I like making stuff but everytime I speak so some 'professionals' they start talking maths and physics shit and it seems like gatekeeping to me. Getting plans past council seems like another rort. Why do we need this stuff. Engineering just seems like a way to make money of morons who think that numbers = facts. Sure;y shit isn't that complicated, you can youtube how to build a rocket FFS, easy shit. Change my mind.
Depend what "stuff" you want to build.
dude you’re right. I’ve been trying to get deep sea submarine tourism business going for a while now and these engineers I hired keep getting in the way… think I might just tell them to kick rocks
too soon
try camper world, I hear they have discount sub parts available
you should hire a bunch of women and diversity
that'll work well for you
Got him lmaoooo
It's so we don't end up like China with buildings that randomly collapse or tip over and swallow innocent people alive
You can design and build most basic structures using common materials using span charts and reading the building codes but when you think you want a 3rd or 4th story, it becomes everyone in the area's problem if that fricker is done incorrectly
>Getting plans past council
Kek
I’m extremely pro gun but that argument is terrible and you should feel bad for posting it.
>revolutionary war weapons were privately owned
No.
All of life is a shit test.
>talk to an alcoholic redneck about how something works
>they go into all of the technical details and seem very knowledgeable
>talk to an engineer about how something works
>"Erm, I don't know much about that in particular. I didn't major in that specific branch of design."
i am that alcoholic redneck but im not dissing engineers that hard. best results come when the redneck say how it should be done and what equipment should be used, then the engineer runs the calculations and figure out all dimension, power requirement, wall thickness, pipe size, cable strength etc for all possible scenarios for whatever the project is about. then the redneck get this back, order materials based on this and goes to work.
problem today is the first step of most projects is a friggin architect or designer who hands over his "futuristic and eco friendly vision" to the engineer who then have to figure it all out with no real life experience in the field and then he hand over a complete A to Z build sheet to the redneck who just stand there wtf is this??
>talk to an engineer about how something works
>"Erm, I don't know much about that in particular. I didn't major in that specific branch of design."
because they are aware a lot of other people are more qualified in certain fields and don't want to talk out of their ass pretending like a redneck
Part of being a professional.
I have qualifications under 2 of the 6 branches of my profession. Working outside of my qualifications, including discussions, can lead to a disciplinary hearing.
>talk to a med school about how something works
>they go into all of the technical details and seem very knowledgeable
>talk to a specialist about how something works
>"Erm, I don't know much about that in particular. I didn't major in that specific branch of medicine."
homosexual.
Couldn't find a better way to explain Dunning-Kruger-Effect if I tried.
math and physics let's you get the most bang for your buck so to speak.
Yeah, you could just pick the biggest residential AC units for your new house, but if you know how to do load calculations you can save a lot of money both in installation and run cost.
Yawn
This is a PrepHole board the biggest savings will come from installing it yourself.
>Audience sits
>You walk to the toilet, turn around, pull down your pants and sit down
>You shit hard enough water splashes up, lifting you off the seat
>Water erupts around every side of your ass in a perfect shower like fashion
>People in the front row get wet
>Everyone resounds in thunderous applause
>Standing ovation
>Your performance is rated 10/10 across the board
>Why does building things require math? Are engineers overrated?
an engineer designed deep sea challenger
a not engineer designed titan.
>a not engineer designed titan.
>In 1984, Rush received a Bachelor of Science degree in aerospace engineering from Princeton University.
Treating the opinion of someone with an engineering degree as gospel truth because it confirms your biases is just as stupid as dismissing them out of hand.
Even stupider is pretending that an engineer with a degree from a prestigious Ivy Leauge engineering school wasn't an engineer just because it doesn't fit the narrative that engineers weren't involved in some engineering catastrophe.
>prestigious Ivy League
Prestigious schools do not deserve their reputation anymore; they'll grant degrees to just about anyone who can fog a mirror.
Really makes me want to not drive over bridges or go into any buildings now.
he got his degree 40 years ago
My dad got his chemistry degree at berkeley back in the 70's.
he ended up being a carpenter, then a GC with my grandpa.
Well you really have 2 options here. Overbuild with experience in knowing what will work, or calculate and overbuild. One of these is easier to do, and safer.
I build some janky shit for MYSELF. I ain't doing that for someone else unless they accept it, and it won't be hazardous.
An engineer designed tacoma narrows bridge.
A non-engineer designed the golden gate.
Do *that* math.
Engineers just look stuff up in tables produced by scientists (i.e. material strengths)
>A non-engineer designed the golden gate.
What... That dude was a professor and wrote the standard textbook about structural frame design. He wasn't only an engineer but primarily a mathematician. The other guys were leading bridge engineers.
>seems like gatekeeping to me
Because it is. It is specifically to hinder morons to do shit without thinking and kill other people. "looks fine to me"
Building things doesn't require math but building things that work and stay working without experience requires math. And no there isn't always some redneck or tradesmen who is experienced. And in some places you don't want to trial and error your way into experience like with a bridge potentially killing hundreds of people and consuming a not irrelevant share of taxes or skyscrapers in Manhatten.
The other thing is making sure people have read and obey to standards even when building miniscule stuff because people (even when educated) are known to very much not give a frick otherwise.
This thread is glorious. So much cope.
>hey that guy wasn’t an engineer
>yeah he was
>NO ARGGH I MEAN HE WAS BUT YOUR WRONG CUZ IVY LEAGUE SCHOOLS ARE SHIT AND MY DADS A PLUMBER
lol like wtf
>maths and physics
Well, you don't. But it certainly helps.
Learn: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL0INsTTU1k2X4kCPqmi1eJBgmYJUth_2s
You can just guess and check depending on your budget and time frame.
If you’re not part of the solution then you’re part of the precipitate.
>it seems like gatekeeping to me.
In engineering, you are going to get sued for everything you have if a design you build breaks and kills people.
Long term safety is the #1 priority in engineering (well, should be!) and if people tell you X needs calculations for something, then it's not gatekeeping but speaking from experience.
People not in the business overlook safety very easily, they're too focused on getting something to work. You can make everything work, that's not a problem at all. But making it work so it won't break and make companies lose profits or outright fricking kill or injure people is where engineers shine.
Also, if you want to talk about money, there's all kinds of manufacturing related stuff that engineers consider. Your garage project is one of a kind - but when you are going to manufacture MILLIONS of pieces of some product, it better be flawless and optimized to minimize material/time usage.
>In engineering, you are going to get sued for everything you have if a design you build breaks and kills people.
no but the company might.
There have been cases of the company then going after the Engineer in return, but they are few and far between and normally after someone had actively fricked up and committed fraud or outright ignored test result etc.
One guy I know of in NDT is getting sued for passing something that failed but not the part he signed off on but it was a component of the part that did fail and it was because he wasn't there for the full cycle of heating and cooling but claimed he was.
It’s still illegal for companies to blame individuals for mistakes. They have to make the case the person was acting maliciously or intentionally negligent… which is almost impossible. You’re right, it would have to be a personal frick up on insane proportions to ever blow back on an individual employee
>seems like gatekeeping to me
Why don't you have a go at building a submersible?
You aren't completely wrong. In fact I found that engineering didn't use math way back when, as math was mainly only used for finance and some academics early on. However later developments in applied math allowed for testing designs in earlier steps which ultimately saved time and money, so it was seen as a major improvement.
The issues you are talking about aren't math related, but a tragic combination of profiteering by way of certifications and over reaction of governing bodies. Basically people did stupid things and people died, so lots of rules got passed to prevent that and some pushed it to make money off of it.
Also facts and math won't help with some councils. I had a project with a fire safety concern, so I came back with years of data showing it was safe. Got rejected because the fire safety testing was for commercial buildings and not residential buildings. Had similar issues with over engineering things as well, didn't have good data so I just made it go well beyond what was needed figuring it would be safe, got rejected as well.
Apparently
fire proof materials will lose their fire resistance if zoned differently
>so glad the council informed or I would have had my fire brick wall set ablaze when I tuned on my backyard grill
A 3 inch solid steel beam can't support my target weight, but a 3 inch hollow steel beam can
>good thing to know several inches of solid steel can't support a few hundred pounds, but air is load bearing
That said if professional is offering you free advice it worth listening, more so if you actually paid for their input. All that knowledge of the past is worth something, so don't waste it or your stupidity will trigger more over reaction of governing bodies and we all suffer for it. Well maybe not you if you got killed, but think of the other DIYers.
It depends on the specific type of engineering. Most building engineers aren't doing any calculations themselves. They're just pulling together standardized solutions for known problems. "for this kind of span I need a beam of this type and size" In some ways, it's not unlike a programmer who knows they need a certain type of sort, but doesn't know shit about how to implement it, so just pulls down a package that does it for them.
I'd go the opposite way. The engineer is the computer scientist who knows exactly which sorting algorithm is best suited – and knows precisely how it works – but ask him to write an implementation in C and it will not look like nice code.
Numbers are facts. You seem under the impression we inventedmath but it’s the most objective field. If you have two rocks and grab two more it will always be four
if you want things designed so that they can /just barely/ do what you need them to, using the cheapest possible materials without failure during the warranty period, you hire engineers
if you want something so overbuilt that it can do what you need for the next 500 years with the occasional spray of wd40 and can support bridges, you hire millwrights, rednecks, machinists, and ironworkers from 60 years ago. foundry workers and cast-iron form makers too
>mfw modern bridges collapse after a few decades, but old bridges will last forever
Survivor bias.
Overengineering isn’t as bad as under engineering, but that doesn’t make it good
>Overengineering isn’t as bad as under engineering, but that doesn’t make it good
It does when the alternative is a profit-driven race to make the most under-engineered structure possible without it collapsing (for now). I'd rather we just stacked rocks like the romans did; their shit is still around.
tbf their shit is still around because we don't use it. there's a reason why roads are the way they are : an enormous amount of heavy cars drive on them every hour of every day for years and years. they also have to be water resistant whilst also soaking up water to prevent hydroplaning, be resistant to wear, temperature changes and UV and most of all they need to be fricking smooth. If you were to build a road the way the romans did and drive on them i doubt your highway would last more than a week.
if you need anything more than simple geometry to do what you're trying to do then it's superfluous and your time would be better spent doing something else.
>I want to create things and be orderly and generally eliminate all the illogical half baked designs around me
>WHAAAAT I NEED TO LEARN A SYSTEM OF LOGIC THIS IS SO UNFAIR
The only excuse you have is your reptile brain telling you to crave distractions and chaos. Open a textbook and learn.
Math is for optimization and for eliminating some portion of trial and error. Having a good intuition is often better, but sometimes the math comes in handy. Relying entirely on math, however, is a mistake. That's how you end up with hyper-optimized structures that collapse when one bolt is off-spec. Overall I agree t b h, engineers think they're hot shit when most of the time they're just shit. Math is no substitute for IQ and experience, in the same way that a cookbook will never produce a great chef.
>Getting plans past council seems like another rort
#1 reason I moved back to the US after living in the UK for years.
For non Bongs: In the UK, the local government authority is called a council, and ALL construction must be approved by them. Not just the zoning/code aspect like in the US, but literally the permission to build any structure. You have to submit detailed plans, groups like the historical societies and environmental agencies weigh in, and then it goes to a vote. It's a highly subjective process, and at any point your plans can get rejected unless you change xyz, or they are outright denied.
No fricking wonder there's a "housing crisis" in the UK.
Checked
Also oi you got a loicense for those ramps?!
At least it isn't difficult to be an electrician in the UK.
It's so morons like you don't hurt anyone else
When a fight breaks out in the lab it's almost always inevitably settled by math. It's primary use is proving to your coworkers that they are dumb and wrong
This is why its irritating when people use the term engineer losely. You see if an engineer makes a wrong calculation, people can die bros. There was a bridge in miami that just flat out collapsed a few years ago.
anglos have indeed a bad habit of calling anyone that touches a tool an "engineer"
>Why does building things require math? Are engineers overrated?
>I like making stuff but everytime I speak so some 'professionals' they start talking maths and physics shit and it seems like gatekeeping to me. Getting plans past council seems like another rort. Why do we need this stuff. Engineering just seems like a way to make money of morons who think that numbers = facts. Sure;y shit isn't that complicated, you can youtube how to build a rocket FFS, easy shit. Change my mind.
tldr, shedding the blame when it breaks
there's a difference between building stuff that works pretty well and building stuff that is never allowed to fail
anyone with a little practice can put together something that works 99 times out of 100, and the 1 out of 100 where it fails is fine because that was kinda rare and it likely wasn't that expensive of a project to begin with so it's no big deal to put it back together
once you start adding more money, or more people start using it, or the stakes of life and death get higher, it's the designer's ass on the line when it fails and nobody wants to be the guy who designed a thing that killed everybody
getting your shit approved by engineers is just a fancy way of saying "yeah I verify that this probably isn't going to fail, and if there's some freak accident where it does fail I'm not responsible anymore"
I'm a structural engineer. Spent 15 years in the industry. I can clearly remember my slow transition from understanding math the way they teach it in school, to the engineering way of thinking about math as a tool. Numbers and calculations are nothing more than a tool to help solve a problem. Statistics is utterly meaningless and moronic in and of itself. But as a tool, you can use these things. A math teacher would teach you that math is good and useful in and of itself. Calculus is for this, algebra is for that, ect. But in engineering, you use the tool you need for the job at hand.
I've talked to a lot of junior engineers and non-engineers who feel the same way as OP. And I've felt that way at times. If you're designing one story houses or jigs for your home wood shop, sure, who needs math and physics? I completely agree. I much prefer working on a project for myself and using trial and error. It's fun.
But I've also spent time in Ethiopia and India as a missionary helping them build multi-story concrete structures and so on. It is no wonder than when an earthquake a Californian wouldn't think twice about slaughters thousands in those countries. They take OP's logic and apply it to everything. It's like that story of the tribe who set the sights on their rifles up high so that the guns would shoot father. Just ignorance. Sure, there is too much bureaucracy and red tape in construction and design, that's why I got out and own an industrial manufacturing company now; I can do things my own way and minimize government control in my life.
But damn OP, you have no idea how deep the math and physics rabbit hole goes in all of the things you use every day.