I was interested in this job because I chose nano-engineering for the materials experience. I decided after 2nd year that I thought I would really enjoy Materials Engineering, and Nano is the closest that any of the Eng Sci options gets to Materials. I also really wanted to see what an actual plant was like, and how they worked. Working there, I was able to see how the different parts of a plant work together, and now when other plants are described to me, even if it is a food processing plant, or a nuclear plant, the general layout makes sense to me and I can picture what goes on there.

The job was mostly materials and chemical engineering. I worked in the Concentrator, the first place the ore comes when it leaves the mine. I
checked that certain instruments were working properly on a daily or weekly basis, and re-wrote some procedures for training purposes. I also got to design and conduct a few large-scale experiments in order to improve the efficiency of grinding-separating-floating circuit. After the ore is ground up, it is separated, and the smaller pieces go to flotation, while the larger pieces go back to grinding. I designed the experiment based on changing three variables, and did various tests over the course of a few months to determine which variables in the circuit most impacted the efficiency. This project was the largest thing that I worked on while I was there, and took about 4 months from start to finish.

It was a good experience, and many of the other co-op students that I worked with are now back working for Xstrata. They take care of their employees, and you get the opportunity to go to many (granted, small town) places. While I do not wish to go back there to work again, I do not regret taking the job. A job like that is good for someone who wants to see how large-scale plants work, and get a feel for the mining industry. It is not so good if you want to do a PhD in theoretical physics.

I studied magnetic nanoparticles as materials for cancer treatment and
purification. My work included synthesis of the nanoparticles and
characterization of their magnetic properties.

My courses definitely helped me with my work. I used many of the
characterization techniques that were covered in class to study the
nanoparticles. They were very impressed with my initiative and problem
solving skills to deal with the many obstacles in research.

Yes, it definitely helped my aspirations. It was great to experience
the industry side of research, and see firsthand the differences to
academia. It definitely helped me decide to pursue an industrial
position after grad school, rather than go for a professorial
position.

I’m part of the Materials and Process Engineering Department, and as such, I provide support for processes on the production floor (electronics manufacturing). Some of my projects include process improvement, and materials evaluations/qualifications, such as investigating different flux chemistries and cleaning chemistries. While I do support the other team engineers in their daily issues when called upon, I also have full-fledged projects which are my own responsibility. My department treats PEYs as regular full-time engineers, which is good for the exposure to ‘real work’.

The chemistry and materials science courses on my transcript helped with this placement. However, the other student hired for the same position as me did not have much of a chemical/materials science background; for this position, I believe that personality played a larger role in the selection process (at least in the interview portion).

PEY has given me a taste of what it is like working as an engineer in a large company. The placement is comparable to a job that I might secure upon completion of undergrad, given that I would be interested in working in a chemical/materials field. I am looking forwards to the thesis experience of 4th year, so that I will have perspective on both industry and research. Having both types of experience will really help to decide what direction I want to take in the future.

R&D on vision motion estimation, software & hardware jobs, programming as well as mechanical support.

No, at least I don’t think it did. I was surprised I got this job too. I think multiple-discipline study in first 2 years was definitely one help as well as the personality and experience I had. My advise to current students is if u look for jobs that you are really interested in however not nano related, it’s ok! Go ahead and show confidence in interview. Express your reasons that you think should convince the employer that you are suited for the job.

Not sure how positive the effect is yet. But definitely good to keep another working experience (this one programming, mechanical, and robotic control in particular) other than my nano background in my pocket. JUST IN CASE “nano” doesn’t get me anywhere in the future. And it’s a good chance to experience to look at interesting things in the field of engineering (hopefully).

I’m a market analyst, mainly concerned with IBM’s software group. My primary responsibility is the running of a primary research study, which includes questionnaire writing, reporting and analysis. When the study doesn’t keep my busy I help our where I can with various projects in the department that include, competitor analysis, ad hoc data analytics and marketplace assessments. Most proudly, I’ve also been a contributing writer to a quarterly Nanotechnology Industry and Research Activities report. I can say that my position is quite interesting as a good part of my job requires me to be in tune with the marketplace, which forces me to do a lot of reading of reports and news articles and figure out how everything fits towards the company vision and strategy.

It was the fact that I was in Engineering Science more than anything else. The person who interviewed me (and my current boss) was an ex-eng sci. When you’re in third year, I’d say you can always push that you’re more eng sci than nano (which is true) and from there you can pretty much be whatever you want.

Yes, it will. Although I had picked nano as an option I still didn’t really know what I wanted to do. The time off has given me the opportunity to figure things out. Besides the time off, I am learning a lot about the business world, something eng sci has not taught me about. I hope to eventually get involved in the business aspects of nanotechnology and my PEY experience will help me get there.

My official position is Product Marketing Engineer. My duties are quite broad and varied but include driving engineering teams, defining new products and seeing it through its development, delivering solutions to claim OEM design wins, interfacing with business customers, analyzing the market and competition and thereby developing business strategy plans. It's a good mix of engineering and business – precisely what I was looking for.

To be perfectly honest, Nano did not help me secure this placement. I stressed to my employers that I was in Engineering Science and therefore had taken numerous relevant electrical engineering courses. Also, I made sure to mention my second year design project – not only does it make a good conversation topic, but also highlights your competence with hands-on electrical engineering.

DEFINITELY, it opens a multitude of doors. Having studied nanoengineering, I felt my career was confined to academia. Now, after having had this industry experience, I feel I will have no problem at all developing a career in industry. I highly suggest a PEY placement but just be wise in your selection of a job; pick something that will be most beneficial to your career aspirations.

Autoliv specializes in the production of electronic products for automotive safety (crash sensors, airbag deployment, etc.). I worked in the quality department as a quality systems engineer and in the surface mount technology (SMT) area as a manufacturing line engineer.

Quality Systems Engineering
As a certified internal auditor for ISO/TS 16949:2002 Automotive Sector, I supported the implementation of an ISO/TS quality system and assisted in all aspects of the audit process: preparation for and conducting of internal audits, completion of internal audit reports, and presentation of audit findings to senior management. I gained a deep understanding of product/process design and development, equipment calibration and maintenance, material planning and logistics, statistical process control (methods for analyzing and monitoring processes), the general expectations for any automotive manufacturer, etc.

SMT
An existing SMT manufacturing line was retrofitted to allow for process and equipment changes - a strategic company decision intended to drive the continual improvement process. As the project manager, I coordinated all phases of the project and worked independently to secure a successful SMT production line launch. Some of the tasks included: coming up with manufacturing line layouts, developing process and material flow charts, defining risks and back-up solutions, addressing unexpected quality issues with respect to the modified process, designing machine fixtures, performing material flow and capacity analyses, and so forth.

No. I secured a placement after my second year without a specialization.

As soon as I walked into the interview room, I handed them my updated second year transcript. I think that scored me some brownie-points. But one of the interviewers (and my future supervisor) was a recent engsci graduate and we got into a great discussion about the design project. We kept chatting and chatting…

I showed maturity and professionalism but I was also being myself. If you just feed them with information that they want to hear, your answers will sound shaky and contrived. It may work in some cases but you certainly don’t want to sound like every other student being interviewed.

I can say (without a doubt) that this placement has had a positive effect on me. At Autoliv, I have been exposed to surface mount technology processes that input a bare board and output a densely populated electronic assembly. State-of-the-art equipment such as high-speed placement machines, solder paste screen printers and solder ovens make this task economically viable. I have become very familiar with standard requirements for the implementation of a quality management system in the automotive industry. These are very transferable skills. The most important thing about PEY is that it allows you to see the other side of the spectrum (a side that is very different from the academic environment) and gain practical skills that you cannot pick up by doing pure research. (Many of us spend years working with MEMS technologies but few get to see how these devices interact in their final homes such as airbag systems in cars.)

Although my nano background did not help me in securing the placement (which was originally for an electrical engineer), my Engineering Science background did. In many fields, Engineering Science provides a well-rounded background, which is considered very useful in a company as large and diverse as MDA Space Systems, especially when I was placed within the research and development department.

Many PEY interviews consist of a personal aspect and technical aspect. My advice is to learn to separate the two. The personal aspect is very calm and casual: ask questions about their company, and express a lot of interest in things specific to what and why their company is. The technical aspect (which I was not originally prepared for) is somewhat more nerve-racking. However, in most cases, Engineering Science students have been exposed to, if not at the very least heard of, most technical aspects. Answer the questions you know with confidence, and refer the questions you don’t to a ready source where you know you can find the answer.

The bottom line: treat them as you would want to be treated as an interviewer. Don’t bullshit them, and leave your ego at the door; I know Engineering Science students have problems with both of those. Lastly, make the interview enjoyable; these companies want people who will make a good addition to their team.