Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!
Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!
-
Congratulations TugboatEng on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
Structural Detailing History 2
- Thread starter EddyC
- Start date
I understand it this way (through conversations with 3 different US engineers who started their careers between 1926 and 1945):
In the early part of the 1900's engineers were a dominant group who prepared many of their plans by themselves. Engineering curricula required a development of drafting skills and individuals who simply were "draftsman" or "draughtsman" were not very prevalent.
Generally, young graduate engineers would come into employment with established engineers (usually an engineer who was a sole proprietor or a partnership of some kind). These young engineers would simply draw for the primary engineer for a long period of time before the chief engineer would trust the younger ones to do design work. I think conditions are similar today, but with a shorter learning curve as projects seem to come and go at a much faster pace.
These older gentlemen that I worked under in the 1980's all came through this process. They were very good at ink on linen drafting and were very meticulous in their designs.
I think that sometime in more recent years (perhaps the 1950's after WW II) the use of non-engineer educated draftsman came into use as the post-war years saw a boom in construction and the need for quicker turn-around in projects compelled the engineers to limit their drawing and focus on design.
The increased complexity of the building codes, higher specialization of engineering disciplines, and an increased awareness of productivity needs in the engineering industry also added to the use of non-engineer drafstman.
So there wasn't necessarily a SEPARATION, but an addition of technical personnel to the engineering office.
Today, we have AutoCADD, etc. that requires another complete level of specialization, although CADD software does seem to be getting easier to use. Many engineering firms do not use "techs" anymore but compel their engineers to do all their drawing. I think this is the trend of the future as CAD becoms CADD (adding Design to the drafting software).
A complete synthesis of drawing and design is coming so the age of techs may be limited to that of a department guru keeping engineers productive on the software...who knows.
Anyway...that's my take on it. Interesting question.
In the early part of the 1900's engineers were a dominant group who prepared many of their plans by themselves. Engineering curricula required a development of drafting skills and individuals who simply were "draftsman" or "draughtsman" were not very prevalent.
Generally, young graduate engineers would come into employment with established engineers (usually an engineer who was a sole proprietor or a partnership of some kind). These young engineers would simply draw for the primary engineer for a long period of time before the chief engineer would trust the younger ones to do design work. I think conditions are similar today, but with a shorter learning curve as projects seem to come and go at a much faster pace.
These older gentlemen that I worked under in the 1980's all came through this process. They were very good at ink on linen drafting and were very meticulous in their designs.
I think that sometime in more recent years (perhaps the 1950's after WW II) the use of non-engineer educated draftsman came into use as the post-war years saw a boom in construction and the need for quicker turn-around in projects compelled the engineers to limit their drawing and focus on design.
The increased complexity of the building codes, higher specialization of engineering disciplines, and an increased awareness of productivity needs in the engineering industry also added to the use of non-engineer drafstman.
So there wasn't necessarily a SEPARATION, but an addition of technical personnel to the engineering office.
Today, we have AutoCADD, etc. that requires another complete level of specialization, although CADD software does seem to be getting easier to use. Many engineering firms do not use "techs" anymore but compel their engineers to do all their drawing. I think this is the trend of the future as CAD becoms CADD (adding Design to the drafting software).
A complete synthesis of drawing and design is coming so the age of techs may be limited to that of a department guru keeping engineers productive on the software...who knows.
Anyway...that's my take on it. Interesting question.
EddyC,
I agree with JAE, but would like to add;
In my early years we did not have calculators and (personal) computers, so all calculation were done by hand or with the help of a slide rule. This was very labor intensive work, I don't know if you can imagine, unless you have actually worked like this. Engineers-in-training were often employed to do the drafting (which was also done 100% by hand), although some firms hired regular draftsmen. A P.E. would be wasting his (or employers) time drafting or "detailing".
Merry Christmas!
I agree with JAE, but would like to add;
In my early years we did not have calculators and (personal) computers, so all calculation were done by hand or with the help of a slide rule. This was very labor intensive work, I don't know if you can imagine, unless you have actually worked like this. Engineers-in-training were often employed to do the drafting (which was also done 100% by hand), although some firms hired regular draftsmen. A P.E. would be wasting his (or employers) time drafting or "detailing".
Merry Christmas!
Yes, some of the early calculations I saw in their files were simply pages and pages of hand math with no clear understanding of what the math was directed at. In other words, the typical: Problem / Parameters / Solution / Answer in many calcs was just not there.
In fact, we rarely if ever submitted calculations to anyone for review. The reason was always stated: "The calculations are the tool of the engineer, not the service that the engineer is providing to the public. Therefore, any calculations by the engineer are subject to his interpretation only and will not be provided to outside review."
I think that this is still true today, but many governing agencies insist on calculations being submitted. I resist is whenever I can.
In fact, we rarely if ever submitted calculations to anyone for review. The reason was always stated: "The calculations are the tool of the engineer, not the service that the engineer is providing to the public. Therefore, any calculations by the engineer are subject to his interpretation only and will not be provided to outside review."
I think that this is still true today, but many governing agencies insist on calculations being submitted. I resist is whenever I can.
From what I have heard, it has become difficult to find good drafters that are not engineers.
I don't really like the way it has become. I started a few years ago just doing cad for PE's in the office, and I would run a calculation every once in a while when we were not on a deadline. This was typical for all the EIT's that were hired. After 3 years of just being handed details to draw, we found that we were unable to produce details on our own. We weren't being required to think through the details and just getting yelled at for Cad mistakes. Also, most of our calculation experience was on Enercalc or Ramsteel and not by hand. I have had to teach myself a lot in my spare time. Many company owners are of course only thinking of the quickest way to make the largest profit and not about Engineer's career. I am afraid it is producing a lot of disgruntled young otherwise talented engineers.
Another point on calculations, I have worked where if there were little or no calculations in the file on a project, it didn't matter as long as nothing happened and we made a profit. I now work where every number on the job has to be verified and put in a 3 ring binder for quality review process.
I don't really like the way it has become. I started a few years ago just doing cad for PE's in the office, and I would run a calculation every once in a while when we were not on a deadline. This was typical for all the EIT's that were hired. After 3 years of just being handed details to draw, we found that we were unable to produce details on our own. We weren't being required to think through the details and just getting yelled at for Cad mistakes. Also, most of our calculation experience was on Enercalc or Ramsteel and not by hand. I have had to teach myself a lot in my spare time. Many company owners are of course only thinking of the quickest way to make the largest profit and not about Engineer's career. I am afraid it is producing a lot of disgruntled young otherwise talented engineers.
Another point on calculations, I have worked where if there were little or no calculations in the file on a project, it didn't matter as long as nothing happened and we made a profit. I now work where every number on the job has to be verified and put in a 3 ring binder for quality review process.
-
2
- #6
Speaking from a perspective of someone still familiar with a Leroy, I'm not aware of any intentional separation that didn't already exist and exist in many disciplines.
I do agree that many a graduate engineer sat at the board inking drawings for a senior engineer. However, in many respects this new engineer was also learning about the art of drafting and structures at the same time.
The new engineer was expected to learn how drawings/plans should look when presenting information to a contractor or manufacturer. At the same time, he was expected to learn many aspects of the structure that simply weren't taught in school, if for no other reason that brevity. For example many students come out with great theory etc, but actually know very little of how a structure goes together. This can be extended to other displines as well.
So the new engineer actually learned from two very important people, the senior engineer and senior draftsman.
If ever there is an intentional seperation going on its right now. I see all the time, where engineers are being employed as draftsmen not as engineers. I really don't understand why companies will pay that kind of money to have someone drafting all day. Many of these engineers are actually satisfied with this which baffles me even more.
Well, that's my perspective.
I do agree that many a graduate engineer sat at the board inking drawings for a senior engineer. However, in many respects this new engineer was also learning about the art of drafting and structures at the same time.
The new engineer was expected to learn how drawings/plans should look when presenting information to a contractor or manufacturer. At the same time, he was expected to learn many aspects of the structure that simply weren't taught in school, if for no other reason that brevity. For example many students come out with great theory etc, but actually know very little of how a structure goes together. This can be extended to other displines as well.
So the new engineer actually learned from two very important people, the senior engineer and senior draftsman.
If ever there is an intentional seperation going on its right now. I see all the time, where engineers are being employed as draftsmen not as engineers. I really don't understand why companies will pay that kind of money to have someone drafting all day. Many of these engineers are actually satisfied with this which baffles me even more.
Well, that's my perspective.
jheidt2543
Civil/Environmental
Qshake,
LeRoy was here too!
I agree with what you said above. I would add one other valuable teacher for the young engineer, the field superintendant. Get as much field time as permitted and ask the superintendant as many questions as he will stand still for. Office training is great and necessary, but those drawings look a LOT different in the field. Field experiance is how it all comes together.
LeRoy was here too!
I agree with what you said above. I would add one other valuable teacher for the young engineer, the field superintendant. Get as much field time as permitted and ask the superintendant as many questions as he will stand still for. Office training is great and necessary, but those drawings look a LOT different in the field. Field experiance is how it all comes together.
I am an civil/structural engineer (first class honour) but I am employed as a draftman and no one like to employ me as an engnieer.
The company cheked that I can use Autocad and know the detail of structure, therefore they employ me. Then, you can learn two differnet things from the senior draftman and engineer. The senior engineer is more valuable eventhough he doesn't know how to do drafting. It's very easy for me to do drafting work becasue I'm an engineer. But I can not learn much how the engineer do some calculation and understand how the results come out.
The company cheked that I can use Autocad and know the detail of structure, therefore they employ me. Then, you can learn two differnet things from the senior draftman and engineer. The senior engineer is more valuable eventhough he doesn't know how to do drafting. It's very easy for me to do drafting work becasue I'm an engineer. But I can not learn much how the engineer do some calculation and understand how the results come out.
Qshake
I gave you another Star...You struck a note with me, Thank You. But my post following... somehow got lost into webspace somewhere...However My thrust was about how I came up from the ranks and learned from the old guys those who used slide rules, yes draftsmen did use slid rules too! These men (they were all Men back then) had to produce a sheet a day of structural drawing. A sheet a day! Not by CAD, CUT and Paste, but manually produce a sheet a day. These drawings were a thing of beauty. You might also be supprised who it was who actually did most of the calculations. Mosts were done by the structural draftsman. Some CAD operators will be cringing now. If you young engineers ever really get a chance to look at these old manual drawings you will marvel at their complexity and clarity. No I did not have to walk three miles to school and back both ways up hill...it was the way it was.
I do not mean to say that we are not in a better place with autocad and the like. But I know that there are people out there who claim to do more than they really do. They want $$ money because they produce a product (drawing) right or wrong.
If we as a nation of bright individuals accept second or third place in technology or science to another country then we are doomed..
I Salute My Mentors!!!
pennpoint
I gave you another Star...You struck a note with me, Thank You. But my post following... somehow got lost into webspace somewhere...However My thrust was about how I came up from the ranks and learned from the old guys those who used slide rules, yes draftsmen did use slid rules too! These men (they were all Men back then) had to produce a sheet a day of structural drawing. A sheet a day! Not by CAD, CUT and Paste, but manually produce a sheet a day. These drawings were a thing of beauty. You might also be supprised who it was who actually did most of the calculations. Mosts were done by the structural draftsman. Some CAD operators will be cringing now. If you young engineers ever really get a chance to look at these old manual drawings you will marvel at their complexity and clarity. No I did not have to walk three miles to school and back both ways up hill...it was the way it was.
I do not mean to say that we are not in a better place with autocad and the like. But I know that there are people out there who claim to do more than they really do. They want $$ money because they produce a product (drawing) right or wrong.
If we as a nation of bright individuals accept second or third place in technology or science to another country then we are doomed..
I Salute My Mentors!!!
pennpoint
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Question