×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

Are standards slipping?
10

Are standards slipping?

Are standards slipping?

(OP)
I really want input from actively consulting engineers, and particularly Structural.  This is about the technical standards in our particular specialisation of the profession falling, and relates directly to Structural Engineers.  

There is a great deal of debate on at the moment here in New Zealand as to whether or not the standards of Structural Engineering, Architecture, and Construction have slipped.  A local Structural Engineer (John Scarry - The name is just a coincidence with what he's complaining about) wrote a 100+ page Open Letter to the Institute of
Professional Engineers of New Zealand (IPENZ) regarding the sorry state of affairs and demanding changes be made to improve the situation.

I agree with him on many of his points, if not on the implication that it is a problem restricted to New Zealand.  I wanted your opinions as to what the state of affairs is like where you practice, wherever that may be.

I will give you some of the main complaints of the Open Letter:

1.  Fees have slipped, particularly through the 1980s period, from between 3 and 6% of total building cost to sometimes less than 1%.  This creates unreasonable timelines (due to less dollars meaning less design hours) and unsustainable pressure upon the skilled professionals and tradesmen involved.

2.  Detailing of structures has reduced to bare minimum
levels.  Connections, flashings, cover, layouts, etc have been reduced while sections and elevations are fewer and fewer.

3.  Cross checking of designs by a verifier (ie: an engineer not involved in the original design work) is nearly non-existant.  This has been leading to gross oversight errors, such as lateral load systems overstressed 1000% (not an error, one THOUSAND percent) in the event of an earthquake.

4.  Training of Engineers at University has been reduced from 40 to 50 hours minimum plus multiple assignments each week to between 20 and 35 hours with many fewer assignments.  Where Engineering Interns were once able to count on senior engineers for guidance and additional training, tight budgets and tighter timelines have errored
te input by senior engineers and left juniors often performing works they are not prepared or qualified to handle on their own.  This is further compounded by point number 3.

5.  Trade apprenticeships where done away with here in the early 1980s.  Now a construction worker is only as good as their foreman and experiences happen to make them.  They very often do not have any clue about other trades and routinely damage, or at least negatively impact, one another's work.  Leaving the Engineers and Architects to
try to clean it up.

6.  Architecture was previously taught on a practical level,
concentrating on flashing and building envelope, structural layout and load systems, etc, stuff until the third year of study.  Now the Architecture training has gone nearly completely Kafkaesque (John's term) with little to no content about the practicalities of putting a building together.

From my personal experience, the standards of practice are slipping.  My father attended lectures Monday through Friday from 8am to 5pm, and Saturday from 9am to 1pm.  My degree had less than half the class time, however did have slightly more laboratory time.  I really don't think that's an appropriate trade-off.

From my experience in design offices, the commercial interests do have the potential to negatively influence the practice of Structural Engineering.  I have found less than adequate checking in many practices, as well as little to no formal or adhoc training of junior engineers.  This is not true of every practice, however it does exist, and that is a serious problem for our profession.

I look forward to reading your replies, and hearing your thoughts on the matter,

YS

B.Eng (Carleton)
Working in New Zealand, thinking of my snow covered home...

RE: Are standards slipping?

2
(OP)
A star, but no post?  I appreciate the positive feedback, but would really like to hear your comments!

Cheers,

YS

B.Eng (Carleton)
Working in New Zealand, thinking of my snow covered home...

RE: Are standards slipping?

Does New Zealand have requirements for a licensed professional engineer, or something similar, to stamp the plans showing they have been fully checked? as for the quality of tradesmen that has gone down a bit from what I have seen. Construction trades in the US are not viewed as a good stable living like they used to be so many people who are ambitious and have a good work ethic choose a better industry.

RE: Are standards slipping?

(OP)
Actually Carnage, the New Zealand system is a bit different from the US/Canada model and more closely matches the UK.  A building application is required to meet the New Zealand Building Code and referencing documents such as NZS 3101 (Concrete; Similar to ACI 318), NZS 3404 (Steel; Similar to AISC), etc, however the designer was not actually required to be a licensed engineer until just this year.  

There is also no stamping, which is something I strongly disagree with.  I have seen jobs go out the door with my name on them when I wasn't involved at all.  The CAD person simply re-used one of my jobs as a model, and ommitted the "detail" of changing the Engineer's name.  When I complained (amongst other complaints) my concerns were essentially dismissed as "its no big deal".

The new system is coming into place in large part because of the Open Letter (written in 2002), but it is a slow process of reform.  I just don't think this is a problem isolated to New Zealand, and I tend to think that, while good, the changes so far are not actually going to solve the low-fees issues.

What are the rates in your jurisdiction anyway?  In terms of a percentage of the overall project cost, what do you charge for a job?  In New Zealand this tends to be somewhere around 1.5% for well established firms.

Cheers,

YS

B.Eng (Carleton)
Working in New Zealand, thinking of my snow covered home...

RE: Are standards slipping?

YS,

The same type discussions have been going on in Australia for several years.  The most vocal group has been the steel fabricators.  They contend rightly that they are being asked to make design decisions and sort out all the mistakes made by the architects and engineers.

I might just comment on each of your numbered items.

1.  Fees in Australia have certainly been subject to competitive pressures, but I see signs that they are turning around.  Our construction is still very buoyant, and consequently the good consultants can afford to quote realistically.  There was a time when everybody used guideline fees, but in the spirit of competition, the government accused us of acting like cartels, so those fee scales are not pertinent anymore.  Too bad, as I believe a bit of healthy collusion is not a bad thing.

2.  Detailing--that is where the steel detailers complain.  They have to do work which should be done by the designer, or else go through countless RFI's, which can't be productive for anyone.  A lot of this is due to your item (6) Architects.  The architects provide so little information to the engineers that there is scant hope that their details will match.

3.  Checking--I am semiretired, and most of my paid time these days is spent doing verifications or investigations.  My company, you know who, does what I consider to be a good job of verification.  But a recent investigation of a completed job done by another engineer shows this is not universal.  In this case, a gross error was made, and I would not like to be in the shoes of the other engineer.

4.  Education/Training--in my experience, engineers graduating from Australian universities are more capable than I was of "hitting the ground running", but that depends a lot on the individual.

5.  Australia still has trade apprenticeships, and for plumbers, electricians, and carpenters, that is the way to get licensed, and also the way they get to be a registered builder.  But there are a lot of other building workers, e.g. roofers, formsetters, reinforcing steel setters, concretors, who have no recognised trade.  A shame.

6.  Now for the worst problems: ARCHITECTS.  The architectural profession has by and large abdicated its place as the leader on construction projects to construction managers or builders.  The architects are really only concerned about the look of a building.  They wouldn't really know how to make sure it doesn't leak.  When I started, architects worked out the details of the external skin, including flashings, before they even developed the building elevations.  A lot of the reason for the architects basically demoting themselves was that they were so hopeless in cost control, so the project managers took over.

RE: Are standards slipping?

YS

If you read the letters submitted to The Structural Engineer you will see a lot of the points you mentioned being raised there also.  There has been an onging discussion about fees for what seems like an eternity.

And also, the technical standards of the graduates.  There was one article from a partner of a firm openly criticizing the recent graduate they had employed.  He even stated in his letter he had to slash the graduates salary as he felt he wasn't 'good enough'.  Fortunately in the next issue he was quite rightly slated.

The argument being made is that the quality of graduates today is far less than say thirty or forty years ago, and that the universities are taking the money but not providing the goods.  This also ties in with the theory that education/exams is getting easier to ensure the government meets its targets showing improvement.

One thing I notice is that most of the arguments against the quality of younger engineers come from older engineers, with the main bugbear that they have been taught to use software not do everything by hand.  This is a discussion in its own right so I wont go into it here.  I will say though, in my opinion there seems to be a feeling among older engineers that the computer software is reponsible for making poor engineers.

I'm not sure I agree with the broad statement that standards are slipping.  The world, commercial market and commercial pressures have changed.  I have no doubt that commercial pressures, low fees, lack of staff has had an effect but I wouldn't put it down to purely a reduction of technical standards.  Nowadays the need to have jobs done super quickly, for as little money as possible will inevitably lead to corners being cut. The world is run these days by accountants not engineers.

RE: Are standards slipping?

Speaking as a grumpy old engineer I'd say criticising grads for using software is unfair.

The problem is with the academics, who have abdicated their responsibility to train people who can analyse any problem /with the tools available/ in favour of drip feeding them with an overview of a few software packages.

Sure the latter looks prettier in the photos they take for the admissions program, and gets those rooms full of PCs used, but it has just about ZIP to do with an engineering degree.

Mind you I see the same at work - Greg, can you run an ADAMS model to predict how much the engine will move with these diff ratios and bush deflection curves?

-Sure. Equally I can do it with pen and paper. In 20 minutes. Why the hell can't you?

 

Cheers

Greg Locock

SIG:Please see FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.

RE: Are standards slipping?

I am not really sure of the situation here in the US, I havent quite figured it out with my limited exposure.

In australia, the engineering fees and the minimalist scope of work are closely related. When fees started going down, enginners started looking for things that they could get away without doing.

The problem is that engineering is seen as a commodity, and engineers compete on price for most jobs. People shouldnt be buying coffee based purely on price, let alone enineering services.

RE: Are standards slipping?

Equally I can do it with pen and paper. In 20 minutes. Why the hell can't you?

Sure, can do, but if the group you're trying to convince won't believe it unless the computer says it's so, then you make the lights flash on the magic box once again.
   

RE: Are standards slipping?

The answer a graduate should make to that:
"give me time to get in the same amount of practice that you have had and I will do it faster!"

RE: Are standards slipping?

Great thread, here are some very good quotes:

"From my experience in design offices, the commercial interests do have the potential to negatively influence the practice of Structural Engineering." ~ YS

"The argument being made is that the quality of graduates today is far less than say thirty or forty years ago, and that the universities are taking the money but not providing the goods.... The world is run these days by accountants not engineers." ~ Ussuri

"The problem is that engineering is seen as a commodity, and engineers compete on price for most jobs. People shouldn't be buying coffee based purely on price, let alone engineering services." ~ csd72

To me this is a  serious problem. Why do we let the world be run by accountants? Why do we allow purely commercial interests prevail over our own? I agree our profession has become a commodity just like chewing gum. This is a recipe for disaster. A system like this only exists because we allow it to exist.

RE: Are standards slipping?

There is currently a global push by the engineering associations, including ASCE, IEAust, IStructE, ICE and others to increase the profile of engineering. Many of those associations are not doing enough, in my opinion, but at least they are trying.

There are a couple of issues here:

1. We ourselves have fallen into the trap of competing on price, and a low one at that (the man who cleans leather sofas around here has a higher chargeout rate than me - not kidding).
2. Enginnering is a behind the scenes type of job, no-one has any idea what it is we do and no-one actually cares as long as it is done.

Point 1. is a fault of our industry, point 2. is a fault of our society.

RE: Are standards slipping?

Engineers are good at moaning about the topic of status (myself included) but not so good about doing something about it.  I mean, where do you start on tackling a problem engrained in society's psyche?

I think the US is better than the UK on this front.  When we were owned by a large US megacorporation I was not allowed to use the term 'Engineer' because I did not have a PE.  It mattered not that I was in the UK.

The fee issue we did to ourselves as companies tried to grow their businesses buy under bidding their competitors.  Clients now have the mindset that engineering work is cheap and all engineering firms provide the same product.  This is not the case with architects.  I bet Lord Foster costs a lot more than an architect working on house extensions.  Clients have taken it a step further with the reverse auction approach to tendering which is going to see the fee levels stay where they are or reduce further.

An accountant can say to his client "give me 1 million and I will save you 100 million", engineering is seen as a necessary cost from which you get no extra benefit by paying more.  Fixing that is going to be a challenge.

RE: Are standards slipping?

Yes its crazy that the average cost blowout in construction is at least in the 10% range whereas they still argue over the engineers 1% fee!

 

RE: Are standards slipping?

"... where do you start on tackling a problem ingrained in society's psyche?" ~ Ussuri

That is a very good question. IMHO, Education is the answer. Our education system should cover this. In other words every high school graduate should know what an engineer does period. And also know about the different branches of engineering (e.g. mechanical vs. civil). Just like we know that a dermatologist helps with skin ailments and a cardiologist deals with heart ailments.

That would be a good start.

RE: Are standards slipping?

Except that I don't think people know what cardiologists and dermatologists do because they're taught that in school; they know because they or someone they know had to go to one.  Very few laypeople have cause to go see an engineer.

Hg

Eng-Tips policies:  FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies

RE: Are standards slipping?

...luckily for all parties involved
 

RE: Are standards slipping?

You are right, Hg, we are familiar with doctors because we all have been to a doctors office. My view is that everyone has been on bridges designed by structural engineers, been on vehicles designed by mechanical engineers, used plastics developed by materials engineers. Sometimes on a daily basis. So it would be valuable for information about our profession to become common knowledge. Education is one way. There are probably other routes as well.

RE: Are standards slipping?

Still the same distinction.  Most of us have to go to a doctor's office.  Most of us have not had to go to an engineer's office.  Seeing the product of someone's work is not the same thing as understanding what they do.

A couple of years ago there was a thread suggesting that maybe getting engineering into popular culture would be the answer.  Since they managed to make a successful drama about a mathematician ("Numb3rs"), I suppose there might be the makings of a drama set in a forensic engineering firm.

Who wants to write the pilot screenplay and deal with the TV executives?

Hg

Eng-Tips policies:  FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies

RE: Are standards slipping?

I don't know, you had Scotty, Laforge etc in Star Trek.

You've even had the likes of Barnes Wallis in films and there've been various dramatic biographies of aerospace "engineers" like Hughes and Mitchell.  You even had George Lopez, OK he was the production manager at an aircraft plant not an engineer but still.

History Channel & Discovery have some OK shows that touch on Engineering, just need to find a way to make ones that get them on prime time and attract more female viewers.  

Given the current fondness for reality shows maybe Big Engineer, lock a bunch of multidisciplinary engineers in an office untill they come up with the ultimate design of X.  You could have 2 competing teams and have elimination rounds based on drawing check, or passing static tests, vibration tests etc.

The possibilities are endless!





 

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

RE: Are standards slipping?

YS asked a question, and he is getting lots of answers to another question, which is only vaguely related.  Could we please get back to the OP?

RE: Are standards slipping?

Kenat,

There is a show exactly like that called junkyard challenge.

Anyway back to the main point. Enginnering no longer gets the cream of the crop as far as students is concerned, management,medicine and accountancy get most of those. Of course standards are going to drop.

 

RE: Are standards slipping?

I don't think engineering ever did get the cream of the crop, but the difficulty of the courses always weeded out about 2/3 of those who started.  We referred to engineering as "prebusiness".

RE: Are standards slipping?

Is product quality/safety/enginuity getting better or worse?  I'd say better on average.  Sod the educational test results.

- Steve

RE: Are standards slipping?

Quality is better in manufactured products, but not in buildings, which is what this thread is about.  Safety, yes, that is better.  I think ingenuity is the same as it has been (excellent), which may be part of the problem.  Ingenious solutions have overrun the capacity of the workforce to use.  

RE: Are standards slipping?

2
I am an older engineer (but not ancient yet) and I do think the quality/ability of younger engineers is dropping, and yes I put part of that down to the training they are (not) getting at university.
I do not think the starting ability relative to the total attending university of the engineering students is any worse as some suggested. I think that the school system is the start of the problem in that the overall level of all students is dropping, partly because we cannot put too much pressure on the little darlings, so they are not allowed to be in a competitive situation at school.

But I put the main part to the training they are not getting once they start work. Again there are several causes to this, many being cost related, but the workplace training they get now is nothing like it was 30 years ago.

The other side to this is they expect to do everything on computers from day 1. And a lot of the older engineers let them because computers are so good (I am allowed to be sarcastic aren't I). Yes, to whoever it was that said they will eventually be able to do it quicker, I agree. But will they be able to decide if the answer they are getting is correct and will they be able to detail it correctly? Will the "experience" they gain by doing it by computer be sufficient to make them better engineers. Or will they just accept the computers answer like I find many do. It depends on the person and how they use the computer.

I most cases, and I am a software developer, from my experience the answer is no, they will not get to the same level. In the training I am doing for software (RC and PT concrete design software in my case) I am finding less and less understanding of design and how concrete works and less and less understanding of design codes and basic design logic. I put this down almost entirely to a generation of engineers who are relying on the computer to apply the code and produce the design. Many of them do not even know the code rules any more and even more do not understand what portion of those rules any particular software package is actually applying and how well it is doing it. If they did, some well know design programs would never be used again or would have to pick up their acts very quickly.

I have been asked recently to supply not design software but "Productivity Software", because the people in question were employed to produce drawings (designing buildingd had nothing to do with it)!!!! They were not interested in what goes onto the drawings, that was the responsibility of the software.

My opinion is that we need to introduce an Internship (yes extra cost but interns get paid less) for engineers where, while still being allowed to use their computer software, must provide hand calculation checks to verify designs under the supervision of a senior engineer. The idea being to  understand what it is doing and learn to question the computer and understand its limitations and what it is not doing for them.
They do not get a final degree until they have done that for say 2 - 3 years. Or maybe we can call it a Masters Degree because most of them will then know an awful lot more than someone with a Masters Degreee and no experience.

RE: Are standards slipping?

Two points to make
One is a piece of advice I got from a retired Chem PE.
Take enough accounting classes to be proficient at communicating with accountants. As engineers we are not taught how to monetarily justify our work. Unless we can learn to do this at least in some basic way it will be assumed that all the benefits we provide just magically appear.

Point two is about education. I am attending Oregon Institute of Technology. My average upper-class size is 15. In order to teach some of the 300 and 400 level classes at the level they want to the college reprints some texts from the 1970's because they can't find newer texts that include the really complex stuff.
My physics teacher contacted the publisher of the textbooks he was using because they had removed some of the material he regularly taught. The text book company told him the large universities were pressuring them to remove much of the advanced material because they didn't feel they could teach it with as large as there class sizes were.
So I have to say yes, most of the large universities are cutting content inorder to stuff more students through for a lower cost.

RE: Are standards slipping?

Fasttracking projects is a major cause of the drop in quality. Trying to do things too fast and not allowing enough time for coordination.

 

RE: Are standards slipping?


carnage1 makes a great point, "yes, most of the large universities are cutting content in order to stuff more students through for a lower cost."

So this is quite ironic, in many places in North America tuition rates have gone up but quality of education has gone down. So many students pay more for an inferior education (not just engineering students but other post secondary students are affected). It is insane that this is allowed to happen.

RE: Are standards slipping?

So in a free ish market what can we assume from " tuition rates have gone up but quality of education has gone down."

?

I'll put my capitalist hat on and say that the hard courses have been weeded out, becasue students pay more and want good grades, and employers don't sufficiently reward those who take the hard courses. In other words the fundamental problem is us, the interviewers.


 

Cheers

Greg Locock

SIG:Please see FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.

RE: Are standards slipping?

(OP)
Hello Again All;

I have been away from the office and computers for two days, so I greatly appreciate the size of the thread (and Hokie's reining in the natural tangential tendencies of our Profession).  I've been well impressed, and have thanked and starred several posts.  I'm going to take a minute and address a few posters:

Hokie:  Thank you for your point by point.  I came to my current employer specifically because it was an NZ firm (NOT the only NZ firm) which I believed was doing it right, and who would invest in my development as an engineer.

1.  Fees:  Competition may be good, but it can only be allowed to happy to a certain degree.  It is interesting to read Milo Ketchum's (the junior, but not junior junior I believe) November 1982 editorial about price competition in Engineering.  Other than being overly optimistic (a "flaw" of nearly every engineer I know), he correctly foreshadowed what was to (and now has!) come.  Please read it at http://www.ketchum.org/milo/sep4-Competition.html.  Money is not only the route of all evil, it is the route to abrogating your Professional Duty of Care to the Public in order to put food on your family's table.  Your children cannot eat your principles...  I am fortunate to have been born to a Structural Engineer who got out of the game early and could impart to me a sense of what MUST (not merely should) be done, and in a country with an inherent engineering tradition of modesty.

2.  Detailing- Purely fees driven. (pronounce the period, or full stop, as your english may dictate)

3.  Checking- This just cannot be considered an option, or a glance-over.  It MUST be, at a bare minimum, a detailed comprehensive check of at least a sample of the works, as well as a complete review of the HOW it will all work, if not a repeat of the actual calculations.

4.  Education/Training- I think the Universities are producing a broader skilled engineer, but at a cost of the fine level, practical, technical training.  Academia rules the day, and the industry training simply has not picked up on the need.  See item 1.

5.  Australia, and anywhere with effective long term apprenticeships in construction, is very fortunate.

6.  ARCHITECTS.  They problem here is that they have not bothered to consider their TECHNICAL core competencies as a product for their customers to buy into. They sell on appearance, not on practicalities.

Rapt:  Your point about Interns is very apropos indeed, however I would point out that, at least in Canada, this system is in place.  I was an Engineering Intern until I received my License, and this was what both my business card and all title blocks stated at that time.  
"YS - Real Name here"
"B.Eng., EIT"

As for being an "Engineer", I was not allowed to call myself an Engineer, just like Ussuri spoke about, until I was awarded my P.Eng.

I was fortunate to work in a firm that valued my enthusiasm and provided an ENORMOUS and energetic practical training scheme.  A small firm that probably spent more in training me than I could have possibly been making for them.  They checked EVERY calculation I did, no exceptions, and pulled me up on each and every failing, no matter how small.  The lessons learned in being so scrutinized will never be lost on me, and the experience laid the foundation for the engineer I became.  I owe to my family, and particularly my Father, the WHO of the man I am becoming, but I owe to that excellent Structural Engineering firm the PROFESSONALISM, and a great deal of the fundamental understanding, of the P.Eng. I have become.

My University did a good, and competent job of producing an Academically qualified engineering INTERN.  They DID NOT PRODUCE AN ENGINEER.  That, if it has yet occurred, will come in time.  My personal belief is that a Structural Engineer is made after a minimum of 12 years (including University) exposure to the fundamentals and practicalities of the Industry.  I do not yet meet my own acid test, although my title does call me a "Structural Engineer", and I often use the nomiker.

As a group we must decide whether or not there is a problem, and then work to find a solution.  I believe that the problems of the present (lack of care and passion in the new generation of graduate, lack of time and resources to train the graduates, lack of time and resources to properly address the details of project, etc, etc, etc) will be solved by our new technologies.

I have been, and will continue to, try and imagine solutions to our problems.  I read voraciously, I am constantly trying to expand my skills.  I contribute here to approximately one quarter of the threads I read... I make damn sure I understand what is being said when I cannot contribute.

Given that I believe there is a problem, I think that we MUST establish and enforce an online (or perhaps correspondence based, or blended) system of Structural Engineering Intership.  A series of courses on practical, rational analysis and code application routed in engineering fundamentals, available to any young structural engineers interested in continuing their learning.  The system need not even be formal; Just AVAILABLE.

And after that, If you've actually this despite the length, I'd like to thank you for getting here.

Cheers,

YS

B.Eng (Carleton)
Working in New Zealand, thinking of my snow covered home...

RE: Are standards slipping?

youngstructural,

I do not know the Canadian system of internship. However seeing some designs results from Canadian companies, it does not always work. It all depends on how it is controlled/applied. My main point was to ensure that designers get a good understanding of how structures work, to understand the design process and to question the tools they are using. Just being an Intern for a few years does not ensure this unless the training is handled properly. And from what I am seesing worldwide, generally this is not happening.

The problem is supervised manual practice (not "how to run a computer program"), not online tutorials. Unfortunately, we are now at a stage where a lot of the "supervisors" do not have the grounding required to do that job properly, so we end up with the blind leading the blind!

RE: Are standards slipping?

(OP)
Fair comment Rapt, and I can only speak for the offices in which I have worked... I cannot, and would not presume to, say that Canada does it better than anywhere else.  I do find that Canada has a unique system of producing a higher proportion of engineers who "know their limitations", but we still have our fair share of idiots.  I simply believe that the structures are in place to permit it to be done right...  Interns vs. P.Eng, etc.

No matter which country you name, without exception, you will always have failures, negligence, incompetence and neglect.  In all professions, again without exception.  

I hope we can agree to disagree on the online training...  I think it could have great value.  I certainly do not think it can be the only, or even the primary, method of continued instruction.  It should be complimentary, but not necessarily optional.  I should think it would be very useful if available... And I would love to hear a practicable alternative to brining the existing training standards up within the current economic/fee environment.

I believe very strongly that most of the training should be by manual, hand-driven, supervised practice (your words).

Cheers,

YS

B.Eng (Carleton)
Working in New Zealand, thinking of my snow covered home...

RE: Are standards slipping?

The drive to reduce costs  and accelerate schedules is one of the main causes for the apparent slipping of standards. Some contributing effects are;

a) primary contractor managed by MBA's whose recent , modern training includes a philosphy to absolutely minimize costs without ever recognizing the "cost" associated with lower quality implied by distributed design and manufacturing  ( ie it is rarely the case that a large capital project is managed, desinged, fabricated, erected by the same single corporate entity with a single point of liability)

b) item(a) acelerated by improvements in communications which allows for outsourcing of each individual task to a global market of engineering firms and fab shops. For example , in the USA, a large boiler might be sold and managed by a small office in the US, desinged and detailed by an engineering office in India, fabricated by a shop in Korea, and erected by whatever subcontractor will accept the schedule risk.

c) general dumbing down of new technically trained engineers who are wholly dependent on computerized solution of all problems and who may have no capacity to proof check design by applying first principles to approximate calculations.

d) less corporate support for standards organizations which then limits the ability of the standards orgs to adjust to changing technology and market forces.

RE: Are standards slipping?

Yes, not accounting for hidden costs is a major failing of modern accounting and management.

RE: Are standards slipping?

A more on topic response as my previous effort wasn't appreciated.

Similar comes up every now and again, for instance thread730-219181: We have better tools, but? thread731-220877: Take me back to the good ol days!.

It's not just in structural engineering that these or similar problems rear their heads.

The idea of cross checking work, especially with the kind of safety/financial impact that making mistakes in Engineering can have, always seemed logical to me.  However with the advent of CAE the amount of 'checking' seems to have massively diminished (so I've been told).

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

RE: Are standards slipping?

This was a good thread to read and it appears the problem is world-wide...I have had an idea of how the problem could possibly be addressed at universities and technical schools.

As Engineers/Architects/Professional People we are often subjected to internal audits to assess our work - well I hope most of us do get audited or assessed at some level.

In terms of Universities, they are often or always assessed by outside or internal academical institutions (at least in South Africa and UK that I know of)- why not get a professional body of PRACTISING ENGINEERS to do the audits and function on behalf of the professional institutes - the assessment could be geared towards a practical approach in the particular field of interest and aimed at the final year students.  Perhaps this assessment should be made by younger qualified engineers that can relate better to the younger students and provide essential tools to coping out in the real world rather than being thrown in the deep end. This could provide the tertiary institution with valuable information as to how their students are perceived outside of a theorical world.  Just an idea that I am throwing out there!  

As I young qualified engineer of 8 years experience, I often have to deal with younger engineers that are out of their depth on site (not a bad thing as I think it teaches one some valuable lessons in life and work and we all have that one site that haunts us when we sleep), but as soon as a practical solution/discussion takes place, then the younger guys are always interested (thinking from a geotech perspective).  They (graduates) always appear more motivated.  I suppose it also does come down to the people skills one has and how one communicates the idea.

Are there other ways we can put back the practical component and 'common sense factor' into the system?? I think it is time that we look into it.  




 

RE: Are standards slipping?

Young grads do not have tinkering experience. They are told by their parents and teachers to keep their heads down and do force fed homework and they will be good and successful people.

Exploration and curiosity with the physical world are not encouraged by the adults around them. The graduates we see today are a reflection of children who have had their minds walled off from the physical world in greater numbers than in the past.

RE: Are standards slipping?

Funny, where I work now we're also told to keep our heads down and do our homework and we will be good and successful people.

Then they marvel that we have lower than the state average for passing the PE exam.

Hg

Eng-Tips policies:  FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources