Cmiller23

Odd Question.... How Many Engineers?

33 posts in this topic

I was a materials science engineer. My specialty was tribology which is the study of friction, wear, and lubrication. Got to do some cool aerospace stuff like work on the liquid oxygen fill-and-drain-valve on the space shuttle, make microlenses, and work on body armor (SAPIs for our troups). Although I was fortunate to do some cool stuff, I changed careers and now teach kids. If asked, "does being an engineer help with builiding baits?". I answer with "sure but not really" (hopefully basic concepts like center of gravity, action/reaction, fall under "general knowledge" and not engineering). Most important is passion. Building baits is more art than science. I've never made a drawing, calculated ballast wt or position, or for that matter even weighed anything(though I did just buy a scale so I can be more scientific in the future, though I probably won't end up using it much, if at all). When I mix epoxy, I just eyeball it. 99% of my baits swim fine (some don't dive as deep as I had intended and some dive deeper than I intended but no big deal). and the 1% that don't were my two attempts at a (3-segment) swimbait.

p.s. Berkely is a marketing and advertising company -case in point, there are no nanofilaments in their nanofil line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was torn between engineering and fish biology before I went to Purdue. I'm starting grad school this spring looking at mercury contamination in largemouth bass. However, studying limnology as an undergrad drastically helped me understand the physical properties of water from a biological standpoint (looking at fish adaptations for water). The benefit of this? I compare how my lures work to biotic factors, such as fish, primarily because I do not have the engineering knowledge to understand the technical physical properties. Basically, same goal just different road to get there!

The even more fascinating part (to me) is looking at how fish function. Primarily looking at feeding mechanisms (bass (and other Centrarchids) use a method called a bucal suction pump... basically these fish vacuum there prey in. I've found this to be beneficial in selecting hook arrangements and hook sizes to achieve better hook-to-land ratios. Bad thing is, the fish still win on occasion.

As for the tech talk, I love it! I like knowing why my lures work! At least, I like trying to understand why my lures work! I think that any info helps and, whether I know it or not, I use everything to create each new lure.

Edited by A-Mac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, After reading all the responses one more time I have arrived at a couple on direct conclusions.

1. There are many learned individuals on this site.

2. No matter how much you know, you don't know it all...

3. Too your original question "How many Engineers?" Well, by the definition "the creative application of scientific principles to design or develop structures, machines, apparatus, or manufacturing processes, or works utilizing them singly or in combination; or to construct or operate the same with full cognizance of their design; or to forecast their behavior under specific operating conditions; all as respects an intended function, economics of operation and safety to life and property." IHO, we are all engineers in his (or her) own little world, its just some delve deeper into the complexities than others... Well that and some of you are degreed of course. :worship:

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Corey dont get me wrong I see the advantages of your degree. Im not dissing you either. I like your style. You have the best of both worlds. I get incredibly frustrated thinking out the details sometimes and that is all I was getting at. It hinders me when I get too wrapped up in the what ifs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did quite a bit of theoretical modeling and monte carlo simulations in R for vortex shedding. Somewhere around I have the results that show the vortex force as a function of effective cross section, lure speed, kinematic viscosity, etc. One the interesting things I found was the kinematic viscosity makes a huge influence.

All that aside, a lure swimming through the water is impossible to accurately model due to the extreme multivariate nature. I have been repeatedly baffled by unexpected swimming behavior of prototypes.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did quite a bit of theoretical modeling and monte carlo simulations in R for vortex shedding. Somewhere around I have the results that show the vortex force as a function of effective cross section, lure speed, kinematic viscosity, etc. One the interesting things I found was the kinematic viscosity makes a huge influence.

All that aside, a lure swimming through the water is impossible to accurately model due to the extreme multivariate nature. I have been repeatedly baffled by unexpected swimming behavior of prototypes.

So does that mean lures move diffently in muddy water?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now