Arka, first you need to understand the real difference between engineers and mechanics before you earn the right to call engineers whatever you want.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ex670c I was talking about "Scientific Engineering". |
First let's break down the terms as it applies here. Science is basically the study of how things are, it is about properties of materials, their behavior under different kinds of conditions like temperature, velocity, stress, etc. Engineering is about applying that scientific knowledge to design useful items like component of the car or in this case Thar.
What do I know about creating products? I have been creating products for 2 decades, I have co-founded a company that creates products, I make my living through it and employ quite a few people through it. Now don't crib about it saying mine is software, this is automobile, etc. When it comes to product design, the process is very similar, only automobile designers have to jump through lot more regulatory and statutory hoops than I do.
Any real engineering work to create a product is based on scientific knowledge. A mechanical/automobile engineer has to understand force, stress, momentum, properties of materials, etc., before designing any component that goes into the automobile. Trust me, some of the very competent guys who design car are not even interested in cars. They don't have to be. I have a close friend who has designed parts for cars of GM and Ford in Detroit, but he still drives his old Indica since 7-8 years. He is not at all interested in cars. Yet, he can design a FFRA better than any expert mechanic. You just have to tell him the intended usage or the abuse it needs to take. This is how real engineering happens.
However, there is another category of product creators. These are people who build a product based on empirical knowledge.
Quote:
Originally Posted by http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_empirical_knowledge
Emperical knowledge come from observation only. You don't know why or have any idea of why reaction A follows situation B but you have seen it happen so many times that you KNOW that is what is going to happen.
People knew that things fell down long before there was a theory of gravitation. Such knowledge was emperical. Emperical knowledge not only comes from observation but also by testing. |
People who build products out of empirical knowledge are not engineers. They are artisans. When a mechanic builds a Jeep, he put it together by using his lifelong observation of how an automobile works. He has no scientific knowledge of why it works the way it works. If his design fails, he has no understanding of why it failed. Generally, the artisans over-design (some call it overengineer, but I feel it is a wrong term) to be on the safer side. If 4mm plate will do, they will make it 6mm just to be sure. An engineer on the other hand can exactly calculate the thickness required for the plate, and then will run 100s of computer simulation to test the designed plate width, and then can even do real-time destructive test to confirm the failure point.
To give you an example, about 100 years back when first skyscrapers were being built, the engineers then didn't have enough scientific knowledge to exactly calculate the stress induced by the massive self weight of the structure, stress induced by the wind, etc. Therefore they decided to take a leaf out of artisan's rulebook, and built the skyscrapers with a load factor of 8-10 times. It drastically increased the construction cost, but they didn't have any choice. However, a few decades later, all that changed thanks to number crunching powers of computers. When they built the Twin Towers of the World Trade center, they could exactly calculate the required strength for the structure and gave lot less load factor, may be within 2 times. That is why it collapsed when subjected to extreme stress of jet fuel burning its core structure, it was not designed for that. The artisan over-designed building with 8-10 load factor could have easily survived that attack. That doesn't mean artisans are better designers than engineers.
So far we discussed the difference between the product creators. Now let's consider the product design process, for a car or a Jeep.
Real engineering is a very expensive affair, it needs highly qualified professionals doing R&D for years before a new car is created. That means this activity can be taken up only by a major car manufacturer. Meanwhile the mechanic built car/Jeep can be created in any street-side workshop on a small budget.
How do they start-off or kick-off a design project?
Artisan (mechanic): A customer asks for a Jeep with X, Y, Z modifications. He may even bring in the base Jeep from army auction or wherever in whatever shape. The mechanic will make an estimate of cost and time, and if the customer agrees, the work will start. Since the mechanic has done this many times, he will follow his normal building process. If the modification involves some unfamiliar things, then he might try to do some innovation based on his practical knowledge. He has no regulatory and statutory rules to follow, except for some rules of thumb of his craft.
R&D Engineer: For a R&D Engineer, the customer happens to be the marketing department. The concept of a product is generally developed by the marketing people based on market survey and their understanding of demand and supply of a product in a market. This is very complex analysis, and involves huge gamble of very high stakes. What segment of the market should they address, urban, rural, men, women, youths, kids, senior citizens, corporate, individuals, tourists, etc. How should they position themselves in the chosen segment, premium product, VFM product, niche product, el-cheapo product, etc. After massive brain-storming, they finally pick a segment and their positioning, and then decide on how to target them, what vehicle can be sold to them. This is just one example of how it is done. They could do it in other ways too. They could decide the vehicle first and then wonder about whom to target. There are no hard and fast rule about that.
Next they will start making forecasts on how much they can sell at what cost. They make these forecast based on the demand/supply curves for that market. This is where they will start involving people from departments like R&D, production, accounts, delivery, etc. The R&D guys tell what is possible and what is not possible. Production guys will tell how much effort it takes to manufacture and how much they can manufacture. The accounts guys will tell how much it will cost to make them, etc, etc. For example, the R&D guy may be able to create a fantastic product, which the production guy can manufacture 500 a month, and the accountant calculates the unit cost to be 8L. Meanwhile the marketing guy is hoping to sell 1000 per month for 7L price, with a per unit profit of 2L. His demand curves says that only 100 units will be sold at 10L price (8L unit cost + 2L profit), then what is he going to do with remaining 400 units per month.
So he needs a 5L unit cost that can be manufactured at the rate of 1000 per month. So he will tell the R&D guy to reduce the cost by lowering the specifications and by using common parts across the products. That will also reduce production cost and time due to economy of scale. The marketing department has the absolute veto power over all other departments. That means Behram can't put a FFRA or Diff lock into Thar unless the demand curve on the excel sheet agrees with the extra cost. Marketing guys will give a broad outline of the product along with segment/positioning info and expect it to be done within a given unit cost. It is up to the R&D engineer to design the best possible combo keeping all the parameters to be satisfied. In addition to this, the R&D engineer is also expected to adhere to CMVR regulations. One can short change the end customer, but one can't short-change the CMVR rules.
Let's imagine a hypothetical conversation:
Behram: Let's put FFRA on Thar, it will cost so much extra.
Marketing boss: I don't know what FFRA stands for, is it necessary for majority of the customers we are targeting?
Behram: Umm, no. About 1% of the Thar customers would badly need it, it won't matter for the rest, they can manage with SFRA at cheaper cost.
Marketing boss: Ok, then forget those 1% chaps, let's go with SFRA. One less par number to deal with.
This is how a product is developed in a company. Behram or Spike surely know the advantage of FFRA. It is the marketing department that decides SFRA is good enough for the segment they are targeting.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ex670c I have every right to call engineers what I want; with in good reason as I have stated in my previous post. |
Therefore, you really have no cause to call engineers whatever you want, they certainly don't deserve the bricks and rotten eggs you have been throwing at them.
However, next time you meet Arif, don't hold back.