<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: What is Mechatronics?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.MechatronicTips.com/commentary/what-is-mechatronics/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.MechatronicTips.com/commentary/what-is-mechatronics/</link>
	<description>The synergistic application of interdisciplinary engineering fields.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 12 Nov 2009 07:47:45 -0700</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: toshiro</title>
		<link>http://www.MechatronicTips.com/commentary/what-is-mechatronics/comment-page-1/#comment-895</link>
		<dc:creator>toshiro</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Mar 2009 07:01:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.projectmechatronics.com/2007/12/17/what-is-mechatronics/#comment-895</guid>
		<description>I have to agree with  eugene thomas. Much like L33tZ0ne, being a mechatronics engineer in training (BSc this june, I hope), I often find myself hard pushed to find the borders of what we do. Most people say &#039;Oh, so it&#039;s MechE, with a twist.&#039; But, as Mr Meyer said, it is more than that.

Usually, I go with the definition of &#039;We are the synthesis of three fields of expertise: Mechanical Engineering, Electrical Engineering and Information Technology. We can act as a link between those three, possessing a wide and fairly deep kind of knowledge at the same time, or we can specialize in one single field of research (various things, like robotics, control systems, electrical motors, and many more) and attain as narrow and deep an expertise as any of the engineers who already started out in it.&#039;

The problem still stands, I have not found a concise, fit-to-the-meanest-understanding definition of Mechatronics yet, and I do not think that there will soon be one.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have to agree with  eugene thomas. Much like L33tZ0ne, being a mechatronics engineer in training (BSc this june, I hope), I often find myself hard pushed to find the borders of what we do. Most people say &#8216;Oh, so it&#8217;s MechE, with a twist.&#8217; But, as Mr Meyer said, it is more than that.</p>
<p>Usually, I go with the definition of &#8216;We are the synthesis of three fields of expertise: Mechanical Engineering, Electrical Engineering and Information Technology. We can act as a link between those three, possessing a wide and fairly deep kind of knowledge at the same time, or we can specialize in one single field of research (various things, like robotics, control systems, electrical motors, and many more) and attain as narrow and deep an expertise as any of the engineers who already started out in it.&#8217;</p>
<p>The problem still stands, I have not found a concise, fit-to-the-meanest-understanding definition of Mechatronics yet, and I do not think that there will soon be one.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
