TSR Chemical Engineers

...

Well, this would be dependant on the core discipline itself. I can only speak for Mechanical Engineering here but I would consider the following topics as essential core material to be a good Mechanical Engineer:

-Heat Transfer
-Thermodynamics
-Fluid Mechanics
-Systems & Electrical Engineering
-Dynamics/Mechanics
- Advanced Engineering Mathematics

The reason why unsteady state is not touched upon that much is because it gets far too complex and starts going into the realms of PhD level content.

Everything gets more complicated, the mathematics, the physics etc. and requires a great level of understanding of the basic principles first (I guess I did learn something from my internship after all )

I think a better way to educate potential engineers would be to introduce a lot more projects into the degree, with the objective of the student(s) producing deliverables that would be as close to professional standard as possible. This could include design projects, but also things like feasibility studies, failure analyses etc. - really any example of a "real world" engineering project. Students would then have to learn the required engineering science in order to complete the assignments, but they'd also get experience with all of the other engineering stuff too. They would be supported in their education by the lecturers, and guided towards relevant material.

I don't think this is the case. I don't imagine there being many process plants being designed using simple steady state design, yet I don't think that many of these process plants are requiring to be designed by PhD level educated engineers utilising PhD level complex mathematics and physics. I believe that process engineers have a variety of methods and rules of thumb for dealing with such situations.

It is the case for some R&D departments in certain industries, especially in the chemicals sector. R&D Engineer roles in top level companies (like Shell/Spirax Sarco etc.) require PhD level engineers for the complex analysis and research that goes into designing some of the stuff (look at AirProducts for example):

https://www.gradcracker.com/hub/315/air-products/graduate-job/23509/phd-development-engineer-uk

Some pure R&D level jobs will not recruit you unless you have a masters degree at the very least due to the advanced nature of the work you'll be doing in the department.

OK, but you're talking about R&D and the position you linked to is looking for candidates with a particular interest in experimental research and modelling. I thought Ade was talking about design of process plants?

Hey!

I study ChemEng and I need help with Thermodynamics II. I need help understanding the module lol.

Can anyone tell me what resources they used to understand Thermodynamics better? Sites, videos etc would be helpful!!

Well, this would be dependant on the core discipline itself. I can only speak for Mechanical Engineering here but I would consider the following topics as essential core material to be a good Mechanical Engineer:

-Heat Transfer
-Thermodynamics
-Fluid Mechanics
-Systems & Electrical Engineering
-Dynamics/Mechanics
-Advanced Engineering Mathematics

These are already included as core learning modules in the degree itself but this should then be complimented with real life design exercises in group projects. For example, in my last year my university introduced a new module for the Mechanical's called "Design of Mechanisms & Machines" and in this module we basically went through real life design engineering processes so we were told to design say a bearing extraction mechanism and we would go through the design process of looking at manufacturer bearing charts, CAD drawings, doing stress calculations etc. just like it's done in industry. However this was only 1 module which was of more of use to us than any of the others...so it would be nice if they in-cooperated these kinds of exercises throughout the degree to give students a good aptitude for design and other areas of engineering in general.

The reason why unsteady state is not touched upon that much is because it gets far too complex and starts going into the realms of PhD level content.

Everything gets more complicated, the mathematics, the physics etc. and requires a great level of understanding of the basic principles first.

I graduated this summer with a 2.1 BEng in Mech Eng and had a job with an automotive manufacturer which I then ended up declining due to financial and accommodation reasons.

I'll be doing an MSc in Subsea Eng come September 2018 so I'm basically looking for an engineering job from now till then! Hopefully have a couple interviews lined up in Jan fingers crossed really.

p.s. it's me @a10 (the guy who made the Mech Eng of TSR thread)

Thanks for posting this, it's a really good insight from someone with both a degree and some engineering experience now. Would you be able to stick around for a bit? Chemical engineering is quite popular on TSR and it would be great if we had someone with both a chemical engineering degree and experience as a process engineer able to provide some guidance.

Glad you've found work. There are opportunities out there, although they're certainly competitive. As well as the sectors you've listed, I'd also add in fast moving consumer goods, food & drink, brewing and distilling, too. Energy and nuclear, too. I'd also say that there are a variety of other jobs within engineering/manufacturing/industrial/energy companies that seem to recruit from all of the engineering disciplines - I just went onto Gradcracker, filtered chemical/process engineering and graduate opportunities, and found a wide range of possible opportunities.

Also, are you following the stuff about the IChemE EGM and vote of confidence/no confidence motions?

Also also, have you read any of Sean Moran's posts on LinkedIn? He's a highly experienced process engineer, and has written quite extensively about university degrees and industry, and takes a very similar opinion to yourself.

I'm not sure about other disciplines, but for process plant design, I would disagree more than agree. It can become complex, but some changes and variations don't require a great deal of science and maths. It is also necessary for tasks such as commissioning. When starting up a distillation column, the process is at unsteady state. Not accounting for this during the design phase can be detrimental.


a10?! Snap! It’s been a long time. What happened to your other account?

I think there is a slight misunderstanding here. What you're referring to mainly are process plant modifications (which as I said to Smack can be done by a trained chemical engineer).

What I was mainly referring to was complete full scale process design. So say a company wants to design a full process plant for whatever purpose (from scratch) that will yield the best efficiencies etc. this would mainly be done in the R&D department by high level engineers with extensive engineering experience (often CEng level or PhD or both) before it is implemented in real life.

Take Sean Moran as an example he is a CEng and has a PhD. You will not find inexperienced engineers doing this.

P.s. I still have my old account just use this one more

I've read almost all of Sean's articles regarding graduates, university and industry. Sean Moran is brave for what he's doing, since as I mentioned before a lot of folks will deny the existence of such issues. I bought his book on plant design and found it more useful than any design project I carried out at university. I think a lot of engineering students feel the same way he does, even if secretively. Graduates will feel even stronger and are probably the ones who are upset the most. Since when they go for interviews or into industry, a lot of what they learn isn't relevant. It's a painful truth that very few are willing to admit but if we need things to improve we have to name the problem.

I think there is a slight misunderstanding here. What you're referring to mainly are process plant modifications (which as I said to Smack can be done by a trained chemical engineer).

What I was mainly referring to was complete full scale process design. So say a company wants to design a full process plant for whatever purpose (from scratch) that will yield the best efficiencies etc. this would mainly be done in the R&D department by high level engineers with extensive engineering experience (often CEng level or PhD or both) before it is implemented in real life.

Take Sean Moran as an example he is a CEng and has a PhD. You will not find inexperienced engineers doing this.

P.s. I still have my old account just use this one more

He's definitely brave for sticking his head above the parapet but there are certainly a lot of people who agree with what he's saying. I've heard many of engineers voice similar opinions but when I first came across his posts that was the first time I saw it them all come together.

I was amazed as well. At first, I thought a lot of these people were simply asking too much of graduates (entry-level with specific experience that will work for entry-level wages), and these people do exist. But even working in a more lab-based role as a process engineer, I could still identify a lot of shortcomings. Even when going for interviews, employers stated that the final-year students they interview had next to no understanding of the basic engineer concepts. It's sad because students and graduates will hurt the most, and not even realise it.

I'm happy to see solidarity amongst engineers (and also academics, some of them secretly agree with Sean) and that they want to address the faults present in engineering education and the IChemE, but I do wonder if it's just better to abandon the ship.

Yes, one outcome I would hope for from the IChemE EGM, regardless of the way the vote goes, is better collaboration between universities and industry (for all disciplines) to ensure that students are receiving an education that encompasses more of the basic engineering concepts, rather than focusing almost solely on mathematical analysis of textbook-esque problems. I think there is support for this on both sides, so hopefully something can happen and the IChemE situation gets resolved without getting too acrimonious.

I’m currently in Year 12 studying chemistry physics maths and further maths, after reading some of the past posts, it worries me slightly the lack of immediate jobs. I already appreciate how competitive it is to get into a top university, but hadn’t considered the competitiveness of graduate jobs. Could you recommend any books related to university content, work as a chemical engineer.. Any advice would help!

Well the Motion of No Confidence failed and it seems the current council is here to stay. My only hope is they work to address the grievances pointed out by various members and not brush them to the side. I plan on getting more involved with this myself, but if things don't then I see no point in renewing my membership next year.

Yes I heard that. The membership voted that way so fair enough, and the no confidence motion was not binding, I believe, anyway. Hopefully though, as you say, they can work towards addressing the issues the members have raised - after all, a not insignificant amounted voted for the motion of no confidence.

Are there other institutions that process engineers could go to for membership and chartership? There are actually quite a lot of different ones out, e.g. I think the Institution of Marine Engineering, Science and Technology is quite big in the offshore industry, and there's the Energy Institute too.

Indeed. It's not just a small rabble. And on top of that this is only among the chartered and fellow members, so who knows what the associate and student members feels. Another major issue is the lack of engagement from members, who don't seem all to bothered about being active in the IChemE. I'm guilty of this and I'm going to work towards being more active with my membership.

There are other institutes. Energy Institute is one I was previously a member (might renew my membership). There's also the Institute of Engineering and Technology. Although it would be more beneficial to have the IChemE giving that it's specific to chemical engineers and the others are a bit general and we'd be lost in the mix.