4 ms·
OP here. While I agree with what you say, I just don't know how this can be changed. It takes substantially more resources to do anything in mech. Sometimes you
by pwnna 13y ago
OP here. While I agree with what you say, I just don't know how this can be changed. It takes substantially more resources to do anything in mech. Sometimes you can't even lift the stuff you're working with without some other expensive machinery.
- angersock 13y agoQuite so. That said, if our tuition is north of a hundred grand (as mine was), one wonders that that expense cannot be borne by the institution. Even building simple structures and predicting their failure would be a worthwhile endeavor.
- pwnna 13y agoNow that I think about it... do we ever predict failures in software? Things just seem to break.. and we go in and fix it after. At least that is my impression.
- greendata 13y agoChemical engineer who now mostly works as a programmer checking in. This is 100% true.
- beambot 13y agoCoops, internships, design courses (like MIT 2.007), fabrication courses (How to build almost anything), undergrad research coursework, hacking w/ friends. It sounds like many of these schools do a poor job... which means it's even more important for motivated students to seek out opportunities outside the classroom. College is (largely) what you make of it, not what the default curriculum spoon feeds you.
- pwnna 13y agoI think you're oversimplifying the problem. When I do programming stuff, a large fraction of the time is spent debugging because my program crashed. I cannot afford my hardware project "crashing" as that may permanently damage a part and thereby pushing back when i can complete the project by a long time (gotta wait for manufacturing). Sometimes I simply don't have the extra money to buy the replacement.. and this is assuming I have the cash to make the first part after I designed it.. Edit: Now I know if you're motivated enough you could do this, but when all of these factors combine (time delay in getting parts, destroyed parts, lack of funds), you lose momentum fairly quickly. The alternative is that you could be right the first time by doing calculations, simulations, what have you. But that means you need a deep understanding of a lot of things to begin with, which is what you're trying to gain.
- beambot 13y agoI'm talking about how to get real hands-on experience during college... not with the difficulties of hardware. The grandparent mentioned how his curriculum offered poor training -- not all schools are so inept. Incidentally... I'm a hardware engineer. I built large mobile manipulating robots during gradschool, and I routinely build electronics projects at home. I'm well aware of "hardware problems" (and software bugs that cause real physical damage). To address your comment: learning how to do the fabrication and hardware debugging yourself is a key part of engineering physical goods. Digital fabrication is nice, but it's not the end-all be-all. For robot fabrication, you can't beat cardboard prototyping, 3D printers, laser cutters, drill press, and table saws. For circuit boards, I routinely use a hot-air rework, exacto knifes (to cut traces), and header breakouts for debugging. Nothing ever works the first time. That's why you learn how to design in a way that facilitates debugging. (All of this is so much more approachable with neighborhood hackerspaces / TechShops.) EDIT: I have no idea how students of "big" engineering go about getting hands-on experience. Building a bridge is a bit different from robotics and electronics. I presume it has many sub-specialties. I suppose this makes coops and internships even more important.
- pwnna 13y agoYeah, incidentally I also have no idea how people in my field are suppose to get hands on experience at home.