Which type of Engineering would you recommend?

Dundhoone · 21-02-2009 02:29AM

Stoner wrote: »

+1,
.
Colleges that once held high standards still do, but they offer other qualifications that are easier to obtain and will still provide a student with a degree in engineering. Fair play to anyone who completes these courses.

The standard, entry level requirements and work load are all lower/less then the traditional courses, but both people end up with a degree in engineering, One student may have studied hard to get honors maths in the leaving, the other got a C or B in pass maths he/she may have opted for a diploma in Engineering with an option to spend an extra year to get a degree, there was a time when this was 2-3 years extra (or five part time).

At the end of the day both can become an IEI member one just knows a hell of a lot more then the other about the subject. The other guys seldom recognise this and consider themselves on par. Most industries agree with them.

We have a system which separate those who get the points to do a degree course form those who dont. It gives those who dont a second chance to go to full honours degree after 3rd year. Even after graduation any technician can go back and study to become an engineer.

And still we are pc around the issue. The EI should move for full protected status of the title. What we have now is technicians calling themsleves engineers, as was already mentioned , whether climbing poles to fix cables or whatever. Its the equivalent of nurses calling themsleves doctors , accountancy technicians calling themselves accountants or solicitors devils claiming to be fully fledged solicitors. It doesnt happen in other professions.

lg123 · 21-02-2009 01:42PM

+1

fishdog · 22-02-2009 08:08PM

The EI should move for full protected status of the title.

+ 1

Turbulent Bill:

Phonewatch etc. use technicians to install their alarms. I'm sure they're very good, but installing equipment to instructions is a world away from solving engineering problems - could a technician design the alarm, for example?

I dont think alarm installers are technicians!

If an engineer is someone with a level 8 degree, then I would think that it follows that a technician is someone with a level 7 (I am finishing a level 7 at present).

No formal qualifications are required to install intruder alarms in Ireland at present. When working as an electrician I installed plenty of alarms after the 1 day (optional) training course!

Turbulent Bill · 23-02-2009 11:04AM

fishdog wrote: »

I dont think alarm installers are technicians!

If an engineer is someone with a level 8 degree, then I would think that it follows that a technician is someone with a level 7 (I am finishing a level 7 at present).

No formal qualifications are required to install intruder alarms in Ireland at present. When working as an electrician I installed plenty of alarms after the 1 day (optional) training course!

Sorry fishdog, I think I confused the issue! What I should have said was alarms are installed by people with some technical knowledge of alarms, but who aren't engineers (or engineering technicians for that matter) - as you mentioned, the engineering training requirements are minimal. You're correct, a level 7 holder should be formally recognised as an engineering technician.

It's interesting that, even as an engineer, I managed to confuse what should be a professional title without thinking. What hope does anyone outside the industry have of recognising titles and educational levels if they aren't formally defined?

fishdog · 24-02-2009 08:16PM

Sorry fishdog

No problem

I upset alarm installers on the electrical forum by suggesting that they were not engineers

:D

Animal-Mother83 · 03-03-2009 09:24PM

I recommend mechanical as it's one of the oldest and broadest branches of engineering. It covers everything: materials and manufacturing, mechanics, thermodynamics and energy systems (incl. traditional & sustainable), heat and mass transfer, fluid mechanics, pneumatics and hydraulics, electrical and control systems, computer applications (even some programming), design (CAD), mathematical & computer modelling, engineering management.

Therefore you can work in just about any area. If you are not sure about which dicipline then mechanical is the safest choice.

There's plenty of funding for postgrads aswell. I'm doing Ph.D research on biomass gasification integrated with fuel cells and the mechanical degree has definitely given me the knowledge to deal with not just the mechanical but the chemical and electrical engineering aspects of the project also.

Good luck

fishdog · 03-03-2009 10:18PM

If you are not sure about which dicipline then mechanical is the safest choice.

Is there much demand for mechanical engineers at the moment??

lg123 · 03-03-2009 10:40PM

fishdog wrote: »

Is there much demand for mechanical engineers at the moment??

there is very little demand for mech engineers with less than ~5 years experience atm and the market is totally flooded. nearly every IT in ireland is offering a level 7 BEng in mech with many offering level 8 too. not to mention the other 8 universities offering same.

fishdog · 03-03-2009 10:53PM

there is very little demand for mech engineers with less than ~5 years experience atm and the market is totally flooded

That is what I thought.

I would seem like an interesting area to be working in, but if there is little chance of getting work there as a graduate it may not be a good choice.

Kareir · 03-03-2009 11:55PM

I'm currently in 4th year (as in transition year), incidentally doing structural engineering work exp. at the moment. Anyway, i've been suggested to do engineering in college, which is why i'm here currently. dont know what type yet, but considering i have 4 years to decide, assuming i get in and i dont take a gap year, i think i'm ok.

Anyway, on the subject of people calling themselves " ___ Engineers", i wonder if you guys had heard the caller that has called into the Colm and Jim-Jim breakfast show on 2fm about... twice now? He says he's a Car Design Engineer when asked. When asked to expand, he says he puts stickers on cars >.>

I think the fact is that people being called some form of "engineer" suggests arcane knowledge and expertise, that seperates them from the normal folk and grants them the powers to programme an alarm or move a bin - put simply, it's a self confidence thing for the people doing the job "why, yes, i'm an ENGINEER".

I woulda thought that it was a protected title, like in the U.K. you have to have done a 7 year cycle and an exam before you can be an architect. but apperantly not. Maybe it should be.

oh well, back to the forum for some random skimming..

_Kar

Animal-Mother83 · 04-03-2009 01:22AM

fishdog wrote: »

Is there much demand for mechanical engineers at the moment??

Well to be honest I don't know because I've been doing the Ph.D for the past 2 and a half years; but if there are any jobs in any form of engineering a mechanical engineer can go for it because the course covers so much. That's what I mean when I say it's a safe choice.

There's bound to be jobs in energy (ESB, ESBI, renewables etc.). If there are no jobs here go abroad, a mechanical engineering degree means you can work anywhere.

lg123:

They have always said you need 5 years experience, it's rubbish, you just chance your arm. Okay the ITs are offering the courses but as far as I know not many people are doing these mechanical degrees, nobody wants to put in the effort.

Soon enough for engineering you are going to need at minimum a masters degree. That's why DIT have set up a new taught masters programme (mechanical) this year. Check the link:

http://www.dit.ie/study/postgraduate/browse/programmes/title,15275,en.html

It's geared towards research, simulation (FEA and CFD), energy, and biomechanics.

If you ask me that's where the jobs will be RESEARCH!!!

Animal-Mother83 · 04-03-2009 01:46AM

Darren1o1 wrote: »

I did an honours degree and seen people coming from IT's struggle with the levels after three years of education (Despite the fact we had only done two). To say come in and simply do "fourth year" is quite untrue and a little irresponsible.

Sorry but just read some of the previous posts and have to respond to the honours degree snobbery.

Right, well I did an ordinary degree level 7 (called a diploma when I started it) because I didn't have honours maths in the leaving cert, after that I transferred to the honours degree level 8 course and had to go into third year. Third year was a complete waste of time because I had all of it done from the diploma third year and it was a breeze (including maths!).

There were atleast 6-8 people in my class who also transferred from ITs and they felt exactly the same. Many of the direct honours degree people were struggling. I found that they had much less experience with design project work and presenting their work both oral and report writing.

I ended up with a 1st (second highest mark out of 50) and now I'm doing a Ph.D. Also one of my mates who transferred from the level 7 course got a 1st and is doing a Ph.D.

And I can't remember who but somebody said something about honours degree graduates do the designing and techs do the building. Not true, I actually did more design theory and design project work for my diploma than my honours degree, LOL!

You really shouldn't comment on what you clearly know nothing about.

lg123 · 04-03-2009 11:58AM

animal mother,

how many years post-grad commercial/industrial experience do you have?

Animal-Mother83 · 04-03-2009 01:17PM

lg123 wrote: »

animal mother,

how many years post-grad commercial/industrial experience do you have?

3 years, why? You?

lg123 · 04-03-2009 01:40PM

3 years also. i asked because a lot of your answers seemed to be coming from an academia point of view.

i also went the diploma route to my degree and i think there was a significant difference between my knowledge and engineering ability between year 3 and 5, as would be expected. form my experience, technicians do the building and engineers do the designing, techs can do the designing also but a lot of the time they cant sign-off on such work.

getz · 04-03-2009 01:56PM

seadog9 wrote: »

I'm currently studying engineering in UCD, but next year I'll have a choice to make, I will either delve into Biosystems, Mechanical, Electrical and Electronic, Chemical or Civil Engineering, so I suppose here is a good place to go, which of these courses would you recommend? I personally am interested in 2 of them but I want to get views on all of them anyway, just in case.....

i was a paint chemist with a large paint company in the uk[i am now retired] when my company closed down i went to work for BOC gas ,just doing analytical work,it was pilot plant[claus]. and all the other work force were gas scientists ,the research that was being done was on destroying acid gas [h2s] the kind of gas that comes from oil wells,my computer could mix a cocktail of gas from any oil well from anywere in the world ,i would then fire it into the plant[furness]that was heated by pure oxygen to 1600dec +[never been tried before]we found we could distroy 99.9% of the nasty gas,this ment BOC could convert any oil well cheeply to reach new clean standards. there are very few gas scientists around the world and if i could live my life again that the area i would go into

shanejunkin · 02-07-2009 07:24PM

Turbulent Bill wrote: »

Educationally speaking, someone who has completed a certified engineering course (preferably Level 8 or above on the National Framework of Qualifications). Depending on their position/responsibilities, they should also have appropriate work experience.

Phonewatch etc. use technicians to install their alarms. I'm sure they're very good, but installing equipment to instructions is a world away from solving engineering problems - could a technician design the alarm, for example?

The main problem is that Engineers Ireland have been useless at protecting 'engineer' as a professional title - anyone can call themselves one, regardless of qualifications. If I set myself up as 'Turbulent Bill, Medical Doctor and Solicitor', I'm sure the Medical Council and Law Society would come down on me like a ton of bricks.

I have recently come across similar concerns about how easy it is to "bandy" about the title "engineer". With the recent onset of three year engineering "degrees", as oppose to the old titile of "diploma", it's getting easier for people to claim to be a qualified engineer. Now you can hold an "engineering degree" when really you hold a "diploma in engineering". The differentiation of "Hons Degrees" (for the four year level 8 course) is not distinct enough to my mind.

I recently decided to solve this problem by joining the IEI and working towards becoming a chartered engineer. I found the IEI to be useless. I hold a level 8 engineering degree in Electronic Engineering. I also have seven years post graduate experience with companies such as Intel, Hewlett Packard and a Johnson and Johnson subsidiory. However, my couse is only recognoised for Associate Membership (as oppose to Normal Membership) of the IEI. I confirmed that it was a level 8 course. I then found out that the new, revamped version of my course, is now recognoised by the IEI. My course was a Batchelor of Technology in Electronic Engineering and is now offered as a Batchelor of Science in Applied Electronics. The IEI fail to recognoise my qualification as sufficent for Normal Membership. Even though WIT concede that the new course is essentially the same but is "now semesterised".

Has anyone, probably graduates of a few years back, come across similar problems with the new "Hons Degree" differentiation from "Degrees" (what used to be diplomas?

shanejunkin · 02-07-2009 07:35PM

doolox wrote: »

I have a diploma in Engineering(Electronics) and cannot get any job at the moment. I am converting to Mechatronics as this is what employers want.
I was in Intel doing motherboard repair on Customer returns, very stressful, very competitive and in the end the jobs were shipped to Hungary which was cheaper.
I transferred to the FAB operations and I was treated as a joke.
They wanted and paid better for craft persons such as plumbers, electricians and fitters and instrumentation people who were respected better and paid better than I was. I was relegated to doing routine operations which I found soul-destroying and mind numbing.
I found it a bitter experience and left in Nov 08 to pursue craft related course in mechatronics with FAS which I am finding challenging in hands on stuff but enjoyable all the same.
I have learnt more in FAS in 9 months than I learned in 7 years in FAB in Intel.
While there were some notable exceptions in Intel such as the trainers who thought me operations (One was an Indian with a doctorate in Electronics, completely wasted doing ops in a FAB........) most technical people guarded their information jealously and were afraid to train and educate new people properly. They only opened up with info when leaving for a better job and the trainee would not show them up, such was the level of competiveness in Intel.
It is well within the bounds of possibility that Electronics will open up and begin to pay dividends in the future but it will be for multidisciplinary people with a grasp of chemistry, mechanics and Biology who will reap the most benefits rather than specialists.
Going through all the branches I'd say construction and civil are crippled for the next 4-5 years until we get rid of the housing surplus and government spending will stop civil eng projects in their tracks.
The downturn the the car industry will also cripple mechanical eng.
Obamas recently announced energy infrastructure projects to take the US away from fossil fuels might bode well for Wind, Solar and energy management and advanced building management expertise esp. energy demand reduction.
The Irish govt have set aside 300million fro broadband rollout in non covered areas so the immediate future of network engineers is ok, but I fear this area, like the railway boom of the 1870's, is overdone and needs a sound revenue plan to sustain itself. Who will pay for all this lovely infrastructure? What will be the benefits to people of all this access and information and who will regulate it?
What I find out in the jobs market is companies looking for skills in HVAC, electrical utilities experience and also the mechatronics skillset.
This would take years to accumulate and leaves me in a difficult position jobwise.

I worked in Intel for nearly three years and I agree with you that lots of senior people held onto information and knowledge for competitive reasons. I bust myself working to attain the skills and knowledge (and recognition) of the senior engineers to no avail. I assumed these guys to be very smart and that their perceived vagueness was because I couldn't quite grasp the concepts they were offering. I have since realised that this is not the case and that they tended to hold onto information. Thinking back I offered a lot of incite that was ignored because I was a junior engineer. Those senior guys are still working there, while they are still on big money, they're still running the same pieces of equipment and guarding the same limited knowledge. F**k Intel!!!You were dead right to move on...

shanejunkin · 02-07-2009 07:49PM

Animal-Mother83 wrote: »

Darren1o1 wrote: »

I did an honours degree and seen people coming from IT's struggle with the levels after three years of education (Despite the fact we had only done two). To say come in and simply do "fourth year" is quite untrue and a little irresponsible.

Sorry but just read some of the previous posts and have to respond to the honours degree snobbery.

Right, well I did an ordinary degree level 7 (called a diploma when I started it) because I didn't have honours maths in the leaving cert, after that I transferred to the honours degree level 8 course and had to go into third year. Third year was a complete waste of time because I had all of it done from the diploma third year and it was a breeze (including maths!).

There were atleast 6-8 people in my class who also transferred from ITs and they felt exactly the same. Many of the direct honours degree people were struggling. I found that they had much less experience with design project work and presenting their work both oral and report writing.

I ended up with a 1st (second highest mark out of 50) and now I'm doing a Ph.D. Also one of my mates who transferred from the level 7 course got a 1st and is doing a Ph.D.

And I can't remember who but somebody said something about honours degree graduates do the designing and techs do the building. Not true, I actually did more design theory and design project work for my diploma than my honours degree, LOL!

You really shouldn't comment on what you clearly know nothing about.

But your observation is virtually irrelevant. You hold a level 8 degree and post graduate qualifications now? Good stuff by the way.... You've just made the point that you found it easy after the diploma. What the "snobbery" here is about is not directed at you, it's directed at your classmates who finished up after the diploma, they're not engineers, they're engineering technicians. And that's not slagging them off.

Turbulent Bill · 03-07-2009 01:33PM

shanejunkin wrote: »

I recently decided to solve this problem by joining the IEI and working towards becoming a chartered engineer. I found the IEI to be useless. I hold a level 8 engineering degree in Electronic Engineering. I also have seven years post graduate experience with companies such as Intel, Hewlett Packard and a Johnson and Johnson subsidiory. However, my couse is only recognoised for Associate Membership (as oppose to Normal Membership) of the IEI. I confirmed that it was a level 8 course. I then found out that the new, revamped version of my course, is now recognoised by the IEI. My course was a Batchelor of Technology in Electronic Engineering and is now offered as a Batchelor of Science in Applied Electronics. The IEI fail to recognoise my qualification as sufficent for Normal Membership. Even though WIT concede that the new course is essentially the same but is "now semesterised".

Has anyone, probably graduates of a few years back, come across similar problems with the new "Hons Degree" differentiation from "Degrees" (what used to be diplomas?

So the issue here is that your level 8 course wasn't accredited by EI at the time that you did it, but the newer (virtually identical) course is? For chartership, I think the accredited course requirement is just a catch-all. For example, your accredited degree does not necessarily need to be in the same field as your work experience, so essentially it's a general education requirement.

I'd appeal to EI, listing the similarities between your course and the present one, all you CPD training etc. and see what they say.

Turbulent Bill · 03-07-2009 01:43PM

shanejunkin wrote: »

But your observation is virtually irrelevant. You hold a level 8 degree and post graduate qualifications now? Good stuff by the way.... You've just made the point that you found it easy after the diploma. What the "snobbery" here is about is not directed at you, it's directed at your classmates who finished up after the diploma, they're not engineers, they're engineering technicians. And that's not slagging them off.

The way things stand now, they are "Engineers" (or whatever they want to call themselves except "Chartered Engineers"), because EI only protects the CEng title. If you had a diploma/ordinary degree, and there was nothing stopping you calling yourself an "engineer", you'd be crazy not to do it.

Just to clarify, I have the upmost respect for diploma/ordinary degree holders and their skills, my only issue is with EI and how it fails to protect different educational standards.

shanejunkin · 03-07-2009 02:08PM

Turbulent Bill wrote: »

So the issue here is that your level 8 course wasn't accredited by EI at the time that you did it, but the newer (virtually identical) course is? For chartership, I think the accredited course requirement is just a catch-all. For example, your accredited degree does not necessarily need to be in the same field as your work experience, so essentially it's a general education requirement.

I'd appeal to EI, listing the similarities between your course and the present one, all you CPD training etc. and see what they say.

Yeah, that's basically the issue. I guess you're right I can just apply to the EI and cite the similarities. They'd probably just direct me to write a report detailing my work experience to get normal membership.

Maybe I should stop sulking and start writing the reports!!!

shanejunkin · 03-07-2009 02:10PM

Turbulent Bill wrote: »

The way things stand now, they are "Engineers" (or whatever they want to call themselves except "Chartered Engineers"), because EI only protects the CEng title. If you had a diploma/ordinary degree, and there was nothing stopping you calling yourself an "engineer", you'd be crazy not to do it.

Just to clarify, I have the upmost respect for diploma/ordinary degree holders and their skills, my only issue is with EI and how it fails to protect different educational standards.

So, do you think one should, now, only do an Hons engineering degree if they want to become chartered engineers? And that to become an Engineer that you should just do an Ordinary Degree?

Personally, I think the EI should start to guard the title "Engineer" and that a pre req should be a level 8 engineering degree. I don't think that's snobbery. No one would like it if an equivalent happened in the medical industry.

godtabh · 04-07-2009 03:52PM

shanejunkin wrote: »

However, my couse is only recognoised for Associate Membership (as oppose to Normal Membership) of the IEI.

You can still apply for chatership. You just do it differently than some one who can do it straight up

04-07-2009 07:25PM

So, do you think one should, now, only do an Hons engineering degree if they want to become chartered engineers? And that to become an Engineer that you should just do an Ordinary Degree?

People have become Chartered Engineers with just an Ordinary Degree.

BuachaillAbroad · 05-07-2009 09:56AM

seadog9 wrote: »

I'm currently studying engineering in UCD, but next year I'll have a choice to make, I will either delve into Biosystems, Mechanical, Electrical and Electronic, Chemical or Civil Engineering, so I suppose here is a good place to go, which of these courses would you recommend? I personally am interested in 2 of them but I want to get views on all of them anyway, just in case.....

Hi,

I did Mechanical Engineering in UCD.
I'd highly recommend it as you get a great base of knowledge across alot of area like Control Theory, Thermodynamics, Energy etc.

You get a good base of knowledge which you can use in practically any job.
For example, I work in automotive which was only covered in the 3rd & 4th year of Mech Eng but I have the basics for any job I have to do here.

As one poster said, talk to people in Engineering.
I choose Mech Eng in UCD as my brother had done it before me (handy for notes!) & he got a good job from it & my own experience of work at home.

Also people will always design & manufacture things (recessions slow them down alright but they'll recover), which are all covered well in Mech Eng.

Only thing about Mech Eng was that unlike Biosystems & Chem work placement wasn't a part of the course, so try to get as much experience during college as possible so you know what you like/dislike.

Also Mech Eng in UCD has Johnny Airflow!!

Good luck with your decision.

Turbulent Bill · 06-07-2009 12:29PM

shanejunkin wrote: »

So, do you think one should, now, only do an Hons engineering degree if they want to become chartered engineers? And that to become an Engineer that you should just do an Ordinary Degree?

Personally, I think the EI should start to guard the title "Engineer" and that a pre req should be a level 8 engineering degree. I don't think that's snobbery. No one would like it if an equivalent happened in the medical industry.

No, you're missing the point. I think everyone who wants to call themselves an engineer (chartered or otherwise) should have completed an hons engineering degree. However, as EI doesn't protect the "engineer" title (only CEng) and the qualifications required for it, absolutely anyone can claim to be one. "Engineer" has more cachet (and money) than "technician", so it's only natural that people would want to call themselves that if there's nothing to stop them.

This has veered wildly OT. To the OP, just do Mech

.

Which type of Engineering would you recommend?

Comments