Attention engineers...What type are you and why?

[Billfred]

Originally Posted by dictionary.com

engineer n. One who is trained or professionally engaged in a branch of engineering.

Originally Posted by m-w.com

engineer tr. v. to contrive or plan out usually with more or less subtle skill and craft.

Originally Posted by m-w.com

engineering n. 2 a : the application of science and mathematics by which the properties of matter and the sources of energy in nature are made useful to people

The way I read these definitions, every FIRST team there's ever been has engineered (verb). However, very few of us on this board are engineers (noun).

As for the whole credentials thing, let me try things this way. I have no problem with a person engineering (verb) with the oversight of an engineer (noun). Somewhere in the process, I want to see someone with that purdy piece of paper give the bridge I'm driving on their stamp of approval. It tells me that someone who's gone through the whole process has looked at it and declared it safe to the point that I can send my CR-V going over it at sixty miles an hour without fearing that I'm going into the drink within reason.

I'll take that back to FIRST. I've stood around a FIRST field long enough to trust such an arrangement. Of course, such robots are given the twice-over by inspectors, which one could argue are engineers in the field of FIRST robot engineering.

I don't mean to trivially create a new field of engineering with that thought, but when you consider that engineers have to look at a problem and make a solution that is both safe to the general public and environment (how many times did you and your team have to file something while being inspected so that you wouldn't pop balls?) and fit within the time, money, and size constraints, you see the parallels.

I hope that got my point across right...if it didn't, please refrain from throwing rocks at me.

[Paul Copioli]

2. For those who have multiple master's degrees: a) why do you and b) what are the benefits, if any?

I have multiple Master's degrees because my Aerospace degree was mostly pointed at fluid dynamics and controls of dynamic systems. I wanted more out of my education so I also went mechanical to get more mechanism design and thermodynamics (aero had some in my track, but not all that I wanted). When it was all said and done I had enough graduate credits to attain both degrees.

The benefits to me are priceless. I work on industrial robots, specifically automotive paint robots. Many mechanisms, lots of closed loop control and the paint delivery stuff has electrostatics, fliud dynamics and thermodynamics (run solventborne paint over hot surfaces .. lots o' fun). I feel that anyone desiring to be a mechanical engineer at a robotics company would benefit greatly from controls engineering (closed loop systems, non-linear control, etc.).

-Paul


P.S. - Chris H., I respectfully disagree with your assesment of the PE and its relation to calling a person an engineer.

[Max Lobovsky]

Let me start by saying that I had a similar discussion via PMs with Ken Wittlief a few months ago about how its bad to trivialize the title engineer and I completely agreed with him. I am also the son of a PE and I think I have a pretty good grasp of the work involved in reaching that status.

I think two slightly different meanings of "engineer" are being discussed. One who engineers, and one whose profession is engineering. As stated by engineers in this thread, many people "engineer" and do not have the honor of being engineers by profession or title. It would be imporper to call them an engineer because that is not their trade. In the US, it can be your trade only if you are certified. I don't think there is anything wrong with saying someone did engineering work even if they aren't certified.

Though Astronouth is guilty of the same trivializing that I was, I'd like to point out that he never actually called himself an engineer, and all the righteous "if a 15 year old bla bla bla" is a bit out of place. I think the most important thing you can gather from his post is that he does respect the degree and the work an engineer has to go through because as he said, he realizes that that usually makes the more qualified person for the job.

Because I know some people will take this the wrong way, I ask you to please read this post in its entirety if you care to reply.

-Max (aspiring engineer/physicist)

[Chris Fultz]

Wow - this thread certainly took off!

Regarding engineers and engineering education - my view is the most important part of an engineering education is that you learn to think and learn to solve problems. You answer one question and find another.

A professor once told our class: "You don't know what you don't know - and that’s what will bite you in the a**". The more you learn, the more you realize you don't know. Every answer has two more questions.

An engineering degree opens doors. It is a requirement in many companies and many disciplines. Where the degree is from may also be a factor – some companies only recruit from the top schools because of the costs of recruiting. After a few years out of school, your performance and demonstrated knowledge begin to outweigh the value of the institution that granted the degree.

**
Regarding the initial reason for the thread – my info is below. A little long, but my career path has been somewhere different from most of the others in this post.

BS Mechanical Technology, Purdue @ Indianapolis
MBA Finance and Marketing, Indiana University
MS Program Management, Penn State (complete mid-2005)
I hold 1 US Patent for a Valve Lock Design

I have a Mechanical Technology (best described as more application oriented and less theory oriented than pure engineering) degree from Purdue at Indianapolis. I was a Co-Op at a small metallurgical company. Exceptional opportunity. I graduated with about 2 years of ‘real world’ experience. I began life at Allison Gas Turbine (now Rolls-Royce) as a Reliability Engineer, focusing on field problems and analyzing trends in failures. This helped identify where engineering resources should be applied to fix field issues.

I moved into project engineering where I was responsible for the development and certification of a new model of helicopter engine. I defined test plans, coordinated with the customer and the FAA, wrote summary and compliance papers and got more into the integration and management of the program (cost and schedule). I had to learn a little about a lot, instead of a lot about a little.

About 5 years ago, I became a Program Manager. My current role is Program Manager for the Model 250 engine line – the engine that powers most light helicopters you see flying around (Bell, MD – like the news and police helicopters that were at the IRI if you saw them). I am responsible for determining budgets, agreeing on what engineering work will be funded, making sure engine and spare parts schedules are met and coordinating with aircraft & helicopters manufacturers. I am becoming more of a “business person” and less of an “engineer” everyday, but it is still important that I know and understand the engineering issues and technical challenges to make safe and sound business decisions for a very technical product.

An engineering education can open many, many doors to other areas of a business. If you look at the leaders of many major corporations (especially manufacturing, aerospace, hi-tech), you will see a lot of engineers at the top. The skills you learn are transferable across businesses.

Hope this helps ----

[Elgin Clock]

Wow.. All I have to say is wow..
Look at all this expertise we have within FIRST. If anyone ever needs a job and posted what they do in this thread, you can just e-mail potential employers a link to this thread.

Seems to me like a lot of posts from the true "engineers" are turning into resume type posts

I wish I had all the (many, many) years of combined knowledge you all have accumulated on your road to becoming engineers.

[petek]

Originally Posted by Dave Flowerday

Engineers are people who engineer solutions to problems.

I have to go along with Dave's definition. Is it really all that important how one acquires the knowledge needed to engineer solutions, as long as the problem gets solved?

As for me, I'm:
a) Electronics technologist by degree (AAS in Electronics, Delaware Tech, eons ago);
b) Sr. Project Manager by title (which means squat, but sounds nice);
c) A mix of electrical, mechanical and chemical engineer by job function (which still doesn't mean I'm a real engineer);
d) Responsible for coming up with technical solutions to real problems encountered in drug discovery every day. I lead a small group of engineers and technicians, and am the only one in the company who can do electro-mechanical design engineering and project management.

Okay, I don't have a BS degree, and I don't claim to be able to do a lot of the more technical aspects of engineering, but I have a pretty good track record of developing effective solutions to real problems. In my current job I replaced a person with an MS in mechanical engineering - a fellow who, in my opinion, never produced a single effective solution to anyone's problem in the eight years I knew him. So who is the "engineer" here?

As to why I am doing what I do: I get to work with a bunch of very talented scientists, learn new things every day, work with leading-edge laboratory automation and analytical instrumentation, occasionally get to invent something, and get paid for it! Besides solving problems, I get a lot of satisfaction from helping the people in my group develop their skills and expand their capabilities.

Right now I'm working on projects to:
- automate testing of drug candidates in an assay which models the human gut;
- manage a project to build an instrument which can dispense 500 nanoliter droplets (too small to see) at 80 drops per second with better than 7% accuracy in a dispensed sample population of over 60,000 drops;
- replicate a robotic work cell (which my group developed) that separates really nasty (very acidic) organic solutions containing high value chemicals in solution.

How much more fun could a person have?!

[Max Lobovsky]

Petek, that is exactly the kind of job I'd like. Dealing with a wide range of technical fields and coming up with original solutions. Actually, it sounds a lot like what a lot of people do as part of FIRST. Because it is like a small version of the real engineering world, people can work on much more complete systems and don't have to stay in their specific field. I think you are really lucky to have a job that gives you so much freedom.

[petek]

Originally Posted by Max Lobovsky

I think you are really lucky to have a job that gives you so much freedom.

How right you are, Max! And luck certainly played its part a few times for me to get where I am now without a BS! That, and hard work, determination not to settle for the easy path and believing what I was once told: "you aren't given responsibility - you have to earn it". Okay, some are given it, but it sure means a lot more when you know you've earned it!

For those who think the kind of work I described sounds interesting, my advise is go for the BS degree, take extra credits in chemistry, biochemistry and (especially) physics, and while you're there see if you can get work maintaining their lab equipment and assisting in labs. Then, look for internships and jobs at scientific equipment manufacturers, biotech, small pharmaceutical or biomedical companies. Once upon a time there were a lot of lab engineering jobs in big pharmaceutical and chemical co's, but these days they've closed or outsourced most of it.

Another area, which doesn't usually pay as well but is rewarding in other ways, is agrotech. Sometimes called "working on the farm", for an engineer this means working with molecular biologists, botanists and biochemists to develop less invasive pesticides, stronger crops and assure that there will be enough food to go around 50 years from now. You may get more fresh air on the job, too!

Be forewarned that few lab engineering jobs are "9 to 5" (9-10 hrs a day is pretty typical), and that many scientist-run organizations don't understand (or value) engineering as much as "real" science (meaning chemistry and biology).

[patrickrd]

I think that to be an engineer, you need to have gone through an accredited four-year college program. I consider myself an engineer, my job title says so. I am a very, very young engineer. I do not yet have a lot of experience. But I've been through an engineering program. Engineering programs in college are rigorous. You learn a lot of things in a short amount of time. You absolutely can not get everything out of a book. One of the most important things I got out of my engineering program is the importance of actually being an engineer. You ask "What does that mean?" A bad calculation can equate to losses of lives. Inaccurately communicating something as a fact can do the same. Even though I am young, I have gone through an engineering program, I recognize the importance of what I am doing, and know when to ask for help and when I can handle something on my own.

The bottom line is that I feel engineering is a very powerful profession. Because of the nature of the work and the ramifications of what engineers do, it's got to be taken seriously and carried out carefully. I took a Science & Technology course where technology is referred to as a golem, or a bumbling giant. Huge. Powerful. Growing. The giant is capable of accomplishing great things, or great distruction. I feel engineers are the ones who sit at the steering wheel, controlling the giant.

[Mike Ciance]

Originally Posted by Cory

But the fact remains that until you hold your degree in your hot little hand, you *are not* a real engineer. I totally agree with Andy. To see 15 year old kids going around the forums calling themselves engineers (Im not trying to pick on you or single you out) is pretty ridiculous in my opinion, and really does degrade all the work that they did to get where they are.

Heck, I know CPR and basic first aid, but I dont go around telling people I'm an EMT.

and personally, I would be VERY scared if I knew a building, car, or airplane had been designed by an "engineer" who possesses no degree, or has ever had formal training, and was "self taught".

$0.02

Cory

and if that poorly engineered car crashed, we would want a real EMT, and not cory

of course, i'd rather have cory than somebody who knows nothing about first aid, just as i would rather have astronouth7303 than somebody who knows nothing about engineering

[Marc P.]

My opinions:

Reading through this thread I see multiple definitions of the word "engineer." I see the term defined as a profession, a hobby, and of course, the literal dictionary meaning. I think it's important to differentiate the use of the word with regards to a title or label. Unfortunately, (as the case may be with other words in the English language as well,) Engineer can be used in many different forms of context, some of which may be offensive to others.

I see an Engineer, as one who works in the profession of engineering (be it electrical, mechanical, aerospace, or what have you). No doubt respected individuals, in accomplishment and education, as well as spirit and passion for what they do. A professional engineer performs (or performed at one time,) engineering related tasks: designing, manufacturing, testing, tweaking, fabricating, etc. as part of an every day, full time job.

I also see hobbyist engineers, or those who perform engineering tasks on occasion, on their own time. In this instance the term is synonymous with other activity-related titles, like a kid who plays on a little-league baseball team is a baseball player. Someone who plays the piano in their spare time is a pianist. Not by profession, but by actively involving themselves in some aspect of the function. So kids involved in FIRST can call themselves engineers, although that's not to say they are professional engineers. That is still a very important distinction. But again, because the term "engineer" can be used multiple ways, it can still indicate someone who spends time engineering something, even it not professionally. Just like a little league player is not a professional baseball player, it does not mean they aren't any less of a baseball player in general.

And of course, the literal definition, which supports both of my arguments-

The first entry for "engineer" from dictionary.com-

Originally Posted by dictionary.com

"One who is trained or professionally engaged in a branch of engineering."

But further down the page, as one of the alternate definitions-

Originally Posted by dictionary.com

"A person who uses scientific knowledge to solve practical problems."

The first definition supports the professional nature of the term, and the second seems to include students involved in the engineering aspects of FIRST, as indeed, any FIRST student capable of designing and building any mechanism would fall into the category of "using scientific knowledge to solve practical problems."

Multiple meanings- just one of those nice little features of the English language

[Erin Rapacki]

Hello,

I just recently switched from Mechanical Engineering to Industrial Engineering. Why?? Well, lets just say that through my continuing participation in FIRST... I'm still learning about myself and what I'd like to do. When in High School, my thought was that "robots are cool, I'll try Mechanical!" Then over the past year, my involvement took a very unique twist that opened my eyes a lot...

I have a year's worth of Engineering experience: two summer internships at Hamilton Sundstrand and six months at DEKA. The two summers were spent helping the Project Engineers, and the six months were spend doing Quality work as a test technician on the iBOT. Everyone knew I was a ME student, but for some reason (particularly noticable at DEKA), I never really had a natural inclination or curiosity as to what the MEs were doing. Instead, I liked what my managers were doing with their problems of money/time/people. I watched them very closely.

I helped with two FIRST events where I learned how to event coordinate, plan, and manage large projects. I loved doing it. I loved taking those kinds of ideas & problems... and turning them into a reality. So it hit me! I could get an ME degree and be hired as project or quality anyway (which happens to the people who may not be very competitive at design... like me, nobody knows me in FIRST for robot design because I haven't done any in the past three years), or I could go get that IE degree and be even more competitive in project & quality. My aim is to get an MBA afterwards.

So there it is, my goal is to be a project-manager and it seems that Industrial Engineering (in NU terms that is) is probably the best Business undergrad degree you can get.

Life is starting to make sense



ByE


erin

[Al Skierkiewicz]

Erin,
Many people have revelations throughout their college career. Remember a person who loves what they are doing never has to work a day in their life.

[Pat Roche]

Originally Posted by Astronouth7303

Software. It's what my dad does, and it's my hobby (and probably career too).

Who said you needed a degree (or even get paid) to be an engineer?
[edit]IMHO, it's the achievement.[/edit]

I'm going to quote a Clarkson University Professor. This comes from the meeting for each major.
"The difference between and engineer and an inventor is that an engineer creates a product through scientific investigation and theoretical anaylses."
(I may have boched that pretty bad...it was over a month ago..)
Point being is that an engineer goes through large amounts of schooling just to learn the sciences involved in design.
As a first year college student and a fifth year member of FIRST I can safely safe that I am *B]NOT[/b] * an engineer by any means yet. I am studying to become a Mechanical Engineer. I chose this major because I fell in love designing and building mechanical systems and had very good mentors through FIRST.

Just and inquiry,
Pat

[Jay TenBrink]

I am a mechanical engineer with a BSME from Michigan State University in 1983.

I wanted to be an inventor when I grew up. It wasn’t until I was in high school that I learned what an engineer was. Suffering from low self esteem and mediocre grades, I didn’t think I could ever make it into the College of Engineering. My undergraduate advisor didn’t think so either. Fortunately there were a few people in my life that did believe in me and through many years of hard work I became a mechanical engineer. It was the biggest achievement in my life and changed my life forever. Thus, I take the title of engineer very seriously.

I’ve been at Chrysler (now DaimlerChrysler) since1983 and have had a number of different engineering jobs. I have worked on sheet metal, body hardware and chassis. I have worked in design, development, test labs, and at assembly plants in resident engineering. I have also worked in a staff position doing budgets. I have supervised engineers and designers for a many years. I am currently a manager in chassis engineering.

I manage engineers as they design and develop new products and resolve technical and non-technical issues. My engineers are responsible to know everything as it relates to their product: what the customers’ requirements are, how it is designed, tested, manufactured, assembled, serviced, packaged, etc. They are responsible for formulating test plans, time lines, ordering parts, visiting suppliers, resolving issues, etc. It’s very demanding work.

A large part of my job is managing engineers and technical problem solving teams. This requires strong root cause analysis skills as well as many of those disciplines engineers learn in school: physics, chemistry, strength of materials, statics, dynamics, heat transfer, fluid dynamics, and more. I can honestly say one could not learn all the skills “on the job” to function in this environment. You can be expected to remember everything, but it’s amazing how much this stuff will come back to you even after many years.