No bridges but I designed a power grid in about that time once, they usually limit the time so that a) if it is open book you can’t simply look up all the answers you actually have to know some of them, and b) so that the teacher doesn’t wait all day for that one kid to finish his exam. Its and effincency thing.
efficieny be dammed.When the bridge collapses because no time to
check the calculations look what happens?
This reply has been removed.
This reply has been removed.
This reply has been removed.
This account has been deactivated.
thats the tacoma narrows bridge
This account has been deactivated.
henr wrote:
hells yeah
flying upside down like a bird eh!
just gotta drive it fast. fast is fun.
This account has been deactivated.
We’ll cross that bridge when we get to it.
Would you like to drive across a bridge
that someone designed in one hour.
Why is there a time limit on exams in school?
It brings some physical reality into the process. I think it’d be more effective if bridge-building students were to write their answers on pieces of paper suspended in the air, and then they could be graded on the answers and whether they accidentally puncture the paper or not.
No, I would not like to drive across a bridge that was designed in one hour. There are time limits on exams because some students will take 40 days and 40 nights to complete them.
thumperoz wrote:
No, I would not like to drive across a bridge that was designed in one hour. There are time limits on exams because some students will take 40 days and 40 nights to complete them.
I would rather have an engineer design a bridge who took 40 days and 40 nights to write his exam than an engineer who took only 30 minutes to complete his exam.
And thinks he’s so smart he can just quickly design the bridge.
Michael Leibman wrote:
Would you like to drive across a bridge
that someone designed in one hour.
Why is there a time limit on exams in school?
It brings some physical reality into the process. I think it’d be more effective if bridge-building students were to write their answers on pieces of paper suspended in the air, and then they could be graded on the answers and whether they accidentally puncture the paper or not.
you really don’t think this post is worthwhile do you?
I live near a bridge which was designed incorrectly and killed many people
when it fell into the second Narrows near Vancouver.
I bet you the engineer was a real smart guy.
Yes I think it is worthwhile, and thought-provoking — that’s why I answered your questions. I hear theser discussions when my sister (an architect) and my brother (a landscaping/concrete/construction person) talk. His biggest problem with the architects he has to deal with is that they often spend a lot of time coming up with designs that seem to meet all their principles and look good on paper but are unfortunately unfeasable, impractible, not physically workable.
Michael Leibman wrote:
Yes I think it is worthwhile, and thought-provoking — that’s why I answered your questions. I hear theser discussions when my sister (an architect) and my brother (a landscaping/concrete/construction person) talk. His biggest problem with the architects he has to deal with is that they often spend a lot of time coming up with designs that seem to meet all their principles and look good on paper but are unfortunately unfeasable, impractible, not physically workable.
while I generally agree with you. I think if you throw enough money at anything
you can build it. It’s just that why do you want to build it.
Most modern architecture is a huge waste of time and money and resources.
It would be less wasteful if the houses/bridges/whatever didn’t collapse! (and I believe that is actually part of the point of making this post.)
yes, you got that right.
But I figure it out how architects these days work.
They take a blank piece of paper and randomly scribble with a pencil all over the paper. And then they take a colored highlighter and mark areas on the paper
that are going to be doors, windows and skylights.
After they get finished they hand it to the builder and say build it.
It doesn’t have to make any sense. Or economy of material. or functional.
It is left up to a structural engineer to design a fantastic arrangement
of steel concrete and wood to bring this so-called creation into existence.
With that comparison, the engineer is one level closer to the physical reality of the creation than the architect is. To me it affirms that education for such a position would be best if it was always kept within physical constraints (such as time-limits) rather than assuming that there is an abstract perfect ideal that can be attained without regards to physical reality. Does that make any sense in explaining my “paper-in-the-air” example (which is not meant for the sake of its ridiculousness, but merely as an exageration of the idea of having the actual test be more bound by physical limitations.)
I think you’ve got me here. I’m just not sure what I got.
But for some reason you’re making sense.
I hope once again you haven’t seen this:
When I was in engineering school I was rewarded for doing a bad job.
I handed in an important technical paper one week past the deadline.
I was surprised to receive a mark one week later of 98%.
The highest mark I’ve ever received in school.
I was also surprised by the professor pointing out to the class
that this was one of the best reports he’d ever seen
and they should look at it.Many of the students were pissed because
I received such a high mark after handing in late.
The professors point of view was that I could not help the fact
that my experiment was a failure. We learn by failure.
hopefully not bridges falling down.
In order of being concerned with the abstract I think it’d be like… professors, architects, engineers, builders (at least within the context of this discussion.)
(I’m not trying to make a point there, just an observation.)
well the profs would like your ratings.
the engineers I know would be insulted because they have big egos.
in the example of the bridge near Vancouver which fell down.
It’s interesting to note that the builders noticed when they
were putting up the beams that the holes did not aligned properly.
So as builders they have to build. And they proceeded to use hydraulic jacks
and drift pins to force the beams into position.
Little did they know that the reason why they beams were not lining up
is because the beams were deflecting due to excess stress.
This resulted in the final failure of the bridge.
It’s also interesting to know that my father who is a practical person
looked at the bridge one week before it fell down. And said if they build that bridge out any further it will fall down. He was 100% correct.
I bet the bridgebuilders would pay a lot to go back in time and ask for the wise counsel of your father. One company I worked at, one day I received the news that my catching a mistake saved some division many thousands of dollars. And I did get a free t-shirt as a reward.
Yeah, gotta love resonance.
you asked “Would you like to drive across a bridge that someone designed in one hour.”
my answer is that it depends whos chasing me.
arnt bridges like the most perfect example of engineering… had to add that
From my experience I would say that on an engineering team you need diversity. You need some orderly people to keep records and write reports but you also need some hard core problem solvers. I was more the intuitive problem solver type and I saved a few million dollars for my employers. However, I hate writing reports or keeping things in order.
hurry up now and get the next piece of poorly designed junk
on the market as soon as you can. Pronto.
wow, I love the bridge parallel. I’ll remember that one.
Having said that, in the real world there are deadlines… :( The hare does usually win not the tortoise.
henr
Michael Leibman
erin
dontAsk&IwontLie
jimreeve
danonymous