Posted 17 December 2021

I have a step-granddaughter of whom I am immensely proud, not least because she has “the knack” – i.e. been bitten by the engineering bug. Although we never talked much as she was growing up, we (or at least “I”) have begun to talk about engineering in general and her Materials Science studies in particular. This morning I was searching my emails for a missing link to her blog site when I ran across a forgotten email from three years ago where I described some of my approach to problem-solving. As I glanced through the material, it hit me that this could be something that others might benefit from, so I decided to post it on my blog site – maybe others will see it and benefit – maybe not. Anyhoo, here it is:

Claire,
I had a lot of fun geeking with you over the weekend with your Raman spectroscopy project, and it occurred to me that you and I look at problems like this from different ends of a long journey (end of mine and start of yours).
So, in an effort to fulfill my role as GOG, I thought I would pass some thoughts on ‘the Tao of Engineering”

• It’s rarely obvious how to get from where you are to where you want to go, but it is usually fairly easy to see how to get from where you are to someplace that might give you some additional insight into the problem.
• It is extremely easy to exhaust yourself going in circles.  This is probably the number one killer of prospective engineers/scientists.  If you can develop an effective technique for avoiding this one problem, you’ll be much more successful.  Everyone believes they can recognize this phenomenon and won’t fall victim to the trap, but humans aren’t evolved to handle long-term problems – their memory isn’t good enough.  There are probably an infinite number of effective ‘circle-breaking’ techniques, but the one that I chose/discovered is to write everything down, in excruciating detail, as if I were describing the situation to someone else.  This produces an intellectual ‘breadcrumb trail’ that allows you to recognize when you are covering the same ground again.  Over and over again I have experienced that the act of documenting a problem will often solve it entirely, or at least illuminate bad assumptions and/or fruitful lines of inquiry.
• Make sure you actually understand the problem; can’t tell you how many times I solved the problem I wanted to solve (easier, more fun, whatever) rather than the one I was supposed to solve.  Any problem, no matter how large or small, can be described in a single paragraph.  If you can’t write a single paragraph that completely describes the problem, then you don’t understand it.  I would tell my young engineers they had to be able to put the entire problem description on one side of a 3×5 card, in an easily readable type  size. 
• physics doesn’t care what you think!  The data is the data, and you have to adjust to it – as it will never adjust to you.  Too many people try to make the data tell the story they want to hear, rather than listening to the story the data wants to tell.
• Until proven to be correct, always assume everything is wrong. Find a way to cross-check everything.  Many times this can be accomplished by ‘cheating’ – using a known-good information set as the input to a process or program, and comparing the answer from the program/process to the already-known answer.  If they agree, then it’s a good bet that the program/process can then be trusted to do the same for your data.  If they don’t, then you need to discard that program/process, or find out why it doesn’t work the way you think it should (referring back to ‘physics doesn’t care what you think’ as necessary).  Everyone wants ‘THE BIG RED BUTTON’ (like the Staples ‘That was easy’ button) that solves the problem in one fell swoop, but that almost never happens (if it were that easy, it wouldn’t be your homework/lab assignment).

I have attached a Word document showing how I used my ‘document everything’ technique on a recent problem I had with a solid-state accelerometer module I wanted to use on my autonomous robot.  As usual, I ran around in circles for a while chasing ghosts until I decided to get serious and start documenting things, and then (also as usual), I started making progress toward a real solution.
love,
Frank

—
G.Frank Paynter, PhD
OSU ESL Research Scientist (ret)
EM Workbench LLC614 638-6749 (cell)