Do You Use What You Learned in School for Your Job? 40

[Christine74]

How frequently do you find yourself using something that you learned in college and applying to your job as an engineer?

Personally, the only time I use something from school at my job is when I use AutoCAD, which is practically never. Everything else I had to learn on my own. I've certainly never used any calculus, differential equations, FORTRAN, descriptive geometry, or just about any of the other classes I was required to take.

If experience is common, I wonder if all of these classes serve any purpose other than to weed out lazy and/or stupid students from the pool of potential engineers.

How about you? Do you actually use what you learned in school? How important do you feel your education was in training you how to perform your job?

-Christine

 

[ferdo]

Hi,

One of my teachers said: "A good engineer is that one which can find what he need and knows where to find the right information". School is very good to train you for this.



Regards
Fernando

 

[bridgebuster]

wes616 - four years of high school drafting; are you a Brooklyn Tech graduate?

 

[csd72]

I think you will surprised how much of what you learned in university you use every day.

University teaches you how to think, and most importantly how to learn.

csd

 

[jgoebel]

Some of you guys are completely missing the big picture.

Generalists are great if you are in a commodity driven market and not interested in advancing anything. If you just want to minimize outflow and maximize your product/service, then by all means hire all super fast cad guys.

A good engineer though will see all those details, take the analysis, and generate (and produce) ideas that will advance the field.

It is an investment to know something truly well, to the point that you can take it to the next level. Hire those people that have the ability to take it to the next level, and empower them to do it.

I can't stand the productivity is everything approach to the workplace. Great way to burnout employees and completely KILL creativity!!!

 

[Twoballcane]

Kenat,

I must be missing somthing on the drawings and tolerance studies. I have taken a drawing class back in college. If I remember, what it tought me was that the notes are on the upper left hand corner, scale and drawing name on the lower right hand corner, drawing in the center, baloons with find numbers to point out the parts that will refer back to a parts list,...etc. Somthing very general and simple, it maybe took a whole three days for the person to explain this to us in class. Not until I got into industrie that I found out that the company had its own standard notes to use (you could not make up your own notes which I thougt you could), some programs like to have their parts list on the drawings and some like to have it separate, and baloons everywhere calling out everything. Even special symbols to call out flatness and roundness. There was a whole array of stuff to learn. And it even got worst when dealing with vendors with their own way of doing their drawings with different notes and symbols. There is a big diffence between drawing up CCA and a simple bracket.

In any case, there are so many ways of making up drawings that it would be dificult to capture all different industies and make some sense and try to teach it in college. So the only way to become compatent in reading a drawing is to spend time in the industrie to learn all the diffrents quarks that the design/engineer will put together.

Tolerance studies is another. It probly took one class to learn how to do a tolerance study in the same drawing class. In school I think I learnd how to do it by RMS. But in industrie, I had some Manufacture Engineers insist that tolerance study should be done in absolute. For example CCAs, after the part, epoxy, perlayer of the board, copper run, finish,...etc Ill have a tolerance build up of 100 mils instead of RMS of 10 mils (Im exaggerating). So again in industry, I had to learn other people's little quarks to get them their answer.

imho, if you come out of college and don't find ways of using the classes that you took to your benefit in the comany or finding work that will require your analysis skills , then you should not be complaining that college was a wast of time, but that you are in the wrong job for your skill set.

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

 

[Twoballcane]

Kenat, after reading what I posted, it sounded argumental, which I did not intend. Please evoke the emotions of some good friends in a bar having a riveted conversation.

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

 

[KENAT]

Twoballcane,

I probably have my own chip on my shoulder (or should that be fry) as I'm repeatedly confronted by people who massively (in my opinion) downplay the importance of design communication, so for me it's a hot topic. Also my drafting class didn't even go into as much detail as yours, no mention of tolerances or notes, just a few labs on how to use Autosketch and some very basic methods of generating projected views.

I also have an issue that the best analyst type 'engineer' I ever worked with didn't have a degree, he was older and had gone the apprenticeship route, I still haven't met a better stress guy and I've met/worked with some with masters etc. So I take issue with the way some people imply/go on about having a degree making you superior.

To me there's difference between being a generalist and giving up engineering to be a CAD Monkey.

IMO A generalist knows enough to do basic analysis and make a judgment call on when more detailed analysis is required. They also know enough to get the various experts talking to each other. Maybe I think this way because my course was actually Aerospace Systems which stressed knowing enough about each topic just to know where you want to get and to get the specialists talking, maybe it’s due to my (limited) Industry experience.

A CAD jockey doesn't always (ever?) think about whether to do analysis, typically can't do it if he wanted to and by default either does everything without analysis or forwards everything to specialists.

I guess I like the definition/description Dan Raymer uses for design:

Aircraft Design is a separate discipline of aeronautical engineering - different from the analytical disciplines such as aerodynamics, structures, controls, and propulsion. An aircraft designer needs to be well versed in these and many other specialties, but will actually spend little time performing such analysis in all but the smallest companies. Instead, the designer's time is spent doing something called "design", creating the geometric description of a thing to be built.

http://www.aircraftdesign.com/book.html

I know it’s about Aircraft but I think it’s true beyond that limited scope. If you read on in the link it differentiates design from simple drafting but I didn’t want the quote to be too long. Also there’s more to it than just the geometric description (specs/requirements…) but I hope my meaning is clear.

Anyway I doubt I’ll win this one but it’s my 2C worth.

It’s also interesting because at least one boss I had steered me away from specializing in just one type of analyst, he valued a good generalist more highly.

However, this is off topic from the OP, I use a lot of my schooling in a very general, back ground information type of way. I use relatively little of it directly in detail, doesn’t mean it was a waste of time though.

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

 

[prohammy]

Ken,

This is where I fall between the lines again whenit comes to the definition of engineer, designer, design engineer and what the guys in that States and in Europe see as the deviding line between those disciplines......

I love your quote above, it describes what I consider my job to be (my title quite simply reads Design Engineer, and even though I do that job on contract, that is what I do). I take a 'fuzzy' concept, a idea from marketing, and a vague direction from the Engineering technical director and make that all into machine or a component system. My job is infancy to middle age of my products and after that a bit of nursing home care.....

But when you look at what that has to do with the specificas of my college career, there isn't a massive correlation. Sure I use my stress calcs, sure I use my drawing knowledge, but what I design is built on the last 13 years experience and that is what I am paid for.

PS One I learned from my Dad, another design engineer...If you ever read a drawing and the Scale Box reads NTS, always assume that that means Not Too Sure

Kevin

“It is a mathematical fact that fifty percent of all doctors graduate in the bottom half of their class." ~Author Unknown

"If two wrongs don't make a right, try three." ~Author Unknown

 

[KENAT]

Thanks Kevin, I was starting to think it was just me.

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

 

[calguy07]

KENAT, you're not the least qualified checker as long as i'm still around, lol!

 

[KENAT]

calguy07, fight you for it

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

 

[prohammy]

Calguy07 & Ken,

Easy to judge this fight...First one of you to get fired is the winner...Ready, set go

Kevin

“It is a mathematical fact that fifty percent of all doctors graduate in the bottom half of their class." ~Author Unknown

"If two wrongs don't make a right, try three." ~Author Unknown

 

[MedicineEng]

Well, I must confess that I have used very little bit what I learned in university, at least as it is taught there. Of course I used some of the concepts.
Due to my current responsibilities, I actually used much more what I've learned in my MBA than actually in university, even is sometimes I still have to dust some chemistry and thermodynamics.
What university taught me was: analytical reasoning, problem solving abilities and how to make a semester homework in only 3 nights. This last one is very useful when time is such expensive commodity...

 

[Twoballcane]

“downplay the importance of design communication”

Design communication is different from one company to another and even more different from industry to another. To try to teach this in college is difficult and maybe more difficult do to our technology is moving so fast. There is no design communication “standards” out there, just loose guidelines a company may follow but use in their own way.

“I also have an issue that the best analyst type 'engineer' I ever worked with didn't have a degree, he was older and had gone the apprenticeship route, I still haven't met a better stress guy and I've met/worked with some with masters etc. So I take issue with the way some people imply/go on about having a degree making you superior.”

Hmmm, I did not mention anything about degrees needed for a specific field, but since you brought this up. If you have people doing any kind of engineering work with out an engineering degree, I would be very suspicious about your company. I would not tell my customers that the work that was done on their project (which they are spending thousands of dollars) was done by people that only had a high school education. I have met more great engineers with degrees than so called engineers with out degrees. An engineer with his degree has a more in-depth knowledge of his field than the non-degreed engineer. IMO the non-degreed engineer is just mimicking the degree engineer with out really know what s/he is doing. I would certainly not go to an accountant who did not have his accounting degree or a doctor who did not have a medical degree. Why is this different with engineering? I can keep track of my checking account, but that does not make me an accountant. I can put a bandage on my daughters’ booboo, but that does not make me a doctor. So if a few people can do some math and put some equations together, I would not call them engineers.

“IMO A generalist knows enough to do basic analysis and make a judgment call on when more detailed analysis is required. They also know enough to get the various experts talking to each other. Maybe I think this way because my course was actually Aerospace Systems which stressed knowing enough about each topic just to know where you want to get and to get the specialists talking, maybe it’s due to my (limited) Industry experience.”

A generalist is a person who may be a jack of all trades but master of none. Just as you indicated that you have to get the “experts” talking to each other. I (not to sound like an a$$ hole) am one of the experts you are talking about when it come to analysis and test. At this level I am using everything I learned in school. All of the theoretical stuff, but to prove it out I test and then correlate. I still do calculus to look for rates and integrals to find the area under curves.

My point is a lot of smart kids end up as generalist and then complain that they are doing work that has nothing to do with what they did in school. If they get out of the generalist role and into an expert role that had something similar to what they did in college, you would be more satisfied with your career. If you don’t and stay in the same role, then you can only blame your self. The work is out there, you just have to find it.


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

 

[KENAT]

Twoballcane or is it Tobalcane

Our experiences must differ somewhat or else one or both of us is completely wrong/an arrogant *%^%*&^ whatever.

I think a large part of it may be that I grew up, attended school and started my career in the UK. I’m assuming you are US. If so cultural differences may explain it.

There is no design communication “standards” out there

I suspect those that prepared the ASME Y14 series, BS 8888 etc (can’t remember the iso number) may beg to differ. Every sector of Industry (for instance I know the above have limited applicability in construction) and even more so each company has some differences but certain fundamentals are pretty common, at least within a country. I’m not talking about every Engineer being able to operate every CAD system or even being able to be a fully trained drafter/detailer. I am saying that the attention paid to this by my degree, and from talking to others at least some other degrees, was arguably inadequate. It seems your degree did spend more time on this area than mine, maybe enough, I don’t know. The concept of tolerance wasn’t even mentioned on my degree and having questioned some interns from US schools the same seems true.

I’ve seen good basic designs turn into a nightmare due to poor design documentation, so yeah, I think it’s important. What’s the point in having the best basic concept using thorough analysis to prove it will work etc if it’s documented so poorly no one can make it, at least cost effectively. Yes a lot of this burden does/can rest on non engineer draftsmen/designers but if I come up with a design I want to know enough to make sure they’ve communicated it correctly, otherwise I’ve potentially wasted my time.

The degree thing wasn’t specifically aimed at anything you’d put. However, your response was pretty typical of what I’ve come to expect. Not that long ago, at least in the UK, it wasn’t unusual for ‘engineers’ to come through the apprenticeship route, in fact when I started out I was asked why I’d gone straight for the degree not done some kind of apprenticeship. The person I was referring to in my previous post was the chief stress engineer for a UK defence company and was a government approved signatory for aircraft certification, he knew what he was doing.

An engineer with his degree has a more in-depth knowledge of his field than the non-degreed engineer.

.

In this case, nonsense, he knew a hell of a lot more about stress analysis than I (or any degreed colleagues at the time) with my fancy degree, as did at least one of the other guys who had actually been an instructor at an apprentice training school on government dockyard (back in the day when they actually did their own engineering). Both these guys must be 60 by now, same for the one US guy I know who I think took a similar route and was good (he may have got his degree, I’m not sure).

I will admit most of the younger people (even in their 40s) that had gone apprentice route didn’t seem to have the same level of technical/analytical knowledge, and most of the non Bachelors guys I work with now are weak in those areas too.

Personally I want to design things, using analysis to help me do that well/optimize design etc rather than just creating a pretty picture which is unrealistic. I don’t want to spend all day/week/year analyzing one strut or simple system unless I really need to, so maybe I’m just not well suited to being a number crunching analyst. If this means I’m less ‘smart’ and you think less of me then so be it, the engineers I wanted to be like were RJ Mitchell, Barnes Wallis, Sydney Camm etc.

I’m rambling now and am unlikely to win the argument so I’m probably wasting my time, we’ll have to agree to disagree.


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

 

[GregLocock]

While I agree that in the UK a lot of good or great engineers came in via the apprenticeship route, typically they also did night school, and got a thorough grounding in engineering theory.

Just because it wasn't called an engineering degree doesn't mean it was any easier.

However, I do agree with Tubal Cain, if you feel that your education is underutilised then you need to specialise. In my career I have used, directly, at least 40% of what I learnt at uni, and am (slowly) learning /more/ maths at the moment.

Cheers

Greg Locock

Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.

 

[KENAT]

Thanks Greg, probably should have mentioned that in addition to the basic apprenticeship they got HNC/HND but my post was already too long. Not sure quite what the US equivalent is, something like an associates maybe?

I remember trying to help one apprentice with his homework, sure made my brain ache on a couple of the questions. It was a little more applied than my more theoretical degree but not necessarily easier as you say.

At my last place in the UK I'd just started to line up getting to work more closely with the chief stress engineer, to use more of my education, when I went and met a US girl and moved. Best laid plans... I do now have a copy of Roarke, that must count for something.

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

 

[GregLocock]

Roarke?-You have taken the first step on the path to the Dark side. Congratulations young Jedi.



Cheers

Greg Locock

Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.

 

[Twoballcane]

KENAT,

Lets shake hands and call it a draw ;+)


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

 

[Twoballcane]

Oh...I am from the US

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