[HN Gopher] Analyzing a failed drill bit with an electron micros...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Analyzing a failed drill bit with an electron microscope [video]
        
       Author : NotYourLawyer
       Score  : 226 points
       Date   : 2023-03-19 03:46 UTC (19 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.youtube.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.youtube.com)
        
       | ar9av wrote:
       | Reminds me of when I was a kid and a car part broke on the family
       | car. I don't remember if the warranty or insurance didn't want to
       | pay, but being an engineer and knowing a few people with tools he
       | got a whole report that said the part was defective due to x, y,
       | and z and got the damage fixed.
        
       | logicallee wrote:
       | What's most amazing about this video is that he was able to get
       | an electron microscope for $3.
        
       | Dig1t wrote:
       | Wow this is seriously amazing, makes me I wish I had studied
       | mechanical engineering instead of CS. I really admire this guy's
       | self-studying though ;I also like to think of myself as an
       | autodidact but this guy seems to have some serious focus. I wish
       | I could meet more people like him in real life.
       | 
       | Anyway, I just subscribed.
        
         | nick47801676 wrote:
         | I studied both CS and Mech Eng (double major). Totally worth
         | the extra work!
        
           | Kennnan wrote:
           | I'm a High Schooler right now (pretty competent software,
           | interested in hardware). If you dont mind me asking, what
           | specifically has your double major opened up for you?
        
             | samstave wrote:
             | I was at lockheed and am still friends with some of the
             | best engineers I have ever worked with ; Every single HW
             | engineer I worked with also coded - and we have built,
             | patented and pursued so many other paths based on the
             | capabilities of HW engineers being able to design actual HW
             | as well as spec the code required to solve the problem.
             | 
             | So, if you have the capability, certainly go both... It
             | will give you, at your age, the ability to build the change
             | you want to see in the world....
        
             | criddell wrote:
             | I can't speak for the person you replied to, but I work for
             | a software company that is always on the lookout for
             | mechanical engineers who can write code. It's a pretty rare
             | combination.
        
               | enginoor wrote:
               | Any suggestions for a mechanical engineer who has some
               | coding aptitude and wants to switch careers? I'm self
               | taught and have mostly worked on hobby projects. I have
               | some professional controls experience programming
               | automated machinery (PLC). My lack of formal CS training
               | seems like a real barrier to jumping into a full-time
               | software role.
        
               | samstave wrote:
               | PLC pays well - and often there are
               | contracting/consulting opportunities - look for jobs in
               | the Automotive area.
        
               | wholinator2 wrote:
               | It's true, you might be able to find a slow career move
               | where your roles take on more and more code until
               | eventually pure programming rolls trust your experience.
               | However if you're looking for a faster move look into
               | night classes, if possible. You can get a computer
               | science degree for much cheaper in a couple years of just
               | doing night classes along with your work. It can be hard
               | to balance all that but career changes are usually
               | difficult to navigate. I wish you luck!
        
         | tony69 wrote:
         | Materials science is more focused on these topics than
         | mechanical engineering fwiw
        
           | thrdbndndn wrote:
           | MSE used to be part of ME (still is in some universities).
        
             | khobragade wrote:
             | True! Even my diploma in ME course has a subset of MatSci
             | in it. Fascinating stuff.
        
             | ghaff wrote:
             | I had a materials science course as part of my ME
             | undergrad. (And of course there was overlap in other
             | courses.)
             | 
             | When I went to grad school for a Master's at an engineering
             | school which, at the time, was small enough to not actually
             | have formal departments, I studied a fair bit of mechanical
             | engineering but actually did a materials science thesis.
        
         | syntaxing wrote:
         | I have a MSc in MechE. Unfortunately a lot of the stuff he does
         | is the "fun stuff" and like any engineering job, you're lucky
         | if you have a 50/50 fun stuff to paper work ratio.
        
         | londons_explore wrote:
         | Your lifetime earnings as a MechE are probably only 20% of what
         | you'd earn studying CS - especially at the high end of ability.
         | 
         | You could just take some of those extra earnings and take up
         | MechE as a hobby.
        
           | angry_octet wrote:
           | Then you'd just be a dilettante.
        
             | sokoloff wrote:
             | Not much wrong with that, as long as your family is fed. My
             | degree is in Mechanical Engineering. Most every dollar I've
             | earned was from computers. I still faff around doing
             | enjoyable hobby projects in engineering (ultra-light ME,
             | EE, CS) with the kids. It's a fine life.
        
             | acidburnNSA wrote:
             | I prefer the word amateur, which shares the same root as
             | "love" for a reason.
        
           | syntaxing wrote:
           | 20% is probably a bit of an exaggeration. I wor in tech and
           | worked in the regular industry prior. I would say my wage is
           | about 20-30% less than my peers of the same level. I don't
           | know anyone that works for a company that has a payband
           | difference more than one sigma for each IC level.
        
             | ghaff wrote:
             | This is basically a drop in to Facebook or Google and make
             | $600K/year or life isn't worth living sort of comment. (And
             | I doubt if it's even accurate as someone with non-CS
             | degrees.)
             | 
             | And the idea that basically any other engineering major
             | will make 20% of an even remotely typical CS major is
             | idiocy.
        
               | syntaxing wrote:
               | Hardware engineers in MAANG makes about 20% less as well
               | (anecdotally). Our wage is not that far off in tech (one
               | signs as I mentioned). But we definitely have way less
               | job openings compared to our SWE peers.
        
           | ghaff wrote:
           | Sorry but this is such an HN comment. It manages to
           | simultaneously make everything about money, basically
           | position things in the context of Big Tech, and assume that
           | your specific undergraduate degree charts your career.
           | 
           | For the record, I have an ME undergrad (and a grad degree
           | that's basically material science) and while I've mostly only
           | used my direct classwork a bit, I've done fine.
        
           | sandworm101 wrote:
           | >> MechE are probably only 20% of what you'd earn studying CS
           | 
           | Maybe if you are a MechE working for facebook or twitter. But
           | go to something like SpaceX or BMW and you will find the best
           | MechEs paid way more than the software people. The insane
           | paychecks in CS only exist at companies where software is the
           | final product. Companies that produce physical products put
           | CS into a support role. A department head at Boeing or LM is
           | far more likely to be from an engineering background.
        
       | Quequau wrote:
       | I like this dude and subscribe to his channel. It's my hope that
       | my next move will land me in a spot with enough space to build a
       | home workshop. It seems like a great hobby.
        
       | l33tman wrote:
       | I didn't know the backscatter could be analyzed to show atomic
       | element composition!
        
         | ghaff wrote:
         | I saw that and I was like hmm. Scanning electron microscopes
         | have sure advanced a lot since I was a grad student.
        
         | dylan604 wrote:
         | it was one of those random, oh, this is how i learned about XYZ
         | moment for me as well. yes, as he states in the video, i could
         | also have read the wikipedia page (and at some point i probably
         | still will), but his explanation went into so much new
         | information for me that it was filled with so many "hmm, never
         | really thought about that to even consider how it worked", but
         | here's the info in a youtube video so now i just have answers
         | to questions i didn't know i had
        
       | legohead wrote:
       | If you liked this, you'd probably also enjoy this video[1] where
       | a guy tests cryogenically frozen drill bits and explains (and
       | shows via microscope) why they are so much stronger.
       | 
       | [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hAxi5YXTjEk
        
         | tgsovlerkhgsel wrote:
         | Takeaways:
         | 
         | - It makes the drills harder, but as a result likely also more
         | brittle, so they may only be "stronger" for certain
         | applications
         | 
         | - Using the bit properly is much more important than what it's
         | made of/whether it's cryo treated - he got an entire plate of
         | steel with one bit with 30 m/min (and the bit was still good at
         | the end) and then destroyed 7 bits, included some treated ones,
         | on fewer holes than that using 40 m/min (I assume that's
         | surface speed).
         | 
         | - This also means he didn't test how much longer the bit would
         | last under good conditions, only that it was able to withstand
         | non-optimal conditions longer. While it's likely that this
         | transfers, it's not guaranteed.
        
         | HyperSane wrote:
         | That dude has a $50,000 oscilloscope.
        
           | rfrey wrote:
           | Which he probably got at salvage and repaired.
        
           | zokier wrote:
           | Probably the least interesting piece of equipment he has.
           | Anyways, at his latest video he has pretty pedestrian scope
           | (~$2k) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JO_EHceV9sk so any
           | fancy scopes might have been just loaners from $work.
        
         | class3shock wrote:
         | Applied Science is an amazing channel. I'd also recommend
         | checking out Breaking Taps and Alpha Phoenix for similar
         | content.
        
       | dclowd9901 wrote:
       | If you like learning how things work, like to learn lots of
       | things and want a good subject to motivate you, restore an older
       | car to perfect working order. You will be investigating
       | mechanics, electronics, chemistry, metal working, even
       | upholstery. Hell, I got into 3D printing too since some of the
       | older plastic parts simply aren't made anymore.
       | 
       | And at the end of it, you get a sweet perfect vintage car to show
       | for all your learning.
        
         | function_seven wrote:
         | And my personal corollary: R/C cars when I was a kid. I learned
         | so many useful things from building, driving, breaking, and
         | fixing them!
         | 
         | DC electronics, motors, suspension tuning and theory, PWM,
         | basic mechanical "instincts", soldering, how transmissions work
         | (some models had even fluid-filled torque converters on them)
         | differential gearing (and some had limited slip!) and even
         | regenerative braking.
         | 
         | Years later I'd constantly be surprised how all of these things
         | worked almost the same way in real cars.
        
           | CrazyCatDog wrote:
           | Ha! I started on flight sim, made it to rc planes, and the
           | first day of flight instruction, I told the instructor and he
           | said: "if you can fly rc, you can fly full scale." All I had
           | to master was emergency procedures and some theory on the
           | throttle vs pitch and I was off to the skies!
        
             | dylan604 wrote:
             | Yeah, flying a plane is "easy". It's the taking off and
             | landing that gets tricky. /s
        
             | doubled112 wrote:
             | I'd imagine the stakes are a little higher when you're on
             | the plane looking down than when you're on the ground
             | looking up?
             | 
             | The rest makes sense. Controls are in different places,
             | everything is bigger, but the basics are the same.
             | 
             | Is the bigger plane easier in the sense it is less twitchy?
             | 
             | I've tried a couple of RC helicopters and the larger one
             | was much easier to handle.
        
       | Animats wrote:
       | Looking at broken parts under a scanning electron microscope is
       | common. I saw that decades ago in a hydraulics R&D facility. They
       | had devices in life cycle tests (the largest being a locomotive
       | transmission) and when a part broke, it was looked at in detail
       | to understand why. Heat treatment failure? Machining error? Weak
       | point in the design?
        
         | OJFord wrote:
         | That's why he did it, he's not claiming it's a novel technique;
         | what's _not_ common is it being accessible to the hobbyist. Of
         | course, it doesn 't really matter, as he says at the end
         | there's nothing really to be done with this information, but it
         | is cool.
         | 
         | Clough42 is one of my favourite channels, always look forward
         | to his reliably weekly video. Great mix of machining (metal),
         | 3D printing, and electronics - CAD too which many don't show
         | (and at just the right speed IMO, doesn't belabour it, but his
         | narration of key presses basically taught me Fusion360, always
         | in my head when I use it myself).
        
           | lsllc wrote:
           | I have picked up most of my (somewhat limited!) Fusion360
           | skills by watching James' weekly videos!
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | dtgriscom wrote:
       | Meta: there are lots of video posts tagged "[video] (youtube)",
       | which is redundant, and gives no information beyond that it's a
       | video. Could that second half mention the YouTube channel that's
       | being referenced? That would be the equivalent of most website
       | references. Perhaps "[video] (youtube.com/@Clough42)"?
        
         | dylan604 wrote:
         | that's doesn't seem like a bad idea to me, but how would that
         | be different than having the author's name attached to all
         | submissions? we see wsj.com, nyt.com, etc all the time with no
         | other metadata.
         | 
         | i get the label for [PDF] and what not, but does anyone think a
         | link to youtube.com is _NOT_ going to be a video?
        
         | gumby wrote:
         | The purpose of that label is to warn people who don't want
         | video. Anyone who wants the additional metadata can get it by
         | clicking the link.
        
       | nirvgorilla wrote:
       | [dead]
        
       | Eisenstein wrote:
       | The call to action in the video (forced reason for viewers to
       | leave a comment or otherwise engage to boost metrics) is
       | cringeworthy at this point. Stop doing it. We all know what you
       | are doing and it makes you seem unprofessional.
        
         | viggity wrote:
         | don't hate the player, hate the game.
        
           | Eisenstein wrote:
           | I hate the game, and there are plenty of players who are
           | successful without insulting the intelligence of viewers by
           | thinking that adding some forced prompt into the video and
           | nonchalantly remarking 'let me know in the comments' is going
           | to fly past us as we all pause the video to give our opinion
           | on whether you should use a drill to expand a pilot hole or
           | not.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-03-19 23:02 UTC)