Speaking of Precision

Excellent and thought provoking post.
At a personal level I find I have an ambivalent attitude to powertools in the making of bows, yet I've just bought a linisher (cheapo one that needed som tweaking).
I think you need at least some feel for the properties of the material you are using, how you best acheive that is debatable.
I'd say that making something for your own use is possibly the best way, you'll soon find out if it's too weak, too heavy or the surface finish is wrong.
In the field of bow making there people crafting bows using stone tools just for the heck of it, but obviously they are not the volume manufacturers.
Arguably the Olympic archery would have been more interesting if each competitor had made their own bow in that way!
Del

(BTW. Short answer to what we are trying to acheive..
Ability and understanding)

Some thoughts:

1. I have some mixed feelings about training, but the root of the problem is not so much a shortfall of training in the machining industry as much as so much of the work has gone off shore where labor costs are almost a factor of ten cheaper for so long now that it has dried up our skilled labor pool.

2. Opening a cardboard box, venting a plastic liner, and microwaving for the instructed length of time is not cooking! Cooking requires planning the meal, washing, chopping, and preparing the vegetables/meats, seasoning, sauces, baking/frying/boiling, presentation, serving, and getting the kids to wash the dishes.

Where your analogy failed is in the details. We do not expect machinists to mine iron ore, smelt it down, and roll ingots of hot metal any more than we expect cooks to rub two sticks together.

However, we do expect an intimate understanding of reading and comprehending prints, basic material science, feeds and speeds, use of measurement tools, and the order things are done. This is what the employers want and it is what they need.

This is a far cry from plugging in some thumb drive with a MasterCam document into a 5-axis CNC machine and pressing the big green button - that is microwaving.

A truly valuable machinist will not only know how to press the big green button, but will be able to understand the the details of prints, MasterCam programming and debugging, material properties, and a host of other minutia that make up the whole process as well as how to resolve problems and exceptions.

Having a basic understanding of manual machining not only gives the student an understanding of what the machine is doing, but an appreciation of what automation will do. If anything, today's machinist not only needs the basics of hands on machining, but the knowledge of the new world of automated machining if they really want to be worth their salt.

In the end it may be the shortage is more about the lack of higher skilled machinists as all the low level, button pushing, jobs have gone off shore.

Furthermore, the last two decades saw such a high rate of attrition of machining jobs due to outsourcing off shore that it seriously depleted the industry of skilled labor as those individuals went into new vocations. Now that the work is coming back there is no pool to draw from for labor and there is no sexiness to factory work (everyone wants to be the chief not the indian).

To fill those vacancies we need to first encourage potential students to enroll into the vocation, train them to be highly skilled in the field (not just button mashers), and let the private sector pay them for the programming between their ears.

Fair enough. A thoughtful reply. My point remains however, that the hands on manual Methods need mot be the entry into the trade, and might be better if presented after the prospect has demonstrated some competency in Cnc. The local community college lists hundreds of open machining jobs, but has only half filled machining classes, because they insist in starting the old style way on koresn war era equipment. Meanwhile their food service classes are oversubscribed and competitive, and using the latest in technologies. I see a pattern. Thanks. Milo

Do you really think that students refuse to take a machining class because they will have to use a manual machine?

I am thinking it is a deeper problem where the vocation no longer has the appeal it did 20 or so years ago.

You may have an argument as to how much time is spent learning manual versus CNC, but unless there is a positive stigma to the trade there will always be a shortage of candidates in the field.

Good machinists need strong math skills, which may be one reason for students selecting other fields. If you have those skills or a desire for the math and physics required, those students may decide that other vocations that use those skills are simply more appealing.

What I'm seeing these days are university trained 'professionals' taking community college courses in the so-called 'mundane' professions. I find it even more amazing how these same students have the math skills but absolutely no idea of the applied and practical utility.

Having worked with engineers with no practical abilities. And by practical some people would call common sense.

It's mainly the attitude, they do not see the benefits and that its a waste their time and resources. In an OEM environment this is detrimental to project success.

They don't know what they don't know, so they can't see the benefits. So how do they communicate, with the exception of, "Just make it happen".

If anything, this has to come from the top down.

Yes. See it at most schools offering a choice of programs. It could be a stigma of the trade. But it seems to me it is also a distinct possibility that there is a stigma to the old school training.

I agree with Anonymous Hero and will add that the really well trained machinist can also envision the correct "set up" that is needed to hold the parts if necessary, AND can produce the fixture if it does not exist! When I taught "Programming for Technicians" I was teaching at the binary code level and introducing students into the inner workings of computers...not really needed today as most computers today are of the "PC" variety and can be readily replaced rather than repaired, and programming is certainly not as common at the "machine code" level. So if you need a microwave operator or a "tool maker" you will have very different training needs.

At some institutions, to teach a class in project management, you have to describe the procedures to accomplish a task.

This task could be as simple as changing a bicycle tire. You would be surprised at how many assumptions were taken to do this tasks.

Training is no different.

but they cannot close their eyes and "see" the loads flowing through the structure.

aka "The Knack". They don't have it.

What's worrying me is the future of all this automation. Who is going to automate the automatons? Can machines invent or create or improve on themselves? Can a machine cuss itself out for not seeing the solution sooner? Is this the last era of anything really new?

Automation was born of smart, skillful folk wanting to unburden themselves from repetition so they could have more time to enjoy their craft. A little like training your competitors in some ways.

What have we done??!!! Automated ourselves into a hole.

You don't have to know how to operate a manual machine tool to run a CNC machining center any more than to know how to shift gears to drive an automatic car. We don't have to know how to prepare food from scratch when fast and convenience foods are available. We can miss the days of old, but it won't get you anywhere today. Sure there are niche markets, but for the most part, it is gone. Machining skills are kept alive by retired machinists and hobbyists. The same is true of food. There are those who appreciate and enjoy cooking, but they are few in numbers. It may be questioned whether technology and progress has made us dumber rather than smarter.

As a button masher who do you get to fix a problem when something goes wrong with your CNC machine's operation?

Is that person going to waste my supervisor's time for every exception he runs into because all he knows how to do is push the RUN button?

Listening to what the employers are looking for they want more than a monkey at the machine and they seem willing to pay for it.

So, you have two choices here; either sell them on the idea that a monkey is all they need or provide candidates with the skill sets the employers are actually looking for.

What the employers don't want is when they hire what is past off as a skilled machinist and get a monkey.

All because the monkey realizes after getting laid off at the union plant and been laid off for a year and a half, with the only skill that consists of 20 years of pressing cycle start, he has no real world skillset.

The machine operator requires only a minimum amount of training to operate the machine. Part of the diagnostics is built into the machine that is accessible to the button masher, which is usually composed of more buttons. If after pushing all the buttons, the problem hasn't been resolved, then is the time to call the supervisor, because further repair of the machine is beyond his level of understanding. As they say in government circles, "it's above your pay grade" meaning, the more education you have, the more you are given to learn; the lowest education level being reserved for the button mashers, but off course you already knew that.

If I were hiring, and we are not, I would not want a simple button pusher. I need problem solvers and self starters.

I have heard of simple button mashers taking upon themselves to try to fix a problem, only to do real damage to the machine, like over-riding stops or creating jambs.

I used a lathe in secondary school, I have a lathe and a mill at home and I play with them. I am not a toolmaker although I have worked with some, I could not easily reproduce items to drawings and tolerance without significant practice but I can and do make stuff. One of my lathes is a treadle ~1917 Drummond. I like creating, but my paying job involves Excel all the time carrying out a boring but required task. I write this so you can see where I am coming from.

BUT the future of engineering is not about removing material by turning milling or shaping, it is about adding material by printing (for example). 3D printing and the thinking processes it requires will produce different designs which are impossible to reproduce with old skills. There will always be a call for the old ways but in the same way that as you progress in physics you have to unlearn the Bohr model so they will have to unlearn these skills. We don't start out teaching electronics by introducing valves. There are many other modern processes I am unaware of, teach these and how to work with them from day one. The sharpest tools in the box will be able to manage to learn the old ways if they want, it was a delight reading about the refurbishment of those hydro power stations on this site but that is a niche, mass production using the latest technology is the future, train for it or lose out to the competition.

I feel there are two types of students today; those who are motivated and go on to be engineers, doctors, lawyers or millionaires, and those who look for the easy way and end up working for McDonalds or in jobs they hate. The way to reverse the trend toward nothing is through education. It's up to the schools to motivate. Traditional machine shop classes did serve a purpose. Many kids would choose machine shop because it appeared to be a nice and easy, laid back course with no homework. Many, after taking the course found that they liked working a machine tool. They found that turning a hunk of metal into a beautiful and smooth finished piece was to their liking and would go on in the metalworking trades. I really haven't met or heard of any long time retired machinists who didn't enjoy what they did and still carry on as a hobby. Its up to the school to set the direction for students to follow. The rest is up to them.