/// How I Work
How the engineering decisions get made.
Start with the physical constraint, test the complete assembly, and carry the decision into the drawing, supplier process and service plan. These examples connect that method to the parts, tests and decisions documented in the project accounts.
The method field
Matter & Heat
High-Stakes Physical Architecture
Motion & Fault
Kinetic Diagnostics & Combustion Logic
Data & AI
Systemic Sovereignty & Code Logic
Light, Sound & Perception
Sensory Architecture & Waveform Physics
13 practices · hover to identify · click to open the evidence
Matter & Heat
High-Stakes Physical Architecture
The governance of matter behaving at boundary conditions — thermal budgets, tolerance stacks, and structures that fail visibly when the physics is not respected.
Motion & Fault
Kinetic Diagnostics & Combustion Logic
The machine as a legible system: input, process, output, failure mode, root cause. Learned on outboards and tugboats, matured on engines under load.
Data & AI
Systemic Sovereignty & Code Logic
The architecture of persistent state and identity — durable, auditable, operator-owned, and designed to survive the container it runs in.
Light, Sound & Perception
Sensory Architecture & Waveform Physics
Engineering at the boundary between the physical world and human perception — audio waveforms, projected light, captured time.
Design
Fence the failure modes before anyone cuts steel.
-
Thermal & EMI architecture
C|24's requirements called for an external power supply and prohibited a fan at the listening position. Moving power conversion outside the console helped make the lower-profile enclosure possible.
Evidence: c24 -
Tolerance, stack-up & mechanical integration
I controlled C|24 board interfaces through Data Control Drawings. The June register lists 19 distinct PCBA designs; the MicPre8 I/O drawing records 12 revisions.
Evidence: c24 -
Mechanism & actuated-system design
I worked with Intretech and cable suppliers on Glyph's cable pinching and abrasion. We revised routing, clearances and wrap construction, and defined lifecycle and drop tests for the changes.
Evidence: avegant-glyph -
Human factors & class-A surfacing
I proposed, tested and brought Glyph's optional headstrap into production, with Radius developing concepts and mockups. It shifted most of the load from the nosepiece to the top of the head. The earcups still had to grip firmly enough for use without the strap, so ear pressure remained.
Evidence: avegant-glyph -
Control integration & kinematics
I designed the C|24 jog-wheel support and surround around the Bourns EM14 encoder. The bracket release and later tolerance relaxation connected the control, adjacent geometry and supplier process.
Evidence: c24
Diagnosis
Find the constraint. Not the symptom, and not the person.
-
Failure analysis & process forensics
One C|24 side-cap sample lost 1.04 mm in length through painting and ended 2.27 mm below its lower drawing limit. Flatness was measured separately; the cure-support comparison addressed deformation.
Evidence: c24 -
DOE & test-method design
For C|24's long molded side caps, I worked with the supplier on cure support and mating geometry. Its comparison documents vertical Method A alongside two unsuccessful support arrangements.
Evidence: c24 -
Accelerated life & destruction testing
Tracked Glyph telescope-arm tests by dated specimen cohort. In the March 16 T6 cohort, specimens 49 and 50 of the five tested could not return at 250 cycles.
Evidence: avegant-glyph
Production
The design is not finished until the line can build it at yield.
-
Serviceability & field support
I designed the field-replaceable C|24 headphone-jack unit that shipped, with Arndt Hufenbach and Manufacturing pressing for service access. The earlier recessed mock-up had been rejected.
Evidence: c24 -
DFM / DFA for automated assembly
I worked with Mass Precision on manual offset-welded C|24 panels and supported the overseas fabrication path while welding capability and panel quality were resolved. Tool access and cosmetic quality belonged in the same manufacturing decision.
Evidence: c24
Governance
Make the next engineering decision easier to trace.
-
Production acceptance & evidence
I originated C|24 deviation DEV00118 to remove noncritical dimensions and increase selected tolerances against named inspection reports. Acceptance stayed tied to fit, function and the production parts.
Evidence: c24 -
Instrumented engineering operations
Built and operate a local agent infrastructure that compiles thirty years of raw program files into a single sourced record - the same constraint method applied to software: fence the failure modes before assembly.
Evidence: colophon -
Regulatory & compliance (UL · FCC · EMI)
SC48's cooling and enclosure work continued through competing configurations. I recall choosing 4U because it worked, passing EMI certification and shipping, with Arndt and Manufacturing carrying the work forward.
Evidence: sc48
The part that is not on the résumé
A useful engineering record lets the next person see what was changed, why it was changed, and what still needs testing. That means keeping the supplier's process, the drawing revision and the inspection decision connected as the hardware evolves.
The colophon documents how I apply that discipline to this site, including the build process and the changes made when a summary outgrows its evidence.
Tell me what's breaking