I currently work for a pump drive and gearbox manufacturer. I have worked for, in the past, gear pump and cartridge valve manufacturers. I have worked with many distributors and end-users. One thing we don't have enough of are application engineers. Usually, it is one poor, overworked guy solving the world's fluid power issues. This poor, overworked guy usually stumbled on this field and has no formal training. We either need to clone him or train some people. I am willing to pursue this degree. Where do I sign up?

It's really Sad to Say, Kathy, THERE IS NO PLACE TO SIGN UP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

In fact if you want a hard time just mention the fact that Industry needs qualified Fluid Power Persons and all you get is Grief.

Why is it that a statement like:

"One thing we don't have enough of are application engineers. Usually, it is one poor, overworked guy solving the world's fluid power issues."

Unfortunately this approach has semi-worked for all the life of Fluid Power and not many want to see a change. Maybe it's "JOB SECURITY" that keeps the Status Quo. I know it surely has helped my tenure as a Consultant.

Thanks to Forums like this there may be changes in the wind but from many of the negative responses it certainly does'nt appear it will be soon, So, you can keep your present job and expect your overworked Application Engineers to be Over Worked until the Electrical Guys figure out ways to COMPLETELY REPLACE Fluid Power.

IS THAT negative OR IS THAT NEGATIVE????????????

The Milwaukie School of Engineering has courses!!! I get flyers all the time! I don't know if they give credit but that is the place to go. I know they have a few of our controllers in their hydraulic labs. ( Yes, those exist too ). There is community college in Spokane, WA that also has a nice computer lab. The are also course in British Columbia, CA. I forget which universities but lumber processing is a big part of the economy there so they have courses to support the local industry.

I don't think you can get a degree. I think the best you can get are a few hours of credit.

Colleges and universities are not long on application knowledge. Just the theoretical stuff and lab experience.

We rely a lot on gotomeeting to do training on our motion controllers. We charge money for the courses. We limit them to 4 hours a day. They are not as detailed as some of our at site training but they would be a start.

Budt, have you ever tried gotomeeting? It would allow you to use your ppt files over the internet. You have a lot of the material already. I don't think it would be too bad to spend an hour a topic. Four hours looking at a laptop is pushing it. I have had companies run the video to a LCD projector in a conference room so many can watch at the same time in comfort.


I think a lot could be learned this way. Budt has lots of power points that would make good class room material.

Now you have done it Budt. Be prepared to get a goto meeting demo next week. You do have high speed internet at home don't you?

If I follow "goto meeting" definition there will be one in June on H&P's web site that will be using the Power Point presentations.

If not please explain "Goto Meetings."

I do have an internet connecton at 100 mbs.

Mr Heney. I am a certified Hydraulics Specialist an have recently submitted a proposal to a local community and technical college to create an Associate of Science degree in Fluid Power Technology. This proposal was fasioned from current cources being taught in other technology programs at this school and eight additional classes that I recommended. I feel this curriculum could easily be adapted and enlarged to provide a bachelors degree. I met with a representative from the school and submitted my ideas in writting back in January but I have yet to get a call back from him. He seemed very positive but was concerned that there was not enough of a job demand in this geographical area to justify the program. I agree that there should be a degree just for Fluid Power and Motion Control and I am willing to help out. Let me know if I can be of assistance. in order to develop this program I studied every program listed in the "Key schools" section of the Fluid Power Societies website. Since I have had 12 years experience in the fluid power industry (mobile) I looked at what I considered each programs strengths and weeknesses. All of these are listed in my proposal. As for expanding the program to a 4 year degree, this could be done. I feel the program should an interdicipline (mechanical, electrical, electronic) program like that currently being taught at Perdue and other universities. Also the program could be a 2 plus 2 engineering technology degree so levels of training may be chosen by the student. The first two years would be basic fluid power and electronics with included sciences and communications and the second half could include more sofisticated motions control like servos, computer programing etc.

Tim;

Keep us posted on your progress with getting a degreed Fluid power program.

Where are you located?

Who will be teaching the Fluid Power classes?

Is it possible o get a copy of the curriculum?

Keep up the good work but don't tell peter.

quote:

I feel the program should an interdicipline (mechanical, electrical, electronic) program like that currently being taught at Perdue and other universities. Also the program could be a 2 plus 2 engineering technology degree so levels of training may be chosen by the student. The first two years would be basic fluid power and electronics with included sciences and communications and the second half could include more sofisticated motions control like servos, computer programing etc.

This is good. The local branch of Washington State University would call this mechatronics and the university offers a mechatronics degree. The small difference is that you place more emphasis on the hydraulic part than the local university.

You forgot:
Calculus, differential equations, numerical methods.
Physics, lots of physics.
mass and energy transfer.
Pneumatics, statics, dynamics, strength of materials.
Control theory and application.
Some practical aspects of power supplies, codes, grounding etc.

Go for it. I am all for it. The hydraulic part is just a minor part of the whole program. That is why I wouldn't call it a hydraulics degree.

I just didn't have the hydraulic and pneumatic part. What I learned about hydraulics and pneumatics was covered in less that two weeks.

quote:

I feel the program should an interdicipline (mechanical, electrical, electronic) program like that currently being taught at Perdue and other universities.

Fluid Power has been the Mechancal Engineers responsibility forever and in my opinion that approach has not and is not working. It is not because the M.E. is not intelligent just not trained to make intelligent decisions about Fluid power circuit implementation.

My Electrical knowledge is minimal but I have no problem with that since every company i design circuits for has a trained electrical person or can get the epertise required from trained electrical types.

It is the same with Mechanical Engineers, they have no problem designing a machine and sizing actuators to perform the work but are not proficient at making the actuators perform as desired.

These M.E's. have Electrical Engineers to design the Control Circuits and oher electrical functions but usually depend on the Fluid Power Distributor to design the hydraulic or pneumatic circuits.

I still beleive there is something wrong with this arrangement and stll beleive there is a need for dedicated Fluid Power persons in industry.

However, I realize there will be no changes until and when the End User of Fluid Power pushes for one and from this and other discussions that does not seem likely in the near or distant future.

quote:

I feel the program should an interdicipline (mechanical, electrical, electronic) program like that currently being taught at Perdue and other universities.

I concur with this. Having the benefit myself of multiple discplines I see areas where individuals without cross knowledge cannot judge which approach among several would be best in a given application. If we consider the task of application engineering itself as a machine with an efficiency level I do not believe 3 engineers, one from each discipline, could ever approach the efficiency level of one engineer trained in all three.

C1ay;

I grew up with a saying that reminds me of the muliple discipline appoach to the dilemna I see in Fluid power.

"Jack of All trades, Master of None"

But that also brings up the daffynition of an "Expert":

"An Expert is a person who knows More and More abut Less and Less until they know practically Everything about Nothing"

My desire to see dedicated Fluid Power persons may be off base but I see even less chance of having people in an interdisciplinary situation and being proficient in the Mechanical, Electrical and Fluid Power fields.

A Fluid Power designer needs to be mechnically inclined so they don't propose a system that can't work or work efficiently or effectively and know enough about the Electrical field to realize there are no viable ways to implement their latest big idea. However, to be able to design the Mechanicl, Electrical and Fluid Power aspects of a machine, I feel, is beyond the capability of the average persons ability. Notice I said AVERAGE PERSON.

I applaud your ability to be able to design all aspects of a machines functions and then do the power and control systems as well, but I see that ability as the exception in my travels in industry.

It would be interesting to me to know of others who consider they are proficient in Mechanical, Electrical and Fluid Power design. It may surprise this country boy.

I do conceed that my own ability is not the norm but, I am only human, if I can do it so can others. I really see it as the only way to maximize the efficiency of designing integrated systems, particularly integrated components. Only a cross trained individual really understands all of the dynamics and variables of electrically dithering a valve spool, for example.

OTOH, I feel there is plenty of room for specialists as well. Many mobile systems are purely hydraulic or have only a minimal amount of simple electrical control circuits, on-off switches and solenoids. Much of the engineering in this field can be performed by a good ME and field service by a competent fluid power tech with minimal electrical training. On many of these systems cross trained people would be a waste.

Mr. Heney,

I just read your article in Hydraulics & Pneumatics magazine and I must say that I agree it is high time a full blown degree be offered in fluid power.
Gone are the days when you could scribble a few things down on a piece of paper and take it out to the pipe-fitters and expect them to build up something to get the job done. That is not to say that I don't respect the pipe-fitters but our customers are demanding more and more elaborate designs that include sophisticated electro-mechanical valves, switches, and ever increasing diagnostics.

I have been designing fluid power systems for more than ten years now and I was forced to learn everything I know while on the job. I took every seminar I could to help gain new knowledge and keep up with current products, specifications, governmental regulations, and industry trends but it seems as hard as I work at it, there is no way to make up for the lack of comprehensive training in fluids.

Several years ago I decided to return to school to complete my Bachelor's degree. I also design electrical equipment and found my lack of knowledge in the fundamentals was holding me back from moving my career to the next level. I approached the local community college with my problem and found that they offered quite a number of classes in electrical theory which I devoured like a hungry lion. Much of the information I already knew from working in the field but what I found most valuable was learning why I had to do some of the things I did and why they worked. Those fundamentals have served me well long after leaving the classroom.

The school also offers some basic fluid power classes but as I sat through the first one I realized that I had to know much of the information they were teaching just to make it through a day at work. I knew the fundamentals and how to build the basic circuits but there was nowhere to go from there. No advanced classes, no coursework that served to bring together electrical, fluids, and programming; knowledge that anyone working in the field must have to do their jobs.

Developing a degree for fluid power would fill the gap where learning from co-workers leaves off. Many people working in the field have limited experience themselves. I teach fluid power classes at my company to other controls engineers and it is amazing to see what they have and have not learned. I am far from a fluid power professional and it seems the more I learn, the more I know I don't know. Giving people the tools to succeed is the first step in moving towards overall success. I am certain that if these classes were available and basic courses were offered at the high school level to prepare people for college, the fluid power degree could be moved into the realm of reality.

Part of the initiative in Michigan right now is to retrain people from the automotive industry to do other things. Many of these folks have years of training and experience in the trades but without a certificate from a college, the knowledge can not be verified so is of little use moving into design and engineering.

I applaud your efforts and wish you success in your endeavor. If there is anything I can do to help move the process to reality I am willing to do what I can.

Regards,

Phil Laurette
Electrical/Fluid Controls Engineer
ThyssenKrupp Krause

Peter,

In an earlier post you wrote, "There doesn't need to be a separate degree. for engineers. There should be a 1 term 4 hour course though as part of a mechanical engineering or mechatronics degree. This class should be taught the junior year after the student has had differential equations."

Unfortunately that gives far too much credit to the MEs who design the motions and assumes that they are competent at their own jobs including fluid power.

It has been my experience that MEs think they know a great deal more about fluid power than they do. They design systems without any consideration for fluid dynamics and assume that all fluid power applications are a simple hydraulic cylinder, a valve, and a pump. Then they send a system out that is capable of lifting the weight they have calculated, with no consideration for miscalculations, and find that their precious software has not included all fasteners, bearings, brackets, controls components, etc. and now the pump can't do the job.

I think many of your comments are short-sighted and assume that all applications are the same. That is as demeaning as assuming that all mechanical engineers do is design a framework for my controls to move. A few classes in dimensioning and anyone can draw weldments and brackets right?

What I learned about hydraulics and pneumatics was covered in less that two weeks.[/quot]
Thats amazing. I have textbooks (Fluid Power Technology) by F Don Norvel that is almost 600 pages and you learned all that in two weeks. I didn't forget anything. The classes you mentioned would need to be considered but it would be considered by a committee of professionals from mobile and industrial fluid power and motion control fields. I love to learn as mush as the next guy but we need to get down to what is being used the most in both industries and teach that. Lets get down to a practicle program. If you want to teach everything go for a masters or a phd. I have a good two year plan that could be expanded to four. I will be looking for a way to make this available to

"Unfortunately that gives far too much credit to the MEs who design the motions and assumes that they are competent at their own jobs including fluid power."

"That is as demeaning as assuming that all mechanical engineers do is design a framework for my controls to move. "

It is you that is demeaning MEs not me.

I appreciate a well designed system that makes my motion controller look good.

"I think many of your comments are short-sighted and assume that all applications are the same."

This statement is unfounded. I see far more different applications than most for obvious reasons. These applications just happen to be servo applications.

"Lets get down to a practicle program. If you want to teach everything go for a masters or a phd." What I suggested can be learned in four years.