MechArtTronics

Citation

Loughlin, C. (2004), "MechArtTronics", Assembly Automation, Vol. 24 No. 4. https://doi.org/10.1108/aa.2004.03324daa.001

MechArtTronics

MechArtTronics

Keywords: Mechatronics, Design

Our theme for this issue is Mechatronics, which is basically a school of thought that electrical/electronic engineers should talk to mechanical engineers. This is very clearly a beneficial way of doing things and you could be forgiven for thinking that engineering had always been done this way.

However, the whole concept of Mechatronics is comparatively recent. When I was at university a mere 30 years ago the electronic engineering department was both physically and mentally completely separate from the mechanicals. And in fact the only time I can recall visiting the mechanical department was for “strength of materials” course when the aim was to guess when a metal rod would break under the applied stress or strain.

At some time in the intervening years we electronic engineers have condescended to talk to the mechanicals, and they have been kind enough to listen.

Why make do with just the mechanicals? Why not embrace all areas of technology and for that matter the arts as well? There is a saying that “if it looks right, it probably is right” and this carries the message that the appearance of a piece of equipment has considerable bearing on its performance. If it looks ugly the chances are it has not been thought out and will function unreliably or quickly fail. This was well understood by our Victorian forebears whose elegant steam powered mechanisms are not only still functioning today but are also admired as things of beauty.

It is well established that in general people are either “arty” or “technical” depending on which side of the brain is predominant. Finding people that are strong in both areas is hard and so it makes sense for a team to include people from both camps.

Ironically there is an equally well known saying among architects (who are predominantly “arty”), that “form follows function”. Or in other words – make a building do the job for which it was designed in an efficient manner and then worry about making it look good.

It is interesting that the architects place great value on functionality – an area in which they are probably least comfortable; while an engineer will strive for aesthetics while probably feeling not fully qualified for the task.

Mechatronics is primarily concerned with the functionality of a piece of equipment and has been shown to produce better results than either mechanical or electronic engineers would have achieved working separately. Does not it make sense to take this marriage further and embrace a polygamous union with artistic design as well?

Clive Loughlin