Quote:
Originally Posted by SS-Traveller Interesting direction this thread is taking!
So a V8 pushrod may be *outdated* because it is complicated, fiddly to adjust properly and not perfect in their long-term performance; yet, it may be *modern* (or perhaps it'd be safer to call it *contemporary* ??) because they do have fail-safe performance over extended periods of use (though not in perfect tune), and would be preferred for rugged / heavy-duty applications over camless valves because of the *unproven* nature of this newer (more modern!) tech.
Therefore, is COMPLEX = MODERN? Or is it any of the following? - SIMPLE = MODERN (rephrased: Less moving parts = Modern)
- SIMPLE = OUTDATED (Complicated construction is a spin-off of technology, to quote vina - no offence here, vina! )
- RELIABLE = MODERN (Is the national 1.3L Multijet engine the epitome of modernity?)
- NEW TECH = MODERN (Ok, this one is obvious!)
- EXTREMELY FUEL-EFFICIENT = MODERN (The Indica 1.4L diesel with 25 km/l ought to be the most modern engine in India - but is it?)
- HIGHER POWER OUTPUT PER CC = MODERN (The pushrod V8 can do that too, so is it modern?)
- MODERN = FAILSAFE (The DSG gearbox is obviously not *modern* by this parameter!)
- EXPENSIVE = MODERN
- HITHERTO UNKNOWN MATERIALS = MODERN
Let the thoughts continue! |
You have taken it in the direction where you are implicitly asking the question - define modern.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sutripta How about
MEETS THE IMPORTANT MAINSTREAM REQUIREMENTS OF THE DAY = MODERN
Regards
Sutripta |
Sutripta sir has given a definition that most design engineers would agree with, but many people on the street may not.
By linguitic definitions, modern=new. Anything old is not modern. However that is not exactly how people understand it, though people's understanding does boil down to this over the longs run.
For example in semiconductors, anyone will tell you that 20nm is more modern than 28nm, which was more modern that 40nm, and so on. However "modern" industrial ICs do not even touch these nodes - the reliability is not up to the mark usually.
Still there are "modern" circuit techniques that can make a 40nm chip as reliable as a 130nm.
My point in my earlier post was that while in case of techniques and tools available it is much easier to see what is "modern" aka new, in case of products or systems (e.g. engine) which are formed by trading off several requirements (usually including cost) and using multiple techniques it is hard to say whether one overall product is more modern than another in the aggregate.
Another point I was trying to make was that while in general public perception modern=better, that may not be so (depends on the definition of "better" of course) even by most general definitions.
A third point I was trying to make was that a superior designer may be able to use older techniques (rather than than the most modern ones) and still obtain a products that is better overall than a rivals designer's product which does use more modern techniques but still falls short overall, as defined by the requirements of the product - this happens so often in industry it shouldn't be news.
In one of the largest (and generally regarded as one of the best) semiconductor companies on one chip designers were dealing with a problem - there was a clock input and the clock was getting too much jitter (a kind of noise for clock signals) due to power supply noise problems. A whole design team studied the problem and tried to form some compensators (very complex circuits, and had they done it it would unquestionably be "modern"), till another designer from a different team attended one of the meetings and said "why are you using a single-ended input, why don't you make a differential input clock". Now the technique he was talking about is a decades old technique, and that did the job pretty well at almost no cost - basically the modern design being attempted was incredibly stupid. But that happens.
In another product that came recently in the market (I can't disclose more) the "innovators" decided to change the signaling in a way nobody else does, because it causes severe EMI problems. They ended up with a "modern" system which is now giving major headaches.