April 1, 2009

Valuing “where to look” for solutions

Recently, I was visiting a customer’s plant as a follow up to earlier work.  In the general conversation, the customer had asked me a basic question as to the principals of operation of one of his process equipment units at his water treatment plant.  The question required a basic understanding of how his water filter operated and a related question as to the operation of his backwash pumps during the backwashing/cleaning of his filters.

Having been involved in both design and operation of the specific type of filter installed at his plant, I asked if we could go the filter building and observe the operation during backwash.  It turned out that, in doing so, I was able to help him understand how he could backwash without the need to operate a 40 hp backwash pump (the pump had been turned on for backwash for the entire plant history of more than 30 years) – thus, saving this energy and relevant costs and “demand” charges.

Since I was visiting the plant on my own volition, it seemed inappropriate to “invoice” for the solution I had just provided.  And, yet, I think that this is part of the “problem” with engineering…..it seems that many of the answers are simply practical and not theoretical or equation defined.  In other words, the supposition might be that any person could see the solution – given the same knowledge which I had acquired.  Yet, isn’t this the base of the conundrum which all engineers face….at any given time, we arrive at solutions which – in some circumstances and with some individuals – the answer could be provided by a casual observer or simple lay person or mechanic.

Is an Attorney's knowledge of Law helpful?

Now, this, I realize, sounds elitist but isn’t it the preparation, the background, the many hours at the drawing board, and even the mathematics in differential equations solutions which are embodied in such a solution?  The pump had run for 30 years – and survived the scrutiny of many previous witnesses and tours by dozens (hundreds?) of engineers and bystanders and no one “knew” what to look for.  My background and my arduous history of working in the internals of design and operation of this type of filter led me directly to the solution/resolution.  Luck?  I suggest that it is the embodiment of engineering knowledge that led me to the solution.  And, why do we feel that this is “un-billable work”….while we are so ready to pay an attorney’s invoice where she/he renders an opinion with much less productive results?

I don’t have the answer for this rhetorical question…perhaps you do?

Regards,
Don

Systems approaches are not always intuitive

Intellectual Capital is a term which has been “tossed around” in business circles for the past several years.  Here’s how I understand the term - which is actually derived from articles from Tom Steward, editor of Fortune magazine.

Simply defined, intellectual capital is the collective knowledge and experience possessed by an organization - or team of organizations - used to create wealth.  It’s what’s distinctive about what you have and what you “do” with what you’ve “got.”  It’s the value-added by stake holders.  Often, with a wealth of real, hands on, experience.

Every business has an abundance of data and increased skills built over time and based on the substance of its existence.  Yet, only those organizations and businesses that know how to mine and collect all of that raw information, then mold and shape it into useful tools will be able to leverage intellectual capital.

The new world we work in is the combination of the stuff of both the Old Economy and the New Economy.  In the Old Economy, products were the hard items that came off of manufacturing lines. In the New Economy, products are the substance of intellectual capital.  Successful companies will take the old – the core business products – and the new – the abundant knowledge and experience – and mold them into a single economic entity.
Your company’s intellectual capital should be your most important asset and integral part of your product lines.  How you use it and bundle it with all your other “hard” lines is what will differentiate your company from the competition. It will increase your position and perception in the market, and thereby will create wealth for your business.

Consider the cumulative benefit of bringing together a select, experienced team to service client needs.  The ability to provide the highest level of service, at the most affordable cost, grows exponentially with the caliber and number of members of the team.

For further reading on this subject, see: http://www.kmnetwork.com/intellectualcapital.htm

Today’s Quote from Draper Kauffman:

TANSTAAFL: There ain’t no such thing as a free lunch.  In complex systems, what looks like the cheapest solution often turns out to be the most expensive in the long run.  Don’t expect something for nothing. There is always a hidden cost.

Cheers,
Don

"P.E." behind the engineer's name brings value to your project

In the world of water and wastewater systems, most of us interface with engineers – most of whom have a “P.E.” after their name.  This message is not to depreciate the value of P.E.s nor to call for any change in who we are interfacing with…the point of this note is to help all of us better understand the big picture in how things get done in our water and wastewater world.

It is a little known fact that less than 10% of all  graduate engineers are P.E.s.  This is due to the fact that most engineers are not asked to produce a license or P.E. registration.  The reason that some engineers become P.E.s and others don’t is involved in the fact that only “public construction” typically requires a P.E. to stamp/submit plans for approval.  And, though it is ironic, extremely few P.E.s require submittal or transmittal on all of the construction related materials for public construction.  It’s like the “don’t ask, don’t tell” conundrum.

The vast majority of engineers – therefore – go completely unrecognized in our day to day routines.  Yet, nearly every major manufacturer of equipment and controls (and even pipe and concrete reinforcements) have engineers employed by the manufacturer at various levels within the organization.

“So what?”, you may say.  Well, it costs almost nothing for your engineer to require that transmittals and submittals on subsystems for your utility be transmitted or stamped by an engineer or professional from the supplier.  And, when such a request is made by the P.E., it raises the bar of competence – since the acquiring of a P.E. is a time consuming and expensive process…and, any licensed engineer is bound to be cautious (careful in her/his review) in providing data, designs and associated equipment.  Thus, the real question should be, “Why not”!

No one objects to requiring their attorney to be a licensed attorney (almost no attorneys are not licensed).  Why would you accept the complex equipment and integration of such equipment in public infrastructure to be assembled, designed or built without a P.E. at the manufacturing/construction end of the project?

It is up to you.  Cost is nothing.  Value is an established level of competence.

Don

Russian space shuttle ‘Buran’ bears an uncanny resemblance to the U.S. space shuttle design, and illustrates the “space race” issues which drove engineers to explore and develop like never before.

Since the early years of my engineering education were filled with an air of “space war competition”, we “mid 60’s” engineers can remember heady days…days when engineering was the focus of huge efforts – both within and exterior to NASA walls. Back then, we had an emotionally common goal – to “beat the Russians” in the race to the moon. I can still feel the tingle of the challenge and I still recall the near patriotism of “doing well” in engineering analysis of the many impediments to success. Sputnik was “out there” “beeping” at us. And, we took up the challenge.

Today, we are faced with equally daunting challenges. We are being held hostage by those who “own” the oil fields and the related speculators who are the direct beneficiaries of their financial machinations. And, even if the cost were not creating the market chaos, we know – intrinsically – that our carbon footprints are affecting all manner of earthly life and future happiness.

Technically elegant and financially responsible solutions to water/wastewater infrastructure needs require that we challenge the “status quo” in our approaches to the solutions we desire. From design efficiencies to construction effectiveness to operational efficiencies….we need to team for the solution. Our industry (water and wastewater) has had a long history of clouded approaches in single file marches to end products and procedures which are – at the very least – inefficient. Europeans have been suffering from the many symptoms we now have (have you seen the BMW commercial where they speak about gas prices in Europe as having been 6 to 10 dollars a gallon for a decade?).Many Europeans have seen the handwriting on the wall and have been focused on efficient solutions and effective methods of construction for decades. We need to embrace and team with their many innovations and move forward with our own. In many ways, we can see the parallel to the German rocket development and our subsequent Saturn Moon rockets. We have the basis for many innovations in our grasp and – with the help of world compatriots, we can meet the world’s needs for the next generation…a generation of eco friendly energy with the implementation of “green” designs from construction to operational excellence.

Be challenged. And, challenge the “old ways”….. it’s the patriotic thing to do.

Don