Peterson's original sump could be considered engineering. I'm sure there is engineering involved when something new in pipes emerges. The P-lip? Possibly. Twin bored pipes? Certainly. Radical deviations from the norm most likely require a bit of engineering. The original concept of a metal stem/base with screw on bowls surely involved some engineering. There was/is engineering strewn throughout the history of the pipe. Some odd shapes require engineering principals when determining "how in the hell" to get a drilled hole through a severely bent stem and into the proper position in the bowl. After the first, with proper tools now developed (engineered?), it's simply copying what went before.
I think there is some engineering involved whenever something new is developed. After that, the mechanics are simply repeated and sometimes refined. Refining a design may or may not require a bit of engineering. However, miss drilling a hole is a ... mistake ... not engineering unless, of course, the mistake improves the product. Then the maker can puff out the chest and claim to have engineered an improvement. :
:
I think there is some engineering involved whenever something new is developed. After that, the mechanics are simply repeated and sometimes refined. Refining a design may or may not require a bit of engineering. However, miss drilling a hole is a ... mistake ... not engineering unless, of course, the mistake improves the product. Then the maker can puff out the chest and claim to have engineered an improvement. :
: Merriam-Webster citation, underlining mine.
