Survival Techniques for the Practicing Engineer

About the Author

Anthony Sofronas is an author, educator, and consultant. He has extensive practical experience in troubleshooting machinery and equipment. His 48 years in industry has been with the General Electric Company, Bendix Corporation, and the most recent 24 years in industry with the Exxon Mobil Corporation. In this position, he was a worldwide lead fixed-equipment engineer with his group troubleshooting problems. Since retirement, he has embarked on a career as an author, lecturer, and consultant. He is the author of over 100 technical papers and similar articles. He has written three books on machinery, fixed equipment analysis, and engineering based on his work that have been used for his seminars and consulting assignments in eight countries.

Dr Sofronas graduated from the University of Detroit with a Doctor of Engineering, Pennsylvania State University, a Masters of Engineering, Northrop Institute of Technology, a Bachelors of Science in Mechanical Engineering, and New York State University at Farmingdale, with an Associate of Applied Science in Mechanical Power Technology.

He has been registered as a Professional Engineer in Texas for several decades and had also been elected to the honor society Tau Beta Pi. He received the Society of Manufacturing Engineers, Young Engineer of the Year award in 1980 for his extensive research into the drilling operation for the Bendix Corporation. His doctoral thesis work The Formation and Control of Drilling Burrs has been considered a pioneering analytical work into the drilling process.

Preface

This book is a compilation of many useful techniques I have learned as a company engineer working in several industries and then after retirement as a self-employed consulting engineer. In it are rules, guides, and examples of what to do and what not to do. There are many personal stories to help illustrate certain points and why the survival techniques suggested are necessary. These personal stories are a way of presenting information in a consolidated way. A story tends to be impressed in one's mind better than rules or guidelines. Everyone will interpret and envision the story in a way most helpful to them.

Colleagues are those who can make the workplace a pleasant environment especially when they have a sense of humor, so some of this is in the book too.

Much of my career in engineering has been involved with determining the causes of failures on machinery and other structures. The term failure denotes something has gone wrong. I like the definition of a failure as an opportunity to better understand it, fix it, and do it right so it won't reoccur.

While the book eventually looks at specific problems solved on machines and equipment using a niche, pronounced neesh, it will begin by discussing this niche and the importance of having one. More importantly, it discusses lessons learned throughout a career. They should be most useful for the practicing engineer to know and to help them be successful.

Many case histories have been presented in my previous books [1, 2], and this book adds a few new ones to emphasize helpful techniques and methods.

This is the type book I wish I had available when in industry. Someone asked, How long did it take you to write this book? and the answer was 48 years. You see you need the industrial experiences to be able to write a book such as this. The experiences are personal and the cases unique and not repeated from other sources. The readers will now have this information early to help them through their career.

What is a successful engineer can mean different things to different people. Being highly respected and confident, performing useful work, building things, being able to touch things you have built or repaired, solving problems, becoming a manager, enjoying a high salary, and always being employed are definitions of success some use.

For me, success was doing work that I had a passion for and am still doing. I find pleasure in working with others that have the same passion. Leaving adequate time for my family and enjoying them is a huge part of being successful. Advancement and the amenities that came with it were because of this passion. Always wanting to learn something new in engineering is so important. One should never stop learning since that's what keeps us mentally alive.

In this book, I also review my experience with the merits of advanced degrees as many engineers have asked about this. Should they go on for one is usually the difficult decision they have had to make especially if they are married with children. Primarily, their question is if it's worth the effort and some perspective on this is provided.

Should I change jobs, start my own business, or go into consulting are also questions I have been asked and even asked them to myself. In a humble way, I try to provide advice on these important issues.

The intention of this book is to have the reader think of it as a personal mentor and friend always ready to provide help by just opening to the section needed.

Anthony Sofronas

March 24, 2016

Kingwood, Texas

References

1. Sofronas, A., Analytical Troubleshooting of Process Machinery and Pressure Vessels, John Wiley & Sons, 2006.

2. Sofronas, A., Case Histories in Vibration and Metal Fatigue for the Practicing Engineer, John Wiley & Sons, 2012.

Acknowledgments

First I wish to thank my dear wife Mrs Cruz Velasquez Sofronas, who is a huge part of my success. Most of my advancement would not have been possible without her understanding and guidance. Her review and suggestions on this book were extremely helpful.

Our children Steve and Maria followed us through our many moves and adventures and whom we are very proud of. Both have obtained their college degrees and are having successful lives and careers.

My mother Irene Lampesis Sofronas and my father Steve Sofronas for instilling in me my moral and work ethics as well as for directing me toward my engineering degree.

My sister Carole Sofronas Paquette, whose creativity, writings, and artwork have always inspired me.

Mr Richard S. Gill, my colleague and friend, whose humor and technical abilities made my work enjoyable.

Mr Heinz Bloch, a master of machinery and a friend, for all his unselfish encouragement and for introducing me into the world of consulting and writing articles.

Mr Geoff Kinison, for his friendship, technical abilities, and discussions we have had.

Mr Martin Hapeman, who mentored me with his superb analytical abilities.

Dr Khalil Taraman, my Doctoral Advisor, whose guidance and commitment was instrumental to my achieving the D.Eng.

Dr William Spurgeon, my Industrial Advisor, who directed me through my Doctoral funded dissertation and introduced me to precis style writing.

Dr Paul Paslay for proposing to me an insightful and unique analysis method for my doctoral thesis and discussing simplifying techniques.

To the many superb Engineers, Technicians, Machinists, Operators, Managers, and Friends who have helped me immensely through the years.

To all the legendary engineers whose books I have learned so much from such as Drs Timoshenko, Ker Wilson, Den Hartog, Spotts, Faires, Roark, and many more.

Anthony Sofronas

Chapter 1

Getting Ahead

1.1 Finding Your Niche

At some time early in my career, I learned that I needed a niche. A niche will be defined here as something you have a need for, do quite well, is unique to you, and is something you enjoy doing. When it is done well, it can make you a highly valued contributor during your career. There are many type niches; for example, an artist may be known for a particular type of artwork done especially well such as oils, watercolors, or pen sketches of nature scenes, or maybe portraits. An engineer may specialize in analyzing and designing a certain type of antifriction bearing. It's something they do very well and is desired by others.

I've always enjoyed working on and understanding machinery. As a young man, restoring automobiles and diagnosing why things failed was something I liked to do.

I decided to go to a 2-year technical college and learn a trade of machinery rebuilding, welding, and machining. The Associate in Applied Science degree program I enrolled in was unique in that it also contained considerable mathematics and physics courses and how they could be used to design machines. By the way, if you enjoy physics you will also enjoy engineering since it is a sampling of an engineering curriculum. I decided I wanted to design things, so after graduating, I went on to receive my engineering degree. My only concern on making this choice was that I was a hands-on type person. I was concerned that I might spend my career behind a desk doing calculations. Nothing was further from the truth. As an example of doing both analytical and field work, Figure 1.1 shows me early in my career taking vibration measurements in the engine room of a new ship during sea trials. I had performed the torsional analysis of the engine–gearbox–propeller system and designed it to be free of excessive forces and was now verifying that the calculations were correct. This was a lot of responsibility and pressure for a young man. It was exciting, and everything turned out well. Looking at the photograph now, I realize how dangerous it was hanging over a rotating shaft and taking data during the rocking and rolling of sea trials. It would never be allowed these days.

Figure 1.1 Taking torsiograph readings during sea trials.

While the majority of my career was designing, evaluating, and troubleshooting machinery, pressure vessels and structures that wasn't my niche. Many people do a fine job in those areas.

My niche takes a little explaining. As an engineer who enjoys using mathematics to troubleshoot difficult problems, my mathematical skills were not up to the superb abilities of my first industrial mentor. I marveled at the way he solved problems in the most eloquent manner many times using first principles. Now a calculation is said to be from first principles when it starts with established laws of physics and with minimal assumptions or empirical data. For example, my mentor Marty once analyzed the external loads on a complex gear drive system. He started by developing beam-moment equations from the loads and geometry and integrating them to determine displacements. About 20 pages later, he had the solution that was used to upgrade a machine. I still have his report with the beautiful equations neatly and logically presented.

My abilities were nothing of this magnitude, and I felt never to have achieved his mathematical ability. His skills with mathematics were like that of a fine musician making beautiful music. A true virtuoso that couldn't be duplicated.

I mention this because I still needed to and wanted to have this ability, so I developed my niche. I was always good at simplifying tasks. This talent was used to simplify equipment and systems into a form where relatively simple mathematics could be used to solve difficult problems. Sometimes, this also required starting from first principles such as Newton's second law or the energy equations.

In my mind's eye, I would find myself inside the simple model of the machine watching it operate and would model it from there. I might see myself in the equipment hanging onto a pipe as it vibrates or watching a part turn red as it rubs and wears.

Once while explaining this to my son who is a Graphic Designer, I told him that I was having trouble visualizing what was going on inside a vessel I was performing a finite element analysis on. Figure 1.2 was on my desk and that's how he visualized me.

Figure 1.2 Trapped in the finite element model.

The procedure for building a model is fairly straightforward:

1. Visualize, simplify, and sketch the system into the areas that might fail.

2. When there are repetitive elements, reduce them to an equivalent simple system.

3. Make sure the equations include parameters that you can modify.

4. Make sure the failure mode agrees with the data such as a metallurgical analysis.

5. Check the analysis results with other experimental data and be sure it makes sense.

Some of the advantages I've found from being able to simplify systems and build analytical models are as follows:

A problem can be reduced to a very simple form that is easily explained to others with sketches instead of complex mathematics.

Modifications can be tested on the model instead of on the actual machine. There is no possibility of a failure if the modification is erroneous. You determine your error on the computer not on the actual system. No one has to know your modification was ineffective and you can easily change it. For example, if you make a reinforcement thicker and the stress is still too high, you change it.

You can verify your analytical model by using data from other similar failures, tests, or failures found in the literature.

You can use the analytical model to determine the failure loads and stresses and equipment life. This is like having had a similar failure occur and recording the data.

You can use all the science and physics you have available as an engineer to develop the model.

It's extremely exciting to have the actual equipment function like the model anticipated. I found this true with vibration torsional modeling and then having to go do the testing in the field to verify the design modifications I had made.

As the model developer, you usually have information others are lacking and therefore can provide information to help solve problems.

I've always felt that analytical modeling is the closest I can get to building a time machine. With a good and accurate model built and while sitting at a computer, you can travel back in time to see how a defect could have started to form and then go into the future to see how long it will take to fail. This is truly exciting and amazing especially when it's verified with historical and actual equipment life data. Unfortunately, I haven't figured out how to do this with the stock market. I'm sure someone has, but they are not going to write a book about it and share their secret and neither would I.

Your niche is quite a personal thing. After retiring and writing books and articles on many of the cases I had analyzed I realized not many knew how I had solved the problems. In a working environment when failed equipment is costing your company production losses, all that is required is that you solve the problem. How you solve it is not as important as getting the equipment back in service and explaining what you have done to prevent it from failing again. That's another advantage of a simple model. It allows you to understand what happened, what should be done and to explain this in a straightforward manner to the decision makers.

I'm sure all of you have talents and niches of your own. You should consider developing them further since this is what will help make you unique in engineering.

Sometimes, even if you don't attain the expectations of yourself you were looking for, you find out how to adapt and many times the results are better.

1.2 Twenty Rules to Remember

Out of all the work I've published, these 20 rules seem to have gotten the largest positive response from readers and seminar attendees. For that reason, they are stated here again and will be elaborated on in some of the later sections. A colleague provided me with quite a compliment when he commented that they should be framed and hung in every practicing engineer's office.

While rules can't replace common sense or a logical and a methodical approach, they can help avoid embarrassing situations. Here are 20 rules that have been helpful in troubleshooting failures that every engineer or technician will eventually have to do.

The rules have been developed for practicing engineers in the refining industry but should be useful to most engineers and prospective engineers.

Rule 1: Never Assume AnythingMaking a statement like The new bearings are in the warehouse and will be there if these fail is an assumption. They may not be there, may be corroded, may be damaged, or may be the wrong size. The only way you can be sure is to go out and see for yourself.

Rule 2: Follow the DataThe shaft failed due to a bending failure, because the bearing failed, because the oil system failed, because the maintenance schedule was extended, is following the data. A string of evidence much in like solving a crime is necessary in problem solving. When trying to solve problems, the person with the data will be the one who can solve the problem. Without data all one has is experience, speculation, or guessing, all which can result in the wrong answer if it doesn't support the data.

Rule 3: Don't Jump to a CauseMost of us want to come up with the most likely cause immediately. It is usually based on our past experience, which might not be valid for this failure. Contain yourself and don't do this and compile data first. This occurs most often when there is a large meeting and everyone is trying to provide input. Be careful when someone of importance or someone who should know does this. Without data, it can short circuit the problem-solving or troubleshooting effort, and focus on only one cause when there may be many interactions.

Rule 4: Calculation Is Better Than SpeculationA simple analysis is worth more than someone who tries to base the cause on past experiences. Many an argument in meetings has been solved by going up to the board and performing a simple calculation. It's hard to argue with this type data. Remember engineering is performed using numbers and anything else is just an opinion.

Rule 5: Get Input from Others but Realize They May Be WrongMost want to be helpful and provide input as to the cause; however, it may not be credible. When interviewing operators, machinists, and others, there are sometimes personal factors that enter into what people say about the cause. This is especially so when one person doesn't get along with another. You need to be aware of these conflicts when collecting data.

Rule 6: When You Have Conclusive Data, Adhere to Your Principles

Safety issues are a good example. Your position may not be readily accepted by others because of budget, contract, or time constraints. Before taking a stand, it is important to have other senior technical people agree with you because it could affect your career.

Whenever there are critical decisions to be made, that's the time to be part of a team or form a team to make these type decisions. You don't want yours to be the only name on a document. Engineering decisions are by necessity based on assumptions as all calculations have assumptions built into them.

Rule 7: Management Doesn't Want to Hear Bad NewsDon't just discuss the failure and the problems it can cause. Present good options that can also be used at other plant locations to avoid similar failures. You will not be popular if you don't have solid methods to correct the problem. You may not need to select which is the preferred option, but you should have the advantages and disadvantages of each. The meeting will be a success if one is chosen or if a next step is outlined.

Rule 8: Management Doesn't Like Wish ListsOnly present what is needed not what you would like to have. Adhering to company standards or national codes is usually a wise approach. There are meetings where someone tries to tighten up specifications due to their experiences. The specifications were tighter than recognized national standards or codes and increased the project cost significantly. This didn't go well for the engineer and he was not asked to be part of future projects, which was damaging to his career.

Rule 9: Management Doesn't Like Confusing DataKeep technical jargon to a minimum and present the information as clear as possible with illustrations, photographs, models, and examples. Keep the presentations short and concise. All too often we are proud of the analytical analysis we have done and think everyone else will be too. Most of the time, management just wants the results and what to do next. Details of the analysis are best left to the final report or a trade journal.

Rule 10: Management Doesn't Like Expensive SolutionsOnly present one or two cost-effective solutions with options, costs, and timing. That is our responsibility as engineers. Present the options best for solving the problems even if the next step is more testing to gather additional data.

Rule 11: Admit When You're Wrong and Obtain Additional DataThis is most difficult to do but when other data contradicts yours, it must be done or you will look foolish. In this book, it