Self Taught Engineers

Someone that doesn't have the drive to learn on their own will not be a good engineer, regardless if they have a degree or not. If you go to school, get an engineering degree, then don't continually learn, practice, and build on that foundation, then you're stagnant. If you don't go through a degree program, but teach yourself and continually learn, you'll be a much better engineer than the former case in the long run.

One of the guys I worked with at my last job didn't have a degree, but was one of the best mechanicals I worked with. He did stress calcs, material and fatigue analysis, part design and drawing creation, FEAs (finite element analysis), etc.

HOW you learn something is just a minor detail. Having said that, going through a degree program does afford a good foundation, as it provides an enviroment that allows you to learn much more quickly than you would on your own; being surrounded by professors and peers, covering a large spectrum of information, building on previous coursework, etc.

"Number 9" wrote in news:UelKc.6670$Qu5.5797 @newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net:

To a large extent, I am one of those. I do not have an engineering degree from an institution, but I am classified as a Mechanical Engineer at my employer. I had two years of pre-engineering classes at a major university, but was young and dumb at the time and didn't like the big- school mentality. I have since been through the state adult vocational machinist program, including CNC, administrated through a local community college. After completion, I actually taught the night program for nearly three years at the school, before a major project at work left me with no time available for teaching. I have considerable amount of experience in hydraulics, pneumatics, mechanical systems, electricity/electronics, including PLC's. When I run upon a problem that I do not know the answer to, or do not know how to arrive at the answer, I do the research needed to learn how to achieve the answer. In the Production/Mechanical Engineering job I currently perform for a large international company for which machining production is highly automated and technologically advanced. I design tooling (both perishable and durable), fixturing and automation. Research, design and implement changes to machinery, processes and systems to increase reliability and throughput while reducing scrap. Identify, investigate, design and implement cost reduction projects. I do all of the part programming for the department. I do equipment layout, write work instructions, perform training of employees, review product proposals for manufacturing capability, troubleshoot machining and/or machine problems, etc. Of the projects our department does, which are numerous and range from redesigning a simple bracket to muli-million dollar new equipment/technology design and installations, normally, the project is proposed, researched, designed, built, and installed by the originating Engineer, with collaboration from fellow Engineers. By built and installed, I mean physically built and installed, within reason. To be an effective Engineer in our company, one needs the physical skills, along with the mental ability, to do design, fabrication, machining, and assembly. If we need automation, or even a machine to perform a task, we usually do not hire outside companies, we design, fabricate, and install it ourselves, in-house. Since our product requires specialized equipment, there are usually no off the shelf solutions available. We have a fully capable machine building department within the facility. You must also, [and personally, I think this is where non-degree'd Engineers excell more than traditionally schooled Engineers], be able to 'Think outside the box'. I know that is a cliche`, however, in todays manufacturing world, it is a very desireable, and highly sought skill. Everyone has the capability, you have to do it better/faster/cheaper than anyone else, while still maintaining a nearly perfect degree of quality. You cannot do that using the 'we've always done it this way' mentality. You have to change, and change rapidly. You have to embrace new methods and technologies, and you have to be able to come up with unique ways of producing widgets that are more cost effective, fool-proof, technologically advanced or preferrably, all the above. I feel traditionally schooled Engineers many times have a more difficult time thinking outside the box because of the schooling. They were taught to do it a certian way, or with a certian methodology. I know I run into it often with peers. This doesn't apply to everyone of course, but in my experiences, I have found it to be true.

From: Anthony snipped-for-privacy@hotmail.com

I'm not so sure that the ability to "think outside the box" is really a function whether or not your training came about in a school atmosphere or not. My experiences lead me to believe that it is probably more genetic than anything else. In other words, we all think in certain ways and everyone seems to solve problems differently. It's sort of like... people who are really good at teaching seem to just have the natural ability to teach. Others don't. Sure... I think a person can be trained to be a better teacher or a better problem solver ( "out of the box" thinking included in this category ). But... I think that we are inherently predisposed to a certain way of solving things.

Those who make some of the more "hard to believe scientific and engineering discoveries" are probably among the ones who think out of the box more often. Of course... part of having such an ability is having the confidence in ones self to express ones thoughts. I have no doubt that some good thinkers out there probably do very little compared to what they are capable of simply because they were "shot down" too harshly in the past for some of their ideas. Of course, no doubt this has happened in school atmosphere's more than we would like. That "this is the way we've always done it" way of thinking can absolutely get in the way at times.

I think that it would be interesting to take a fair sized group of engineers... especially the ones who like to stick rigidly to "traditional methods"... and have them spend a few weeks of pure academic problem solving. Only, not typical engineering problems. I'm talking about puzzles and riddles and visualization problems that don't require an engineering degree but do require you to think in a way that is contrary to everyday wisdom. I believe that practice at learning to "think out of the box" on these types of problems would likely have a positive effect on a persons abilities to solve some of those engineering problems where traditional methods just aren't sufficient.

Dan :-)

Yes I do believe you. I have always wanted to do engineering school, but I need to get started now. I was wondering what are some good books to start with. I'm currently waiting to enter Southern Polytechnic

Wow, it seems you were able to go a very long way with little formal school, and a lot of self teaching... That helps my motivation, thanks

Good Point... I think it varies from individual to individual, with the person that does not learn on his/her own to be the individual that has the most difficulty thinking 'out of the box' or realising, that there has never ever been a box in the first place.

engineering

If that's Southern Polytechnic in Marietta, Georgia then you have chosen well. You'll learn a lot in terms of practical application that graduates from Georgia Tech will have to learn on the job. Whereas they'll have more theory background and may eventually surpass you in the same field, you'll be able to hit the ground running.

The same can be said perhaps to a greater degree IN SOME WAYS to on-the-job training as to training at a school like Southern Tech, but OJT takes longer, requires more self-discipline and also requires you to move around more jobwise to gain the kind of experience you need. I'm self-taught pretty much, and although I have great confidence in myself and what I can accomplish, I do know that there are areas where I would have been better off to have gotten my training in school. Structural analysis, for example. Thermodynamics and fluid dynamics for two others. Microprocesser programming for still another. You can learn all that without help if you are VERY motivated, but you'll find that the normal pressures of living every day after you've taken a job will keep you quite occupied. It takes a lot of discipline to overcome that.

I was fortunate in my choice of jobs to be able to rub elbows with some people who could teach me a lot, and with having the freedom to try things I hadn't tried before. You may not be so fortunate. Go to school. But co-op as much as possible. You'll find that some people will go out of their way to share their knowledge with a co-op that they won't bother to do with a graduated engineer. They'll be more forgiving with mistakes also.

Mark 'Sporky' Stapleton Watermark Design, LLC

I know several, most of them quite talented.

One observation though, that I've heard lots of times in this context, including from my self-taught friends. There are exceptions, but, for the general case---

ignoring all question of talent, and of the work you can perform, if you want to get paid like an engineer you have to have the piece of paper.

It's a little more than a "piece of paper".

It's hard for me to believe that a person can "pick up" what is taught in engineering school. The people who seem to believe that are the people who have never been. Four intense years of studying and testing and instruction by qualified professors is hardly comparable to buying some books and reading them. Do these self-taught engineers actually have knowledge of kinematics, thermofluid mechanics, turbomachinery, vibrational mechanics, heat transfer, advanced thermodynamics, chemistry, mathematical control theory, physics, dynamics, metallurgy, statics, calculus (I, II & III), graphical analysis, differential equations, machine design, matrix algebra, material mechanics, descriptive geometry, circuit theory, electronics and a score of other technical classes and labs? And what about English, technical writing, political science, history and other humanities?

It's one thing to read some books and work some problems and another entirely to be taught by a battery of scientists and tested on your knowledge for four or five long, grueling years. I am very skeptical about anyone that claims to have acquired such technical knowledge on their own (and worked 40 hours a week besides!). I don't think I'd let a doctor operate on me with such credentials, would you?

I agree that an engineering student, fresh out of college, with no real-world experience isn't worth much for many years, but he will eventually obtain the experience and the hard-knocks, just like anyone else. You will never similarly glean all the mathematics and technical knowledge passively.

Don

their knowledge tends to be more specialized (for instance--solid grounding in kinematics,dynamics, and vibration but little or no thermodynamics or heat transfer background), but in their area of specialty some of the self-taught guys I know are at least as good as most degreed engineers.

bear in mind that I'm talking about smart, motivated folks with 10+ years of experience--not exactly "buying some books and reading them". And as for the math-- it's entirely possible to teach yourself advanced mathematics if you're sufficiently motivated, and I know people to prove it. "Self taught" is not the same thing as learning passively.

PS--as they say, when you get right down to it, not even rocket science is rocket science. The fact that you wouldn't want a self taught doctor operating on you is neither here nor there.

Well, I didn't mean to say that "self-teaching" is passive. I was just comparing it to experience, which is pretty much passive.

Ah, but it is! How about non-engineers designing bridges or skyscrapers or other things that your life depends on?

Don

Thanks, it is Polytechnic in Marietta...

Very true, payment is more of a secondary/tertiary goal, yet still of great significance.

Very good observation, thanks

Good point, seems that education is still worth pursuing.

message

"Number 9" wrote in news:9ozKc.7354$ snipped-for-privacy@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net:

Yes, however, to prepare you for reality..it was a long, long, very difficult road to where I am now. I had to prove what I could do much more thoroughly, and many times over, compared to what someone with a degree would have had to do. Had I stayed in school, I would have been in a position similar to this years before, and my earnings potential would be much better. Unfortunately, even though I do the job, get excellent reviews, and am the person whom other Engineers in my dept ask questions most often, I am still somewhat penalized financially because of my lack of a degree. I definately suggest that younger folks not do like I've done, and turn down the opportunity to get the degree. For now, it would be virtually impossible to get my degree. I have two teenage children for whom college will start all too soon. Their welfare and education comes before mine. I tenatively plan on starting back to school after they have graduated.

For now, I follow the the philosophy I have used all these years:

Learn and fully understand at least one thing, no matter how small or seemingly insignificant every single day, without fail.

"Michael" wrote in news:ZIQKc.78969$ snipped-for-privacy@twister.nyroc.rr.com:

I will wholeheartedly agree. It costs me probably in the neighborhood of $20k a year, with my experience, abilities and track record figured in.

I think you gentlemen are forgetting one very important fact. In most (if not all) states, to be an

*engineer* you must have a license - a registered professional engineer - a PE. To design a bridge or other public construction project requires the seal of a PE. To engineer a building you must be a licensed architect. To be a surveyor you must be a licensed surveyor. Some states accept self taught engineers IF they meet the requirements and pass the examinations (Pennsylvania) Other states require the engineering degree as one of the qualification requirements (Ohio).

Many states do NOT accept the title of engineer without that license regardless of what an employer may dictate. You may recall several states were after Microsoft for calling their computer technical people "Software Engineers". (I don't know what resulted with the law suit.)

As one of those non-degreed engineers, my decision to take the examination was based on the fact that I had to show several graduate engineers how to calculate and/or design various mechanical devices. I felt that if I could do the work, I would accept the responsibility and the pay. I was the Chief Engineer of one company. Using data from the National Society of Professional Engineers, my salary was above average. I state this to show that it is up to the individual and his/her abilities to determine how far they may advance in their career. I know of other non-degreed engineers who have advanced more than I had. Look at the history of engineering and see how many great inventors were not college graduates.

Today, the want ads that I read all specify "graduate engineers only". If you want the job, get the degree whether you need it or not. They won't talk to you if you don't have that degree. If you get that degree, please learn your trade. Don't let some under paid technician do your work for you.

I hope that I have contributed to the OP quest for an answer.

Jim Y (retired PE)