标签: engineers

The upside is that I am repeatedly astonished at the performance and functionality that is packed into consumer products, and at an amazingly low price. The downside is that I fear this never-ending wave of providing so much more for so much less has been a major contributor to the low professional stature of engineers of all disciplines in the public's mind. The latest example I saw of a product with an impressive ratio of specifications and features to price was the Kidizoom Camera Connect from VTech Electronics. These may be low-to-modest by today's standards for non-kid products, but they would have been considered pretty good just a few years ago for adult products as well. A few key specs of this camera, which has a suggested retail price under $50, include: - 1.3 Mpixel  (probably not with the finest image-color rendition or low-light sensitivity) - 1.8" color LCD screen - 128 Mbyte memory (about 800 photos) - dual optical viewfinder (for using both eyes at once, like binoculars) - all sorts of software-based features: 4× optical zoom, animated and special video effects including backgrounds and borders - audio capability - very easy to use, no fancy menus, just basic buttons - uses 4 standard AA batteries, widely available and easily replaced (no need for charger circuitry) - plus a solid, rugged case—after all, this is a toy for children The Kidizoom Camera Connect from VTech Electronics (available in pink or blue) packs an impressive set of features and specifications into a low-cost, rugged package; it also has a USB port and a slot for a microSD memory card.   It sounds like an "OK" product thus far, but not great. But then I wondered, what happens when you want to upload the pictures or run out of memory for storage? The product has that covered as well, via a USB port (with support software for PC or Mac) and a slot for a microSD memory card. Given the suggested retail price and typical markups at the vendor and the retailer, the BOM (bill of materials) cost is probably between $12 and $25. That's what amazed me; this is a surprisingly decent camera for kids, and amateur hobbyists or experimenters, for modest cost. While the folks at GoPro don’t have to worry, it's still an impressive product. Seeing all this for such a low BOM and retail price, all I could think was that, once again, engineers have done too good a job. Think about the billions spent on process technology, IC fabs, other components and material RD, circuit design, specialty plastics, tooling and molding machines, and more that it took to get to this point. Unfortunately, the general public equates low price and high performance with the perception that it must have all been easy to do, yet we know it was not. Further, if it is so easy, those who do it — engineers, scientists, countless associated people and disciplines — really aren't that smart or working that hard, either. In some ways, I admire the "it's so hard to create" aura that musicians, actors, and athletes have allowed and even guided the media to create around them. By showing how hard some – certainly not all – of their work is, and their perceived dedication to their professions, they also create the sense that they are special. For technical professionals, that type of glow is absent, and it's you're "just an engineer" even though the creativity and difficulty may be among the most challenging out there. I'm not sure what can or should be done to counter this image issue. I do know that when you create amazing products and technologies on a routine basis, and make it look so easy, soon these achievements are viewed as ordinary and the people who make them happen are judged to be ordinary as well. Maybe we need a publication and PR effort such as "STEM Celebrity" which would profile leaders and innovators in science, technology, engineering, and math instead of Hollywood celebrities whose every sneeze or appearance is apparently of interest.   Do you have any ideas on how the public perception and stature of engineers and scientists can be enhanced? Or is a case of "not going to happen" because celebrity-chasing is just so much more fun and easy?

What a controversial word is “ethics,” with its explosive potential lending itself to varying interpretations. It’s like the word, “obscenity.” Everyone knows what it is, but how do you define it? —Frank Lebell, The Manufacturers’ Representative   I’ve been thinking about ethics recently, but not the generic kind represented by violations like taking a company pen home. And who among us can claim to be purists? I can’t—I have plenty of company pens laying around my office. And, truth-be-told, my war stories get more polished and elaborate each year. Let the stones in my glass house be unthrown.   Without dusting off the inevitable business ethics textbook from college, most of us instinctively know what is right or wrong—and choose the high road, and not just on principle, but because experience guides us. Is the short term joy of dishonesty worth the impact on our careers? And, if you always tell the truth to the best of your ability, then you never have to worry about steering the story you’re telling.   However, the flavor of ethics I’m thinking about is represented by artificial certainty. As Mark Twain put it:   It ain’t what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It’s what you know for sure that just ain’t so.   As engineers responsible for products important for people’s lives, we should be certain about what we say—more certain than a politician, for example. But how do we “know?” By testing, calculating, measuring and analyzing, that’s how. It would be great to always have complete knowledge, but we’re constantly called on to make decisions with incomplete information. As close as we may be, engineers are not God with perfect understanding of everything. Too bad.   I will say this, however. You should make a reasonable effort to gather the necessary facts to make a rational decision. Do your homework. If you want to change a process, first make an honest effort to understand why things were done a certain way. If you’re changing a part or a design strategy, make an honest effort to understand the existing circuit and design decision. In decision making, the brash confidence of youth is cute and might be appealing to upper management, but there be alligators lurking in the deep.   It’s hard to know the scope of what you don’t know, but it’s necessary. Wise up! If you don’t have sufficient information or context to make a decision, then defer to someone else or take the time to dig deeper.   Perhaps we can take some guidance from pop culture…know, or don’t speak.   I don’t think. Neither do I speculate, assume or hypothesize. —Joe Sarno, The Way of the Gun   Do my comments stir any thoughts or recollections? What can you say about ethics in engineering?   Ken Coffman Field Applications Engineer Member of the Technical Staff Fairchild Semiconductor

Engineers consider accuracy and precision as highly important. You are designing and solving critical applications to ensure the highest product quality, system safety, and performance. You are solving complex calculations to ensure the greatest likelihood of success. There’s little room for guesswork or contradictions.   Engineers say that other engineers don't fill out registration forms, but they do. What's up with that? (Image: Getty)   So when engineers first told me with certainty that other engineers will never give up their personal information on a website, and then they turned around and did exactly that, I was amazed. And I remain amazed, because it’s happened many more times since.   Case in point: My business partner and I were speaking to hundreds of engineering business leaders at a conference recently about marketing to a technical audience. The topic was lead generation on the web. During the QA, several people in the audience voiced their reluctance to place registration gates on areas of their website, out of fear that technically minded web visitors would go elsewhere.   When I asked for a show of hands on who would fill out a lead form themselves, very few hands went up. They made it clear: Engineers do not fill out lead forms.   Right after our talk, we offered a handout with more information about marketing to technical audiences in exchange for a business card. The offer was totally voluntary, it was there if they wanted it.   Do as I say, not as I do Guess what? We had a line of engineers 75 deep waiting with business card in hand. The same engineers who said engineers will abscond when confronted with a registration wall actually waited in line to give us their information.   I have spent 25 years working in marketing with engineers and developing and executing campaigns targeting highly technical audiences. During my 14 years at National Instruments, and as CEO at TREW Marketing today, I’ve worked with business leaders to market their services, products, and companies to highly technical, skeptical audiences.   And they are generating leads every day from engineers who are filling out forms on their websites and through other channels. These are embedded engineers designing WiFi into medical device products that are surgically placed inside the bodies of humans; test engineers evaluating armament systems on mil/aero platforms to ensure they work properly for the warfighter on mission; scientists looking for new, disruptive technologies for marine fossil fuel exploration to lower costs and improve our energy resources.   Engineers will fill out lead forms. Day in and day out, it’s happening at big companies and very small ones alike.   These are real engineers, real scientists, solving real problems, and seeking real information to help them succeed. It’s about trust. Your customers are solving really big problems, and they need serious information that is accurate, technical, and trustworthy.   Why? They do it willingly when they perceive information is highly valuable, current, and accurate, and they develop trust. With the combination of established trust and a perception that the information you are providing is of high value, they will share their information to get yours. And they will expect that the trust they have placed in you with their information will be treated with respect.   So, the next time someone tells you engineers won’t fill out a lead form, remind them, sometimes even really smart, well-intentioned people will say one thing, but do another… when there is trust and perceived value.   What's your take on filling out lead forms? Do you have a good, bad, or funny experience to share? Please comment below -- I'd love to hear your story.   Rebecca Geier is CEO and Co-Founder of TREW Marketing based in Austin, Texas. With over 20 years of global marketing experience primarily in the B2B science, engineering, and technology fields. She is passionate about creating marketing that engineers love, and teaching others how it can be done. When she is not working with TREW clients in the embedded, test, control, and life sciences fields, Rebecca regularly speaks on the topic, and has written and co-authored many blog posts, articles, and e-books, including TREW’s popular Smart Marketing for Engineers , covering topics such as website design, lead generation, and product launches.

Initially, I planned to write a blog about networking, but I soon realised that there are two sides to networking. If done correctly, it can help you get a job or find out more about a certain employer. If done poorly, it might cost you a great opportunity. Here are my thoughts on this important skill, starting with the bad. How to burn bridges I recently saw an article on Medium.com titled " I wanted to work at Apple really bad, and now not so much ." Jordan Price writes about how he was extremely excited to get a six-month contract job with Apple. However, he didn't get along at all with his immediate supervisor, who insulted him and generally treated him with little respect. Price finally had enough and left without notice one day. On one hand, I can't blame him. I've worked for a few terrible bosses. At one company in particular, leaving in this manner probably wouldn't have been a bad idea. On the other hand, publicly insulting the largest US company won't win Price many friends. It's possible that parts of the company are excellent places to work, so this may come back to haunt him. Additionally, he was working for a third-party placement firm, which wasn't happy (to put it mildly) with him that way. Nevertheless, if Price's public appeal is seen by the correct person, maybe it will work out well for him in the long term. Certainly, he's not the only person disgruntled with how he's treated at work. Personal experience In my own work experience, it's really hard to tell if I have lost an opportunity due to someone who didn't like me or whom I offended somehow. If it has happened, I would guess the conversation went something like this. Boss: Hey, Jim, didn't you work with a guy named Jeremy Cook at KludgeCo years ago? Jim: Oh, Jeremy, yeah. Well, he was OK, but I didn't really like that he did X, and that he was kind of a Y person. It's possible that never happened. I like to think that I get along with most people. I do remember one instance where a colleague asked about a resume that the company had received. Since my cubicle was adjacent to his, he turned to me and said, "Didn't Jim work with you at the Stamping Shack?" Apparently, I gave him a sordid expression and said something to the effect of "Jim— bad ." I didn't feel great about it, but I'm fairly certain he didn't get the interview. Hopefully, I haven't convinced you that I'm a terrible coworker, or that I regularly say bad things about people. I've had many good experiences with networking, and I have been happy to recommend quite a few people for jobs. I'll share a few of my positive networking experiences in another post, now that the bad part is over. Jeremy Cook is a manufacturing engineer with 10 years of experience and has a BSME from Clemson University.  

I just read Max the Magnificent's blog: What? EEs who do not know how to solder? Sadly, unlike Max, I was not "shocked" or "flabbergasted" to learn that some engineers can't or don't solder. Like so many things in the modern world, hand-soldering is no longer a required skill. It's useful, and I personally think that everyone in the industry should have the skill, but it's not a requirement anymore. Years ago, I would draw a schematic on paper, acquire the requisite parts, and test the design using solderless breadboards. Once I was confident enough to create a more durable prototype, I would get out my wire-wrap tools or soldering iron. Even when wire-wrapping, I would often need to solder a few parts down. Soldering was inevitable and it wasn't really possible to be involved in electronics without the skill. Today, however, the situation is a quite a bit different. It is very possible, perhaps even common, for an engineer to go from idea to finished product without ever putting iron to solder. This is not to say that problems don't crop up in the process. Some of these problems could be fixed with a hot iron, but not always. The only choice may be to re-spin the PC board and have it built by someone else. Sometimes the problems simply can't be resolved by hand and—in those cases—soldering skills will help about as much as sewing skills. Take a common problem in the prototyping domain: an incorrect footprint on the PCB. This is probably the most frequent design issue to pop up in my world. It can have a couple of different causes: 1. Metric vs. SAE measurements: It's not just Mars Probes that have this problem. Connectors see this one a lot. If you have only four positions on a 0.1" (2.54mm) pitch header strip and you try to use a metric 2.50mm pitch header strip... no one will care. However, if you try that with 25 positions, even good soldering skills likely won't help make it fit. You'll need a new PCB. 2. QFN vs. QFP footprints: Many newer chips, especially in these form factors, don't have pre-made land patterns in CAD software. Either a footprint has to be custom made or a similar one has to be borrowed from a pattern that's close enough. QFP (quad flatpack) land patterns look very similar to QFN (quad flatpack, no lead) land patterns, but are typically larger. Swap the two and, again, hand soldering skills may not get you anywhere. Not long ago, I was designing in a Microchip MCP72833-AMI/MF. It's a compact LiPoly charger, requiring no more than a few resistors and capacitors. It comes in two form-factors: a 3 mm x 3 mm DFN (dual inline flatpack no leads) and a slightly larger MSOP. I picked the DFN to save PCB real estate. It wasn't until after I had PC boards in hand that I discovered the DFN isn't available in the small quantities I need. This was a bad time to discover such an issue. Had I checked and discovered that information early in the design cycle, I would have designed in the MSOP. The land patterns are close, but not close enough that I could place the MSOP on the DFN land. Some people might turn the chip upside down and run individual 24 gage wire from the chip legs to the PCB footprint, but with 0.5mm pitch leads, I just can't do that—despite 30 years of hand soldering experience. 3. Form factors not available: You may have designed in a BGA only to find that particular package unavailable and purchase time. Part availability in a different package won't help, nor will hand soldering skills. Take the NXP LPC11U14 ARM processor. It comes in a 4.5mm x 4.5mm BGA, a 7mm x 7mm QFP, and a 5mm x 5mm QFN. There are two other parts in the family: LPC11U13 and LPC11U12. All three are virtually identical except for the amount of Flash memory. The BGA would be idea for keeping things small. After completing the firmware, however, I might decide that I don't need all 32K of the Flash. The LPC11U12 only has 16K and costs less. That's fine, except the LPC11U12 doesn't come in the BGA form factor. Hand soldering won't help in any of the three scenarios described above. Of course, there are always a few exceptions to everything. I once met a guy who has hand-soldered 01005 passive components. He's a wizard though, so that doesn't really count. So, in summary, my personal opinion is that electronics engineers should know how to solder, but I do know that not all need to. What do you think? Duane Benson Marketing Manager Screaming Circuits