RANT: Why Can't People just Hire the Right Person For the Job????

[FXPert]

Yea, they type newbie in the subject line incase the others can't tell

 

[robertmee]

Ron, you're pounding the head on the nail with the shoddy shops lowballing projects in an effort to shutout competition. Like you were once, I'm a single owner contractor and have experienced this first hand the past couple of years.

And to emphasize your point, my customers have suffered due to the inadequate work, yet no longer have the capital to correct the problem. So, they call me in, toss me a few $$ and I bandaid what I can here and there. Over the course of a few years, we MIGHT get the process where it needs to be, but of course it has cost them 3x what my original estimate was. Yet, I see the same companies make the same mistakes over and over. It is all about the $$ capital expenditure up front with no account taken for the final product.

There's also an odd issue of momentum to overcome. One of these particular shops is a huge name in the particular industry I service. They've been around for decades, but due to attrition, layoffs, etc. they produce some of the worst control work I've seen. I've been involved (no exaggeration) with no less than 6 or so projects of theirs where they are finally kicked off site, and we end up re-writing major portions of their code, if not all. But the higher ups know the name, and even though they know their work is sub-standard, they know EXACTLY what they are getting (as it was explained to me).

There's alot of head shaking in integrator work. I've been doing it for almost 20 years and I'm still amazed at how I initially lose jobs to these jokers in the industry that have NO clue. I'll be the first to admit I'm not God's gift to integration and a large part of why I peruse this forum is to continue to learn what I don't know or to learn better ways, but the work I continue to see pumped out of these lowball PLC houses is frightening. Just to give you an example, I was just called in to 'fix' a packaging machine running CLX. This was a simple palletizer where the integrator has been on site for SIX weeks trying to get it to run. A job that should take no more than 1 week to implement. On reviewing the code, I see double OTEs used, short circuit branches EVERYWHERE, no aliases used for I/O, etc. It's a mess and an obvious attempt by an inexperienced programmer to patch and bandaid in a vain effort to get it to run long enough so that they can get the hell out of dodge. I fix what I can in the 3 days I'm given, and discuss what I think it will take to make it work reliably (a complete re-write). Well, I think they are going to give the integrator another chance to re-write it. They will take the chance of further downtime, and further screw-ups with the potential of the same final product, because the integrator is offering to do it for free. Even though the engineers know that the cost is NOT free based on what's happened to date, upper management will of course go with free everytime.

 

[timbo_uk]

Very well put Robert!
It must be really frustrating for you. I am still learning, but all my projects so far have been "production safe", a much safer way to learn a few things!

 

[Oakley]

I've been following this thread since it's inception, but have kept quiet (until now) ...

I have observed a fundamental failure in the way business is run. You cannot go on bid cost alone - there must be an evaluation by competent people.

Yet, I see the same companies make the same mistakes over and over. It is all about the $$ capital expenditure up front with no account taken for the final product.

... shops is a huge name in the particular industry I service. They've been around for decades, but due to attrition, layoffs, etc. they produce some of the worst control work I've seen.

The first comment is that engineering (or others) put out an RFQ then let unexperienced people evaluate the bids - which typically lead to lowest cost winning.

When I (or my team) evaluate bids, we have an engineering developed matrix that we complete.

We evaluate past performance, assigned resources, ability to quote the project based on the RFQ, technical ability (goes back to past performance), process risk, etc.

If the resources are not familiar, then we ask for resumes and past references.

All this may be more workload for us, but we have data that will back up our decision for our selection. Management has a much harder time rejecting our selection based solely on costs.

 

[bkottaras]

I've been following this thread since it's inception, but have kept quiet (until now) ...

I have observed a fundamental failure in the way business is run. You cannot go on bid cost alone - there must be an evaluation by competent people. And here is where the Sales force comes in! Why evaluate? Costs $$$, Just throw a figure out (which is usually pulled out of sales people A$$)and if they accept it a bonus is guranteed! Enough said.




The first comment is that engineering (or others) put out an RFQ then let unexperienced people evaluate the bids - which typically lead to lowest cost winning.

When I (or my team) evaluate bids, we have an engineering developed matrix that we complete.

We evaluate past performance, assigned resources, ability to quote the project based on the RFQ, technical ability (goes back to past performance), process risk, etc.

If the resources are not familiar, then we ask for resumes and past references.

All this may be more workload for us, but we have data that will back up our decision for our selection. Management has a much harder time rejecting our selection based solely on costs.

Just my experience!

 

[wirepuller134]

I understand this all to well. I topped out as a journeyman electrician from I.B.E.W. local 429 long ago, then went to full time army. It did not take me long to learn that if you are enrolled full time in school your not sitting in the motor pool everyday. After 2 degrees, I started working a second job where ever I was posted. When I took my retirement (not voluntarily) I took a job with a company I had done some work for, and worked for off and on depending on duty assignment. Looking at a system that was costing the company aprox 12k per quarter to maintain, I started searching the web for solutions, that is how I found this forum. Built a scale model of the system in our shop. This was costing the company no money over what they were already throwing away with the status quo. I posted my first question here, and got some good replies. I also asked if we could outsource to a local shop to speed the process. They charged 60 dollars an hour, seemed cheap enough to me, but the plant engineer went into a fit almost like giving birth. We went with a device that was made to do what we were wanting to do, not a good solution but cheaper than the status quo to maintain. I kept working on a simpler solution, and found it. Unfortunately the bean counters went with a mechanical drive becouse my solution took almost a month to make a working model in the shop. Which is fine, my department doesn't have to touch it now, but cost almost 10 times more to install than our solution and in the first month has broke down due to bad mechanical engineering 3 or 4 times. I don't mind admitting when I get in over my head, and paying someone for their experience. Unfortunately like others have posted, if it can be done cheaper by a company that has good salesmen, then that is the route they will take.

As far as paying back the community, I am slow to respond, don't want to add bad information to someone already confused, so I am working on catching my knowledge up with the new software and hardware. So thank you to everyone who contributes here, and to the people whom host and maintain this site.

 

[PeterW]

I remember years ago being told by an older engineer, take a look at the top management here, none are engineers, most came from accounting. It's the same everywhere.

 

[harryting]

Boy, hasn't we covered this in the past?

I am bother by some of the question asked here, the thing is, unlike other fields, a wrong move in this profession can get someone killed. On the other hand, I didn't know of any word-processor or 1st person shooter game get someone fried.

We don't do much to protect our profession. In this state, a hair dresser needs a license from the state but you don't need one to program a PLC to control a process and can result in loss of life or limb. Make sense, eh?

Nope, I don't expect anything to change either.

 

[SLC_Integrator]

Wow what a can of worms to open!

I've mentioned before that I spend alot of my time in the DCS world, generally mining and oil refining. My experience is actually that its the big contract companies that are hiring the useless people. I have not 1 but THREE projects on my desk right now that have supposedly been 'engineered' by large, well known contract engineering companies and it seems they couldnt find their *** with both hands!

Whats going on in these companies???

Myself I dont see alot of use for experienced people in 'vendor training' unless its a small vendor that knows its product well. Alot of Rockwell/Modicon & DCS training is 'monkey see/monkey do' stuff, PC based and with 1 instructor for 25 people or so. Hard to get down to the specifics in a situation like this and its EXPENSIVE. Good for an entry level guy to teach them the basics but not much use for others.


As to this forum:

I have noticed two things.

1) Theres alot of people asking folks to do projects for them. Alot seem to come from India, I guess thats the joys of 'outsourcing' one of the biggest mistakes of today. Probably the ultimate in 'get it cheaper'. No offence to the Indians out there, I've worked with plenty and theyre generally extrmemely intelligent but is hard enough engineering & building stuff with people from the same city never mind different time zones!

2) Elitism. I'm not a hard-core PLC programmer. I live in the DCS world, process control etc. I've asked some (dumb I guess) questions quite innocently on here and got the distinct feeling im being treat like a retard. I've come across this in my world too so its by no means a PLC thing, but irritating none the less. Give a guy a break, they cant know everything about everything (unless your Dr. Phil).

 

[harryting]

With big engineering companies, they hire and fire based on the demand at the moment. Just browse any big engineering co's website, they all have a instrumentation/control section, which means they got a "engineering manager" for that department. When they get a big project they get someone off the street.

Oh, I came from the DCS background but haven't touched one for many years.

 

[MASEngr]

You want bad questions? Take a look at wikianswers. It's amazing that some of those people are actually able to operate the door to the computer room, let alone the computer itself.

I've done a lot of programming in my life. I started out in 1985, when I won a computer. I was eight years old. Think about that for a moment - while other kids were learning to read at a grade 2 level, I was learning to program. Unfortunately, while the other kids were having fun learning how to read and hanging out, I learned how to relate to machines. I remember I skipped a party once to wind electric motors. Anyway, I'm now an Electrical EIT working towards my P.Eng. designation.

I've programmed everything - personal computers, servers, cell phones, cash registers, embedded processors (some life critical), radios, and now PLCs. I'm programmed in C, C++, C#, VB, *ML, Assembly, direct HEX, and ladder logic. Believe me, I know what happens if you mess up code. I've had to get tigers re-tranquilized because I messed up one freaking line in a GPS library. I've had people ask me WTF their coyotes were doing in a line in the ocean off Rhode Island. That wasn't a good week.

I came to this forum to ask what type of PLC I should get. I was steered towards a DL-06. I've asked a few other times for help: communication questions on an RS-485 system, avoiding heat death, and how to fix a wonky analog reading on an accelerometer. I haven't had to ask many more questions because I've been able to figure out most of the stuff on my own. It's relatively easy. If you want to add serial communication, write just a simple serial communication program. The reason I can do that is because I'm not afraid of making mistakes. They happen, and as long as you learn from them and you do your best, then you'll be all right. I've worked with other people who refuse to make (or admit making) mistakes, even when prototyping or testing.

I also know that a great way to avoid making mistakes is to learn from the mistakes other people have made. I've asked high-level questions about noise filtering and equipment selection, not "PLZ EMAIL ME THE CODZ". I haven't had much trouble with ladder logic at all, and my stuff seems reasonably complicated. It's about 1300 lines in the DL-06. (Are those bytes? I'm not sure.)

Years ago, I swore an oath that the sum total of my knowledge is about zero. It still is, but at least I know enough of that nothing so that I can feel confident programming a PLC and designing the safety equipment that goes near it.

I'm learning. I may not be able to solve a problem in the same amount of time that you can, but that's a question of experience. We'll see what happens once I've been doing this for 10 years instead of 10 months.

 

[Peter Nachtwey]

The more mistakes you make the faster you learn.

The idea is to make mistakes where you know nothing bad will happen.

The reason I can do that is because I'm not afraid of making mistakes.

One thing I have never understood are those that ask how an instruction works. Everyone has access to the same documentation. My attitude has been to just stick the new instruction in a rung and see what it does! As long as the outputs are connected to anything real what harm can it do? I do the same thing for C and Mathcad code. I am learning Java now. I make plenty of mistakes. I just do it where they only cost my time. When I figure something out I save it away so I can reference it later.

 

[MASEngr]

The idea is to make mistakes where you know nothing bad will happen.

Touché.

One thing I have never understood are those that ask how an instruction works. Everyone has access to the same documentation. My attitude has been to just stick the new instruction in a rung and see what it does! As long as the outputs are connected to anything real what harm can it do? I do the same thing for C and Mathcad code. I am learning Java now. I make plenty of mistakes. I just do it where they only cost my time. When I figure something out I save it away so I can reference it later.

I think there's somewhat of a mentality that harmless mistakes aren't to be tolerated at any cost, and that they're a sign of personal failure. It's probably rooted in the ideas that you have to get straight As in school to be successful. (I've always felt that if you didn't fail a course outright, that was what constituted a success.)

I've never understood why people don't read that Spanish love story that's included with your products. The epic journey of Manual, the Mexican instructor, on his journey to enlightenment. It's a good read.

Never mind the fact that it's faster and more productive to try yourself:

"Hmm, what does MRX do?" I can ask on the forums:
1. Go to the site, post the question.
2. Wait a few days.
3. Try out forum answer.
4. Ask another question / follow-up.
5. Not quite understand what it does.

or try it:
1. Create new program with just MRX and END in it.
2. Look at outputs.
3. Know for sure what it does.

The thing I find baffling is people who ask a question then they ask "well, what if I did this completely different thing anyway?"

 

[eebads2391]

Ron ,

My point was : although there is "competition" from the unskilled , unqualified and downright dangerous , if you are qualified then they should not affect you on the whole

I agree of course they are not good for the industry , but qualifications should sort that out

If a company uses an unskilled operative to do a job , they cannot reasonably expect a good job to be made

A business has to choose someone capable
( references , recommendations , proof of qualifications )

With respect , this is a healthy debate , and people will always debate both sides - I stand by my views

 

[Pierre]

Like many "tools" we have in this era, we don't use perhaps 25% of what most PLCs have to offer.

I am always amazed when I get the feeling a machine/PLC programmer seem to beleive he's deserved a freak'n Nobel Science prize.

Guys, its just a darn PLC.

More than half of what makes a good PLC programmer has nothing to do with code or computer or zeros and ones.

For instance, social habilities is one MAJOR factor.

How will you output the best sequence when your are not told by the End-Users the smallest important details of there process?

How will you? Ho! I forgot, most PLC programmer whom had learn in a real school are sooooo darn smart.

Sorry but I tend to disagree with most I have read in this thread.