PDX 2025 registration is live! Enter to win one of two free expo passes by filling out the survey.

Welcome to The Wave Engineering Newsletter, your weekly guide to the cutting edge of engineering. Whether you're a seasoned professional, an eager student, or simply curious about innovation, we’re here to inform, inspire, and connect.

More than just a newsletter, we tell the human stories behind the tech—spotlighting the innovators, dreamers, and changemakers shaping our world. Backed by insights from Pipeline Design & Engineering and the Being an Engineer Podcast, we deliver the latest advancements, impactful collaborations, and stories that redefine what’s possible.

Join the conversation at The Wave, where ideas spark, questions find answers, and the engineering community comes together to create the future. Engineering isn’t just about technology—it’s about people. Subscribe and ride the wave of innovation with us.

[Action Required]: Reply to this email answering the following question. Top, thought provoking comments will be featured on The Wave!

Why do our most technically brilliant solutions often fail to change the world, while simpler approaches succeed beyond our wildest expectations?

Every morning when you scan your coffee at the checkout, you're using technology that almost died because it was too good. The barcode system that now processes 10 billion scans daily nearly got killed in 1973, not because of technical flaws, but because IBM's solution was politically inconvenient.

This disconnect between engineering excellence and real-world impact shows up everywhere. The Segway packed $100+ million worth of cutting-edge gyroscopic technology into solving a problem most people didn't know they had. Meanwhile, researchers at Stanford and MIT are now using AI systems to automate entire scientific discovery processes, but only after decades of manual lab work that screamed for engineering solutions.

Here's the uncomfortable truth: technical superiority doesn't guarantee success. The solution that wins isn't always the best engineered, it's the one that best navigates the messy intersection of technology, business constraints, and human psychology. Three stories from different eras of engineering reveal the same pattern: brilliant technical work failing to achieve impact, while strategic thinking and user-focused design create lasting change. Whether you're designing the next generation of manufacturing equipment or building software tools for research labs, understanding this gap might be the difference between building something impressive and building something that matters.

The question isn't whether you can engineer the perfect solution, but whether you can engineer a solution that the world will actually adopt.

Every time you buy groceries, you're witnessing one of engineering's greatest lessons about impact versus excellence.

In 1973, Paul McEnroe's IBM team had developed the technically superior barcode system. But there was a problem: the selection committee worried about choosing "Big Blue's" solution purely due to political optics. Four years of brilliant engineering was about to die not because of technical flaws, but because of perception.

McEnroe made a split-second decision that changed everything. He suggested minor cosmetic modifications to the code - cutting off some extended bars, nothing functionally significant. This allowed the committee to claim they'd selected their own unique solution while still getting the best technology.

The result? The UPC system now processes 10 billion scans daily worldwide.

The Big Ideas:

The gap between invention and impact isn't technical - it's everything else. The best engineering solution doesn't always win. The solution that best navigates technical requirements, business constraints, and human psychology wins.

Next time your "clearly superior" approach isn't getting adopted, remember April 1973. Sometimes changing the world means letting someone else take the credit.

Hear the full interview at the link below.

Early in my career, I loved to "show up by showing out" - designing overly complex solutions to impress my team. I once created a brilliant wire joint fixture with slide rails, modular nests, and custom nozzles. It worked perfectly but had one fatal flaw: operating it required one foot and three hands, making it completely impractical for manufacturing.

That's when my mentor taught me: technical complexity does not equal technical superiority. Sometimes the best solution is the simplest - "Keep it simple, stupid."

This lesson hit home when researching the Segway PT's spectacular failure. Despite being an engineering marvel, it became a cautionary tale of technical brilliance without commercial success.

The Over-Engineering Problem: The Segway packed $100+ million worth of cutting-edge technology into a simple transportation challenge. Five gyroscopic sensors measuring position 100 times per second, redundant control systems, dual motor windings - all to solve standing upright on two wheels. Compare that to a bicycle, which humans master using just physics, practice, and balance.

Two Fatal Flaws:

Today's Relevance: We're adding AI to coffee makers and IoT sensors to doorknobs. Modern cars have features that can strand you with software glitches or cost $2,000 to repair failed sensors.

The Core Question: Are we solving real problems or just showing off technical capabilities?

The Segway worked brilliantly - but it was a brilliant solution to a problem most people didn't have. Technical complexity without user value is just an expensive engineering exercise.

Remember: Keep it simple and keep user needs at the center of your design.

Neuroscientist Nick Edwards got tired of repetitive lab processes that screamed for automation but lacked the tools. So he teamed up with technologist Ryan Kosai to build Potato AI - a company that just raised $4.5 million from Tim Draper to automate the entire scientific discovery process.

The problem is massive: research today operates like a 1950s factory - manual, inconsistent, and painfully slow. Labs burn millions on experiments that can't be reproduced, like having a manufacturing process where every product comes out different.

Potato's solution mirrors good engineering practice: break complex problems into manageable pieces. Their AI research assistant generates hypotheses, creates protocols, and analyzes literature using retrieval-augmented generation technology. They're partnering with Ginkgo Automation to add robotics for fully autonomous research cycles.

The validation is strong - Stanford, Harvard, MIT, and other top institutions already use their platform. Starting in biotech makes sense since these labs already use automated equipment.

The challenges are real: robotics integration, safety protocols, regulatory hurdles, and convincing researchers to trust autonomous systems. But if successful, Potato AI could transform scientific discovery from craft to engineering discipline.

Their name says it all - building complex systems from simple components, just like the potato battery experiment. Read more at the link below:

Engineering is about solving, innovating, and connecting ideas to make a difference. Progress is a collective effort and your curiosity is what drives it forward. Thank you for exploring the dynamic world of engineering with all of us at Pipeline Design & Engineering and The Wave.

If you found value in this newsletter, share it with a friend or colleague who might enjoy it too. Don’t forget to subscribe so you never miss a new perspective, idea, or breakthrough.

“Creativity is just connecting things. When you ask creative people how they did something, they feel a little guilty because they didn’t really do it, they just saw something. It seemed obvious to them after a while.” - Steve Jobs

In collaboration and creativity,
Brad Hirayama
Blueprinting tomorrow, today