Design Engineers?

It is definitely good to get cross-talk among these groups. Not every theoretically bright idea works out in the field. But this is bidirectional; not every field fix meets the needs of theory, either.

"... in all fields ..." - I'll second that.

Number of screw-ups I've seen from design guys not knowing what happens on the shop floor or on site (and vice versa in all permutations) suggests that it would be good to find some way that everyone in the organization should have at least a little experience of what happens in the other sectors.

How did this thread get in here? I started it in General! Stealth moderation again!

One "designer" I worked with had the initials BW, he soon got christened Burn & Weld!

Good Morning Tony,

You started with your ego but you have to listen to people have more knowledge and experience what's happening with new employees without many things, mostly knowledge and experience. Accept that people around you have brain and can think, and being logical by directing newbies to do what they already did many years earlier.

We are here to learn. Never forget and accept that other think differently, Gil.

Let's just say that I will never buy a product from a company who allows newbies to do design work without any experience in operations, maintenance and construction. They will always do what seems great on paper and esthetically pleasing but downright impractical in actual field application.

like ford with its better way.

I didn't see anything above to suggest that manufacturing need have the least idea of what goes into design, worse still, nothing to the effect that field and construction "engineers" should actually have any engineering training; they both feel very free to criticize the engineers, generally without having a clue as to the restraints on design.

If you think this is abrupt, I took my cue from the previous posts in the thread.

If you think this is abrupt, I took my cue from the previous posts in the thread.

Didn't the first post, Tornado's, suggest that bidirectional communication is good?

Many design engineers can't do this easily because manufacturing is located on the other side of the globe.

Design engineers that have easy access to the manufacturing area are in an ideal position. They should take any and all appropriate opportunities to learn about manufacturing processes & procedures and directly observe/interact with manufacturing personnel.

Savvy design engineers that take advantage of this opportunity will gain valuable insight on how to improve current and future designs for the specific manufacturing process. This is usually a win-win-win (management-designers-builders) situation for everyone as it will improve costs, quality, and morale.

Some ancient Greek literature i was reading up on, but it rings true if you substitute architect with engineer. 1. The architect should be equipped with knowledge of many branches of study and varied kinds of learning, for it is by his judgement that all work done by the other arts is put to test. This knowledge is the child of practice and theory. Practice is the continuous and regular exercise of employment where manual work is done with any necessary material according to the design of a drawing. Theory, on the other hand, is the ability to demonstrate and explain the productions of dexterity on the principles of proportion. 2. It follows, therefore, that architects who have aimed at acquiring manual skill without scholarship have never been able to reach a position of authority to correspond to their pains, while those who relied only upon theories and scholarship were obviously hunting the shadow, not the substance. But those who have a thorough knowledge of both, like men armed at all points, have the sooner attained their object and carried authority with them.

Does anyone know of any good sources/guidelines for creating field failure reports (mainly for electronic assemblies). We've tried all sorts of ways to get relevant information from the guys in the field, and, failed miserably. The problem is that if the questions are too "open" then the responses are just the equivalent of "it doesn't work", and, if you could create a more closed question then chances are you would have already predicted the failure mode and designed in the fix.

(I remember one quality guy who included a question with the rider "if cause unknown state symptom": sure enough he got loads of forms back in which the field engineer had written "symptom")

If you find one, I'd love to see a copy!

P: number four engine missing

S: number four engine found under starboard wing after brief search

P: auto-land giving rough landings

S: auto-land not fitted to this aircraft

Not only "Newbys" should do this. The old saying about "the more you know, the more you know you don't know" Is extremely valid. The best way to improve something you have designed is to watch someone make it. Two things often happen. You see them doing something better than you told them to do, or you see them doing things the way they interpret your instructions, which may not be anything close to what you meant them to do. You may have written things technically correct, but if is easy to misinterpret it, it needs to be rewritten.

Personal experience for both examples.

A very good and necessary training step. When I was at Honda R&D we spent a week on the production line installing parts. Then after you designed your first part, you were the first person to assemble it into the prototype car to make sure you understand what had to happen. Although more time with maintenance techs on car repair would have been ideal. I still spend as much time as I can on the floor with production and maintenance as there are a lot of good ideas just waiting.

Hi Tony,

Be realistic. Accept that you have to learn what and how to do. Put a few bricks with some cement mix. See and understand what's happening on the field, and later you can design your building.

When I started in the lab, I was cleaning beakers and other dirty things before I mixed two chemicals in one clean beaker. I survived but most importantly, I learned what and how to do things in the lab.

Make your hands dirty first and do your best on those experiences, Gil.

The manager is right. You cannot be a good designer if you do not know problems of building or development or related to production

A problem I had a few years back involved the layers of bureaucracy between design engineers and the factory floor. I was a production shift supervisor, and we were trying to run a process according to specs developed by off-site design engineers. We knew we had to slow the line down, but the process engineers and plant manager did not have the authority to do this. After a few fires, the big boys in Germany shut us down until the problem was resolved. The design engineer in charge was sent to the factory and solved the problem in a day because he had the authority to slow the line down. Too often engineers hands are tied by the corporate pecking order because there are so many people involved who want the brownie points that rightfully should belong to the problem solvers.