Electrical Engineer in Instrumentation

Not only is "Instrumentation" a very, very broad topic, the required knowledge base is a moving target. One should pay attention to the extensive documentation most manufacturers in the field make available- from basic measurement concepts to device-specific promo literature.

I myself have a background in Mechanical Engineering. Over the many years I have been practicing, all too often I have become the instrumentation engineer by default...Not because I was any more knowledgeable than other participants, but more because I was willing to do the research to determine the appropriate approach (IF the appropriate approach existed! Sometimes, we had to come up with our own...)

"...Not because I was any more knowledgeable..." But you probably were.

It's easy for engineers to underestimate how much background knowledge they bring to solving problems.

I recently had discussions with an "experienced technician" calibrating load cells, He seemed to be doing things in an unnecessarily complex way and after talking for a while, I realised he didn't really understand the whole linear equation y = mx + c thing. Surprising for someone who uses it for a living.

Yet, one of the best places to start in getting a handle on the instrumentation issues is a discussion with the technicians...They may not understand why they do it the way they do it, but they can give you an idea of where you have to start. And there are a lot of good technicians out there that really do have a good handle on what they are doing...

To make it more specific I am currently an instrumentation engineer working on oil & gas projects (refineries, upgraders etc). The job requires a lot interpretation and working with process P&IDs.

In order to make decisions a lot of process background is required.

As you said that you take on the role of "instrument engineer" through research, that's exactly what I am doing currently.

It just bugs be a bit that my educational background plays not a big role in my job. This learning from the scratch just makes me question the value of my 4 years of Bachelors.

I have used very little of the materials I studied in University over the years, but there are esoteric aspects of the learning process that stay with you and are invaluable- the most important, in my opinion, being how to approach a problem, followed by how to ferret out the important information that is needed to resolve the problem. In other words, the most important thing you learned in University was the learning process itself...

No, that can't be true.

Having a deep understanding of the physics behind what you're measuring, being able to understand the statistics used, understanding the various sources of error, having the ability to design the electronics inside the sensor - all this means you know way more.

Of course, it always takes a few years to get local, specific experience in any field, but once you master this, your EE skills will enable you to be very employable.

For fun, gently question the tech's about what they do, often you'll get answers like "We always do it that way", " That's how its done" or "That's how I was shown how to do it" ("Why, do you think you can do better?") . As a EE you can understand instead.

Hi,

If you are electrical engineer then how come you accepted the job of instrumentation engineer. I assume it might have been due to the circumstances. You could not get reasonably good job as electrical engineer.Many a times in life we have to compromise with our career options due to circumstances. There is nothing wrong in it, at least you have a job, also you have learnt about instrumentation, there is no end in learning throughout the life. Yes you have feeling that what you learnt you could not put into practice, leave aside such feelings. In schools we are taught zoology, French and many other subjects but we engineers never use them.

My advice to you is that if your basic interest is in electrical engineering, as you are pursuing Masters then please continue the same and wait for the opportunity to get suitable job in electrical engineering in different organisation.

thanks for the response and advice.

You are partly right. Circumstances had a role to play. My first job was a mobility engineer with "Intel". I didn't much like the software programming job. I&C was my top priority at that time as the scope and demand is big universally. Besides at that time there didn't seem to be a specific degree being offered for this field in engineering. Electrical seemed to be the closest to this field.

So it was an intentional choice as well. I just didn't know that how much I will be lacking in educational background.

In schools we are taught zoology, French and many other subjects but we engineers never use them.

C'est ne pas vrai, mon vieux! How, without the knowledge of Zoology, can you tell a jackass from a dumbass?

The electrical engineering degree certainly is a good start. Now, like most jobs, comes actual field experience. (learn on the job)

A really good place to get instrument experience, but a terrible way to make a living, is to become what the oil field calls a "logging engineer". The logging engineer gets to sit in front of a processor and HMI in a truck stuck in 3 feet of mud on a well site and record the outputs of up to 10 different instruments being run in the borehole to measure density/resistivity/hydro-carbon stauration/porosity/angle of incline/and so on. The real catch here is that after a 6 week intensive course on the various instruments and the processor (class instructor "here is the density measuring instrument - you'll know one when you see it - next instrument...."), you are sent 200 miles from any help and expected to field repair these beasties on the spot. You learn instrumentation theory and repair quite rapidly, or get run off site by angry drilling foremen and company geologists, who expect results as soon as you arrive on site.

Nothing like hands on experience to teach you.

Thanks for the advice.

I came to a similar conclusion over the last 3 years. I need field experience to get a feel of this field.

Sadly the recent global recessions and local circumstances had not allowed me such an opportunity. But I am trying to land myself a field position to see some instruments working and how the Instruments and Controls work and behave.

Theory is available from manufacturer specs but a lot of times I just don't know what to spec for when I don't have a feel for the instruments and controls.

Regards

You have the EE training, and, quite frankly, time has proven that this training can get you into most engineering positions, and a lot of other technical positions as well. I mentioned the well logging job as an example of what can happen, not as a suggested job. The oil field companies realized that geologists were logically the best for this work, since it involved understanding rock formations, but they couldn't handle the electronics required to run instrumentation in very poor conditons. So, in my training class in 1978, there were 8 EE's, 1 ME, and 1 geologist. The geologist quit in less than 3 months. I'd never go back to that field, but it sure taught me a lot about how to make quick decisions. So, hang in there. With your knowledge, something will come along. Don't be afraid to try something very weird, as I did, cause it might work out good in the end. By the way, my current position for 22 years now is as a controls engineer designing machine control systems.

For those that made some comments about us ignorant technicians and those like ffej that ask us questions "for fun" please leave us alone .

I can do my job with my good for nothing two year degree education, and please when the plant is having problems and is about to shut itself down don't follow me around asking me questions while I am trying to trouble shoot go back to you office and do your y=mx+c thing. I do need EE's but don't call me I'll call you

Dear DigMas, i would like to know where u r from, because im in a similar situation as yours.

Being an EE (passed just last year), im too in an oil & gas industry, in a natural gas Purification Plant, learning instrumentation from scratch. I find instrumentation more closely related to Electronics enginering and Communication and some what Mechanical engineering since it deals mostly with 4-20mA, 0-24VDC, ICs, sensors, electronic cards, communication ports and buses (as in DCS, PLC cabinets), pressure, temperature, flow etc.

The thing which has helped me are the knowledge and experience of the TECHNICIANS, who in truth are the backbone which keep the system running without any problems. Before being an engineer, it is the TECHNICIAN which is ur real guru both in the beginning and afterwards in life.

Ive also downloaded tons of free ebooks from the internet regarding this field and the book that has probably helped me the most is lessons in instrumentation from Tony R. Kuphaldt. I love this writer and his books!

But still i have problems understanding the PID concept. Its so abstract, its seems to be like its just works in air and no practical. How can an integral and derivative equation that we studied in high school control the physical movement of the ctrl valve?? i know it does ofcourse, BUT HOW??

Though we studied a course of Control System in our senior year, the course was so theoritical and so dry, i didnt pay attention to it. and any way in the industry, in the maintenance section esp, it isnt of much use as yet. But i would love someone to tell how to understand this concept.

Regards

If you think in terms of a continuous plot of the signal you are monitoring, the derivative is the slope of the line at any one point in time- it tells you how the signal is changing at any given point in time. I.e., whether it is increasing or decreasing (that is, whether the sign of the derivative is negative or positive) and how quickly it is changing. The integral calculates the area under the line- this can tell you the long-term trend of the signal by comparing adjacent readings. The derivative will be noisy, and if you use only the derivative to control your process, you could have a lot of cycling and instability. Because the integral requires a longer time period to generate it's error, you could have the process wander off the control point too far before a correction is applied. By combining both the derivative and the integral into your control scheme, you get smoother control over your process.

PS- I also find the "All About Circuits" series from Tony R. Kuphaldt to be very, very helpful (especially for a non-EE!).

Exactly in the same situation. We did some controls courses but they were way too different with some nyquest and bode plots and stability analysis. Nothing too fancy here in instrumentation unless you are working for vendors and coming up with new products.

I have noticed I am learning from experience of others on daily basis, but progress in my own opinion is slow

btw I have been told that

Shinskey, F G (1967) Process-Control Systems - Application, Design, Adjustment

is THE book to get more info on I&C.

Regards

is it available on the internet?

Yeah that book too! SUPERB!

Mr Kuphaldt, wherever you are, Mmmuwwaaaah!!!