I work in aerospace engineering and i hesitate to hire PhD. In my experience, PhD always want to find the best engineering solution and cant, dont, or wont bother to understand the business implications of budget and schedule. They simply cant say, “good enough,” and move on. They always need 1 more study, or to so the 1 month model instead of the 1 day hand calc because it gives a more accurate answer, and theyre a pain in the ass to manage. Sometimes all management needs to understand is directional trends to make a decision
We recently ran into a situation where we got an update to NX and the new version physically couldnt model a part we had designed. The part was very specifically designed around its aero features. Our CFD PhD said itd take him 3 months to determine the impact to the features.
I sat down with one of the other engineers, we ran through every scenario possible, ran it all through 1d flow solver models, and determined worst case scenario (which we were certain wasnt going to happen) was 7 degree F change to the metal temperature. When we’re talking metal temps 1200F+, 7 is insignificant.
We came to that conclusion in 4 hours and told the team to keep going with what NX could do.
Not usually. For my sphere, you need field time to understand how things work. The academic smarts gives you the horsepower to the hardest problems, but it doesn’t replace the foundational skills that comprise 97% of the work
Within your area of expertise too, even. In my field, Ph.Ds are viewed as being overqualified with not enough field experience
I work in aerospace engineering and i hesitate to hire PhD. In my experience, PhD always want to find the best engineering solution and cant, dont, or wont bother to understand the business implications of budget and schedule. They simply cant say, “good enough,” and move on. They always need 1 more study, or to so the 1 month model instead of the 1 day hand calc because it gives a more accurate answer, and theyre a pain in the ass to manage. Sometimes all management needs to understand is directional trends to make a decision
Bingo. It’s like this here too.
We recently ran into a situation where we got an update to NX and the new version physically couldnt model a part we had designed. The part was very specifically designed around its aero features. Our CFD PhD said itd take him 3 months to determine the impact to the features.
I sat down with one of the other engineers, we ran through every scenario possible, ran it all through 1d flow solver models, and determined worst case scenario (which we were certain wasnt going to happen) was 7 degree F change to the metal temperature. When we’re talking metal temps 1200F+, 7 is insignificant.
We came to that conclusion in 4 hours and told the team to keep going with what NX could do.
I dunno what any of that means but that’s cool. I thought aerospace engineering would be working with metric units even in the USA though.
All my schooling was is metric units, but my 15 year career in the USA has all been standard units
Well… Are they wrong?
Not usually. For my sphere, you need field time to understand how things work. The academic smarts gives you the horsepower to the hardest problems, but it doesn’t replace the foundational skills that comprise 97% of the work