> Actually makes sense, as engineers are not known for their
> communication ability
> Gary
Not the good ones. Engineering is discipline of communications--we
don't (routinely) make things; we tell people who do how to makes
things properly. That's what drawings and reports are all about--
communicating instructions unambiguously to artisans (for lack of a
better word) can give materials a specific usefulness. We don't do
science or math; we use science and math to make sure the
instructions we communicate are soundly based in physical principles.
My own experience is that academics who teach engineering tend to
lose sight of the need for communications and organization--maybe out
of desire for greater rigor in presentation or just a tendency to
impress the onlooker with technicalities. I know that's happened with
the Pressure Vessel Codes. With the ASME Codes, I think the problem
is that industry isn't supporting Code writng efforts like they once
did, and academia has necessarily moved in. I've always suspected
(without an ounce of actual proof) that it's what happened when LRFD
was introduced.
Christopher Wright P.E. |"They couldn't hit an elephant at
chrisw@skypoint.com | this distance" (last words of Gen.
.......................................| John Sedgwick, Spotsylvania
1864)
http://www.skypoint.com/~chrisw/
******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
* Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
*
* This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers
* Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To
* subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
*
http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
* Questions to seaint-ad@seaint.org. Remember, any email you
* send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted
* without your permission. Make sure you visit our web
* site at: http://www.seaint.org
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********