Zesty Mordant

It’s the Ente of the world

Tonight I went out and ate a duck in front of some of my friends. The group included my two housemates, a visiting German friend, and two of her friends. My housemate had just finished explaining his experiences pitching spec scripts to the LA film market, when one of the girls turned to me and asked “So what’s your test on tomorrow?”.

Background info: I have a test tomorrow. I racked my brains for something exciting to say, but in the end the only words that came out of my mouth were “digital hardware”.  This was, in fact, a condensed version of the actual answer. The actual answer was “Using C to program the ATmega16 AVR microcontroller’s serial port, timer, PWM and ADC functionalities”. But I didn’t want to sound like a Dusche.

See, I’m slowly realising as a student engineer – especially the half that’s an electrical engineer – that there’s no easy way to explain what you learn about to people without boring them to death or dumbing it down so many shades that it doesn’t really explain anything at all. It’s alright if you write movies or newspapers or novels, or teach english, or dissect small animals. These are activities that people are familiar with. Even organic chemistry can be made exciting (I synthesise meth), and biology ain’t too bad either (I study the mating patterns of sloths). But if you tell someone you’re performing a Fourier transform on a square wave to see what its fundamental frequencies are… well how do you glamourise that?

I think the essence of what I am trying to communicate here is that in other areas of study it is possible to reduce an explanation of things to a level that people can relate to, like books, movies, or psychology. With a technical study like engineering, quantum physics, or nanotechnology, there’s fewer ways to do that. Let’s go back to the example before: Microcontroller. Do you know what that is? What it does? I guarantee you you’ve used something – probably many things – with one in it today. But how do you explain it to someone non-technical without boring them or confusing them? A programmable chip? That’s still jargony. Really tiny computer? That sounds condescending and is inaccurate.

I still don’t know, but anyhow. I think I have a solution that avoids all these pitfalls. It involves lying about almost everything, but let’s just agree to say it’s stretching the truth. The next time someone asks me what my test is about, I will answer with: Robots.

Everyone loves Robots.

Play it again, old man

Today I had a 5% design interview for a mech subject. And, as is typical of groupwork assignments, there were several gaping black holes within our efforts.

The interview consisted of us sitting before a panel of 4 academics who proceeded to drag us over hot coals about every nuance of the design in order to ascertain exactly how our contraption planned to work. As nobody was yet 100% in agreement on how each nut, bolt, and idea all went together, there were some conflicting explanations thrown around the room, and suffice to say, ‘working’ was not one of the things on the list of functions of our device.

Our task is to design a dustiness test rig that complies with two sets of standards – AS 4156.6 and IS EN15051. And the solution to the problem we have been working on has genuinely been plaguing me for weeks.

One of the things I was finding difficult to come to terms with was how to implement an interchangeable drum into our device so that it could function within the parameters of both the standards. Of course, there are dozens of solutions to the problem and I could have picked any one and been done with it. But up until this evening, all the suggestions that have been tossed around involved some sort of contraption or mechanism that just added to the overall complexity of the device by requiring custom machining and painful CAD modelling.

Now, I’m a big believer in the ‘elegant solution’. I can probably explain this best by directing you to Euler’s Identity:

Whilst not a solution to any problem per say, it is an incredibly elegant statement that manages to link 5 fundamental mathematical constants using three basic arithmetic operations. So it is the uncomplicated, yet obvious-in-hindsight solution that I like, and one that can often be obtained by taking the most basic approach.

Keeping it simple does not mean just using the first idea that comes into your head, but the process should generally be quicker versus a more complicated design. In the past I have often not realised this from the outset and gone down the arduous task of trying to design something complicated directly in the CAD program itself (a task which, in my opinion, should rarely be undertaken).

The last time this happened was at my old job. I spent several days mulling over something that was not going to work, before finally cracking the shits one midday and going to lie on a park bench somewhere in the middle of Redfern. Many great minds had lay here before me, and their ideas permeated the fabric of my imagination and provided me with a solution that was simple but functional. By that afternoon, I had a draft modelled and ready to show the boss, who approved.

This time, however, I was running low on motivation. ‘Designers block’, if you allow me to liken the process to writing, seemed to cloud my head and block the way to the solution. I could feel it in there, like a lone tablet in a pill jar filled with cotton wool, yes, it was in there somewhere but it had to be prised out. In these circumstances, further measures were needed. So I did what I knew best.

I went and talked to Dad.

My old man probably couldn’t program a microcontroller to save his life, but he could engineer his way out of anything with a pen and a notepad. He’s a bit of a ‘back of the napkin’ type guy who, unlike myself, has learnt more from experience than from textbooks. When I told him about my problem, the first words he said were “there’s a very simple way to do that”. And that was that. Within 15 minutes we’d sketched out a design that would work. The problem was gone, I ate a meat pie, and went home a happy man.

What’s the moral of the story? Well, it’s the first of two conclusions that I reached in my professional engineering work experience report: ‘Keep it simple, stupid’. What was the second conclusion? ‘Measure twice, cut once’.

But that’s a story for another day.

Resource Scheduling

If you’ve ever seen an episode of “Grand Designs” you’ll know what happens when someone who is ill-prepared for the job tries to manage a project. Budgets are blown, time periods escalate and people lose hair. Often, things would have gone to plan and may even have come in under budget if they had simply used a project manager from the start. Nevertheless, people remain adamant that the path they chose was the best one (an example of this?). Let’s have a look at some project management considerations. First off we’ll be looking at resource scheduling.

Resource Scheduling

Resources are limited. And demand for resources is not constant. It is desirable to efficiently utilise existing resources by evening out the demand for resources. This can be done by delaying non-critical activities (using slack). This in turn lowers peak demand, and increases resource utilisation. This process is known as resource levelling, or smoothing.

What is a resource?

1. People: Classified by the skills they bring to the project, eg. programmer, engineer.

2. Materials: Cover a large spectrum. Often the cause of the delay for many projects, eg. waiting on parts

3. Equipment: Things needed to get the job done, eg. tools, cranes, computers. Often overlooked as a constraint

4. Working Capital: If working capital is readily available, a project manager may work on many activites concurrently. If, however, it is in short supply, materials and labour usage may have to be restricted or delayed to conserve cash.

Constraints in Resource Scheduling

1. Technical or Logical Constraints: These are constraints related to the order in which things must be done. Eg. you can’t lay a foundation until you’ve poured the concrete.

2. Resource Constraints: An absence or shortage of resources can alter technical constraints

3. Physical Constraints: Constrain activities that would normally be performed in parallel eg. Contractual or environmental

The downside of levelling is a loss of flexibility that occurs from reducing slack. The risk of acitivites delaying the project also increases because slack reduction creates more critical or near-critical activities.

Five Reasons Why Dexter Is The Best TV Show I’ve Seen In A Long Time

After reading something on the net about TV show Dexter, I decided to watch it based solely on point 5 below. I had noticed the show on various torrent sites, but never bothered to download it because of its rather nondescript title. I watch a lot of TV, but a program hasn’t managed to suck me into a viewing vortex this deep since Trailer Park Boys, or the masterpiece that is Oz. Here are the reasons I like it. I’ll try not to leave any spoilers.

5. The main character is a forensic blood spatter analyst. He’s also a serial killer. This makes for some interesting scenarios, including Dexter analysing his own crime scene.

4. The show is not ridiculously censored. This means there is swearing, dismembered body parts, and even the occasional boob. Odd for a US-based program, but it’s good to know the writers haven’t been constrained by some ridiculous rules.

3. Dexter’s foul-mouthed sister is played by the awesome Jennifer Carpenter. She’s hot, she curses a lot, and doesn’t take any shit. A good combo if you ask me.

2. It accurately portrays the lighting in Miami. Apparently, everything there is not covered by an orange tinge, after all.

1. It’s got half the cast from Oz.

Edit: Honorable mention goes to the theme music. It’s hauntingly upbeat. I think there’s even a banjo in there.

Leadership: Being an Effective Manager

I’ve been watching the Office a lot lately, and was wondering whether Michael Scott would be a good leader, a good manager, or both? How about neither?

Perhaps Richard Branson is a better example of someone who is a leader, rather than a manager. Back in the startup days of Virgin he might have had a more managerial role, but now he gallivants around the world in hot air balloons, sponsoring formula one teams, impersonating binnies and shagging flight attendants. At least, that’s what we’re led to believe.

On the other hand, Bill Gates was probably more of a manager than a leader. Although there is no doubt his position would have required him to do both, his great technical knowledge and ability to manage tasks was undoubtedly one of the reasons behind Microsoft’s success.

According to Kotter (1990),

- Management is about coping with complexity, while

- Leadership is about coping with change

A good project manager has elements of both. A well defined project, however, requires little leadership. As the degree of uncertainty increases, more leadership is required. It takes a special person to perform both roles well.

Project Stakeholders

Project stakeholders can be internal or external.

Internal stakeholders are people on whom the project depends, for example:

-Project Team: Manages and completes project work. Most members want to do a good job, but are also concerned with whether their involvement on the project will contribute to their personal goals and aspirations.

- Project Managers: Compete within an organisation with each other for resources and support of top management. Often have to share resources and exchange information.

- Administrative Support: Provide valuable support services

- Functional Managers: Can have varying level of involvement. Want to cooperate, up to a point.

- Top management: Approves funding

- Project Sponsors: Champion the project. Are a key project ally. Often, they have a mad reputation and it is tied to the success of the project.

External Stakeholders

- Customers: Define the project and its scope. The ultimate project success rests with their satisfaction.

- Contractors: May do all the actual work

- Government agencies: Place constraints, eg. permits, compliances etc.

- Other organisations

Changes in thinking

The old-fashioned view of project management emphasised directing and controlling the subordinates, much like Dwight Schrute does.

The new perspective emphasises managing project stakeholders and anticipating changes as the most important jobs.

Influence as exchange

Cohen and Bradford describe the exchange view of influence as “currencies”.

Several types:

Task-related: Providing assistance, extraordinary effort

Position-related: Promotions, aiding people with challenges, making other people look good, enhancing reputations

Inspiration-related: Perhaps the most powerful form of influence. Derive from people’s burning desire to make a difference, and to add meaning to their lives.

Relationshiop-related: Picking someone up when they’re down, boosting confidence, listening

Personal-related: Deals with helping others feel a sense of importance and personal wealth, to naturally generate goodwill. Can be done by sharing tasks, delegating authority over work so that people feel ownership of it, and allowing individuals to stretch their limits.

Management by walking around – I had a supervisor who would walk around every so often just to check how people were doing. Such face-to-face interaction helps to build a cooperative relationship.