Big Bird
08-08-2013, 08:51 PM
I'm finding some of the questions being asked here to be quite poorly thought through at best, and outright rude at worst. Some people just do not "get" how to communicate on a public forum. So I offer this as my attempt to help people understand the context in which they ask their questions. At the bottom of this post is a copy of my MasterChef analogy, which I will be beating to death in this post. If you are not familiar with it, you might want to scroll down to it first.
If a complete stranger walked up to you in the street and asked "can you please tell me how many eggs I need?", you'd think they were a few sandwiches short of the full picnic. Correct?
You would be asking questions to yourself like - what does this dude want eggs for? Who is he? Why should I help him?
If a complete stranger walked up to you in the street and demanded "tell me how much salt I need", you'd think they were not only a few sandwiches short of the full picnic, but damn rude too. Correct? You would not feel too inclined to help them.
Now just imagine you were feeling particularly benevolent and decided that today you were going to be as helpful as you could be to your fellow man. A random guy walks up to you in the street and asks "how long should I cook the meat?". You carefully put together your response, and help him with advice that it depends on the cut of meat, the weight of the piece, and whether you are wishing to stew it or present it as a steak, whether you like it rare or well done or somewhere in between. You realise that this is actually a really complex question, so you draw it back to first principles and explain that for reasons of bacterial control you really need the meat to be cooked until it is 60 to 70 degrees right through, and that this will cook the meat through to the "medium / well done" end of the spectrum - and that around 50 degrees is the rare end of the range but puts you at some risk of not killing off any nasties that might be in the meat. You explain the theories of searing the meat initially to seal in the juices and flavour, and resting it when it comes out of the pan to let the contracted fibres relax a little. You explain how cutting across the fibres makes the meat more tender and easier to eat. You feel quite satisfied that you have tried to help this stranger as best you can, and to guide them through some core principles of being a good cook - and then they just walk away without saying thanks or even acknowledging the effort you have gone to. You'd feel a bit annoyed, right?
OK, following are some of the questions that have been asked on here recently - some publically, some directly to my PMs. In each case these were by "random walk-ups":
"Track width to wheel base ratio... how much does this affects the vehicle dynamics??"
"hey, i wanted to know if u could tell me the mounting angle of yamaha r6, manufactured during or after 2006"
"what should be no of teeth on smaller & bigger sprocket.... & what should be velocity ratio for 600cc engine"
"what is the difference between the torsional rigidity of chassis and the torsional stiffness"
"helppppp plzzz
anyone know the advantages and disadvantages of vertical master cylinder in pedals box design???"
In each of the above cases, (and in many more examples I've seen in recent times) the poster has not made any attempt to introduce themselves, made very little attempt to give any context to their question, and has not bothered to respond with any sort of thanks or even acknowledgement for the efforts that people have made to respond. Little wonder tempers get short around here.
If you want to post on here, you will find it a very helpful place if you stick to some basic principles:
- Make some effort to introduce yourself
- Make some effort to explain the context of your question
- Make some effort to thank those who try to help
- Make some effort to likewise offer your own thoughts when someone asks a question you know something about.
This is an information EXCHANGE, not a bottomless well of free help. Think about how you might like to be treated as a member of this community, and then offer us the same courtesies.
Cheers all,
Geoff
**************************************
Formula Masterchef
There is a proliferation of cooking shows on Australian television, and it has got me thinking about the similarities between being a good chef and being a good engineer. It is a subject close to my heart as I spent 10 years working in a kitchen, and much of what I have learnt about good project management comes from that experience.
In Masterchef (or Iron Chef, or pick your own local variation), the contestants try to prove to the judges that they are the best chef. They do this by presenting the best dish that they can with the resources available to them.
In Formula SAE (or Formula Student, or pick your own local variation), the contestants try to prove to the judges that they are the best engineers. They do this by presenting the best car that they can with the resources available to them
When we came into FSAE, Cornell was doing a brilliant roast beef as their signature dish. The meat was cooked perfectly each year, they made a great gravy, the veggies were spot on. Cornell knew that as long as they kept pumping out their own signature dish, and as long as everyone else thought this was a competition about the best roast beef, then they could pretty well keep the big trophy back at the shop on permanent display. When I visited FSAE Detroit in 2006, I was gobsmacked at how many plates of roast beef were being served up.
Cornell’s competitive advantage was that they had perfected their signature dish. As long as the opposition’s strategy was to “copy the winners”, then at best they could match Cornell but it would be damn hard to overtake them.
This competition became interesting when a critical mass of teams started looking into the competition itself and realizing it was not about the best roast beef, it was about who was the best chef.
So Cornell continued with their roast beef with Yorkshire pudding, red wine gravy and roasted vegetables. They continued doing a damn good job.
Wollongong did a similar roast beef, and did a damn good job of that too.
Monash did roast too, but it had wings. Let’s call it roast turkey Smile
UWA went rather gourmet, aiming for the top end of town. So lets call their dish seared scallops & vegetable fettuccine with saffron beurre blanc (thanks Mr Google).
We looked at our resources, and our history of failed main courses, and realizing we are just simple folk we decided “stuff it, let’s make a chocolate cake”. We served it with fresh berries, home made ice- cream and raspberry coulis.
Believe me, when we showed up with our first cake, there were any number of “experts” who, smugly or out of a deep feeling of concern for us, felt obliged to tell us that our cake looked nothing like roast beef. Wow, really???
Anyway, now to start beating this analogy to death….
I’ll start with a couple of sayings I’ve heard that I’ll throw in for good measure:
A master chef is one who can serve up a 5-star meal from the cheapest of ingredients.
An engineer can do for $10 what any idiot can do for $100.
Take those and run with them if you wish.
It is not just about the ingredients
I’ve had common old lamb shanks that were brilliant, and top line eye fillets that were appalling. The former indicates culinary expertise, the latter a misguided waste of good resources.
Don’t think you’ll impress anyone just because you’ve got an eye fillet. It is what you do with it that counts
Don’t worry about your neighbour’s pantry
Linked to the above, don’t sweat it if your neighbour has access to eye fillets. So what? You can be a great chef without them. Play your own game
It ain’t Christmas dinner if you serve it in February.
A Christmas dinner is served on December 25th, maybe 6pm. Everyone knows that. When the guests sit down at the table, they are expecting to see food, and you had better serve it to them. A hungry customer ain’t going to be impressed by an empty plate and a story about how good the meal might be if he came back next month.
Put something on the plate. It might not be what you initially wanted, but any meal is better than none. 70% of FSAE chefs each year fail to present a complete plate.
Don’t cherry-pick others’ designs
Cornell might be complimented on their red wine gravy
UWA might be complimented on their seared scallops
RMIT might be complimented on their home made ice- cream
It doesn’t mean that the best meal of all would be seared scallops with home made ice- cream and red wine gravy
I’ve seen some awful Frankenstein’s monsters of cars, (I’m thinking of one I saw that had our engine, Cornell’s turbo, RIT’s rolling chassis and geometry. Overweight, underpowered, underbraked, unreliable and drank copious amounts of fuel). Think of how the ingredients work with each other.
Your design is never going to be all things to all people
Some people like big hearty meals. Some like light meals. Some like savoury food, some like desserts. Some people just want to get drunk. Design something that fits all the above and you have lost the plot. No-one wants a roast beef with seared scallop chocolate cake and beer smoothie.
The judges will look at your design on its own merits. They know you cannot build a car that will win acceleration, and fuel economy, and endurance, and cost event, and skid pad…
Explain which are your priorities, and how your design integrates with these priorities.
Be flexible
Sometimes food goes out of season, suppliers can’t supply, etc. Don’t stubbornly stick to your path if it you are not possibly going to deliver. Accept it, deal with it, change plans, move on.
Design Event / Design Review
Yes, Pat Clarke can see you have made roast beef. Yes, he is happy you know how long you cooked it for (and would be happier if you knew that a roast should be cooked until it is 65-70 degrees in the middle – that shows a greater understanding). Yes he can see you have served it with gravy, potatoes and peas. But he also wants to know WHY DID YOU SERVE ROAST BEEF? Why not a cake? Why not seafood? Why not an apple?
We made some good chocolate cakes in our time. We answered the “what” and the “how” reasonably well, but we rarely did a good job of explaining “why”.
The answer is in the rules, and in your resources…
The limitations of science
The scientific method of developing a product is as follows:
? Take existing product
? Make one change, test modified product
? If modified product is better, adopt change. If worse, reject change.
? Repeat process
Science is great for refining your gravy recipe or your cooking times. It is lousy for high level, big picture concept change.
Try scientifically “optimizing” your way from:
Roast beef with Yorkshire pudding, red wine gravy and roasted vegetables
To:
Chocolate mud cake served with fresh berries, home made ice- cream and raspberry coulis
All the intermediate steps are awful.
Roast beef with Yorkshire pudding, home made ice- cream and roasted vegetables
Roast beef with Yorkshire pudding, red wine gravy and raspberry coulis
Roast beef with fresh berries, red wine gravy and roasted vegetables
Chocolate mud cake with Yorkshire pudding, red wine gravy and roasted vegetables
Etc etc.
If you only had scientific enquiry as your development tool, you would never get from roast to cake or vice versa. Scientific process is a useful tool, but you have got to know its limitations too…
And that is the fun of engineering. It is a little bit science, but it is also art and imagination and creativity too.
If a complete stranger walked up to you in the street and asked "can you please tell me how many eggs I need?", you'd think they were a few sandwiches short of the full picnic. Correct?
You would be asking questions to yourself like - what does this dude want eggs for? Who is he? Why should I help him?
If a complete stranger walked up to you in the street and demanded "tell me how much salt I need", you'd think they were not only a few sandwiches short of the full picnic, but damn rude too. Correct? You would not feel too inclined to help them.
Now just imagine you were feeling particularly benevolent and decided that today you were going to be as helpful as you could be to your fellow man. A random guy walks up to you in the street and asks "how long should I cook the meat?". You carefully put together your response, and help him with advice that it depends on the cut of meat, the weight of the piece, and whether you are wishing to stew it or present it as a steak, whether you like it rare or well done or somewhere in between. You realise that this is actually a really complex question, so you draw it back to first principles and explain that for reasons of bacterial control you really need the meat to be cooked until it is 60 to 70 degrees right through, and that this will cook the meat through to the "medium / well done" end of the spectrum - and that around 50 degrees is the rare end of the range but puts you at some risk of not killing off any nasties that might be in the meat. You explain the theories of searing the meat initially to seal in the juices and flavour, and resting it when it comes out of the pan to let the contracted fibres relax a little. You explain how cutting across the fibres makes the meat more tender and easier to eat. You feel quite satisfied that you have tried to help this stranger as best you can, and to guide them through some core principles of being a good cook - and then they just walk away without saying thanks or even acknowledging the effort you have gone to. You'd feel a bit annoyed, right?
OK, following are some of the questions that have been asked on here recently - some publically, some directly to my PMs. In each case these were by "random walk-ups":
"Track width to wheel base ratio... how much does this affects the vehicle dynamics??"
"hey, i wanted to know if u could tell me the mounting angle of yamaha r6, manufactured during or after 2006"
"what should be no of teeth on smaller & bigger sprocket.... & what should be velocity ratio for 600cc engine"
"what is the difference between the torsional rigidity of chassis and the torsional stiffness"
"helppppp plzzz
anyone know the advantages and disadvantages of vertical master cylinder in pedals box design???"
In each of the above cases, (and in many more examples I've seen in recent times) the poster has not made any attempt to introduce themselves, made very little attempt to give any context to their question, and has not bothered to respond with any sort of thanks or even acknowledgement for the efforts that people have made to respond. Little wonder tempers get short around here.
If you want to post on here, you will find it a very helpful place if you stick to some basic principles:
- Make some effort to introduce yourself
- Make some effort to explain the context of your question
- Make some effort to thank those who try to help
- Make some effort to likewise offer your own thoughts when someone asks a question you know something about.
This is an information EXCHANGE, not a bottomless well of free help. Think about how you might like to be treated as a member of this community, and then offer us the same courtesies.
Cheers all,
Geoff
**************************************
Formula Masterchef
There is a proliferation of cooking shows on Australian television, and it has got me thinking about the similarities between being a good chef and being a good engineer. It is a subject close to my heart as I spent 10 years working in a kitchen, and much of what I have learnt about good project management comes from that experience.
In Masterchef (or Iron Chef, or pick your own local variation), the contestants try to prove to the judges that they are the best chef. They do this by presenting the best dish that they can with the resources available to them.
In Formula SAE (or Formula Student, or pick your own local variation), the contestants try to prove to the judges that they are the best engineers. They do this by presenting the best car that they can with the resources available to them
When we came into FSAE, Cornell was doing a brilliant roast beef as their signature dish. The meat was cooked perfectly each year, they made a great gravy, the veggies were spot on. Cornell knew that as long as they kept pumping out their own signature dish, and as long as everyone else thought this was a competition about the best roast beef, then they could pretty well keep the big trophy back at the shop on permanent display. When I visited FSAE Detroit in 2006, I was gobsmacked at how many plates of roast beef were being served up.
Cornell’s competitive advantage was that they had perfected their signature dish. As long as the opposition’s strategy was to “copy the winners”, then at best they could match Cornell but it would be damn hard to overtake them.
This competition became interesting when a critical mass of teams started looking into the competition itself and realizing it was not about the best roast beef, it was about who was the best chef.
So Cornell continued with their roast beef with Yorkshire pudding, red wine gravy and roasted vegetables. They continued doing a damn good job.
Wollongong did a similar roast beef, and did a damn good job of that too.
Monash did roast too, but it had wings. Let’s call it roast turkey Smile
UWA went rather gourmet, aiming for the top end of town. So lets call their dish seared scallops & vegetable fettuccine with saffron beurre blanc (thanks Mr Google).
We looked at our resources, and our history of failed main courses, and realizing we are just simple folk we decided “stuff it, let’s make a chocolate cake”. We served it with fresh berries, home made ice- cream and raspberry coulis.
Believe me, when we showed up with our first cake, there were any number of “experts” who, smugly or out of a deep feeling of concern for us, felt obliged to tell us that our cake looked nothing like roast beef. Wow, really???
Anyway, now to start beating this analogy to death….
I’ll start with a couple of sayings I’ve heard that I’ll throw in for good measure:
A master chef is one who can serve up a 5-star meal from the cheapest of ingredients.
An engineer can do for $10 what any idiot can do for $100.
Take those and run with them if you wish.
It is not just about the ingredients
I’ve had common old lamb shanks that were brilliant, and top line eye fillets that were appalling. The former indicates culinary expertise, the latter a misguided waste of good resources.
Don’t think you’ll impress anyone just because you’ve got an eye fillet. It is what you do with it that counts
Don’t worry about your neighbour’s pantry
Linked to the above, don’t sweat it if your neighbour has access to eye fillets. So what? You can be a great chef without them. Play your own game
It ain’t Christmas dinner if you serve it in February.
A Christmas dinner is served on December 25th, maybe 6pm. Everyone knows that. When the guests sit down at the table, they are expecting to see food, and you had better serve it to them. A hungry customer ain’t going to be impressed by an empty plate and a story about how good the meal might be if he came back next month.
Put something on the plate. It might not be what you initially wanted, but any meal is better than none. 70% of FSAE chefs each year fail to present a complete plate.
Don’t cherry-pick others’ designs
Cornell might be complimented on their red wine gravy
UWA might be complimented on their seared scallops
RMIT might be complimented on their home made ice- cream
It doesn’t mean that the best meal of all would be seared scallops with home made ice- cream and red wine gravy
I’ve seen some awful Frankenstein’s monsters of cars, (I’m thinking of one I saw that had our engine, Cornell’s turbo, RIT’s rolling chassis and geometry. Overweight, underpowered, underbraked, unreliable and drank copious amounts of fuel). Think of how the ingredients work with each other.
Your design is never going to be all things to all people
Some people like big hearty meals. Some like light meals. Some like savoury food, some like desserts. Some people just want to get drunk. Design something that fits all the above and you have lost the plot. No-one wants a roast beef with seared scallop chocolate cake and beer smoothie.
The judges will look at your design on its own merits. They know you cannot build a car that will win acceleration, and fuel economy, and endurance, and cost event, and skid pad…
Explain which are your priorities, and how your design integrates with these priorities.
Be flexible
Sometimes food goes out of season, suppliers can’t supply, etc. Don’t stubbornly stick to your path if it you are not possibly going to deliver. Accept it, deal with it, change plans, move on.
Design Event / Design Review
Yes, Pat Clarke can see you have made roast beef. Yes, he is happy you know how long you cooked it for (and would be happier if you knew that a roast should be cooked until it is 65-70 degrees in the middle – that shows a greater understanding). Yes he can see you have served it with gravy, potatoes and peas. But he also wants to know WHY DID YOU SERVE ROAST BEEF? Why not a cake? Why not seafood? Why not an apple?
We made some good chocolate cakes in our time. We answered the “what” and the “how” reasonably well, but we rarely did a good job of explaining “why”.
The answer is in the rules, and in your resources…
The limitations of science
The scientific method of developing a product is as follows:
? Take existing product
? Make one change, test modified product
? If modified product is better, adopt change. If worse, reject change.
? Repeat process
Science is great for refining your gravy recipe or your cooking times. It is lousy for high level, big picture concept change.
Try scientifically “optimizing” your way from:
Roast beef with Yorkshire pudding, red wine gravy and roasted vegetables
To:
Chocolate mud cake served with fresh berries, home made ice- cream and raspberry coulis
All the intermediate steps are awful.
Roast beef with Yorkshire pudding, home made ice- cream and roasted vegetables
Roast beef with Yorkshire pudding, red wine gravy and raspberry coulis
Roast beef with fresh berries, red wine gravy and roasted vegetables
Chocolate mud cake with Yorkshire pudding, red wine gravy and roasted vegetables
Etc etc.
If you only had scientific enquiry as your development tool, you would never get from roast to cake or vice versa. Scientific process is a useful tool, but you have got to know its limitations too…
And that is the fun of engineering. It is a little bit science, but it is also art and imagination and creativity too.