Words are important- Mechatronics

Words are important to our lives. Careless use of words gets us in trouble with our wives, children and coworkers. Incorrect use of words obscures meaning. Overuse of words reduces impact. Today the word mechatronics is being carelessly, incorrectly and too frequently used. The result could be a setback to innovation, education and workforce development. Let's review the definition of mechatronics and what we should do to keep its use pure.

My definition of mechatronics is "the synergistic application of mechanical engineering, electrical engineering, controls engineering and computer science to make useful products". The most important single word in this definition is synergistic. Others may refer to" applying the integrated disciplines of...." The point is that synergistic, integrated, and systems approach all mean generally the same thing, but that thing flies in the face of the way that we generally teach and apply engineering and maintenance.

One way of getting our hands around this definition is by looking at what mechatronics is not. It is not automation. It is not process control. It is not electro-mechanical or electro-hydraulic engineering. It is not networked machines. It is not multi-disciplinary maintenance. It is not robotics (although a robot is an example of a mechatronic system). All of these areas are legitimate areas of study and application, but each is more limiting or specialized than mechatronics. Using the RPI diagram of mechatronics or my Venn diagram of mechatronics provides a glimpse of where some of these disciplines fit, yet these 2-D diagrams lack the ability to fully describe this multi-dimensional undertaking.

Some of you may remember when the term CIM or computer integrated manufacturing was in vogue. For primarily commercial reasons, this term became so prostituted that it ceased to be a useful. It meant so many different things to different people that the end result was that it meant nothing to everyone. And in its lack of meaning, the benefits of integrated manufacturing largely escaped us. I don't want to see the same outcome with mechatronics.

We are overusing the word for many of the same reasons that CIM was overused. In our capitalistic zeal to create competitive advantage, mechatronics has become a term that people use to imply innovation. In schools' attempts to stand out and attract students, some have recycled old technology programs and re-labeled them as mechatronics without ever considering the synergy issue. Organizations have begun to take note that the National Science Foundation, the Department of Labor and Departments of Education have begun to make grants to mechatronics programs. After seeing a few grants being given to support mechatronics, every proposal begins to include the word mechatronics along with other magic words like green and innovation. I've seen people use the word megatronics in funding proposals, not even realizing that they not only don't know what the word means, but also that they don't know how the word is constructed or spelled.

Mechatronics is a word that has been around for about 35 years. Like many new technical ideas, it has taken our North American culture quite a while to embrace this one. Now that we have, let's not ruin it by going overboard and wearing out a good word.

Without the word, how would we succinctly describe the concept? And if we can't describe the concept, how would we create programs to teach it? And without teaching mechatronic principles, how likely would we be to employ them? And if we don't employ the principles of mechatronics, what impact will that have on innovation?

Literally hundreds of companies and dozens of schools have begun to make claims on mechatronics. Just a few short years ago, when I visited our Pennsylvania Department of Labor to seek support for mechatronics occupations, the assistant to the Secretary pointed out that a Google search of the term turned up a very limited number of hits with most of them coming from European or Far Eastern websites. Nevertheless, we obtained state support, and PA continues to make great strides in mechatronics technology education. Today a similar search yields almost 15 million hits and everyone is jumping on the bandwagon. Let's just be careful not to crush the wagon under its own weight.

When a vendor tries to sell you a mechatronic machine, a school asks you to endorse a mechatronics curriculum, or management asks what your company is doing about mechatronics; stop and test their use of the term. Look for new paradigms based upon the synergistic integration of the 4 legs of the mechatronic stool.

If you, your company or your school need help in establishing or evaluating a mechatronic technology plan, give me a call. And when you find the word being used incorrectly, challenge it. Help us to maintain the integrity of the term so that we may gain the full benefits of the concept.

Let Keith Know What You Think:
Comments On August 31, 2010 Paul Zepf wrote: I became familiar with mechatronics in the early 1980s and it was from a German engineer. Europe seems to be able to keep things in perspective and use their tools more wisely then we do. Post a comment (If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.) Name: Email Address: URL: Remember personal info? Comments: (you may use HTML tags for style) Type the word 'packaging' (required):