Author Topic: Oh, I finally get it why we don't get it..............  (Read 2346 times)

Gen. Dreedle

  • Commander, Alabama wing, Confederate Air Farce
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
    • View Profile
At least when it comes to all this insistence on DBTs, and all that stuff. And why our "anecdotal evidence" is just anecdotal, and not really evidence, etc.

(This may belong over in the Blowtorch schematics thread, but since it gives me more chances to type Blowtorch schematics, which is the raison d'etre for this dump.)


Some of you may be following the infamous Blowhard thread, over at The Pub. Finally, after wasting countless hours, trying to figure out what their damn problem is, I have finally figured out it is our damn problem.

Case in point. A "buddy" posted this:

I'm somewhat staggered at the idea of an engineer who can't do differential equations, complex variables (and contour integration), and transforms. That certainly doesn't describe any engineer who ever worked for me.

Yeah, guess I am not a real engineer. I never had to do any of that, ever, at any job, at any time. But, I never did R & D. Never claimed I did. (And no, you are not going to suck me into revealing what I did, and where I did it.)

So...........using a Smith Chart, because it did not require any LDEs means I was not a real engineer. So, placing a stub, on a microstrip, to act as a........well, it depended on where you were putting it, and why, and how long it was (1/4 wavelength..........1/2 wavelength.........), but you had to understand something about how it all worked. The technicians didn't understand, which is why they were techs, and guys like me were engineers. But, according to my "buddy", I must have only been a highly-glorified (and possibly over-educated) technician.

Of course, back then..............there were no computer programs to do all that for you. You had to get your master Smith Chart out, make a Zerox copy, and start tracing circular lines, until you reached the right point on the curve. Sorta required knowledge of algebra, since there were complex numbers involved. And, maybe, some calculations to make sure you did not design network that was too high in Q. But, certainly not anything requiring what my "buddy" thinks real engineers do.

So.............if we have such a radical disconnect, as to what makes a real engineer, is it any wonder why they condescendingly look down upon us that don't give a rat's rear-end if the feedback goes round and round? Only if low- or high-feedback designs sound best, to us. And that is the key: how it sounds, and how it sounds to us. Don't care if it sounds good to you, as I am not a real engineer, so I am obviously incapable of designing anything good. So, who cares how it sounds? They don't, or at least, they shouldn't. Not building it for them. Nope, building it for me. And only my opinion counts.

So there.

Ditto for the stuff they build. If they are impressed that it measures really well, then fine. Good for you. Just don't try to tell me that by extension it has to sound good, because I know there is more to it than just that.

No, I don't know what "that" is. Never claimed I did. And if I did, we all know you would not believe me, because I won't be able to produce a bunch of LDEs to explain why that is so.

No, I just found out, to my ears, low or zero global feedback stuff sounds better. Some other folks obviously agreed, as I was able to make a living at it, once upon a time. (And before you suggest they got wise, which is why I no longer can, it has nothing to do with that. And, no, I am not going to spill the beans on that. You can guess it is because I am getting old, and it is too hard, and if that helps you to sleep at night, then that is what you should believe.)

No, I don't know why it sounds better. Never said I did. Never made any bogus claims as to why, because I do not know.

Of course, I don't know...............I'm not a real engineer! Haven't you been paying attention to what I writing? Oy vey...........
"Major Danby, sir."
"Danby. D-A-N-B-Y."
"Take him out and shoot him."
"I said take him out and shoot him. Can't you hear?"


  • Jr. Member
  • **
    • View Profile
Re: Oh, I finally get it why we don't get it..............
« Reply #1 on: August 15, 2012, 01:21:31 PM »
Good you brought this up. While still searching the Blowtorch schematics, I saw this and was staggered, and almost responded to your "buddy". Which would have me gotten another vacation from that site.

I'm not an EE, but I know a little bit about ME's....
In good ol Europe, If you're more into development (and advanced development) than research, no way you'll ever need to do higher mathematics. Algebra yes, but other And I saw and worked with quite some development departments in the automotive (gee, even automotive electronics) industry....

Apart that, there is simulation all over the map today:
Finite Elements Methods, Mold Flow for parts design which have to be molded, Computational Fluid Dynamics, Kinematics and Dynamics, human body models for occupant safety simulation, whatever.

And....before this all was available: experience, ideas, a calculator, knowing where to look up the correct formulae, understanding how things work, logical thinking.

So...yes, 90% of the engineers today seem to have a problem...they are no real engineers.
Maybe luckily, because if they were "real" ones according to the "buddy", they would tell us why things go wrong in our technical world but would never manage to fix the problem.


  • Hero Member
  • *****
    • View Profile
Re: Oh, I finally get it why we don't get it..............
« Reply #2 on: August 15, 2012, 04:57:43 PM »
I fail the test.  So sad.   :'(

I think that in my career since school, I have maybe used calculus once.  Algebra, a lot.  Simulation, a lot.  Smith Charts, a lot, but not lately.

My observation is that engineers are supposed to make products that work.  And can be used in research, or sold to paying customers.

Since my career has been spent doing that last one, I guess that makes me a whore.  An ignorant one at that.  Or, worse, a fraud.

Gee; where does creativity and ingenuity fit into this?
No double blind testing was used in the making of this post.