Interpretive Paper

There is a vast difference between engineering school and actual engineering. Most
classes in engineering school require students to learn a set of methods to solve problems and
apply those methods on exams to obtain the correct answer. In reality, however, engineering
problems do not have set methods that can be used to obtain a solution. Real world problems are
complex and require engineers to mae !udgment calls to solve them. "s mentioned in the article
by #ainsburg, engineering !udgment is $a sense of what is important$ and is $virtually
synonymous with expertise.$ The only way to obtain or improve engineering !udgment is to
study past problem or to wor on problems and learn from them, there is no substitute. The
articles by Thornton, %erguson and #ainsburg discuss engineering !udgment and its importance
in engineering design.
#ainsburg provides great examples of engineering !udgment in his article. &etermining
what is a precise enough calculation, maing simplifications to a model, and determining the
proper elements for a structure are things that cannot be taught or verified by proof. If these
things could be calculated by a formula, engineering !udgment would not be necessary and
engineering would be straightforward. This is not the case and it is faulty engineering !udgment
that is usually responsible for design failures. %erguson provides a variety of examples of faulty
!udgment in his article and the one that I found most striing was the case on #eneral 'lectric(s
compressors. The #eneral 'lectric )hief 'ngineer ignored the advice of a firm experienced in
compressor design, cut the testing of the compressors short, and then once again ignored the
advice of a senior technician. The lapse in !udgment is surprising* if someone more experienced
and qualified offers advice it is best to tae it into consideration. The lapse in their !udgment led
to severe losses for the company and could have easily been prevented. In this class alone, the
suggestions to use vector plots in %'M + and truss elements for my group(s final pro!ect were
incredibly beneficial in the design process. These suggestions were based on previous experience
that I did not have and by listening to the advice, I was able to accurately model the problems.
,ne area of engineering where !udgment is particularly important is in %inite 'lement
"nalysis -%'".. )omplex computer software such as /olid0ors allows engineers to simulate
an ob!ect(s design and the forces acting upon it. The engineer is responsible for correctly
formulating the problem* the software cannot do this. "s stated by %erguson, $/uccessful design
still requires tacit nowledge and intuitive $feel$ based on experience.$ Incorrectly formulating a
problem or oversimplifying a problem can lead to completely incorrect results that can be
disastrous if used. %urthermore, even if the problem is formulated correctly these results are by
no means exact, only approximations. The programmers of the software mae assumptions
which are usually unnown to the engineer and it is up to the engineer to validate the results
obtained from %'" to ensure that the programmers did not omit critical factors. "s stated in the
article by Thornton, $If we, as engineers and scientists begin to blindly accept results because
validation is too difficult, then we become scientific soothsayers whose predictions can only be
proven or refuted over time.$ The software provides results that have fancy colors, illustrations,
and precision to many decimal places, but if these results are not verified, they are meaningless.
These descriptions by the authors are very similar to what I experienced in M' 123. In %'M +, it
was necessary to correctly formulate the problem and ensure the design was consistent with the
physical reality of the system. This required experience and the only way to obtain this
experience was by examining different types of shaft and pulley systems. It was also necessary to
validate the results and since no analytical solution was available for the design, the only method
to verify the solution was by convergence testing. These are things me and my group have
encountered once again when evaluating the pull4up bar for the final pro!ect5 it is necessary to
properly understand the physical boundary conditions of the system and validation of the results
will be necessary.
The articles reminded me of another aspect that I have not yet experienced in engineering
school5 most real world problems are interdisciplinary. Multiple interactions occur at the same
time and it is not possible to focus on !ust one part of the problem at a time. 'ngineering school
divides engineering into different fields and topics, but the real world is not divided so cleanly.
"s I learned on the very first day of class in M' 123, and have learned throughout the course,
most problems are not as simple as applying formulas. %or me be a successful engineer, it will is
necessary to understand at least the basic concepts in other fields, mae connections between
different ideas, and stay up to date with new and up4coming information. 6y doing so, if I
encounter a problem with a design that is not in my own field of study, I will now to consult
someone who has experience in the sub!ect. In the case of the Tacoma 7arrows 6ridge collapse,
the engineers built a bridge without properly understanding the real world situation. "ccording to
%erguson, if they had studied previous bridge designs and understood aerodynamics, something
not in their own field, the disaster could have been prevented.
"lthough the three articles do not strictly mae the claim, engineering !udgment also
involves ethics. "n engineer(s responsibility is to fix problems with their design and ensure that it
does not fail. The recent case with #eneral Motors shows a distinct lac in engineering ethics.
%or nearly ten years, #.M was aware of a defect with their ignition switches but chose not to find
a solution to the problem. Instead, they blamed the users and ased the users to not overload their
ignition eys. "n engineer in #.M even proposed a fix, but it was canceled, most liely due to
the cost the company would incur by fixing the switches. The company(s cars had a variety of
problems throughout the years that were repeatedly brought up, but still no fixes were made. The
problems persisted, hundreds of people died, and only recently the company has recalled the
faulty cars. 'ngineers need to prevent such problems from occurring and, since it is not a perfect
world, rectify the problems when they are brought up. It should not require hundreds of deaths
and criminal investigations into the company for engineers to react.
The $experiments$ performed in many engineering classes are usually demonstrations*
the data for the experiment can be found without doing the actual experiment. ,ther classes do
not have experiments or design pro!ects to relate the topic to the real world. The analytical tools
learned in these classes are necessary and important, but there is a distinct lac of hands on
experience and experimentation. I was fortunate enough to have attended a vocational high
school where I obtained hands on experience, but I now many of my classmates have not. "
course lie M' 123 provides actual experiments where the results cannot be predicted, it is
necessary for a student to examine the physical system, and use engineering !udgment to validate
the design and results. The course also offered me the chance to read articles about past
engineering failures and engineering !udgment, something not offered in other classes.
'ngineering !udgment cannot be taught, but the pro!ects and readings in this class have definitely
helped me gain experience in decision4maing and analysis.