about the title of the show,
Invention : A new device, method, or process developed from study and experimentation. The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition. Copyright © 2002, 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved. |
Re: American Inventor
The show reminds me of the Hammacher Schlemmer search for invention competition. Those inventios are really quite unique and original. Here is a link. I think the reason why this show seems so vapid and stupid is the same reason why American Idol is known for it's horrible signing. They let anybody try out. Hence you get William Hung.
|
Re: American Inventor
Quote:
|
Re: American Inventor
Quote:
![]() Notice how in the second hour, the commercial breaks are almost as long as the show segments. Other than that, I thought there were too many inventions that were given a yes that were either such a niche item that they shouldn't be the "greatest american invention" (the pit hiding bowl or the cookie snowglobes) or that were entering a flooded market with little improvement over their competators (the exercise machine). Hopefully, the show will improve with time, but something tells me it will never reach season 2. |
Re: American Inventor
Oh my God.
It's comming back. WHY? DEAR GOD, WHY!!!! ![]() |
Re: American Inventor
This is a terrible show
|
Re: American Inventor
Yea, from what I remember last year, I didn't really like the show due to the people on it. Most of them seemed to spend their life savings on their "invention" that I really couldn't ever see myself using. I wish Junkyard Wars would come back on... I loved that show and it tought me a lot of what I know today about ways to do things and ways to not do things :D I might watch this show a few times this year, but I'm pretty sure I won't be impressed with it at all. I think if I went on there, or really, any FIRSTer that is like me (used to take things apart when he/she was little, made things in elementary school that most high schoolers couldn't make, and tried to think of things that everybody could use) that I could be picked, but then, it would probably ruin my life or something.
|
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 16:46. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi