Engineering sometimes calls for the use of the specification called unattainium. In other words, at times there is just no easy way to find the balance between design requirements and reality. Other times, someone isn’t knowledgeable enough to make certain specifications, so they come up with specs that may sound right, but aren’t real. Anyone ever run into a set of parts that were designed with all the mating features being line-to-line? How many of us have searched high and low for a “black alodine” finish? Another mythical metal finish is “clear hard anodize”. I’m going to cover some of these points in future articles. For now, I’d like to see other misspecifications that people have experienced in the engineering field. Please comment about what you’ve seen.
Like this:
Like Loading...
Author: fcsuper
As a drafter, mechanical designer and CAD engineer, I've been in the mechanical design field since 1991.
For the first 8 years of my career, I was an AutoCAD professional. I utilized AutoLISP and many other AutoCAD customization features to streamline drafting activities for 6+ drafters and designers. I authored several custom functions, one of which was published in the March 1997 issue of Cadalyst Magazine.
Since 1998, I've been used SolidWorks non-stop. I've worked to utilize the SolidWorks' user environment to simplify drafting and design activities for 20+ engineers. I've created this website to provide current information about SolidWorks from a variety of contributors.
More recently, I am now employed by Dassault Systemes as SOLIDWORKS Sr. Product Definition Manager to improve drawing, annotation and MBD related areas.
View all posts by fcsuper
I haven’t heard of that one, but I often hear (and use) the term “unobtainium” (James Cameron also used it in “Avatar”).
https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Unobtainium
Unattainium is a rarer form of unobtainium. 😉