Machine Shop class ideas

Machine Shop
#33

@Kentamanos

I think the most serious issue that @zmetzing raised was that training for the welders is required, but that classes are infrequent.

I know I have been trying to get into one of those infrequent classes for the best part of a year and haven’t managed it so far. I think this represents a major problem with the idea of requiring training.

Woodshop, which seems to have a large pool of volunteers, offers lots of classes, so requiring training there isn’t really a burden, but other areas it certainly is.

1 Like
#34

I’m not talking about a usage fee for exactly the reason you mention, but a one-time class fee ($20 or whatever), same as the Lift Class in Auto that provides funds for maintenance and purchasing new tooling. I’m not dead set on the idea, just was a thought. Either way, the fact remains that the board is more inclined to agree to purchases of 1) Gear that is used by more than a few select people 2) Gear that is partially paid for by the committee. Teaching classes are a double edged sword (even if you don’t charge a fee, the committee still gets $50) against both points.

#35

Well one possibility would be that you can get checked out by anyone already certified by having them watch you use the machine and then add your name to the approved list.

1 Like
#36

There are a couple of problems with the argument that training reduces our (your) liability.

  • Our trainers qualifications are subject to criticism by injured party.

  • As a co-operative it can be argued that our members are largely responsible for their own safety.

  • By requiring training before using our tools, we effectively assume additional liability by acting more like a commercial firm like techshop. In other words our training is assumed to be sufficient or any accidents may be the fault of poor training.

  • With multiple, non-certified, trainers we will have inconsistent training.

  • And with required training, and to a lesser extent any training on a tool, anyone providing that training will be subject to personal liability. Our teachers are not employees, so any insurance coverage the space has will not likely cover the instructor.

2 Likes
#37

OK.
but no one is doing that.
Anywhere.
And to implement this, we’re now asking for volunteers to, with no compensation other than feeling good about it, to take the time to test out, certify, log, etc. people to a non-existent “approved list”.

This would be my best suggestion so far:
Treat “test out” like a rolling enrollment class. Charge for eventbrite ticket (or not) and, when a volunteer “tests out”, say, 5 people, it’s treated as if a “class” were made, honorariums paid out, etc. The “instructor” will spend no less time testing out 5 people than they would teaching the same. I think similar credence should be lent to “online classes”, such as the “video/quiz” I suggested before, with, say, 10 certifications getting the creator(s) a class honorarium.

I’m glad to see Adam got the ball rolling on this. I hope something drops out of it. I hope I am able to help.

#38

We already exist on the unpaid labor of tons of volunteers. I don’t think this would be any different.

#39

I would say one exception to welding would be you can provide a valid AWS welding certification. And then only if it covers the types of welding you do: Stick, MIG, TIG, etc. I’m not aware of any other equivalent certification for other machine operation.

#40

I agree, and that’s why we’re in this pickle.
I still think “teach yourself - ask for help” is the best policy, and I’d like to reward those who teach straggling “one - offs” or “test outs” in a similar fashion to those who teach formal classes. More of an accumulated class credit system.

Ok. I’ll bow out of this, now. I’ve said my piece. I’ll grab some popcorn and watch for a place where I think I can make a difference. My jabbering on about it here is not going to be that. :slightly_smiling:

1 Like
#41

I just signed up for the talk account, but have been a member of the space for about a month.
I looked at the event calendar and see the Monday trainers class, but do not see the Sunday class.
What time will that class be?

#42

enter link description here

#43

I’m thinking that at least on my first couple of classes that i’d teach, that a co-teacher who has at least been through the 101 & 102 level course, would be awesome as I’m betting that there are things that I’ll forget. What would be great is to get someone with machining experience to assist.

#44

Woodshop has been reorganizing and improving their training structures recently, to try and meet the demand from new members, and to improve the way we conduct training. We have three required classes necessary to use our tools - Woodshop Basics (all saws, sanders, drill press, joiner, and planer), Lathe Basics (lathes), and CNC Router. We are also beginning to offer advanced classes, most of which have one of the basic courses as a prerequisite.

Each class has a standard syllabus, followed by all instructors of that class. New instructors must audit a class, then lead the class with an authorized instructor monitoring, and then they may solo classes thereafter. The syllabus’s are routinely reviewed and improved as we learn new things, run into questions, etc.

You might think the extra requirements would discourage new instructors, but the opposite has proved true, New instructors appreciate the training. Many folks want to help, and knowing they will be trained, and reviewed gives them the confidence to step forward and volunteer. And standardized training also means all users know the rules, and help enforce them - making the shop safer too. We’re now up to 8 trained WSB instructors, 4 Lathe Basics, and 3-4 CNC instructors, and still adding more to help us meet the demand. And advanced classes are being added to the schedule all the time now, and more to come.

May not be the only way, but it’s working for us.

#45

Woodshop has at least one very full tier of equipment below their big fancy CNC machine.

I still think at least a couple cheap chinese machines would make a foundation for education

in this department, without the stakes always being so high. Blasphemy, I know.

1 Like
#46

I think this will be an ever-present problem. Identify (RFID logging on big tools) and troubleshoot the issues as they occur.

Who would you say is qualified to judge a “practical test”? Are we going to get into the quagmire that Automotive has turned into with “only ASE certified mechanics can give classes”? Those who judge competency might just be adding their name to the “Defendant” side of that lawsuit. :wink:

3 Likes
#47

Anyone who is teaching a ‘required’ class is already do so. It is only a matter of time before someone gets hurt and sues.

1 Like
#48

Very true. I give training classes at work, if I’m video taped then I say something to the tune of “Nothing I say supersedes anything in the book”. Before I’m video taped they have a waiver signed too saying they won’t sue us if I miss-speak. Of course it is my due diligence to warn them of the extreme hazards of having a 700 vdc buss. I had a chief engineer of a major hospital want us to show him how to work on 13.8k-4160 drive. Myself & a guy I work with told him no repeatedly.

1 Like
#49

There are a couple of issues with your understanding. First, you are teaching as an employee, so your employer is the primary responsible party. While our teachers are not officers of our corporation, they can be directly named in a suit (so can an employee), and given that we (DMS) have limited assets, anyone suing is going to want to spread the blame around.

Finally, any attorney will tell you that you can’t say anything that eliminates your potential liability, nor can a waiver keep you from being sued, nor even from loosing such a suit. We have disclaimers that all members are required to sign, yet we can and ultimately will be sued by some stupid person who harms them self at some point.

1 Like
#50

I told my boss that the waivers are a lost cause. My business attorney told me this many years ago. She said that waivers just keep the masses thinking they can’t sue. In this country you can sue for anything at any time.

2 Likes
#51

To put a penny or two where my mouth is, try this out.
This is not something I am “good at”, but I have thrown together a course for “Introduction to Welding and Welding Safety” and posted it to the “free-for-instructors-up-to-five-classes-available-at-a-time” Blackboard offering “coursesites.com”.

It’s a bit of a pain in the arse, but you can sign up (or sign up using a google or facebook account), self-enroll, and check out the sort of thing one could do with such an offering. This is by no means intended to showcase all you can do (with this product or any other), but I wanted to hit the highlights of the sort of thing I am thinking about when I suggest “vidoe-fying” intro/safety classes and offering “test-out quizzes” online. On the backend i get fairly extensive reporting info. I am unclear on how this might be leveraged into “certificates”, but at the very least the data could be exported to a database, and checked for “completeness” before offering other, more advanced classes (or enabling RFID, or whatever).

Requesting a Welding Safety Course
Welding Safety Course Materials
#52

Many organizations use a simple 4 level training system, something like this:

1 Rookie - Must have supervision to use the equipment, in training.
2 Operator - Can use equipment without supervision
3 Trainer - Can train and evaluate rookies and operators
4 Master - Can train the trainers (as well as rookies and operators) and create training material.

With the Masters training more Trainers, we can increase the number of qualified Trainers.

If we’re going to implement an equipment training system, we should include something like this to multiply our training personnel where needed. Right now we basically have 2 levels: Operator and Master.