licensed mechanic wants to be engineer

[fjamal]

I am new to this site. Not really the type to waste anyone's time with a stupid questions, am a no-non sense type myself. Im a 28 yr old licensed automotive service tech (mechanic<310-S>) and a licensed automotive collision repair tech (body <310-B>) Hold both red-seal certificated, have been in the automotive industry my entire life. Father owns mechanic and body shop. Have never had any math or science studies in highschool. Never went ot college for training prior to writing my exams for certification for my licenses. Basically learnt everything from the shop at a very young age. I constantly look at the cars im working on and always question why certain manufacturers dont adopt certain methods-insturments-designs-etc from other manufacturers. Every manufacturer does certain things very well and lacks greatly in other areas of their vehicles and this bothers me. I find myelf to be somewhat of an intellect though i probably dont even know what that word even means. The people i deal with on a day to day basis are very...hjow do i say this without sound like a total a**hole, pretty basic. I just wake up every freakin day and feel that there is a higher calling for me in the automotive industry. My work no longer challenges me. I am a well paid and respected mechanic and bodyman in my industry but i just dont feel like this is for me anymore. I feel like im capable of taking myself to a higher and a more significant field in my industry. Problem is im only now doing my grade 12 math, chemistry and physics and would like to start an engineering (mechanical with automotive option) program this comming sept. I love the math, chemistry and physics courses. Find them hard to stop reading and learning more of. I have gotten myself a math tutor to help me pick up the math skills. I am good at algebra but thats where my math skills end. I am sacrificing alot by pursuing this "calling". i just dont know if i will make it as a good engineer. Same industry but totally diff skill set. Any constructive criticism would be greatly appreciated. Is it pheasable? i am probably the most determined and disciplined person i know, i have never failed any task i actually tried but am i chewing on more then i can swallow here??

[jboggs]

fjamal,
Listen carefully to these words from one at the other end of the career -
If there were more young folks like you in the world we would have a much brighter future. Your words seem so rare among those of your generation. Actually take responsibility for your own future? Don't just sit there and wait for more government handouts? What a breath of fresh air! I am hear to tell you just based on your descriptions of yourself that ... you CAN do it! And I don't mean that in some sort of squishy feel-good sentiment. I mean it. You can do it. Your success will help the profession too! We always need more engineers with actual hands-on real world experience. So many design mistakes are made by people that, though well intentioned, really don't know any better because they lack that experience.

There is another reason I believe in you - you are motivated! You aren't just trying to complete some course or fill in some blank. When I was in college, we had several guys that were GI's back from Vietnam or wherever. They were several years older than the rest of us. They weren't there to party or pick up girls or "discover themselves". They had a mission and were there for one purpose - an education. Frankly the rest of us kids resented them a little because they absolutely screwed up the grading curve for the rest of us. Your motivation is the reason you will jump over obstacles that would stop others dead in their tracks.

Unrelated - One tip you have probably already figured out about the automotive industry - cars are designed with an eye to manufacturing cost. In other words they are designed to be put together once by technicians with specially designed tools. The poor schmuck who has to change the plugs does not even enter into their thought process. He is not their customer. You aren't likely to hear a marketing campaign that says "Buy our car because its so easy to work on!"

[PinkertonD]

Bravo fjamal,

I totally echo JB's words. You will be better than just an Engineer. I too am at the old-fart age and have seen my share of "Engineers" run the full scale from dangerously incompetent to brilliant. The curve for that is like a a very fat carrot with "Brilliant" at the pointy end. If you keep going as you are, you will indeed make it well towards, if not all the way to the pointy end.

Now, automotive design. Having spent some time in the Auto Industry I can tell you, you are in for much heartburn and pain with that line of questions. As JB says, cars are not often designed to be easy to maintain. The cynic in me would suggest that repairs and maintenance make up a goodly portion of a Dealership's sustained-survival income. Two hours to replace a component in one model or one hour in another, the sales force may be encouraged to sell the two-hour version vehicle.

Please do not go into the Auto Engineering field with rose colored glasses. You will find in all ********** that life is pretty much about compromise. The only thing we as Engineers never compromise on is safety, but other than that, it will be rare to work on a project where you do not have to do things the way the client/team etc wants rather than all your way. No matter how correct and brilliant your way would be.

In Autos, Marketing has a great deal to do with design. They are constantly doing studies with potential buyers on what looks "nice" etc and then they formulate the "view" of the new model. Also Production, Maintenance and Sales will have a good amount of influence so they can get that two-hour-to-replace, but three-minutes-to-install item in there.

So, given your enthusiasm at this level AND you say you are enjoying Physics and Math, you are on the right road to a great, rewarding and successful career. The Engineering world needs more of people like you, BUT, temper your beliefs and remember, when you are discussing something with another person, that persona also believes their view is totally correct too.

[zeke]

I totally agree with everything above but may add

The math and physics are critical to a great career in engineering. For autos I would not take any chemstry seriously.
Unless it is required in a degree program that you may pursue.

As far as the math, if you are good in algebra, you are automatically good in EVERY calculus course you will ever need.
Physics is also crucial to your success.
At age 28, I would seek personal professional teachers in math and physics until you get up to speed. The money you spend for this will be more than worth it.
If you succeed in these subjects,you are 95% sure of total success. Enginerering after math and physics is a snap.
As an aside point it is very interesting that,preengineering students in my day were subjected to calclulus and physics which are considered STOPPER courses intended to discourage the student from continuing in engineering, sometimes dropping out to go to premed in cases I know.


Finally, in my experience,insofar as math and physics , most engineers do not have a really good grip on these subjects, but most succeed anyway by avoiding heavy analytical engineering or teaching jobs and go more into design which is 90% of the ballgame, or sales which could be lucrative but less engineering demanding.



Good luck. I think you can make it and be rewarded in a wonderful field

[Kelly_Bramble]

Drive, desire and ambition are traits that should not be wasted - forge ahead young man!...

However, you should be aware that automotive repair and troubleshooting is not the same as design engineering... These are very different skill sets and the job functions, culture, applications and the perspectives are dramatically different.

Also, there are many different avenues one can pursue in engineering. Be aware that an engineering degree is math and physics heavy and industry practical applications are not studied as much as one would think in pursuit of a engineering degree.

It is my view that it takes approximately five to seven years after graduating for most folks to develop as fully functional and efficient engineer.

An advantage you would have on graduation is your familiarity with functional engineered systems. This is a skill set lacking in most graduate engineers – in fact I am astonished when I have a room full of brilliant engineering graduates whom have no ideal how the disk brakes on their cars work, are manufactured, and the different components required within the assembly.

To me, a guy with your practical background should explore the applications side of engineering – maintainability, manufacturing engineering, maintenance engineering, etc..

I think you would likely be disappointed with the analysis side of engineering.

Good luck!

[PinkertonD]

Good point Kelly,

Many years back when I worked in Australia, fresh graduate Engineers went on to a two-year probationary status. They were little more than coffee getters and checkers. They were given tiny parts of projects to see what they could do.

It was a brilliant system that I hope still exists today. It gave the newby a chance to find out what real Engineering was about and also gave the employer a chance to see the potential of the newby as an Engineer.

[fjamal]

Thank you so much for your kind words! I failed to mention that although i hold dual licenses in both the service/troubleshooting as well as the structural/body repair. For the past 6 years i have been focusing mainly on the structural inspections conducted on vehicles. In Canada vehicles that are involved in semi-serious to serious collisions are written off and branded as salvaged (if the repair estimate exceeds 70% of the cars value). There is a huge market for these salvage branded vehicles and many shops purchase them with the intent on rebuilding them. In order for a salvaged vehicle to have a rebuilt title it needs to pass a structural inspection by a licensed technician (310-b). I have inspected probably every single common car from the early 2000 models to brand new vehicles. If you drive a "common" vehicle, i most likely have seen how it faired in a collision and have also seen what it takes to repair (structurally) the vehicle back to its original manufacturers specifications. Most (about 85%) of the vehicles that i inspect fail the incpesction. Even a slight contamination in the technicians weld will prompt me to fail the vehicle because it will not "behave" the way it is intended as the strength of the weld has been comprimised by a lazy tech who hadnt taken the proper procedures to perform a contaminated-free and "proper" weld. Many of my customers are wealthy shop owners who have little to no knowledge on the repair side of the business, they pretty much go with whatever their technicians say. I provide them with an in-depth report as to why their vehicle failed and what needs to be done in order to have that vehicle deemed safe for the roads again. Their techs will then perform the repairs i give them in my rpeort and the vehicle is brought back to me for another thorugh inspection. So i actually have the same responsibilities as an Engineer, in that people's safety is my number one concern and priority. When i get frustrated by the vehicles designs its the structural components that raise questions in my mind. Certain vehicle manufacturers have designed the structure in a way where the major components (ex the frame rails) sustain its original state and their class b components (such as the radiator core support) take the brunt of the damage without causing damage to the rails. Now i know that alot of variables determine the total effect of the collision but ive seen some cars fair better then others and that's what raises these qustions. Why does the frame rails on a Honda Civic get mangled during a moderate head on collision, while the frame rails of say a vw jetta remain unscathed. Ive seen vehicles hit from all angles at all speeds and have noticed that certain manufacturers have designed their structural components much better than others. What i would like to know is the fatality rate and which manufacturer's vehicle yield the highest fatality when involved in a serious collision. Again i know i am dealing with Engineers on this forum and many questions would need to be answered before someone can give an explanation as to why certain vehicles fair better than others, but for aruguements sake say two vehicles were involved in a collision with all variable identical to one another. Why does one fair better than the other? Shouldn't theses manufacturers notice that other manufacturers are designing safer vehicles and adapth whatever method-design that their competition is using? I very much look forward to my new endeavor and am sincerely appreciative of all the comments i've read regarding my new goal. Once again i thank you and wish all of you the best in your pursuits to make a difference in this world!

[PinkertonD]

First off, can I encourage you use pargraph breaks you message is all but unreadable. If you Javascript turned off then that will also bunch up the text into on big block.

Probably the most important thing for an Engineer is to be able communicate clearly and concisely and I refuse to read most of your last post as it is similar in structure to your first one.

One thing I did see when I visually scanned the lower portion to see if you were going anywhere with the conversation, was the "fare better than others," comment. Depending on what you regard as "safer," I would rather be in a wreck with the Honda than the VW if the Honda was bent more. That means energy is being absorbed in crushing up that steel. As much as a wreck may seem like an instant thing, it is actually a slow and steady sequence of crushing metal in a quite ordered fashion dissipating energy all along the way.

If the VW is less bent and thus better for rebuilding then the occupants of the vehicle would have to have disposed of that extra energy themselves, and that ain't good.

[jboggs]

If I can piggyback on Dave's comments (and others on this forum are probably sick of hearing me harp on this), ...

An engineer that is clearly and easily understood by others is more likely to be taken seriously. He will find greater acceptance of his ideas.

I have made the point with many young engineers that first impressions count. If your drawings are sloppy, people won't take the time to dig out the technical value. The same applies to your words. Today there is a tendency to ignore grammar, spelling, punctuation, and sentence structure. I'm not saying you did this, but please be aware that allowing those habits to creep in will only hurt your advancement.

[fjamal]

Thank you gentlemen. I apologize for the mess and will adopt the habit of presenting myself and my work in a pleasant and clear manner. I hope to learn much from you gentlemen (and ladies) and can say that i already have. Both you gentlement have just humbled me with my first few lessons in engineering. Thank you