f*****n
发帖数: 970 | 1 咱们做化工的说到底还是工科，而且是古老的工科，很多EE今天的概念比如chips上的一
些概念还是建立在化工当年提出的总体流程设计基础上的
但是现在的问题是发现自己越学越偏向化学和材料了，我想搞合成发文章是相对点数能
高了，但感觉不算是一个脑力活这样的话无论以后从教还是进入工作岗位是否有做模拟
他们那样灵活的头脑。
而且说到底，再怎么搞合成况且只不过是简单的一些制备怎么可能有人家专门学材料的
人底子深厚呢，这样下去以后岂不是成废人了。
大家怎么认为的呢？ | k***i
发帖数: 662 | 2 这个问题不同的人可能有不同的看法，不同的年代也和会有不同的认识。
我个人看法，化工区别于其他学科最重要的特征，是以化学产品(包括生化产品等)的
规模化生产为最终目标，具体而言包括大规模的原料预处理、加工、化学转化、产品提纯等步骤。由此而衍生出来一些重要的科目，比如关于热力学、反应工程、传递原理、化工流体力学、化工原理、生化工程等，是当前化工的基础。
不管具体研究的是宏观还是微观，最终还是服务于规模化生产的最终目标。
不过，也要注意到现在化工和物理、化学、材料、生物、环境、石油等学科互相融合得很厉害，所以存在很多交叉学科。至于怎么看待这些交叉学科和化工的关系，就是仁者见仁、智者见智了。
【在 f*****n 的大作中提到】
: 咱们做化工的说到底还是工科，而且是古老的工科，很多EE今天的概念比如chips上的一
: 些概念还是建立在化工当年提出的总体流程设计基础上的
: 但是现在的问题是发现自己越学越偏向化学和材料了，我想搞合成发文章是相对点数能
: 高了，但感觉不算是一个脑力活这样的话无论以后从教还是进入工作岗位是否有做模拟
: 他们那样灵活的头脑。
: 而且说到底，再怎么搞合成况且只不过是简单的一些制备怎么可能有人家专门学材料的
: 人底子深厚呢，这样下去以后岂不是成废人了。
: 大家怎么认为的呢？
| y*****a
发帖数: 580 | 3 ChE is a topic of ENGINEERING, which uses physical, numerical/mathematical
and chemical model(s)/simplification(s) for a real chemical problem. The
first step of ALL engineering would be:
to understand how these simplifications are made, why they are made and what
are the limitations. This is on the contrary of science that the purpose
of science is to provide a hypothesis to a phenomenon (engineering provides
a simplification or solution).
As far as I am concerned, some topics/research practi
【在 k***i 的大作中提到】
: 这个问题不同的人可能有不同的看法，不同的年代也和会有不同的认识。
: 我个人看法，化工区别于其他学科最重要的特征，是以化学产品(包括生化产品等)的
: 规模化生产为最终目标，具体而言包括大规模的原料预处理、加工、化学转化、产品提纯等步骤。由此而衍生出来一些重要的科目，比如关于热力学、反应工程、传递原理、化工流体力学、化工原理、生化工程等，是当前化工的基础。
: 不管具体研究的是宏观还是微观，最终还是服务于规模化生产的最终目标。
: 不过，也要注意到现在化工和物理、化学、材料、生物、环境、石油等学科互相融合得很厉害，所以存在很多交叉学科。至于怎么看待这些交叉学科和化工的关系，就是仁者见仁、智者见智了。
| k***i
发帖数: 662 | 4 Glad to see your comments.
ChE is doing much research on many other disciplines.
As an example, ChE + biology ---> system biology, e.g., to study the
kinetic networks in a bio-system, or to optimize the production efficiency in a bio-system. Some people refer the later as "Metabolic Engineering".
This kind of research in complex system kinetics is very mature in ChE but
very useful in emerging fields.
Some other example includes the heat and mass transfer in some small systems
including lab-on-a
【在 y*****a 的大作中提到】
: ChE is a topic of ENGINEERING, which uses physical, numerical/mathematical
: and chemical model(s)/simplification(s) for a real chemical problem. The
: first step of ALL engineering would be:
: to understand how these simplifications are made, why they are made and what
: are the limitations. This is on the contrary of science that the purpose
: of science is to provide a hypothesis to a phenomenon (engineering provides
: a simplification or solution).
: As far as I am concerned, some topics/research practi
| S*****n
发帖数: 6055 | 5 agree with most of your points, but in my opinion, chmical engineers need to
figure out not only how, but also why and what.
Thanks to our multidiscplinary background, we could do better than chemists/
biologists/physicists in certain areas. That is to say, chemical engineering
is not only about industrilization of some science, it is a scientific
discipline by itself.
what
provides
from
of
【在 y*****a 的大作中提到】
: ChE is a topic of ENGINEERING, which uses physical, numerical/mathematical
: and chemical model(s)/simplification(s) for a real chemical problem. The
: first step of ALL engineering would be:
: to understand how these simplifications are made, why they are made and what
: are the limitations. This is on the contrary of science that the purpose
: of science is to provide a hypothesis to a phenomenon (engineering provides
: a simplification or solution).
: As far as I am concerned, some topics/research practi
| k***i
发帖数: 662 | 6 Possibly we can regard ChE as a combo:
(1) Answer why (explain the mechanism of a phenomenon)
(2) Demonstrate the possiblity in lab scale to produce something useful
(3) Provide production technology and schemes in industrial or society scale
The major difference is, ChE is targeting both 1,2 and 3, while other science disciplines may stop at step 1 or 2.
However, for any individual in ChE, he/she may work only in one of the above
steps. Though I would prefer ChE engineers should aim at step
【在 S*****n 的大作中提到】
: agree with most of your points, but in my opinion, chmical engineers need to
: figure out not only how, but also why and what.
: Thanks to our multidiscplinary background, we could do better than chemists/
: biologists/physicists in certain areas. That is to say, chemical engineering
: is not only about industrilization of some science, it is a scientific
: discipline by itself.
:
: what
: provides
: from
| y*****a
发帖数: 580 | 7 Thanks. I agree (and actually I said) that ChErs need to how, why and what.
But as karni has pointed out, engineers are focusing on solutions and
simplifications, while scientists working on explanations. Many research
studies in ChE right now focus too much on scientific part, but not provides
an approporiate simplification and its analysis. This is a deviation of
engineering perspective.
Nevertheless, ChE is definately one of, if not THE one, disciplines that
integrates various discipline
【在 S*****n 的大作中提到】
: agree with most of your points, but in my opinion, chmical engineers need to
: figure out not only how, but also why and what.
: Thanks to our multidiscplinary background, we could do better than chemists/
: biologists/physicists in certain areas. That is to say, chemical engineering
: is not only about industrilization of some science, it is a scientific
: discipline by itself.
:
: what
: provides
: from
| k***i
发帖数: 662 | 8 thanks for your comments
【在 y*****a 的大作中提到】
: Thanks. I agree (and actually I said) that ChErs need to how, why and what.
: But as karni has pointed out, engineers are focusing on solutions and
: simplifications, while scientists working on explanations. Many research
: studies in ChE right now focus too much on scientific part, but not provides
: an approporiate simplification and its analysis. This is a deviation of
: engineering perspective.
: Nevertheless, ChE is definately one of, if not THE one, disciplines that
: integrates various discipline
| f*****n
发帖数: 970 | 9 in my opinion, ChE is not equal to chemistry plus engineering.
it is itself, what it originally created-the logic processing to initialize
a purpose. unfortunately， this purpose related with chemical products. Actu
ally, that chemical products is the only connection with chemistry.
so we do not need to know what the exact product is. one thing we should alw
ays treasure is the process's design and the cost and limitation of the proc
ess.
what
provides
from
of
【在 y*****a 的大作中提到】
: ChE is a topic of ENGINEERING, which uses physical, numerical/mathematical
: and chemical model(s)/simplification(s) for a real chemical problem. The
: first step of ALL engineering would be:
: to understand how these simplifications are made, why they are made and what
: are the limitations. This is on the contrary of science that the purpose
: of science is to provide a hypothesis to a phenomenon (engineering provides
: a simplification or solution).
: As far as I am concerned, some topics/research practi
| m*****7
发帖数: 9 | 10 你看到了化工的优势，同时做化工的人往往会觉得做合成的人对反应机理会懂得更多。
化工的领域很广，对每个人来说不可能面面俱到，一个做化工流体模拟的对合成也不会
很熟悉的，在行在行只在一行。当然在做好自己的工作的同时了解一些别的知识也是必
要的
的一
【在 f*****n 的大作中提到】
: 咱们做化工的说到底还是工科，而且是古老的工科，很多EE今天的概念比如chips上的一
: 些概念还是建立在化工当年提出的总体流程设计基础上的
: 但是现在的问题是发现自己越学越偏向化学和材料了，我想搞合成发文章是相对点数能
: 高了，但感觉不算是一个脑力活这样的话无论以后从教还是进入工作岗位是否有做模拟
: 他们那样灵活的头脑。
: 而且说到底，再怎么搞合成况且只不过是简单的一些制备怎么可能有人家专门学材料的
: 人底子深厚呢，这样下去以后岂不是成废人了。
: 大家怎么认为的呢？
| | | h***y
发帖数: 1657 | 11 反应机理大部分是没什么用处的，发发paper而已。
【在 m*****7 的大作中提到】
: 你看到了化工的优势，同时做化工的人往往会觉得做合成的人对反应机理会懂得更多。
: 化工的领域很广，对每个人来说不可能面面俱到，一个做化工流体模拟的对合成也不会
: 很熟悉的，在行在行只在一行。当然在做好自己的工作的同时了解一些别的知识也是必
: 要的
:
: 的一
| j***i
发帖数: 4975 | 12 这个是外行话了
【在 h***y 的大作中提到】
: 反应机理大部分是没什么用处的，发发paper而已。
| c********z
发帖数: 1688 | 13 请教现在paper上的反应机理实用性如何？
【在 j***i 的大作中提到】
: 这个是外行话了
| j***i
发帖数: 4975 | 14 PAPER上的。。。。
大概差点儿意思
尤其是近些年的
反应机理得看为了搞商业软件和合成专门搞的研究结果
【在 c********z 的大作中提到】
: 请教现在paper上的反应机理实用性如何？
| S*****n
发帖数: 6055 | 15 师兄英明！
【在 j***i 的大作中提到】
: PAPER上的。。。。
: 大概差点儿意思
: 尤其是近些年的
: 反应机理得看为了搞商业软件和合成专门搞的研究结果
|
|
