Lacar is moving up in the world - AMA

[lacar1601]

This is a thread about an impending transition point that is about to take place in my life, and I'm feeling excited enough to share the news and conduct an ask-me-(almost)-anything.

For those who don't know me, I joined T9k nearly 3 years ago during the Minecraft Beta golden times, and have been lurking the forums and servers since then. Lately, I've taken a less active stance in the community, and only ever make rare appearances on Mumble during select gamenights. My inactivity is due to my focus on college. I am a Senior student attending the University of Wisconsin - Madison, and I expect to be graduating with a Bachelor's degree in Engineering Mechanics this May. Graduation is one exciting event for me.

The other exciting event is that I managed to secure a summer internship at Sandia National Laboratory in Albuquerque, New Mexico. Here's a blurb from my letter.

Again, for those who don't know, Sandia NL is one of the United States' leading institutions for generating research and innovation in science-based, systems engineering solutions for national security challenges (grabbed that straight from the employee handbook). Now this may sound technically and patriotically cliche'd, but the point is that I am honored and humbled to be selected to work with some of the world's smartest people in a professional, high-integrity work environment.

My role at this utopia for nerds (positive connotation retained) will be as an experimental and computational technical support with the structural dynamics division. I don't know the exact details, but I am told that I will be working on developing computer codes that compare and assess how well the theories and models - developed by other graduate student interns - fare at solving a particular structural dynamics problem (such as modeling the vibration in a bolted joint). The objective would be to see which theories are better than others in solving a problem under a particular set of conditions (multiple joints, high-impact excitation of the joint, etc.).



So if I haven't already lost you with all that technical jargon, or this sheer wall of text, I'll get to the reasons that I posted this thread...
1) Shameless bragging.
2) To demonstrate and pass advice on to the younger members here that going to the right college for the right reasons to pursue the right degree and, most importantly, having the right network of contacts can pay off big-time. Granted, college is not the only way to find opportunity, but, life in general requires hard work and dedication before you reap the rewards.
3) Ask me anything.
Advice for college, my college experience, how I got my internship, plans for the future. Almost anything related to the above, but I won't respond to off-topic or deeply personal questions.

Mind that I'm still quite busy finishing school (senior design takes a huge bite of my time), so please understand if I do not respond within a day.

 

[TheGurw]

What got you into Engineering Mechanics, as opposed to the more practical Mechanical Engineering? I seriously considered EM, but I found the preview too theoretical, with too little focus on the application of the work done.

 

[NewspaperCrane]

Is it more the "Spy on everyone" type of national security, or the "Blow stuff up" type of national security?

 

[Kris]

How many years have you been in university, 4? Is this your last? What key classes did you take?

 

[lacar1601]

What got you into Engineering Mechanics, as opposed to the more practical Mechanical Engineering? I seriously considered EM, but I found the preview too theoretical, with too little focus on the application of the work done.

I joined engineering mechanics for exactly for its rigorous science-based approach, which helps make me a more versatile engineer. The broad topics in mechanical engineering did not appeal to me since there is little room to stand out from my peers.

Indeed, the engineering mechanics program at my school emphasizes more science, math, and computing than our mechanical engineering program, which focuses on design and manufacturing applications. True, ME has practical but very broad topics such as manufacturing processes, machines, measurements, and energy systems. EM includes specific courses in advanced structural engineering and dynamics that prepare us for a career in design and experimental research. Of course, that's not to say that there's no similarities between the two. In fact, the two programs at my school share about half the curriculum, particularly the early courses such as material mechanics, thermodynamics and heat transfer, circuits, and the gen eds.

But where the similarities end, EM's theory base makes us more versatile than MEs because we can pursue careers in other engineering fields such as aerospace, materials, biomechanics, and civil, and in addition exposes us to more research than MEs. Our EM undergrad program is so academically rigorous that we develop a set of skills that one would commonly find in a graduate-level engineering student. There's a lot of in-talk among us Senior EMs that we have a edge over the MEs because our research training would allow us to perform the exact same work as them. A degree is half the education, the other half is on-the-job training, and if there's knowledge that we EMs don't have that ME's do, it really doesn't take much effort to consult the Machinery Handbook.

I could keep going on about the differences, but I'd rather give you the opportunity to mull over what I've said so far and continue a discussion.

Is it more the "Spy on everyone" type of national security, or the "Blow stuff up" type of national security?

Funny you should mention that. Sandia was originally established in the mid 20th century as a design, test, and assembly facility for nuclear weapons post-Manhattan project. While today they still delve in nuclear weapons technology, they have expanded into other programs such as military systems, energy, infrastructure, and climate.
So yeah, they deal with the more fun "blow stuff up" national security.

How many years have you been in university, 4? Is this your last? What key classes did you take?

This is my 5th and last year in the undergrad engineering mechanics program. Many engineering students complete degrees in 5 years due to a co-op that they receive while in school, or due to the rigorous nature of the program.
I have taken an astronautics option with my degree so a lot of courses emphasize aerospace:
- advanced material mechanics
- satellite dynamics
- aerodynamics
- experimental vibrations
- orbital mechanics
- senior capstone design (we do full-blown design of an airplane, submarine, or rocket)
- intermediate computer coding for engineering problem solving
See my response to Gurw's post for more courses.

 

[TheGurw]

I joined engineering mechanics for exactly for its rigorous science-based approach, which helps make me a more versatile engineer. The broad topics in mechanical engineering did not appeal to me since there is little room to stand out from my peers.

Indeed, the engineering mechanics program at my school emphasizes more science, math, and computing than our mechanical engineering program, which focuses on design and manufacturing applications. True, ME has practical but very broad topics such as manufacturing processes, machines, measurements, and energy systems. EM includes specific courses in advanced structural engineering and dynamics that prepare us for a career in design and experimental research. Of course, that's not to say that there's no similarities between the two. In fact, the two programs at my school share about half the curriculum, particularly the early courses such as material mechanics, thermodynamics and heat transfer, circuits, and the gen eds.

But where the similarities end, EM's theory base makes us more versatile than MEs because we can pursue careers in other engineering fields such as aerospace, materials, biomechanics, and civil, and in addition exposes us to more research than MEs. Our EM undergrad program is so academically rigorous that we develop a set of skills that one would commonly find in a graduate-level engineering student. There's a lot of in-talk among us Senior EMs that we have a edge over the MEs because our research training would allow us to perform the exact same work as them. A degree is half the education, the other half is on-the-job training, and if there's knowledge that we EMs don't have that ME's do, it really doesn't take much effort to consult the Machinery Handbook.

I could keep going on about the differences, but I'd rather give you the opportunity to mull over what I've said so far and continue a discussion.



Funny you should mention that. Sandia was originally established in the mid 20th century as a design, test, and assembly facility for nuclear weapons post-Manhattan project. While today they still delve in nuclear weapons technology, they have expanded into other programs such as military systems, energy, infrastructure, and climate.
So yeah, they deal with the more fun "blow stuff up" national security.



This is my 5th and last year in the undergrad engineering mechanics program. Many engineering students complete degrees in 5 years due to a co-op that they receive while in school, or due to the rigorous nature of the program.
I have taken an astronautics option with my degree so a lot of courses emphasize aerospace:
- advanced material mechanics
- satellite dynamics
- aerodynamics
- experimental vibrations
- orbital mechanics
- senior capstone design (we do full-blown design of an airplane, submarine, or rocket)
- intermediate computer coding for engineering problem solving
See my response to Gurw's post for more courses.

It appears to me that you believe book learning is more important than field training (being a tradesman, I curse engineers like that - I can tell just by looking at a blueprint if the engineer has ever been not behind a desk). It also seems you hold the typical "we had higher GPAs, so we're better" attitude of the geeks in the tough programs. I challenge you to this: if you've never actually gone to the field and physically run your hand over a turboprop, how can you have confidence in your own designs? I ask, because that's one of the reasons I quit both my paid internship and chose not to enroll in the next year of university. I came to a point where I realized the guys actually putting it together were probably insulting me, and not without cause. And now I'm a tradesman (conveniently making more money with less training).

 

[moondoggy23]

Congrats!

Uh...Can I get a tour of Area 51?

 

[lacar1601]

Congrats!

Uh...Can I get a tour of Area 51?

Thank you very much!
There's a bunch of paperwork you'll have to fill out to get inside Kirtland Airforce Base. Even then, I don't think they allow outsiders in, but I haven't checked that.

It appears to me that you believe book learning is more important than field training

I believe both are important. As I stated, a degree is half the training, on-the-job training is the other half (more so in many cases). The real value that comes with an engineering degree is acquiring the ability to approach a problem critically. That is, being able to look at a problem (such as how should this wing attach to the fuselage), assess various solutions to the problem, and apply engineering principles to choose the most effective solution based on strength criteria, cost, parts compatibility, simplicity of design, etc. A degree does not teach me how to do my specific job, and that's why internships and co-ops are encouraged by my school's engineering professional development office.

I can tell just by looking at a blueprint if the engineer has ever been not behind a desk.

I agree. My senior design course really nails that point into us. We are required to make drawings of all the parts that go into our design, so we have to keep in mind manufacturing processes, cost of machining parts, ability to even machine those parts, and parts assembly. Then as proof of concept, we are required to construct a prototype of our design. If attaching this part to that part requires that I need to insert a fastener on the blind side of a sheet, that's poor design. If a single part has over 100 unique surfaces, and most of those surfaces are on the inside of a part such that a machine can't even get a cutting tool in there, that's really poor design.

It also seems you hold the typical "we had higher GPAs, so we're better" attitude of the geeks in the tough programs.

Where did you get that idea? I learned a long time ago that most employers don't care about GPAs, so I don't gain any advantages over other engineering students in that respect. Also, I wouldn't be surprised if the average GPA for people in my EM program have slightly lower average GPA than the MEs.

If you've never actually gone to the field and physically run your hand over a turboprop, how can you have confidence in your own designs?

I don't, or at least I don't have complete 100% confidence in my designs. That's why we prototype and test our designs. But prototyping and testing costs money, especially in aerospace. This is the reason why much engineering research goes into developing better models to predict how things will work. Why spend thousands testing hundreds of prototypes to find a solution that works when you can develop a working model of your design and validate it with only a few tests. But to develop those models, we need to have intimate knowledge of the engineering topics they teach in school. Certainly, the models aren't completely accurate, but most come damn close, and it's better than blindly designing for things like:
1) the flow rate and enthalpy of fuel that needs to be supplied to an engine cylinder to keep it running smoothly.
2) the amount of energy released in the combustion, and how much is useful work, and how much is wasted heat.
3) the shape and size that a structural cage needs to be so that it can withstand the forces, torques and accelerations placed on it without breaking while simultaneously being as lightweight as possible.
4) If the load is dynamic, what vibration modes in the structure do we need to watch out for so that the structure doesn't shake itself apart.
These are all hard problems, and all can't be solved without developing models or performing physical experiments on them as you stated.
This is the job of an engineer.
And this is the kind of stuff I'll be doing at Sandia: contributing to engineering knowledge so that people can better model the hard problems.