3 ms·

Also I would trade you mech eng tutoring for JS tutoring, if you've got the time.

techdragon 5y ago
I wish there were more opportunities for people to learn via “cross training” like this. I’d love to learn more about a number of engineering disciplines by helping people who know those fields, learn how to implement the algorithms and mathematical calculations they need in Python and simultaneously, learning more about those algorithms and calculations in order to best implement them and show how best to use Python for these tasks. But unfortunately such opportunities are few and far between outside academia and other learning oriented environments in my experience.
- knolan 5y ago
  I love this idea. The best way to get academics to buy in would be to have some clear outcome such as a publication or funding opportunity. There are a lot of clunky engineering tools that would benefit greatly from professional software development. Computational Fluid Dynamics software in particular is just plain awful in terms of usability for beginners.
  - lasagna_coder 5y ago
    What are the names of some of this software that are a good example of in-use but are clunky/have awful usability? I ask because it sounds like an interesting area, and I would like to see for myself what you're working with.
    - knolan 5y ago
      On one hand there is Ansys. It’s a Frankenstein’s monster of a software suite for numerical simulation comprising several tools that have been acquired over the years. It’s frightfully expensive and there’s no incentive to make it more usable as there’s limited competition. Then there’s OpenFOAM which is a fantastic open source alternative. It’s entirely command line based but there are UI derivatives and cloud based versions (SimScale). However it’s a nightmare of disjointed code, difficult to build and heavy on dependencies. You spend all your time dealing with endless problems related to defining simple geometries in the basic BlockMesh tool and then dealing with and compiling various solvers. It’s a research grade tool and not a polished piece of software. I won’t go into the various versions with incompatible differences. Getting the most basic stuff working is tedious and frustrating in both. After a few years of this masochism you just get on with it. However, when you are trying to guide students through the software for their final year project they spend about two thirds of their time just figuring out how to get something simple running and then never want to touch CFD ever again. Then there’s Blender where I can install it in seconds and set up a simple flow simulation with a straightforward workflow. Sure the result is not remotely accurate but that’s just the solver, there is no reason for the complexity of the workflow in Ansys or OpenFOAM other than it was designed by (Mechanical) Engineers who know nothing about good software design.
      - lasagna_coder 5y ago
        Thanks for the info! Heh, if Blender is your only go to alternative for ease of simulations and usability, then there's definitely a need for improvement.
        knolan 5y ago
        The speed and efficiency of Blender at creating geometry and timing animation is incredible. Doing mostly the same stuff in the aforementioned CFD tools is incredibly convoluted in comparison. It’s like trying to code in MS Word whereas Blender is like Vim.
knolan 5y ago
What’s this time you speak of?
- lasagna_coder 5y ago
  (new Date()).toLocaleString()
- ayewo 5y ago
  I guess the person you replied to is saying that they are interested in teaching you JS, in exchange for you teaching them mechanical engineering fundamentals, assuming your schedule can allow that.
  - knolan 5y ago
    I got that, I have very little free time and I’m in Ireland so I’ve no idea how time zones would permit this. My response was meant to be humorous.
    - lasagna_coder 5y ago
      as was mine (I'm in CEST timezone, fwiw)
  - jordanbeiber 5y ago
    And my guess is the reply means: ”there is no time, but I wish...”

I wish there were more opportunities for people to learn via “cross training” like this. I’d love to learn more about a number of engineering disciplines by helping people who know those fields, learn how to implement the algorithms and mathematical calculations they need in Python and simultaneously, learning more about those algorithms and calculations in order to best implement them and show how best to use Python for these tasks. But unfortunately such opportunities are few and far between outside academia and other learning oriented environments in my experience.

knolan 5y ago
I love this idea. The best way to get academics to buy in would be to have some clear outcome such as a publication or funding opportunity. There are a lot of clunky engineering tools that would benefit greatly from professional software development. Computational Fluid Dynamics software in particular is just plain awful in terms of usability for beginners.
- lasagna_coder 5y ago
  What are the names of some of this software that are a good example of in-use but are clunky/have awful usability? I ask because it sounds like an interesting area, and I would like to see for myself what you're working with.
  - knolan 5y ago
    On one hand there is Ansys. It’s a Frankenstein’s monster of a software suite for numerical simulation comprising several tools that have been acquired over the years. It’s frightfully expensive and there’s no incentive to make it more usable as there’s limited competition. Then there’s OpenFOAM which is a fantastic open source alternative. It’s entirely command line based but there are UI derivatives and cloud based versions (SimScale). However it’s a nightmare of disjointed code, difficult to build and heavy on dependencies. You spend all your time dealing with endless problems related to defining simple geometries in the basic BlockMesh tool and then dealing with and compiling various solvers. It’s a research grade tool and not a polished piece of software. I won’t go into the various versions with incompatible differences. Getting the most basic stuff working is tedious and frustrating in both. After a few years of this masochism you just get on with it. However, when you are trying to guide students through the software for their final year project they spend about two thirds of their time just figuring out how to get something simple running and then never want to touch CFD ever again. Then there’s Blender where I can install it in seconds and set up a simple flow simulation with a straightforward workflow. Sure the result is not remotely accurate but that’s just the solver, there is no reason for the complexity of the workflow in Ansys or OpenFOAM other than it was designed by (Mechanical) Engineers who know nothing about good software design.
    - lasagna_coder 5y ago
      Thanks for the info! Heh, if Blender is your only go to alternative for ease of simulations and usability, then there's definitely a need for improvement.
      - knolan 5y ago
        The speed and efficiency of Blender at creating geometry and timing animation is incredible. Doing mostly the same stuff in the aforementioned CFD tools is incredibly convoluted in comparison. It’s like trying to code in MS Word whereas Blender is like Vim.

knolan 5y ago

What’s this time you speak of?

lasagna_coder 5y ago
(new Date()).toLocaleString()
ayewo 5y ago
I guess the person you replied to is saying that they are interested in teaching you JS, in exchange for you teaching them mechanical engineering fundamentals, assuming your schedule can allow that.
- knolan 5y ago
  I got that, I have very little free time and I’m in Ireland so I’ve no idea how time zones would permit this. My response was meant to be humorous.
  - lasagna_coder 5y ago
    as was mine (I'm in CEST timezone, fwiw)
- jordanbeiber 5y ago
  And my guess is the reply means: ”there is no time, but I wish...”