[comp.software-eng] Bridge building & engineering professionalism

mjl@cs.rit.edu (Michael J Lutz) (04/24/91)

In article <33407@mimsy.umd.edu>, cml@tove.cs.umd.edu (Christopher Lott) writes:
> In article <jls.672364339@rutabaga> jls@rutabaga.Rational.COM (Jim Showalter) writes:
> >.... until the 1800's, HALF of all bridges built fell down.
> 
> 
> uh, half?  But I don't know any better.

From
Blaming Technology: The Irrational Search for Scapegoats
Samuel C. Forman.
St. Martin's Press, NY, 1981.  p. 184


  When I turned from steamboats to railroads I found another
  long-forgotten story of catastrophe.  Not only were there
  problems with the trains themselves, but the roadbeds, and
  particularly the bridges, made even the shortest train
  journey a hazardous adventure.  In the late 1860s more than
  25 American bridges were collapsing each year, with
  appalling loss of life.  In 1873 the American Society of
  Civil Engineers set up a special commission to address the
  problem, and eventually the safety of our bridges came to be
  taken for granted.


The book's a good read.  Florman is a civil engineer, and also the
author of The Existential Pleasures of Engineering -- another
book I recommend.  In addition to this quote on civil engineering
practices in the mid-19th century, he has many other provocative
things to say.  Here's another sample, on engineering
professionalism, compared to law, medicine, etc. (pp. 150-51):


  What sort of profession is this in which three-quarters of
  the members are merely graduates of four-year college
  courses?  (And fewer than half take the trouble to obtain
  state licenses or to join professional societies?)  Are all
  engineers authentic professionals, or only a few?  Indeed,
  is engineering a profession or only a quasi-profession?


---------
Mike Lutz
Rochester Institute of Technology
Rochester, NY 14623-0887
mjl@cs.rit.edu

mjl@cs.rit.edu (Michael J Lutz) (04/26/91)

In article <33407@mimsy.umd.edu>, cml@tove.cs.umd.edu (Christopher Lott) writes:
> In article <jls.672364339@rutabaga> jls@rutabaga.Rational.COM (Jim Showalter) writes:
> >.... until the 1800's, HALF of all bridges built fell down.
> 
> 
> uh, half?  But I don't know any better.

From
Blaming Technology: The Irrational Search for Scapegoats
Samuel C. Florman.
St. Martin's Press, NY, 1981.  p. 184


  When I turned from steamboats to railroads I found another
  long-forgotten story of catastrophe.  Not only were there
  problems with the trains themselves, but the roadbeds, and
  particularly the bridges, made even the shortest train
  journey a hazardous adventure.  In the late 1860s more than
  25 American bridges were collapsing each year, with
  appalling loss of life.  In 1873 the American Society of
  Civil Engineers set up a special commission to address the
  problem, and eventually the safety of our bridges came to be
  taken for granted.


The book's a good read.  Florman is a civil engineer, and also the
author of The Existential Pleasures of Engineering -- another
book I recommend.  In addition to this quote on civil engineering
practices in the mid-19th century, he has many other provocative
things to say.  Here's another sample, on engineering
professionalism, compared to law, medicine, etc. (pp. 150-51):


  What sort of profession is this in which three-quarters of
  the members are merely graduates of four-year college
  courses?  (And fewer than half take the trouble to obtain
  state licenses or to join professional societies?)  Are all
  engineers authentic professionals, or only a few?  Indeed,
  is engineering a profession or only a quasi-profession?

---------
Mike Lutz
Rochester Institute of Technology
Rochester, NY 14623-0887
mjl@cs.rit.edu