Engineering and Construction - Essay Example

Engineering and Construction Engineering and Construction Part One A summary of Who Invented My House This is a short history by Ted Cavanagh about house construction in America (Invention & Technology, 1999). He is trying to explain the way the construction of houses has changed within generations. How houses are built, the materials used and demand put on housing reflects cultural shifts from the ways of the American ancestors through revolutionary technology. He focuses his attention on the way the 19th century construction is different from the current century’s, especially in North America (Invention & Technology, 1999). Traditional methods and materials have been replaced by modern means of nail connections and light wood frames. He further sees today’s carpenters as finishers of houses, rather than builders of houses. He begins by telling the readers about Henry Mitchell, his neighbor who has lived in the same house for 85 years. Henry Mitchell watches the writer renovate his house often. Each renovation watched by his neighbor reminds the writer of the original builder of his house one and a half centuries ago (Invention & Technology, 1999). The writer notes that before the 19th century, frame houses were built using large timbers. The constructors believed that sawing was a waste of materials and labor, so, through experienced workers, they only squared off logs to facilitate connection. This gave rise to the balloon frame. They introduced nails and lumber in mass production, giving further advantage to the balloon frame. The results were savings in man hours, less requirements in skills and a complete change in ways of building. The writer also notes that balloon frames are structurally and materially more efficient. Since no joint is of more significance than another, then the connection between each wood is efficient. This exemplifies modification of building practices progressively. Although the practices called for less labor, simplified connections and used light weight materials, they were limited because construction of houses never reached a fully automated level. Therefore, in as much as it was an innovation, it has remained resistant to change, to the surprise of many (Invention & Technology, 1999). The writer also believes that the American style of construction of houses was influenced by the Midwest, made up of the French, Amerindians, Europeans and Spaniards (Invention & Technology, 1999). The 19th century saw new houses rise in demand, occasioned by a change in wood technologies, and American settlers around the Mississippi at that time found new cultures in building. The settlers built sawmills as one of their new enterprises, contributing to the millions of feet of lumber produced in the region. This denotes a change towards the new culture, because if the settlers had been close to a river, they would have used saw planks instead. The writer also believes the invention of balloon frame lies with the Chicagoans. This is because the balloon frame is among the City’s founding myths. It has also been mentioned as a contributing factor to the 1872 Chicago fire. It is believed that in 1833 when Chicago was a year old, Augustine Taylor, a carpenter from Connecticut, was requested to build many houses but his response was to invent balloon frames (Invention & Technology, 1999). In that year, wood was of variable quality and dimension. In the structure of a balloon frame, one joint may collapse due to poor quality wood, but the main structure will remain stable because of many redundant joints. Nevertheless, the openings left by the collapsed joints would let in cold in cold weather. It was, therefore, suggested by Taylor that dimension lumber, since it reacts in different ways than wood plunks and timber, be selected by experienced carpenters. It would then be assembled into a building leaving allowance for contraction and expansion. With all the displayed experience, observers noted that Taylor must have worked with balloon frames before his arrival in Chicago. In conclusion, 90 percent of Americans live in light wood frame houses presently (Invention & Technology, 1999). The building methods and resultant houses are influencing their ways of life. Most Americans share common construction memories, and a unique culture of building houses (Invention & Technology, 1999). The culture of wooden houses would not impact on European visitors in the same way it does to the Americans. This is because the Europeans value the permanency of brick and stone in their construction of houses more than they would understand the use of light wood. References Invention & Technology. (1999). Retrieved from http://203.197.81.56/article-test-it/content/who- invented-your-house-1. Part Two This part will answer questions on the principals of scientific management according to Taylor. Also known as Taylorism, the theory was aimed at analyzing and synthesizing workflows in production processes (Aitken, 1985). The questions attempt to clarify the link between the science of engineering and management. A possible objection to this thesis could be that it is biased against the workers. The methods applied under the principles of management seem to be in favor of the managers and owners of businesses. On the contrary, scientific management has improved work ethics, empiricism, rationality and efficiency (Head, 2005). It has also contributed towards minimizing of waste, creating standards and promoting best practices. Knowledge transfer between workers has also been witnessed, including its conveyance from workers to tools, procedures and documentation. Question One The first of the four duties of a scientific manager is developing a science for every element of the workman’s job. This replaces the old methods of rule of thumb. The second duty is the scientific selection followed teaching, training and developing them in their lines of duty. This takes the place f the old methods where the workers chose their own work then trained themselves in the best way they could. Thirdly, the scientific manager must cooperate with the workers to make sure that the work is being carried out in conformity with the laid scientific principles. The forth duty is necessitated by the equal division of responsibility and work between the workmen and management. Therefore, the manager takes over the work and responsibilities that is fit him best. This is unlike the past, where most of the responsibilities and work were borne by the workers (Aitken, 1985). Question Two Two examples of scientific management by Taylor are Time and Motion and Division of Labor (Kanigel, 1997). Question Three Taylorism made us view time as a critical factor of production (Head, 2005). Workers are made to understand that every moment at work also counts towards their wages, and their rest times are scheduled scientifically (Kanigel, 1997). Question Four Scientific management changed the role of workers by reducing their responsibilities by one half (Kanigel, 1997). Workers were only left to do what they were best suited for after being scientifically selected, while the management took up the other half. The advantage is that workers will perform their duties under intellectuals with managerial qualifications, hence increasing productivity (Aitken, 1985). The workers are also trained by more intelligent people than themselves to achieve the habit of performing their duties according to the scientific laws. Disadvantages are that while principles of scientific management improve productivity, they also promote work monotony. Key aspects of work specifications like variety of skill, significance of task, feedback and task identity were all not present in the outlook of scientific management (Aitken, 1985). Lack of acceptance by workers was also a significant disadvantage of scientific management. While some accepted and worked by them, others protested against issues like use of stopwatches.   I do not think that John Stuart Mill would have supported Taylor’s scientific management. This is because Mill was known to be concerned about industrialization’s moral impacts. His view about the division of labor and work repetitiveness was that they gave rise to moral and spiritual death. Furthermore, unlike Taylor, whose aim was to maximize economic efficiency in labor productivity (Kanigel, 1997), Mill’s intellect sought to work with the people rather than make the people work for industrialists. He stood at the meeting point between enlightenment and rationalism. References Aitken, H. (1985). Scientific management in action: Taylorism at Watertown Arsenal. New Jersey: Princeton. Head, S. (2005). The new ruthless economy: Work and power in the digital age. London: Oxford University Press. Kanigel, R. (1997). The one best way: Frederick Winslow Taylor and the enigma of efficiency. New York: Penguin. Read More