| Author |
Message |
    
Clevelandxb9r
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 05, 2005 - 10:00 am: | 
|
Do any of the engineers here frequent the Eng-Tips forums? And what do you think of the logo? Looks familiar to me.
http://www.eng-tips.com/index.cfm |
Craigster
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 05, 2005 - 12:53 pm: |
|
Are we speaking about those who deal in contruction only?
Oddly we are all communicating through computers with horsepower provided by Intel and AMD as well as memory by Crucial (Micron) and other processing power by Motorola. These companies guide your 'drive by wire' throttle plates in higher end automobiles and make sure your plane lands with the wheels down and in the right place.
They call folks employed in the field of enginering engineers. They call Professional Engineers PEs.
So do the companies that make the machines for manufacturing the micro-devices.
You can poo poo it, but if you think it's very wrong, in protest you could refuse to have anything to do with those vile companies who would drag the name engineer through the mud.
Anyone care to give up their PC or other micro-processor based electronic devices? |
Keith
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 05, 2005 - 01:49 pm: |
|
I believe the use of the title "engineer" is only an issue if you want to represent yourself and your services directly to the public, i.e. "Keith's Engineering Company". As Blake said, this is to protect the public from persons who do not have the education and/or the experience to perform the work they say they can do.
I sure don't want a "doctor", for instance, who is misusing the title, to perform surgery on me.
I know there are companies who title persons without the degree as engineers and then call that person an engineer when meeting with customers. This may not be illegal in some states but it is most certainly unethical. Please refer to the example above.
Keith, licensed P.E. by exam in the State of Texas |
Blake
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 05, 2005 - 05:34 pm: |
|
DJ,
Interestingly, in some states, you can take the exam for an EIT certificate and PE license without having a college degree of any sort. I know PEs in Georgia that have never even been to college. The PE license has also been accepted in lieu of a college degree as a qualification in higher level state jobs.
Those who have the required experience and are able to pass the FE and PP exams are certainly deserving of licensure as an engineer as far as I am concerned. All states at one time and very recently here in Texas provided for the issue of PE licenses to qualified engineers who lacked an ABET accredited engineering degree. The qualifications to achieve licensure without an ABET accredited degree were EXTREME and required concurence/approval by a significant number of licensed practicing engineers in the state in question.
Not sure what the status of educational prerequisites is in other states now, but I assure you that it is a very long, arduous and rigorous path to obtain an engineering license without having the associated educational background. To pass the FE and PP exams without such educational background would be a feat virtually impossible to all but the cream of the MENSA crowd.
Thank you Keith for clarifying my poorly worded explanation of this issue.
Craig,
Apparently you missed the part where I posted the Texas statute section dealing with the very subject of your indignant rant...
quote:(f) Notwithstanding the other provisions of this chapter, a regular employee of a business entity who is engaged in engineering activities but is exempt from the licensing requirements of this chapter under Sections 1001.057 or 1001.058 is not prohibited from using the term “engineer” on a business card, cover letter, or other form of correspondence that is made available to the public if the person does not:
(1) offer to the public to perform engineering services; or
(2) use the title in any context outside the scope of the exemption in a manner that represents an ability or willingness to perform engineering services or make an engineering judgment requiring a licensed professional engineer.
And you apparently also missed where I admitted that I was wrong concerning the use of the title "engineer" in the workplace. So I'll say it again. I was wrong.
So, if that high horse that you are on is called "Engineer", you might want to allay his concerns, so long as he does not represent himself as an "engineer" to the public.  |
M2nc
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 05, 2005 - 08:11 pm: |
|
Blake,
What is important is we can find areas of agreement. We both like Buells. We both have M2's and I do believe your bike could run 145mph with the setup you got. I saw 132mph, indicated, back when my M2 was bone stock. I believe it will do a little better than that now. Your set up sound too cool.
I am not arguing but merely debating. I have never been upset in our bouts and like the different points of view.
As far as for club members, SME is not just any boys club, anyone in Manufacturing would know this. What I was trying to do was show objective evidence that outside of Texas, the term Engineer is use for some who may or may not be a PE. If I went to a head hunter looking for a job as a manufacturing designer, no industry in the world would know what kind of work I would be looking for. But if I stated the I was certified through SME as a Manufacturing Engineer, I would receive instant recognition internationally.
This plays into my second conclusion about English norms. I would properly be representing myself to industries and the public alike if I were to give out my business card stating that I was a design engineer. Please refer to your dictionary for objective evidence on my next point.
engineer 1. A person trained or professionally engaged in a branch of engineering. 2. A person who skillfully or shrewdly manages an enterprise. 3. A person who operates an engine.
"American Heritage Dictionary, 2nd College Edition"
Note the term "branch" as in more than one. Again pointing to what most would call obvious and overwhelming objective evidence of my point.
Would you trust a PE to build the plane that carries your family on vacation, or a Phd in Aerospace Engineering.
You Texas Law has no jurisdiction in North Carolina, but the English language does have a foot hold in Texas. My statement is as accurate as they come. You definition does not meet English norms. |
Keith
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 05, 2005 - 10:01 pm: |
|
"Would you trust a PE to build the plane that carries your family on vacation, or a Phd in Aerospace Engineering"
I could trust both if they had the skills to do the job.
I worked for several years for one of the best "engineers" I have ever met though he made it through only one year of college. He still can not legally represent himself or his services to the public as an "engineer".
I have also worked with masters and PHDs in engineering who could not design their way out of a wet paper bag.
Whether we like it or not, most, if not all states in this country require a license to perform engineering services for the public. However, most of us including me, do not perform engineering directly for the public.
Keith |
Buellisti
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 05, 2005 - 10:33 pm: |
|
M2nc
Nearly every state has a law covering the practice of engineering. Do we have any Boeing or Airbus engineers/designers on the board? A PE with years of real world experience in aeronautical design would be better suited to the task of managing the design of a passenger aircraft. I have worked with far too many PhDs who are simply academics with little or no practical experience outside of the university. Even as critical of PEs as I am, I have more confidence in their being grounded in the real world versus the theoretical. The role of PhDs is to expand our knowledge and push the envelope. PhDs excel at pure research and that is the expectation of the university. But for a passenger aircraft, I would prefer a BS or MS with 15 to 20 years of conservative practical experience and some form of professional certification.
I not dinging PhDs out of ignorance, spite, or envy. I will be starting my studies for a doctorate in Environmental Engineering in 2006. My employer is encouraging me to do so. The trick will be to finish before I retire.
(Message edited by buellisti on January 05, 2005) |
M2nc
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 05, 2005 - 11:00 pm: |
|
What you say is true. Some of the most educated engineers I have met, mess up with the obvious. As a last hurrah, I will sum up my point.
Someone who is not a PE could not represent themselves as a licensed professional engineer, but since PE are the minority of engineers the English language has made provisions for the rest of us poor souls. In this thread, Jim Nance asked "Are we all engineers?" Most of us responded using English norms. A few, pointed out that only PE could call themselves engineers. We will have to agree to disagree.
My point on PE and Aerospace Engineering is like Manufacturing, Industrial and other non-public forms of engineering, are mostly non-PE. We trust them like the automotive engineers, like the Buell engineers, that they have designed and sound structure and mechanical machine. Most PE are either Structural, Electrical or Mechanical engineers by trade. So most PE's could not engineer a plane that I would want to be in.
So Jim, for you, it was an excellent observation that many Buellists are in the Technical or Scientific Fields. I hope this statement is PC enough for everyone. |
Blake
| | Posted on Thursday, January 06, 2005 - 12:56 am: |
|
A PhD with no experience nor a PE would have absolutely no business designing aircraft. All the engineering managers in charge of the design of the B2 bomber had their PE's and they had to personally sign the drawings for which they were responsible. I would initial; they would then sign, sometimes after reviewing and asking a few very insightful questions about my analysis.
Good grief, even in the field of large earth station satellite antennas we have a majority of the key engineers holding their PE's.
Sorry Carlos, but you are so wrong it ain't even funny.
Blake (not an Engineer) |
Blake
| | Posted on Thursday, January 06, 2005 - 12:57 am: |
|
Who do you think designs aircraft if not structural, electrical, or mechanical engineers??? |
Court
| | Posted on Thursday, January 06, 2005 - 05:04 am: |
|
quote:And you apparently also missed where I admitted that I was wrong concerning the use of the title "engineer" in the workplace. So I'll say it again. I was wrong.
Blake: I've an idea. We print the above on fancy schmancy paper, have it framed in an attractive staples black certificate holder and sell copies for $25 each to raise funds for racing.
With the millions we'd raise, we could do FX and NASCAR.
Court
(who has had to mutter the "I was wrong" phrase more than my fair share of times....) |
Djkaplan
| | Posted on Thursday, January 06, 2005 - 08:01 am: |
|
I've known some PhDs that were total idiots. They are always the ones, of course, that request that you call them "Doctor". One PhD I worked with said "just call me Bob". He was good.
One the other hand, every PE I've ever worked with was top-notch (with or without a degree), especially the older ones. |
Craigster
| | Posted on Thursday, January 06, 2005 - 12:55 pm: |
|
Blake,
Who's on their high horse?
I didn't hijack the thread...but it would appear that at least one Badwebber is hellbent on spewing their oppinions about what constitutes an engineer, even when their own state law says otherwise. This person is quite knowledgeable about who is wrong, yet appearantly didn't bother to read the state law they posted....dare I say, Prior to their own indignant rant.
My suggestion....Take a Zoloft. |
Blake
| | Posted on Thursday, January 06, 2005 - 02:56 pm: |
|
Whining is not an endearing trait. |
Craigster
| | Posted on Thursday, January 06, 2005 - 08:02 pm: |
|
Glad you see my point. |
1313
| | Posted on Friday, January 07, 2005 - 12:17 am: |
|
1313 |
M2nc
| | Posted on Friday, January 07, 2005 - 12:19 am: |
|
Blake, you make a good point. An Aerospace Engineer once told me that you could make a cow fly if you gave it enough thrust. Looks like the B2 project, like so many others, had a PE sign off on someone else's work.
I have known some great engineers. One of my favorites doesn't even call himself an engineer, he's a tool designer. Most of our engineers go to him if they get stumped with a solution to a problem. He just has it.
Blake, our difference is simple. You are stuck on a legal definition, and I am looking at a broader, English definition. |
Buellisti
| | Posted on Friday, January 07, 2005 - 12:51 am: |
|
M2nc
I'll agree that a majority of people performing engineering are not PEs. I am doing the design work for a project to rectify a design error made by a consultant on a public supply well. The hydrogeologist managing the project, a PE and PG, will review, stamp, and sign the drawings once I finish the CAD work. A slim majority of the staff in the engineering office are not PEs, but are Engineering Techs or Specialists. The PEs managing these projects oversee, review, stamp and sign off.
The real issue in most states is if you are offering engineering services to the public you must be licensed in order to represent yourself as an engineer and perform the work. Inside a company and out of view of the public, the title is used freely for people that do the real work.
A lot of us are, as you reiterated from Jim's post, "in the Technical or Scientific Fields". That's plenty PC enough for me and I suspect many of us are midnight "engineers" at heart.  |
Buellisti
| | Posted on Friday, January 07, 2005 - 12:55 am: |
|
1313
Yep. They sometimes play the PE card when their design is untenable as well. |
Blake
| | Posted on Friday, January 07, 2005 - 12:40 pm: |
|
"They" would then share a trait in common with all who allow personal insecurities to dictate their practice of an all to common ego-driven misbehavior.
Professional engineers certainly don't hold any special monopoly on ego-driven bad behavior. In fact, I'd say that the far more objective professional training/education of engineers probably renders that scenario a much less common problem in engineering than in most any other profession. |
Buells Rule!
(Dyna in disguise)
| | Posted on Friday, January 07, 2005 - 12:56 pm: |
|
I've known some PhDs that were total idiots. They are always the ones, of course, that request that you call them "Doctor".
We have one that comes to my plant to perform trials. Always has some hairbrained ideas that to date havent panned out. He has absolutely no work experience in the field, nothing but all of his degrees, yet when he suggests something & you tell him it wont work he gets very upset, loses his temper, etc. Hmm lets see now, 17 years work experience in the industry, vs 0 years. The stuff he is suggesting has been tried many times & has failed every time, yet for some reason we are expected to continue down this path because he is so much smarter than we are? Has actually used the statement that he has 12 years of college & has a Phd so he knows more than we do. |
Daves
| | Posted on Friday, January 07, 2005 - 01:13 pm: |
|
He probably knows his way around campus better than you do. |
Slaughter
| | Posted on Friday, January 07, 2005 - 01:38 pm: |
|
Dyna's right - so many PhD's are TOO academic and are NOT go-to guys.
If I wanted to see if Buell knee-pucks COULD be co-extruded with the logo all the way through the thickness, you think I'd ask a polymer scientist? He!! no, I'd ask Dyna.
If I wanted to know what material made the most sense to use for an extrusion, do you think I'd bug a scientist??? No
We have one PhD here who CAN actually do work outside the lab. He grew up in his dad's fab shop. Can weld, program computers, understands laser machining. Has a restored VeeDub with flowers stuck all over the outside (he was born a generation too late)
Along those lines - my favorite quote from all time is from Robert A. Heinlein:
"A human being should be able to change a Diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, and die gallantly.
Specialization is for ants." |
Steve_mackay
| | Posted on Friday, January 07, 2005 - 01:54 pm: |
|
Dyna, I deal with those types on a daily basis. Guys who couldn't "engineer" their way out of a paper bag. I deal with plastic molded parts. They need to be designed a certain way, or the mold cost goes up an enormous amount. You try to give these types suggestions on how to better design their parts, and they at times just go balistic. Parts with zero draft, or parts that have backdrafted conditions. And they think it will work in a straight open and closed mold 
I will say, *EVERY* part we've gotten from Buell has been pretty much perfect, with little to no tweaking to get it to work in a moldbase. Properly drafted, etc... |
Buells Rule!
(Dyna in disguise)
| | Posted on Friday, January 07, 2005 - 02:02 pm: |
|
You try to give these types suggestions on how to better design their parts, and they at times just go balistic.
Yep, this guy at times has gone almost into a rage, have actually had to sit him down in the cafeteria & tell him to relax for a bit. BTW, he's not a young guy either, has to be in his late 50's. From Yugolavia, attended college there for a number of years, then came here & attended a lot more college. Hasnt held a job at any company longer than 2 years. |
Slaughter
| | Posted on Friday, January 07, 2005 - 02:25 pm: |
|
Hey Dyna,
PM me offline - I've actually got some extrusion questions to ask.
Seriously.
I shoulda done it when I was out there and would have been able to save a vacation day. |
Buells Rule!
(Dyna in disguise)
| | Posted on Friday, January 07, 2005 - 02:35 pm: |
|
PM sent |
Jlnance
| | Posted on Friday, January 07, 2005 - 02:59 pm: |
|
Has actually used the statement that he has 12 years of college & has a Phd so he knows more than we do.
I once worked for a guy for about 2 years before I found out he had a PhD. He was good. Someone else said it well. It's the people who insist on being called Dr. that are difficult. |
Starter
| | Posted on Thursday, January 13, 2005 - 08:09 pm: |
|
I am a Professional Engineer. Civil/Environmental to be exact. I went to university, spent 4 years studying, paid a hefty price for the privilidge. Part of those studies requirements were extensive unpaid practical experience in order to graduate and now 7 years after starting I have been accepted by my employer as being able to be called an Engineer as my job title (3 year Graduate Program). I am still not granted with Engineering Authority which is the authority to approve a design for construction etc but that is internal policy. The part that really gets me pi$$ed is that purely in my opinion because our Institute of Engineers (maybe PEs should have a completely different title like Antwerps that would have stopped this confusion)went to sleep some years ago they are now having to push for engineers to become chartered engineers so a register can be kept and there can be some public confidence in the services they are hiring and some sort of line can be drawn in the sand. The courts of law realise that PEs are legally accountable for their professional conduct but due to the de-sensitising of the title "engineer" public perception is quite the opposite. Currently this is a massive issue in the industry I work in because some years ago position requirements for historically tertiary qualified PEs were dropped and wording to the effect of "PE or equivalent" was used for various reasons. Now in a world focused on liability the problems arises when it is discovered a vast majority of your workforce is not strictly academically competant or liable. Now whether or not that competancy is really necessary is another arguement but whilst that arguement is being resolved the courts take a grim veiw on of lack of liabilty and the blame quickly climbs the corporate ladder till they find someone. And hence beurocratic processes are born. |
Djkaplan
| | Posted on Thursday, January 13, 2005 - 08:42 pm: |
|
(Message edited by djkaplan on January 13, 2005) |
Slaughter
| | Posted on Monday, February 14, 2005 - 07:57 pm: |
|
Couldn't resist:
 |
|
