EDAboard.com | EDAboard.de | EDAboard.co.uk | WTWH Media

The Two Fundamentals of Engineering

Ask a question - edaboard.com

elektroda.net NewsGroups Forum Index - Electronics Design - The Two Fundamentals of Engineering

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next


Guest

Sat Feb 15, 2020 10:45 pm   



Stop .... Think..... That is an abbreviated way to say paralysis by analysis?


Guest

Sat Feb 15, 2020 10:45 pm   



On Sat, 15 Feb 2020 12:53:52 -0800, Joerg <news_at_analogconsultants.com>
wrote:

Quote:
On 2020-02-14 18:35, jlarkin_at_highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:


Stop

Think


It's slightly different:


Stop

Drink a beer

Think


Not for me.

Stop

Drink a beer

Nap.




--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc

The cork popped merrily, and Lord Peter rose to his feet.
"Bunter", he said, "I give you a toast. The triumph of Instinct over Reason"

Joerg
Guest

Sat Feb 15, 2020 10:45 pm   



On 2020-02-14 18:35, jlarkin_at_highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
Quote:


Stop

Think


It's slightly different:


Stop

Drink a beer

Think


--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

Dean Hoffman
Guest

Sat Feb 15, 2020 10:45 pm   



On 2/14/20 8:35 PM, jlarkin_at_highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
Quote:


Stop

Think


Wasn't there something called the KISS Rule?
Keep It Simple Stupid.


Guest

Sat Feb 15, 2020 11:45 pm   



On Sat, 15 Feb 2020 13:30:05 -0800 (PST), bulegoge_at_columbus.rr.com
wrote:

>Stop .... Think..... That is an abbreviated way to say paralysis by analysis?

No, it's more like "are you sure you're still headed in the right
direction?"



--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc

The cork popped merrily, and Lord Peter rose to his feet.
"Bunter", he said, "I give you a toast. The triumph of Instinct over Reason"

Klaus Kragelund
Guest

Sat Feb 15, 2020 11:45 pm   



Be, Think, Innovate

https://www.grundfos.com/about-us/Our%20company/be-think-innovate.html

Lasse Langwadt Christense
Guest

Sat Feb 15, 2020 11:45 pm   



lørdag den 15. februar 2020 kl. 22.15.53 UTC+1 skrev jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com:
Quote:
On Sat, 15 Feb 2020 12:53:52 -0800, Joerg <news_at_analogconsultants.com
wrote:

On 2020-02-14 18:35, jlarkin_at_highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:


Stop

Think


It's slightly different:


Stop

Drink a beer

Think

Not for me.

Stop

Drink a beer

Nap.


https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/ballmer_peak.png

Bill Sloman
Guest

Sun Feb 16, 2020 1:45 am   



On Sunday, February 16, 2020 at 9:19:55 AM UTC+11, Klaus Kragelund wrote:
Quote:


Innovation is good - when you need it. When it becomes a form of showing off, it leads to designers rejecting the known good way of solving problem and adopting a solution which isn't quite as tried and tested.

I've worked with people who fancied themselves as inventors, and it could be wearing. I've known two people who had got their their on 25 patents - my father and a friend of mine from EMI Central Research - and neither of them was in the least interested in being innovative for the sake doing things differently.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

Jeff Liebermann
Guest

Sun Feb 16, 2020 2:45 am   



On Fri, 14 Feb 2020 18:35:18 -0800, jlarkin_at_highlandsniptechnology.com
wrote:

Quote:
Stop

Think


Does that mean one should stop working before one is allowed or able
to think? That doesn't really work well because the project clock and
schedule don't just stop on my command. Consider the time to think a
luxury, that should be tasted sparingly lest run out of time to think.

Or, does that mean I should empty my mind before attempting to think?
The Wisdom of Empty Minds
<https://www.beliefnet.com/faiths/buddhism/2001/05/the-wisdom-of-empty-minds.aspx>
Emptying Your Mind and Becoming Zero
<https://www.hinduwebsite.com/divinelife/selfnegation.asp>
Hopefully, you're not recommending meditation.

Or, is "Stop -> Think" an abbreviated form of:
When you're up to your neck in alligators, it's hard to
remember that your initial objective was to drain the swamp.
At one employer, it was considered proper to be subtle when reminding
engineers of this rather common problem. My immediate supervisor
would look at what I was doing and ask "Am I paying you to do this?" I
usually didn't have an answer, but after being buried in diversions, I
would ask him "Are you paying me to do this?"[1]

Or, perhaps it's a variation of:
Do something, even if it's wrong".
It's often difficult to distinguish between thought, contemplation,
day dreaming, thought experiments, loafing, meditation, and plotting
revenge. In all cases, it requires interrupting the thinker to
determine if their line of thought is productive, reactionary, or
conspiratorial. Whatever the motivation, the act of interruption is
disruptive and non-productive. It's better to assume that a blank
stare means re-evaluating the projects direction and reconsidering
contradictory instructions and assumptions, than to interrupt the
thinker and insure that nothing of value will be produced.

I noticed that you left a blank line between stop and think, possibly
for the addition of another fundamental. When I'm stuck, it's usually
not due my failure to recall the project objectives. Instead, I find
myself failing to see the obvious, too many assumptions, or my
trademark arithmetic errors. In other words, I can't properly
evaluate my own work. So, I press the virtual reset button by
stopping what I'm doing, go for a walk to get away from the problem,
and return with a fresh or at least modified approach. I suggest you
amend your Fundamentals of Engineering to include:
Stop -> Clear Brain -> Think
Also, when I go for my walk, I usually carry a small note pad or
smartphone voice recorder app, to record anything of value because
I've found that creative thinking is often rather transient and
volatile.


[1] Two of the most original products I created were the result of
distractions and diversions.





--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl_at_cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558


Guest

Mon Feb 17, 2020 3:45 am   



On Saturday, February 15, 2020 at 8:37:43 PM UTC-5, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
Quote:
On Fri, 14 Feb 2020 18:35:18 -0800, jlarkin_at_highlandsniptechnology.com
wrote:

Stop

Think

Does that mean one should stop working before one is allowed or able
to think? That doesn't really work well because the project clock and
schedule don't just stop on my command. Consider the time to think a
luxury, that should be tasted sparingly lest run out of time to think.

Or, does that mean I should empty my mind before attempting to think?
The Wisdom of Empty Minds
https://www.beliefnet.com/faiths/buddhism/2001/05/the-wisdom-of-empty-minds.aspx
Emptying Your Mind and Becoming Zero
https://www.hinduwebsite.com/divinelife/selfnegation.asp
Hopefully, you're not recommending meditation.

Or, is "Stop -> Think" an abbreviated form of:
When you're up to your neck in alligators, it's hard to
remember that your initial objective was to drain the swamp.
At one employer, it was considered proper to be subtle when reminding
engineers of this rather common problem. My immediate supervisor
would look at what I was doing and ask "Am I paying you to do this?" I
usually didn't have an answer, but after being buried in diversions, I
would ask him "Are you paying me to do this?"[1]

Or, perhaps it's a variation of:
Do something, even if it's wrong".
It's often difficult to distinguish between thought, contemplation,
day dreaming, thought experiments, loafing, meditation, and plotting
revenge. In all cases, it requires interrupting the thinker to
determine if their line of thought is productive, reactionary, or
conspiratorial. Whatever the motivation, the act of interruption is
disruptive and non-productive. It's better to assume that a blank
stare means re-evaluating the projects direction and reconsidering
contradictory instructions and assumptions, than to interrupt the
thinker and insure that nothing of value will be produced.

I noticed that you left a blank line between stop and think, possibly
for the addition of another fundamental. When I'm stuck, it's usually
not due my failure to recall the project objectives. Instead, I find
myself failing to see the obvious, too many assumptions, or my
trademark arithmetic errors. In other words, I can't properly
evaluate my own work. So, I press the virtual reset button by
stopping what I'm doing, go for a walk to get away from the problem,
and return with a fresh or at least modified approach. I suggest you
amend your Fundamentals of Engineering to include:
Stop -> Clear Brain -> Think
Also, when I go for my walk, I usually carry a small note pad or
smartphone voice recorder app, to record anything of value because
I've found that creative thinking is often rather transient and
volatile.


[1] Two of the most original products I created were the result of
distractions and diversions.





--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl_at_cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558


Mixing metaphors here..rules vs algorithms. as well as level of abstraction.
I tend to refine 'think' to something a bit more concrete, but still abstract enough:
Understand the problem that is being solved, or as some of my physics teachers used to say, make sure the problem is well formed...
This is sometimes harder than you think.


Guest

Mon Feb 17, 2020 4:45 am   



On Sat, 15 Feb 2020 17:37:41 -0800, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl_at_cruzio.com>
wrote:

Quote:
On Fri, 14 Feb 2020 18:35:18 -0800, jlarkin_at_highlandsniptechnology.com
wrote:

Stop

Think

Does that mean one should stop working before one is allowed or able
to think? That doesn't really work well because the project clock and
schedule don't just stop on my command. Consider the time to think a
luxury, that should be tasted sparingly lest run out of time to think.

Or, does that mean I should empty my mind before attempting to think?
The Wisdom of Empty Minds
https://www.beliefnet.com/faiths/buddhism/2001/05/the-wisdom-of-empty-minds.aspx
Emptying Your Mind and Becoming Zero
https://www.hinduwebsite.com/divinelife/selfnegation.asp
Hopefully, you're not recommending meditation.

Or, is "Stop -> Think" an abbreviated form of:
When you're up to your neck in alligators, it's hard to
remember that your initial objective was to drain the swamp.
At one employer, it was considered proper to be subtle when reminding
engineers of this rather common problem. My immediate supervisor
would look at what I was doing and ask "Am I paying you to do this?" I
usually didn't have an answer, but after being buried in diversions, I
would ask him "Are you paying me to do this?"[1]

Or, perhaps it's a variation of:
Do something, even if it's wrong".
It's often difficult to distinguish between thought, contemplation,
day dreaming, thought experiments, loafing, meditation, and plotting
revenge. In all cases, it requires interrupting the thinker to
determine if their line of thought is productive, reactionary, or
conspiratorial. Whatever the motivation, the act of interruption is
disruptive and non-productive. It's better to assume that a blank
stare means re-evaluating the projects direction and reconsidering
contradictory instructions and assumptions, than to interrupt the
thinker and insure that nothing of value will be produced.

I noticed that you left a blank line between stop and think, possibly
for the addition of another fundamental. When I'm stuck, it's usually
not due my failure to recall the project objectives. Instead, I find
myself failing to see the obvious, too many assumptions, or my
trademark arithmetic errors. In other words, I can't properly
evaluate my own work. So, I press the virtual reset button by
stopping what I'm doing, go for a walk to get away from the problem,
and return with a fresh or at least modified approach. I suggest you
amend your Fundamentals of Engineering to include:
Stop -> Clear Brain -> Think
Also, when I go for my walk, I usually carry a small note pad or
smartphone voice recorder app, to record anything of value because
I've found that creative thinking is often rather transient and
volatile.


[1] Two of the most original products I created were the result of
distractions and diversions.


It's useful to stop doing things once in a while and ask if you are
still trying to do the best thing. Or if you are making any big
mistakes. In a group, personality pressures discourage this sort of
thinking.

In economics, the "sunk cost fallacy" corresponds to the folk concept
"throwing good money after bad."

Sometimes halfway through a 2-year project, someone stops and thinks
of a different approach that will be better and take three months.

Sometimes the act of executing a clumsy design makes one really
understand the problem.

I'm thinking about this because I'm involved with a semiconductor
company that is all pickey about how we are instrumenting sensors that
haven't worked for about 18 years now. They spend around a million
dollars a year installing them. We acquire the data. Nobody uses it.
But nobody will state the obvious.





--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc

The cork popped merrily, and Lord Peter rose to his feet.
"Bunter", he said, "I give you a toast. The triumph of Instinct over Reason"

whit3rd
Guest

Mon Feb 17, 2020 4:45 am   



On Sunday, February 16, 2020 at 7:10:12 PM UTC-8, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

Quote:
I'm thinking about t... a semiconductor
company that is all pickey about how we are instrumenting sensors that
haven't worked for about 18 years now. They spend around a million
dollars a year installing them. We acquire the data. Nobody uses it.
But nobody will state the obvious.


If it's process monitoring, knowing how a process went awry AFTER a
few batches fail is very important, but when the batches don't fail,
the records gather dust.

There are circumstances where a process gone awry can destroy the equipment (in
parts-per-billion contamination with the wrong stuff) and only an extraordinary
amount of info can tell you the salvage prospects. So, the information might
be only for insurance in case of a disaster. Pay for insurance, don't expect
to profit from it, but it still DOES make sense.

John Larkin
Guest

Mon Feb 17, 2020 7:45 pm   



On Sun, 16 Feb 2020 19:25:29 -0800 (PST), whit3rd <whit3rd_at_gmail.com>
wrote:

Quote:
On Sunday, February 16, 2020 at 7:10:12 PM UTC-8, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

I'm thinking about t... a semiconductor
company that is all pickey about how we are instrumenting sensors that
haven't worked for about 18 years now. They spend around a million
dollars a year installing them. We acquire the data. Nobody uses it.
But nobody will state the obvious.

If it's process monitoring, knowing how a process went awry AFTER a
few batches fail is very important, but when the batches don't fail,
the records gather dust.

There are circumstances where a process gone awry can destroy the equipment (in
parts-per-billion contamination with the wrong stuff) and only an extraordinary
amount of info can tell you the salvage prospects. So, the information might
be only for insurance in case of a disaster. Pay for insurance, don't expect
to profit from it, but it still DOES make sense.


But it doesn't make sense to collect and archive bad data.

This is a process that dithers some timings to find the sweet spot,
maximum output, which is roughly inverted parabolic on our inputs. Our
gear was supposed to work but, since it doesn't, they found some other
sensor to use. But they keep installing the sensors that don't work.

I guess a million dollars a year is way down in the noise.

--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
picosecond timing precision measurement

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com

Rich S
Guest

Mon Feb 17, 2020 8:45 pm   



On Saturday, February 15, 2020 at 2:39:29 AM UTC-5, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Quote:
jlarkin_at_highlandsniptechnology.com wrote in
news:15me4fhal4bn844re4mn4t8djos51g90uj_at_4ax.com:



Stop

Think







No stopping until I die. And certainly not first. Yet you lay it
out as if to be a chronological step process. So...

There are more than two, but a few are...

Observe
Learn
Observe
Think
Create
Observe
Proof
Give to the world


also consider the cyclical nature of EE work,
a la Shewart cycle (plan, do, act, adjust,...Go To 1)
or, as done on s.e.d., 'lather' 'rinse' 'repeat'...
cheers, rich s.

three_jeeps
Guest

Mon Feb 17, 2020 10:45 pm   



On Monday, February 17, 2020 at 1:16:44 PM UTC-5, John Larkin wrote:
Quote:
On Sun, 16 Feb 2020 19:25:29 -0800 (PST), whit3rd <whit3rd_at_gmail.com
wrote:

On Sunday, February 16, 2020 at 7:10:12 PM UTC-8, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

I'm thinking about t... a semiconductor
company that is all pickey about how we are instrumenting sensors that
haven't worked for about 18 years now. They spend around a million
dollars a year installing them. We acquire the data. Nobody uses it.
But nobody will state the obvious.

If it's process monitoring, knowing how a process went awry AFTER a
few batches fail is very important, but when the batches don't fail,
the records gather dust.

There are circumstances where a process gone awry can destroy the equipment (in
parts-per-billion contamination with the wrong stuff) and only an extraordinary
amount of info can tell you the salvage prospects. So, the information might
be only for insurance in case of a disaster. Pay for insurance, don't expect
to profit from it, but it still DOES make sense.

But it doesn't make sense to collect and archive bad data.

This is a process that dithers some timings to find the sweet spot,
maximum output, which is roughly inverted parabolic on our inputs. Our
gear was supposed to work but, since it doesn't, they found some other
sensor to use. But they keep installing the sensors that don't work.

I guess a million dollars a year is way down in the noise.

--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
picosecond timing precision measurement

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com


Process monitoring and associated data can be very useful if the right data is collected and used in the right way.
Process data is often used to detect drift in certain process variables which can kickoff some inspection/diagnosis/mitigation action. All sorts of neat statistical things can be done here.
Also, it can be used to determine machine wear out. Back in the day, we developed signature analysis for machine tool monitoring, prime mover monitoring, etc. Basically it was frequency spectrum analysis of vibration on various axis, which correlated to impending tool or machine failure.
We developed a digital version of signature analysis focused on discrete logic boards - put a whole lot of input vectors into a discrete board and observe outputs at different points of the board. Did a similar technique for analog boards...
point is, collecting a bit basket full of data doesn't have to be useless.....

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

elektroda.net NewsGroups Forum Index - Electronics Design - The Two Fundamentals of Engineering

Ask a question - edaboard.com

Arabic version Bulgarian version Catalan version Czech version Danish version German version Greek version English version Spanish version Finnish version French version Hindi version Croatian version Indonesian version Italian version Hebrew version Japanese version Korean version Lithuanian version Latvian version Dutch version Norwegian version Polish version Portuguese version Romanian version Russian version Slovak version Slovenian version Serbian version Swedish version Tagalog version Ukrainian version Vietnamese version Chinese version Turkish version
EDAboard.com map