Hi, What makes an engineering hero?!?

Hi, What makes an engineering hero?!?

You can tell a lot about people from the individuals they most admire. 

So a recent poll to find the public’s top engineering heroes paints an interesting picture of Britain’s view of engineers.

For one thing, THE SURVEY conducted by the organisation behind the Queen Elizabeth Prize for Engineering shows a recognition of how wide a discipline engineering really is, taking in civil, mechanical, electrical, chemical and computer engineers - including many who probably wouldn't achieve chartered status today. But the poll also reveals some things about how we view engineering achievement.

Firstly, it’s clear that some things never change. 

Isambard Kingdom Brunel has probably been Britain’s most famous engineer since well before his death in 1859 and his number one position in this list comes as little surprise (especially given that he was also voted the second greatest Briton ever in 2002). 

His infrastructure changed the physical shape and appearance of the country in a way that helped make Britain the most advanced nation of the 19^th century and that can still be felt today.

The presence of fellow Victorians James Watt, George Stephenson and Joseph Bazalgette show just how associated this period in Britain remains with engineering. 

There’s also the continuing dominance of people like Leonardo Da Vinci and Archimedes who have little connection to our lives today but who have become mythical figures that represent engineering on an archetypal level.

But much of the rest of the list actually shows how attitudes and fashions are changing, not so much in terms of the outcomes and INVENTIONS we value but the kind of people, their experiences and what they represent.

Computers and the internet have made arguably the biggest change in society during the last century so it’s no surprise to find Tim Berners-Lee and Alan Turing on the list. 

Perhaps of more interest is that the other computing pioneers on the list are arguably lesser-known FEMALES.

Ada Lovelace, considered the world’s first programmer, has become a figurehead for attempts to encourage more women to take up computer science in recent years, and she now makes it into fourth place on this list. 

Charles Babbage – the man who INVENTED the computer Lovelace programmed – on the other hand is nowhere to be seen.

Even Turing’s position at number six represents something of a rehabilitation of a man whose pioneering work setting out the principles of modern computing had arguably limited impact on his contemporaries and who is believed to have killed himself after a conviction for homosexuality but recently received a royal pardon.

The list also shows the results of work to give greater recognition to those who weren't white, Western males. 

Brazilian aviation pioneer Alberto Santos-Dumont comes in at seven while the Wright BROTHERS are left languishing at 20, and the Bengali radio pioneer Jagadish Chandra Bose who beat Guglielmo Marconi to a demonstration of radio by two years is now rewarded with a higher placing despite Bose’s lower public profile.

Much of the order of this list probably has to do with the way it was put together: on Twitter. 

A wider poll of a more general sample of the public may well have yielded different results than a method that relies on a self-selecting sample of people who are keen to have their opinion heard.

Still, the poll reminds us that sometimes what you do isn't as important as how you do it, the circumstances you do it in or the adversity you face along the way when society has stacked the odds against you.

The list in full:

1. Isambard Kingdom Brunel (1806-1859), civil and mechanical engineer who built the Great Western Railway and over a hundred bridges, dock systems and ships.

2. Leonardo Da Vinci (1452-1519) Renaissance artist and inventor whose designs included a helicopter, concentrated SOLAR POWER and flood defences.

3. Nikola Tesla (1856-1943), pioneering electrical engineer who helped develop radio, radar and INVENTED alternating current transmission.

4. Ada Lovelace (1815-1852), mathematician who developed the first computer algorithm.

5. Archimedes (287 BC – 212 BC) Ancient Greek mathematician, astronomer and INVENTOR.

6. Alan Turing (1912-1954) mathematician and war-time code breaker who laid out the principles of modern computing and helped develop the first computers.

7. Grace Hopper (1906-1992) computer scientist who designed the first ever English-like DATA PROCESSING language.

8. Alberto Santos-Dumont (1873-1932), aviation pioneer who designed and built the first dirigible and flew the first powered aeroplane in Europe.

9. James Watt (1735-1819), mechanical engineer whose improvements to steam engine. technology were fundamental to industrial revolution

10. Jagadish Chandra Bose (1858-1937), scientist and pioneer of radio communication.

11. Frank Whittle (1907-1966), engineer and air OFFICER who invented the the jet engine.

12. George Stephenson (1781-1848), civil and mechanical engineer considered the “Father of Railways” for building the world’s first public inter-city railway line to use steam locomotives.

13. Elijah McCoy (1844-1929), one of the first African-American engineers and famous for work on steam-engine lubrication.

14. Joseph Bazalgette (1819-1891), CIVIL ENGINEER who designed the London sewer system.

15. Tim Berners-Lee (1955-present), engineer and computer scientist who invented the World Wide Web.

16. Hertha Ayrton (1854-1923), first FEMALE member of the Institution of Electrical Engineers in 1899 famous for research on electric arc.

17. Guglielmo Marconi (1874-1937), electrical engineer who developed the first long distance telegraph and broadcast the first transatlantic radio signal.

18. Carl Bosch (1874-1940), industrial chemist known for engineering synthetic fertilizer through the Haber-Bosch process.

19. Thomas Edison (1847-1931), a prolific INVENTOR whose most famous devices include the motion picture camera and a long-lasting electric light bulb.

20. Orville (1871-1948) and Wilbur (1867-1912) Wright, aviation pioneers who built the first working airplane and developed the first practical fixed-wing aircraft

"Who’s missing? Tell us who your engineering

hero is."

Hi Toy! Easy-to-pilot personal submarine set for launch; Hi Deep Flight.

Hi Toy! Easy-to-pilot personal submarine set for launch; Hi Deep Flight.

The inventor of a new personal submarine set to launch next week is hoping to create a new niche MARKET for would-be adventurers who have no professional training in underwater navigation.

Hi Deep Flight

The new Deep Flight Dragon craft is an evolution of the company's Super Falcon vehicle (above).

Deep Flight, the company founded by personal submarine pioneer Graham Hawkes , plans to launch its new two-person Dragon model next week at the Monaco YACHT Show.

The all-electric craft was designed to be easily used from a yacht or the shore by anyone who has undergone minimal instruction. 

It features power and on board monitoring and MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS, uses vertical thrust instead of a ballast and drop-weight system to dive, and automatically floats to the surface when its propulsion system is disengaged.

The Dragon is an evolution of Deep Flight’s earlier “Super Falcon” craft (see video), itself a development of the vehicle Hawke built to enable the late Steve Fossett to travel to the deepest point in the ocean, the Mariana Trench.

L x H x W: 4.8 m x 1.5 m x 2.1 m (15.7 ft x 4.9 ft x 6.8 ft) 

Operating Depth: 120 m (400 feet) 

Crew: 2 

Payload: 230 kg (507 lbs) 

Air WEIGHT: 1800 kg (3968 lbs) 

FLIGHT Capabilities: Flight and Hover 

Safety Features: Positive Buoyancy 

Inflatable launch platform enabling easy entry and egress 

Emergency inflatable gas bag system

HI Deep FACT(s).

Hi Triggered Email Marketing: Give it a Shot!!!

Hi Triggered Email Marketing: Give it a Shot!!!

Triggered EMAIL MARKETING is underutilized by email marketers around the world, much to the detriment of their businesses, cash flow and even their customers! The proper usage of triggered email marketing does not result in clogging a customer’s inbox full of irrelevant questions, statements and information – that’s what Facebook is for.

Read on to find out the stats behind the claims and how you can use triggered EMAIL MARKETING to improve your results today!

Why and How Does Triggered Email Marketing Work?

Triggered email is sent when a customer performs a pre-determined action with your company (orders a product, sends an email, browses a product). 

We've all encountered them at one stage or another – whether it’s a confirmation email or a forgotten password email. That’s why it’s such a great idea to use them for your MARKETING efforts!

The correct use of Triggered EMAIL MARKETING allows email marketers to get creative.

Think about it, if the recipient is expecting the email because of an action they initiated themselves, you’re not only emailing an INVESTED party, but you also have a vital piece of information on the party you’re emailing – their interest in a specific product, service or action.

Real-time triggered emails sent via an auto responder perform well because they are immediately relevant and the customer expects them. Usual promotional email is unexpected and often not relevant to the consumer’s current state of mind.

Triggered Email Marketing Shotgun Stats:

• THE OPEN rate for triggered emails are over 400% higher than email newsletters
• Click through rates can increase by 125%
• Triggered emails can result in a 12% increase in revenue 
• Bounce Rates for triggered email are super-low at 3.5% according to a 2012 benchmark report by the Direct Marketing Association.
• Open rates were 75% higher on triggered EMAIL MARKETING emails when compared to other promotional mail.

Some Common Calibres of Trigger Email Marketing:

• Browse Abandonment – these emails are sent when a customer has browsed items on your website, but then left without purchasing anything.
• Cart Abandonment – sent when a customer adds items to their cart, but does not actually proceed to checkout.
• Welcome Emails – sent when a new customer joins your subscriber list.
• On-boarding Emails – a series of emails that are sent to a new subscriber giving tips and hints on what to do next.

With advanced auto responder tools, however, you can set email to be triggered on a wide variety of actions allowing you to create your own type of trigger EMAIL MARKETING strategy!

If done correctly and intelligently, a triggered email is a targeted, free (you should send it anyway) promotional email that is highly personalized and likely to be opened by the recipient.

When it comes to Triggered Email Marketing, your creativity is the limit to your aspirations.

!!!GOOD-LUCK!!!

Hi Email Personalization in the Obama Campaign!.

Hi Email Personalization in the Obama Campaign!.

If you want to make a couple hundred dollars quickly, use a knife.

If you want to make a couple thousand DOLLARS quickly, use a gun.

If you want to make a couple million DOLLARS quickly, use a politician.

Or EMAIL MARKETING, if the amazing success of the Obama campaign is any proof!

USA President Barack Obama’s election campaign’s story is almost fable-like.

Beating overwhelming odds, one man, one vision for change and one inspiring quote to rally behind – ‘Yes We Can’.

… the realistic (but not as glamorous version) has to do with EMAIL MARKETING, personalized EMAIL MARKETING to be exact!

The Obama administration was grossly underfunded when compared to the Romney campaign. However, after using EMAIL MARKETING and Email Personalization, Obama was able to raise the majority of his 690 million dollar campaign through Personalized Emails.

When you hear the term email personalization, what do you think of?

When it comes to EMAIL MARKETING, most people think of including the recipient’s first; name in the subject line and the opening line in the email. 

While this is an important type of email personalization, it is not the only one! Obama’s EMAIL CAMPAIGN made heavy use of 

‘Appearance Email Personalization’.

Appearance Email Personalization:

A personalized message can mean more than just fields that change depending on recipient – and it should.

The layout, template and subject line that appears as a personal letter or informal message is an example of Appearance Email Personalization. It doesn't matter if you send out your email to thousands of subscribers, as long as it appears personal, it will have the desired effect.

“The subject lines that worked best were things you might see in your in-box from other people,” 

,...says Toby Fallsgraff, the campaign’s email director.

Obama’s emails are a good example of Appearance Email Personalization. 

They begin with a slightly informal tone while communicating in the first person about relevant, everyday and human topics slowly bringing the election and fundraising in as the main focus. 

Within reason, the same approach can be applied to your own EMAIL MARKETING CAMPAIGN!

However, testing through A/B tests is extremely important for Appearance Email Personalization, as Amedia Showalter, Obama’s digital analytic expert points out,

 “We did extensive A-B testing on the subject lines and the amount of MONEY we would ask people for.”

Some Tips for Appearance Email Personalization;

• Don’t be too personal – slang and lingo is never well received.
• Don’t be too specific – if you’re too specific you risk isolating a percentage of your readers.
• Use the first person and simplify words where you can to appear friendlier.
• Keep context in mind – if you’re a legal company, for example, you do not want to sound unprofessional and not serious.

Gain that Vote of Confidence!

Use email personalization to gain the trust of your subscribers and their vote of confidence in your business.

Some of the available services offered include advanced email personalization and segmentation tools to all their clients, allowing them to achieve higher open rates, higher revenue and higher deliver ability in their EMAIL MARKETING CAMPAIGN.

Do you have any tricks for email personalization? What are some of the lesser known email personalization tricks you know of? Let us know in the comment section below!

Hi, The Best Of Engineering!!!.

Hi, The Best Of Engineering!!!.

The following is an actual question given on a University of Washington engineering mid-term. The answer was so "profound" that the Professor shared it with colleagues, and the sharing obviously hasn't ceased...

Bonus Question: Is Hell exothermic (gives off heat) or Endothermic (absorbs heat)?

Most of the students wrote Proofs of their beliefs using Boyle's Law, (gas cools off when it expands and heats when it is compressed) or some variant. One student, however, wrote the following:

"First, we need to know how the mass of Hell is changing in time. So we need to know the rate that souls are moving into Hell and the rate they are leaving. I think that we can safely assume that once a soul gets to Hell, it will not leave. Therefore, no souls are leaving. As for how many souls are entering Hell, let us look at the different religions that exist in the world today. Some of these religions state that if you are not a member of their religion, you will go to Hell. Since there are more than one of these religions and since people do not belong to more than one religion, we can project that all souls go to Hell. With birth and death rates as they are, we can expect the number of souls in Hell to increase exponentially.

Now, we look at the rate of change of the volume in Hell because Boyle's Law states that in order for the temperature and pressure in Hell to stay the same, the volume of Hell has to expand as souls are added. This gives two possibilities:

1. If Hell is expanding at a slower rate than the rate at which souls enter Hell, then the temperature and pressure in Hell will increase until all Hell breaks loose.

2. Of course, if Hell is expanding at a rate faster than the increase of souls in Hell, then the temperature and pressure will drop until Hell freezes over.

So which is it?

If we accept the postulate given to me by Teresa Banyan during my Freshman year, "...that it will be a cold day in Hell before I sleep with you.", and take into account the fact that I still have not succeeded in having sexual relations with her, then, #2 cannot be true, and thus I am sure that Hell is exothermic and will not freeze."

This student received the only A.

- Unknown.

Hi Common Purposes (Be True to your School (Ranking))!!!.

Hi Common Purposes (Be True to your School (Ranking))!!!.

What are the Common Purposes? I've dwelt on that question since first reading my Alma mater's founding principle "for the purposes of instructing persons, who may choose to apply themselves, in the application of science to the common purposes of life". 

The question, more than any answer I may ever offer, has guided me through many personal and professional endeavours, And, if I have learned anything it is that I have derived my greatest joy when I, as part of a team, have made a lasting difference to improve the lives of others. 

Should the thoughts I share here and the ensuing discussion lead others to ask the same question, to seek their own answers and to experience the same joy as I, then I shall consider this effort of value.

Image: "The New Shoes" by Jane Bucci. This work is based on the touching photo snapped by Gerald Waller in 1946, in Austria. The little boy, who lived in an orphanage, had just been given new shoes by the American Red Cross.

Hi Be True to your School (Ranking);

Forbes Magazine joined the fray a few years ago in ranking America's Colleges and recently issued their 2012 results.  US News & World Report (USN&WR) has offered such rankings for many years as they proved of interest to college-bound students (and their parents, most likely).  Over time, colleges started to take note of their ranking and, as has been observed, many colleges started to focus on the metrics (possibly to the detriment of their primary focus) to improve their standing. Could millions of dollars in funding and alumni donations be at stake? Could the quality of applications change based upon a school's ranking? Perhaps. Forbes relies on the work of the Centre for College Affordability and Productivity (CCAP) to prepare their ranking. CCAP shares reports publicly that cover a range of interesting topics centred on American Colleges and I gather they take their work very seriously and earnestly.  With regard to the ranking they prepare for Forbes, they provide a fairly detailed summary of their criteria, their sources and their methodology, and, they provide a summary ranking for each of the criteria by school. CCAP uses five general categories: 1. Student Satisfaction - Student evaluations, retention rates (27.5%). 2. Post-Graduate Success - Who's Who, American Leaders and Salaries (32.5%). 3. Student Debt - Debt loads, default rates, debt percentage (17.5%). 4. Four-year Graduation Rate - four year graduation rate (11.25%). 5. Academic Success - student awards and alumni with PhD's (11.25%). Remember that Forbes' tagline is "The Capitalist Tool" so they have a focus on capitalism and, in general, have a penchant for monetary returns and professional acumen as a measure for success.  So, it is not surprising that they weight salaries, graduation rates, and academic achievement highly. Curiously, however, the measure with the highest weight (at 17.5%) is Student Evaluations from RateMyProfessor.com  (RMP).  Now, the good folks at CCAP have done their homework on assessing the validity of the RMP data and they have done their own analyses (as well as corroborating work by others) to qualify the value of these data.  I have read a reasonable number of blog posts that question the CCAP data but I'll not quibble with the detractors for now, but, why is it that a subjective measure from students (the most confounding of all consumers as the less you give them the happier they are!) on a populist website would have the highest individual value in the overall ranking? Do Barron's or Fiske include such a measure? CCAP generates a score for each element of the five categories and in some fashion (which is a mystery to me) generates a total score.  As stated above, they do weight the value of the scores but it's not clear to me if (or how) they normalize or scale the scores such that they can be meaningfully combined.  I do know that in the tabular summary for each category, CCAP provides information for each school by its rank order.  Is the total score based upon a school's rank within each sub-category? I hope not! But, I can't say it's obvious to me how the final score is determined. I wrote to CCAP (they provide an address on their website) seeking more information on the actual scores for each school. I received a timely reply that stated, "Unfortunately, we are contractually obligated not to make the raw RMP scores publicly available."  Fair enough; if Forbes paid for this work to be done, they can do with it as they wish, but, I do not believe it's a good idea to keep the data private for the schools, their professors, students and alumni, for Forbes or for CCAP. Here's a simple anecdote of explanation: I ran into a similar situation reviewing wages for teachers in several districts where I live.  One local union was upset that their wages were ranked among some of the lowest in the county while all measures of success (test scores, enrolment and much more) were ranked at or near the top.  It is not difficult to see why such a situation could turn into a major issue with placards and protests! Alas, pay rates are not a complete measure of compensation (medical benefits, retirement, days worked, etc..) and even if they were, the variations in pay rates were not egregiously different.  Sure, if I'm making $500 less than someone else doing the same job, I do care and I would want the situation rectified; I do get that point. But, for union leaders to fan the flames with incomplete statements about pay scale rankings does more harm than good. So, I ask CCAP, again: What are the actual scores, particularly the RMP scores, for these colleges? How significantly do these scores vary by category? Are the top ranked colleges really that much better than those at the bottom by your quantitative measures?  It simply is not sufficient for a magazine of Forbes' stature and readership or for CCAP to present information in a manner that cannot be substantiated.

 

*Bottom Line: Their results are of interest. For now, however, they are doing more harm than good.