BOTS

The following blog was inspired by an article written by Ann R. Thryft.   Ann is the senior technical editor for Materials and Assembly for Design News.  This is a marvelous magazine that highlights engineering efforts underway and making news on a daily basis.  The photographs were also taken from that article.

I have a fascination with robotic systems that can perform functions emulating human beings and various animals.   There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that “homo sapiens” are the most complicated organisms on our planet.   An electromechanical device capable of performing functions hazardous and unsafe for humans would necessarily be patterned after subjects who can get the job done—namely us.   There are also certain capabilities animals have that definitely apply to the performance of some functions.     Let’s now take a look several research and development efforts specifically patterned after “lesser creatures”.

SPIDER

The Multi-Appendage Robotic System (MARS) from Virginia Tech’s Robotics & Mechanisms Laboratory looks like a giant spider with six legs instead of eight. Fabricated out of carbon fiber and aluminum, the robot’s legs are spaced axi-symmetrically around its body, which lets it walk omni-directionally. Each leg uses a proximal joint with two degrees of freedom and a distal joint with one degree of freedom for added strength and rigidity. The goal is to develop a walking gait system for negotiating terrain with variations in height.   Changing elevations has always been a considerable impediment to robotic systems relative to continued motion.  The system is based on simplified biological neuron networks, arranged in sub networks and subsystems to support the operation of another neural network: a central pattern generator (CPG) that generates gait patterns based on feedback from all supporting systems.  .    I think it’s a little scary what these things can do.  I certainly understand the need to go where human health and safety would be compromised but I’m a little nervous relative to the more clandestine possibilities.  Remember the movie “Minority Report” and the “bots” used to search for the hero (Tom Cruise)?   He’s lying there in the tub, under water, to avoid these pesky little devices that will certainly cause his capture and possible death.  (OK so I’m paranoid!)  The mechanical aspects represent just how far engineering has come and how successful y we have mastered emulating “moving things”.  I am also fascinated that programming can make these things do what is needed.   This “spider” robot reminds me of that movie.  It certainly appears that fact has caught with fiction.   (Source: Virginia Polytechnic and State University)

 

INCH WORM

The Massachusetts Institute of Technology‘s Inchworm (shown above) moves like a caterpillar by flexing and extending itself. Electromagnets at each end of its body provide the anchoring force. Developed by a team at the Distributed Robotics Laboratory of MIT’s Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Lab, the Inchworm can climb vertical steel walls or crawl across a steel ceiling by using the electromagnets to attach itself to surfaces. It can also navigate autonomously in unknown environments by making transitions between surfaces. Its stepping gait for straight-line motion consists of four phases: attach the back foot, extend the front foot, attach the front foot, contract the back foot. While navigating, it can also push and pull objects.    Of course the effectiveness is negated when the device tries to move over a surface that is not metallic in nature.  This represents the fact that it has been designed for a very specific purpose.    (Source: Massachusetts Institute of Technology)

MOBEE

Some winged robots are designed to work in swarms, such as the MonolithicBee, or MoBee, from Harvard University’s Microrobotics Lab. This lab focuseson creating high-performance aerial and ambulatory microrobots and soft robots inspired by biological models. The robots can be used for exploring hazardous environments, search-and-rescue operations, environmental monitoring, and assisting agriculture. The MoBee, which is about the size of a housefly, is made from custom hardware. It is part of the RoboBees Project funded by the National Science Foundation for mimicking the behavior of a bee colony and adapting to changing environments.   The most fascinating fact, at least to me, is the very small size and how engineers and manufacturers fashion the individual component parts to assemble the device.  Please look at the JPEG above and notice the comparison with the quarter it sits on.  Truly marvelous engineering from the guys at Harvard.   (Source: Harvard University)

The University of California, Berkeley’s Biomimetics Millisystems Laboratory has designed two small winged robots: the Dynamic Autonomous Sprawled Hexapod (DASH), a cockroach-like robot with wings added to boost ground locomotion, and the flying Bipedal Ornithopter for Locomotion Transitioning (BOLT), shown below. The BOLT, a 13-gram ornithopter, is based on the lab’s OctoROACH, also inspired by a cockroach. The BOLT uses its flapping wings to provide passive stability when running at up to 2.5m/sec while maintaining ground contact, as well as for flying. This lets it travel over a variety of difficult environments for surveillance or search-and-rescue operations.   (Source: University of California, Berkeley)

These systems are important and fascinating because they represent research underway to advance “state-of-the -art” for robotic systems and fulfill definiteneeds—very definite needs.   Each system was developed for a specific purpose but all represent the ability to remove an individual from harms way.    Most of the effort is funded by the DOD or DARPA but the results have definite possibilities for law enforcement also.  Used properly, lives and property could save the agony of personal injury and reduce unnecessary liability.  Another huge benefit necessary to these programs is the development of software and mathematical algorithms required to drive systems such as the ones shown above.   We are a long way from “terminator-type” devices but we probably do not wish to go there anyway.  I certainly hope you enjoyed this very brief summary and have gotten some idea as to where we are relative to robotic systems.  Exciting work is continuing and I’m sure by this time next year remarkable advances will have taken place.

 

COWBOY STADIUM—FROM AN ENGINEER’S PRESPECTIVE

 

Last week my wife and I visited our youngest son now living in Dallas, Texas.  (It’s really nice to have them gainfully employed and off the “payroll”.)    He is an MIS graduate from the University of Georgia and works for AT&T in their 401K area as a quality control specialist.   Monday was a tough day for him with multiple meetings so we decided to take the day and visit Dallas Cowboy Stadium.   Let me mention right now that I am a die-hard Chicago Bears fan and I went only to observe and not to praise.  The stadium is located in Arlington about forty-five minutes west of Dallas.   Fairly easy drive even with traffic.   I was not disappointed.  It is an absolutely fabulous stadium.  The architecture is stunning; the engineering is remarkable.  I’m not saying it is one of the ten wonders of the modern world, but maybe eleventh.  What I would like to do now is give you an engineer’s viewpoint relative to the structure with several observations along the way.   Let’s look at the stadium itself.

  The picture does not really do justice to the size or basic configuration.  By that I mean you cannot tell the walls are canted outward 14 degrees to enhance the mechanical design and support the massive movable panels located in the dome itself.   This structure replaced the Texas Stadium which opened in 1971 and served as the Cowboys’ home through the 2008 season.   The new stadium was completed on May 27, 2009 and seats 80,000, making it the third largest stadium in the NFL.  The maximum capacity, including standing room, is 110,000. The Party Pass (open areas) sections are behind seats in each end zone and on a series of six elevated platforms connected by stairways. The cost for “standing room only” is about $29.00 with sell-outs every game.   The original estimated cost to build the structure was $650 million dollars but the actual costs was $1.15 billion, making it one of the most expensive sports venues ever built.  The city of Arlington, the state of Texas and the NFL contributed to overall financing which made construction possible.      It is the largest domed stadium in the world, has the world’s largest column-free interior and the 2nd largest high definition video screen which hangs from 20 yard line to 20 yard line. The screen assembly is absolutely massive.  Our tour guide indicated that when the screen was positioned, the supporting beams dropped four inches due to the weight.  (The maximum calculated drop possible was eight inches.)   These screens hang ninety feet above the playing field.   Two video screens facing the sidelines each measure 72 feet high by 160 feet wide, roughly equivalent to 4,920 52-inch flat panel television screens.    LEDs serve as individual pixels for viewing and, of course, they all work in unison when operating.  That alone is an engineering marvel in my opinion. 

During a game with the Tennessee Titans, the very first year, the Tennessee kicker actually hit the screen during a forth-down punt.  This generated some concern but not enough to necessitate any real changes to elevation or positioning.   In addition to the magnificent screen, there are 3200 HD TVs located throughout the stadium for the benefit of the fans. 

The facility can also be used for a variety of other activities outside of its main purpose (professional football) such as concerts, basketball games, boxing matches, college football and high school football contests, soccer matches, and motocross races.  We were told that the previous week, there were three weddings, all on the fifty yard line and right on the Texas star.  That’s devotion.

Before we go much further, let’s give credit where credits due and look at the companies performing the work.  These are as follows:

General Contractor: Manhattan Construction, Dallas, Texas
Architect: HKS, Dallas, Texas
Structural Engineer: Walter P Moore & Assoc, Dallas, TX
Concrete Contractor: TXI Operations, LP, Dallas, Texas
Consulting Architect: Cooper Robertson & Partners, New York, NY
Contractor: Bencor Corporation of America, Dallas, TX
Contractor (steel): Desert Steel, Irving, Texas
General Contractor: 31 Construction, Dallas, Texas
Grouting/Millwrights: Derr Steel Erectors & GroutTech, Inc, Hurst, TX

You will note that all of the work, with one exception, was performed by firms within the state.  I personally think this is very admirable.  Now for interesting specifications:

Site Size: 135 Acres
Total Sq. Footage: 2.3 million
Project Est. Completion Date: June, 2009
Fixed Seating: 80,000 people
Total Capacity: 100,000 people
Total Yards, Concrete: 200,000 cu. yds.
Total Reinforced Steel: 21,000 tons
Size Moveable Roof: 661,000 sq. ft.
Ea. Mechanized Roof Panel: 63,000 sq. ft.
Ea. (2) Arched Roof Supports: 1224.5 ft. long x17 ft x 35ft
Max. Roof Height: 292 ft.
Arched Truss Weight (ea.): 3,255 tons
Video Score Board Size: 20,000 sq. ft.
Grouts Used On Arch Footers: L&M EPOGROUT 758
Total Epogrout 758 Used: 440 Cubic Feet (880 units)

The field you see below is actually three stories DOWN.  It’s subterranean.  96,000 truck loads of earth were removed prior to starting the foundation work.    Can you imagine the time it took to remove and haul that number of loads? 

The “carpet” is laid in ten yard widths with the yard-line markings stitched into the backing then adhered onto one inch open cell foam padding.  There is no “painting” on the surface at all—just stitched into the composite.  I thought this was very interesting.  If you look closely, you can see two stars in the picture.  One indicating the Cowboys’ locker room and one indicating the Cheerleader locker room.  The visiting team does not get a star to run through.   I might mention the wood used for the individual lockers is made from the same material as the wood trim in Ms. Jerry Jones’s Bentley.

The stadium’s 660,800-square-foot retractable roof can be open or closed, depending on weather conditions.  It takes 12 minutes to open or close each roof panel and the roof opening is visible from an elevation of five miles. The roof is supported by two enormous arches, soaring 292 feet and weighing 3,255 tons each.   Please go back and take a look at the first picture of the stadium and you can see the huge beams supporting the roof panels.   The roof isn’t the only thing that can be opened when the weather is nice. Cowboys Stadium has the largest retractable end zone doors in the world, measuring 120 feet high by 180 feet wide and made of glass.   You can see one end zone section below.                              

These doors allow entry for special events, such as “monster truck” demonstrations, motocross races, etc etc.

 I certainly recommend that if you are in the Dallas area you take a look at the Cowboy’s stadium.    We took the self-guided tour but there are audio tours and tour guides for visiting groups.  It truly is an engineering marvel.

SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING–GLOBAL TRENDS

I really don’t know who said it first but—“sometimes the only way you know where you are going is to take a look at where you are right now”.   There is a great deal of truth in this statement so I thought we might take a look at where we are relative to S & E (science and engineering).  Since this is not a subject that can be covered quickly, I am writing the first in a series of documents that will cover the following:

• Overview of science and engineering—where we are now with conclusions as to where we need to go.
• Current labor force relative to S & E professions.  This is a fairly broad look, but an important indicator as to where we are falling behind.
• R & D trends (Global)
• Public Attitude towards S & E professions.
• State indicators.  What states within our Unites States provide the majority of trained S & E professionals and offer the greatest number of jobs.

This first effort is a brief overview of where we are now.  The next publications will follow during the month of May.   All of the information for each segment comes from the following publication:

 National Science Board—National Science Foundation, “Science and Engineering Indicators–2012”, required by 42 USC, Paragraph 1863(j) (1)

It is very important to note that—“Science and Engineering Indicators (SEI)” is first and foremost a volume of record comprising the major high-quality quantitative data on the U.S. and international science and engineering enterprise. SEI is factual and policy neutral. It does not offer policy options, and it does not make policy recommendations.  The data are “indicators.” Indicators are quantitative representations that might reasonably be thought to provide summary information bearing on the scope, quality, and vitality of the science and engineering enterprise. The indicators reported in SEI are intended to contribute to an understanding of the current environment and to inform the development of future policies.  All we are after here is to present the basic facts as they exist, without embellishment or fanfare.  Just the facts!   The overview focuses on the trend in the United States and many other parts of the world toward the development of more knowledge-intensive economies in which research, its commercial exploitation, and other intellectual work are of growing importance. Industry and government play key roles in these changes.  We primarily will be looking at knowledge-based economies and other intellectual work of growing importance on a global basis.  There is absolutely no doubt; those economies that have and continue to develop technologies benefiting their populations will progress faster, maybe much faster, than those countries otherwise dormant relative to science and technology.  Even though manufacturing is critical to continued national sovereignty, science, technology and engineering in general drive manufacturing.   We will be looking at trends relative to the United States, China, the European Union, Japan and those eight countries; i.e. India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan and Thailand, etc. within the east Pacific theatre.  There are several generalities we can state relative to the global progression in question.  These are as follows:

• We definitely live in an interconnected world with intertwining economies.  Those countries continuing to prosper economically offer open markets and willingness to participate in the transfer of technology.   No doubt about it.
• Open markets exist in just about every country on our globe.  One exception is North Korea and even that potential trading partner is beginning to recognize the benefits of world-wide trade.
• Most countries recognize the significant importance of education and dedicated R & D effort relative to global commerce.  It is imperative that a knowledge-based workforce exist to promote technology on a wide scale.
• With Asia’s rapid ascent, China is a major player on a global scale.  A rising superstar on the world stage that must not be taken lightly.  China has made a commitment toward being a world force, thereby promoting science and engineering education.
• The European Union is “holding it’s own” but much of the trade is between members of the “union”.
• Brazil and South Africa show very high rates of growth relative to science, engineering and technology and recognize the great importance of an educated population.
• Israel, Switzerland and Canada are examples of countries with mature growth relative to science and engineering- technology in general.  Continued progress is dependent upon a well-trained work force, and they recognize that fact.
• Global R & D expenditures have grown faster than global GDP with significant efforts to make economies more knowledge and technology based.  An example of this—global R&D efforts in 1996 were $522 billion USD whereas in 2009, that number was $1.3 trillion USD.  This fact is demonstrated by the following graph.  There is a 69.23 percent increase in R & D expenditures in just thirteen (13) years.  A 5.325percent in R & D spending per year for thirteen years.  

 

• The United States is the largest contributor to the R & D effort with $400 billion (2009) USD but with Asian countries, mostly China, a very close second.  Please note, the EU figure represents all expenditures for R & D by the seventeen (17) countries within the “Union”. This is a conglomerate number.

For many countries, there is an R & D target of 3% of GDP.  They recognize the great importance of technology and engineering relative to continued economic improvement.    It is also a recognized fact that industry is the mechanism that fuels this technology growth.  In the USA, industry funds 62% of the R & D effort.  70% for Germany, 45% for the United Kingdom and 60% for China, Singapore and Taiwan respectively.  The chart that follows gives the percentages of GDP for each region.   That percentage being on the ordinate (vertical) axis of the chart. The percentage in the USA is roughly flat over the last thirteen years.   China has grown consistenly.

 

If we look at the annual growth rates for selected countries, we see the following:    China has made significant efforts to invest in R & D whereas the EU, USA and Japan have reduced  R & D funding.   2008 and 2009 exhibit percentages that, in my opinion, are truly alarming.

 

 

There is no doubt that China and the Asia/Pacific countries are giving the US a real “run for the money”.  The chart below will demonstrate that fact quite well.

North America; i.e. USA, Canada and Mexico, etc. traditionally spend more than the rest of the world but Asia/Pacific is catching up.  Figure 0-6 is a fascinating look at how R & D expenditures “travel” across our globe.  This graphic represents the global transfer of technology and further demonstrates how intertwined global commerce is.

The relative importance of global technology is driven home by the following chart, showing graduation rates by region.  This chart represents the importance associated by each country as to what is expected of education.   It also is a very definite indicator as to where the jobs will continue to be in the twenty-first century.

Next, we will look at the current labor force and those professions participating in that labor force.  You may be surprised as to where scientists and engineers work.

 

 

 

POSITIONS WANTED

Statistics sited in this document were taken from “National Association of Colleges and Employers”, Bethlehem, Pa. Survey of 160 Major Employers across the Country.

Across our country right now are millions of high school seniors anticipating graduation within a few weeks.  Many of those students have been accepted to attend colleges and universities, both near and far, with goals of pursuing their passion and finding that coveted “dream job”.  There are also a great number that really don’t know what they want to do but realize they have about two years to “declare” a major.  Too many times they do what daddy or mommy want them to do without taking a good hard look at what’s selling.  What occupations would I enjoy for a lifetime AND what occupations satisfy need for the basics; i.e. food, shelter, clothing, gas in the car, enough money for a date on Saturday night, etc., if graduate school is not in the picture four or five years down the road.  The statistics below may give the graduating high school senior insights as to where we are in this nation relative to employment and where we might be in the very near future.

AVERAGE NUMBER OF APPLICANTS PER JOB:

• 2009-2010            40.4
• 2010-2011            21.1
• 2011-2012            32.6

Scary right?  As a college or university graduate, you will be competing with many individuals FOR THE SAME JOB.     Also, no longer is your competition “local” only.   People seeking employment have online sources to search for positions AND, they are willing to move in order to get the best job in their specific field.    My town is very fortunate to have VW as an employer.  Over 2500 people work at VW with 800 additional individuals being sought at this time.  I think it is very unfortunate that VW  is having to go “national” in its search for technical people.  We simply do not have candidates that meet their needs.  This is the country we live in right now and I suspect conditions will not get much better.

HIRING PROJECTIONS:

The recessionary period we have just experienced, and some say we are still in, has lead employers to defer hiring, thus creating the average number of job applicant per position as given above.  This hiring “freeze” has abated somewhat but competition is still extremely great.  Let’s take a look at employee hiring vs. year:

                YEAR         YEARLY CHANGE

• Spring 2007         19.2 %  gain
• Spring 2008         8%  gain
• Spring 2009         21.6%  decline
• Spring 2010         5.3%  gain
• Spring 2011         19.3% gain
• Spring 2012         10.2%  gain         

Hiring is definitely on the rebound and the greatest gains are within very specific fields of endeavor.  Let’s take a look at spring 2012 to see what professions are in demand.  Please keep in mind that 160 companies were interviewed to find out what disciplines represented the greatest need.

PROFESSON    % of EMPLOYER RESPONDENTS HIRING               

ENGINNEERING               69

BUSINESS                     63

ACCOUNTING               53

COMPUTER SCIENCES    49

ECONOMICS                22

PHYSICAL SCIENCES      19

COMMUNICATIONS        16

SOCIAL SCIENCES         16

HUMANITIES               13

The 160 companies interviewed also indicated they prefer prospective employees to have work experience within their specific field of study.  Co-ops, interns, volunteer efforts may just give you the edge when competition is the greatest.  It certainly won’t hurt.  Also, having a great and credible reference (or references) is a definite benefit.  

I will now like to give you my “short list” of desirable attributes relative to securing a position in the highly competitive job market.  This list is really intended for that entering university freshman and possibly gives them something to think about along the way.  You eventually WILL graduate.  You WILL eventually seek gainful employment.  Let’s take a look:

• You MUST know how to draft a well written document, put words together to make a sentence, paragraph or page that makes sense and is readable.  Good punctuation, good “wordsmithing”, logical sentence structure and basic flow of ideas will get you a long way.  You would not believe what I have seen from university graduates.  Some simply don’t know how to write (which consequently makes me believe they don’t know how to think!).
• The need to be bi-lingual or even multi-lingual is extremely desirable in today’s culture.  Learn Spanish or French or German or Italian.   Oh by the way, we have English and we have Southern—I’m from Tennessee, and I know the difference.   Know how to speak English- the King’s English -but know at least one other language. 
• If you are a person of color you may have to “act white” when dealing with customers, peers, managers and teachers.  Don’t “axe” them a question, don’t use “ghetto” language and think you will get ahead any time soon.  It just does not work that way.  You will eventually be working in a professional atmosphere so be professional.  Employers won’t say anything but you will be evaluated based upon how you speak and how you answer questions.   I have told our three children that their first manager may just be an old guy like me, so behave. 
• Read continuously from the moment you enter college and continue that action throughout your professional career.  Don’t ever think that watching hours of TV will do anything but waste your precious time.  Stay abreast of developments within your profession and discuss those developments with your peers and your manager.  Cultivate the habit of reading about subjects outside your chosen field.  Some day and in some way, that information will come back to benefit efforts within your profession.  Never fails!  Managers needing employees know those individuals who are well-read and articulate subject matter in a concise manner. 
• Network—ALWAYS, prior to the interview and after the interview.
• Dress in a manner that is appropriate for the interview and the job.  DON’T WEAR YOUR LUCKY BALL CAP TO THE INTERVIEW!  Pull up your pants.  Leave your mini-skirt at home.  The interviewer is looking for a worker, not a date.  Don’t even think about smoking or “dipping” during an interview or on the job.  (You would not believe what I’ve seen over the past few years.  What are these kids thinking? I even interviewed a guy who was smoking “weed” during the very short interview. )
• Know the company you are interviewing.  Do your homework before you sit down with the HR guy.  What do they do?  Where are they located?  How many employees?  Where are their offices?  National or international?  You get the picture. You must know this information before you go in.
• Don’t go into the interview unless you are sober. (Please see previous discussion.  Again, what are these kids thinking? )
• YOUR COURSEWORK MUST REFLECT YOUR ABILITIES FOR THE POSITION YOU ARE INTERVIEWING .  You won’t be able to “wing-it here”.   Enough said.

Good luck!   I have worked with some of the very finest young people on the planet in my years as a mechanical engineer.  They are smart with great work ethic and really resourceful.  (I love the resourceful.)  Trust me on this one, you can do extremely well during the interview and on the job with the proper attitude and a willingness to listen, apply your considerable talents, and work.  Always remember—If you want to leave you’re footprints on the sands of time, you must wear work shoes.  Been there, done that, got the “T” shirt.

 

Environmental Markets

Environmental Markets

Regardless as to how you feel towards “global warming”, man-made or otherwise, I think we all share the thought that being conscious of our environment and how we treat man-made effluents is critical to our wellbeing as a society in general.  I personally feel “the jury is out” relative to man-made reasons for global warming and we very well may be in a cycle of planetary warming that will work itself out in a few thousand years.  That’s not the point!    You don’t live in a dirty house so why continue polluting a dirty planet?  There is not one state in our union of states that disregards laws governing littering and yet we seemingly overlook many of our major polluters.  Many many companies are now very conscious of their “environmental footprint” and work seriously  towards improving those conditions that provide rigorous compliance with EPA standards and local codes.  I applaud their efforts.    That’s not the reason for this blog.  The technology devoted to improving our environment is really fascinating and, I think as “card-carrying” members of this planet, we need to know more about those efforts.  It’s important that we keep up with the “movers and shakers” behind the very standards being developed and those in place right now.  I would like to present to you a document written by Mr. Greg Jackson.    His write up explains the very basic elements of how environmental markets work.  I have been given his permission to copy and present his document.   That work is presented at this time.  “His words” are in italics and are as follows:

The environmental markets have been actively trading on both compliant and voluntary levels for the last seven (7) years. The Kyoto Protocol was the first compliance driven agreement among 37 countries established by the (UNFCCC) United Nation Framework Convention on Climate Change.   The UNFCCC created benchmark emission reduction goals. Annex I initiated that effort in 2005 will conclude at the end of 2012. The reductions call for 5% annual reductions based on the emissions benchmark established in 1990. There are currently 34 countries that have selected to continue in 2013 with compliance guidelines established at the Durban Conference to insure Climate Change regulations would be in place.  These non-binding guidelines will become mandatory in May 2012. The European Union Trading Scheme will continue with the Clean Development Mechanism and Joint Implementation Programs to reduce total emissions by an additional 20% by 2020. Currently Certified Emissions Reductions from industrialized and non-developed nations are being traded through the aforementioned programs from entities adopting these programs.

The United States signed the Kyoto Protocol however never put in place compliant guidelines enabling emission reduction instruments to be traded within these markets. Therefore, credits originated in the United States would have to be traded within voluntary markets. The Western Climate Initiative is scheduled to begin January 1, 2013 with California and Quebec as the two participating parties in the first North American compliant cap and trade program. The trading platform will adhere to guidelines outlined in Bill AB 32, ratified in 2006 and recently upheld by election in November 2010 via Proposition 23. Prop 23 was overwhelmingly endorsed by 63% of the voters and has cleared the way for a statewide cap and trade program. The California Air Resources Board has cleared the way for the first compliant stateside cap and trade system. Phase I is through 2020 with targeted reductions of 17% overall. The resources board has acknowledged 4 crediting programs whose protocols were adopted from the Climate Action Reserve; Forestry, Urban Forestry, Ozone Depleting Substances, and Livestock. These programs will be eligible for carbon crediting through the abatement or reduction of carbon emissions. California represents 25% of the total U.S. GDP and will allow carbon sequestration projects that can be originated anywhere in the continental U.S., Canada, and some regions in Mexico. The Western Climate Initiative (WCI) will be the established platform that California and Quebec will adhere to for climate protocol. WCI member jurisdictions include 7 US states and 4 Canadian provinces:  Arizona, British Columbia, California, Manitoba, Montana, New Mexico, Ontario, Oregon, Quebec, Utah, and Washington. It is expected that states and provinces within the WCI will follow suit once the program is up and running. There is definitely a political element to cap and trade programs. It is somewhat difficult to predict what federal and state programs will be put in place in future years that could expand the areas of compliance. California Carbon Allowances are currently being traded on the Intercontinental Exchange. Pricing for the allowances began at $17 per allowance for the first transaction and then went as high $23. Point Carbon has forecasted carbon allowance prices to rise as high as $75 by 2020. The offsets are credits that are generated from emission reduction projects that are expected to price at approximately 70% of allowance prices.

The voluntary markets were impacted dramatically when federal cap and trade legislation stalled in the senate in 2009. The economic environment and passing of the health care initiative put a formal cap and trade program on hold.   Voluntary carbon offsetting went from being for the greater good of the public to a luxury line item. The economy has started to slowly correct and voluntary market transactions per Markit have continued to grow. Issuance activity was up to 27.8 million Verified Carbon Standard Credits an increase of 500,000 credits. Credits being traded from 2010 to 2011 were 3.6 million to 9.8 million or an increase of 6.2 million credits. The Gold Standard credits traded at premiums and most transactions were over the counter pricing from $8-$12. Companies such as Whole Foods, Google, Yahoo, and Wal-Mart are forward thinking companies that are either buying voluntary carbon offsets or actually funding projects that directly reduce emissions. The Bonneville Environmental Foundation was set up to offset emissions and list participants such as Chevrolet, The North Face, REI, NHL, MLS, Idaho Power, Silk and Oregon State University.  The Foundation has identified projects that yield certain credits to address the offset needs of these individual entities.

Renewable Portfolio States (RPS) continue to grow as there are now 34 with Renewable Portfolio Standards currently in place. The RPS mechanism generally places an obligation on electricity supply companies to produce a specified fraction of their electricity from renewable energy sources. Certified renewable energy generators earn certificates for every unit of electricity they produce and can sell these along with their electricity to supply companies. Supply companies then pass the certificates to some form of regulatory body to demonstrate their compliance with their regulatory obligations. Because it is a market mandate, the RPS relies almost entirely on the private market for its implementation. Unlike feed-in tariffs which guarantee purchase of all renewable energy regardless of cost, RPS programs tend to allow more price competition between different types of renewable energy, but can be limited in competition through eligibility and multipliers for RPS programs. Those supporting the adoption of RPS mechanisms claim that market implementation will result in competition, efficiency and innovation that will deliver renewable energy at the lowest possible cost, allowing renewable energy to compete with cheaper fossil fuel energy sources. California currently has the largest requirement that is 33%. Credits are traded in the form of Renewable Energy Certificates or Solar Renewable Energy Certificates.

In the early 1990s the United States realized the need for Renewable Fuel Credits to reduce the amount of fossil fuel consumption. Transportation accounts for the majority of fossil fuel use and incentives were put in place to offer renewable/alternative fuel credits. Corporate Average Fuel Economy is a standard that was adopted to improve the average fuel economy of vehicles in the mid 1970’s to try and reduce the fuel consumption after Arab Oil Embargo. Most recently the use of ethanol and various other biofuels have created renewable fuel credits or RINs. RIN is short for Renewable Identification Number and is a renewable fuel credit. A RIN credit is a serial number assigned to each gallon of renewable fuel as it is introduced into U.S. commerce. RIN credits were created by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as part of the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) to track our nation’s progress toward reaching the energy independence goals established by the U.S. Congress. RIN credits are the currency used by obligated parties to certify compliance they are meeting mandated renewable fuel volumes. All gasoline produced for U.S. consumption must contain either adequate renewable fuel in the blend or the equivalent in RIN credits. EPA regulations require that the RIN be tracked throughout each link in the supply chain, as title is transferred from one party to the next. RINs are assigned and travel with renewable fuel until the point in time where the biofuel is blended with petroleum products to produce gasoline. Once the renewable fuel is in the gasoline, the RIN is separated and is then eligible to trade as an environmental credit.

 Overall, emission reduction credits are here to stay. The Climate Change initiative is considered to be gaining more traction with the WCI platform being established and is predicted to pick up steam on a national level as states begin to adopt their own regulations regarding greenhouse gas emissions. The Clean Air Act is still in force and additional GGE compliance could be implemented through the EPA.

CLATHRATE HYDRATE

I certainly enjoy reading about and understanding new technologies.  Those technologies that provide “value added” by their very nature.   I just ran across two “new words” that demonstrate old dogs can learn new tricks and seemingly old technology can be new to the uninitiated—in other words me.  Do you know what a clathrate is?  A clathrate hydrate?  OK, neither did I.  Here we go.

Clathrate hydrate technology was first proposed in 1942 by M.E. Benesh as a method of storing natural gas.   An excellent paper entitled “Gas Hydrate Storage Processes for Natural Gas”, written by R.E. Rogers, Yu Zhong, R. Arunkumar, J.A. Etheridge, L.E. Pearson, J. McCowan and K. Hogncamp give basic details as to how this technology would work in a very practical sense.  All gentlemen teach at Mississippi State University and have spent years working to research and perfect a working prototype used to demonstrate that this can be a viable approach to the problem of storage.  I would like to indicate some of the conclusion derived from that study, as follows:

“Formidable problems (forming hydrates rapidly, collecting and packing hydrates, and reacting interstitial water) to make natural gas storage in gas hydrates an economically viable process are overcome by forming the hydrates from a surfactant solution. In the feasibility study, a non-stirred laboratory test cell could be filled with hydrates in less than 3 hours with a capacity of 156 vol/vol. The important attributes of the laboratory process are incorporated in the design for a proof-of concept scale-up. Simplicity and minimum labor requirements are stressed in the design. The process is designed to store 5,000 scf of natural gas in gas hydrates to be formed from surfactant solutions at 550 psig and 35°F. A finned-tube heat exchanger accommodates latent-heat transfer during hydrate formation and decomposition, but the exchanger also serves to collect by adsorption and symmetrically pack hydrate particles as they form.  The proof-of-concept facility is based on experimental results of the laboratory feasibility study; the facility has been constructed, installed and full-scale tests are proceeding. “

As indicated in the first sentence of the paper—“Gas hydrates are clathrates where guest gas molecules are occluded in a lattice of host water molecules.”  Well and good, but for a “gear-head” like me, what does this mean?  A clathrate hydrate is a very special type of hydrate in which a lattice of water molecules encloses molecules of trapped gas.  This gas could be methane, ethane, syngas, etc etc.  You get the picture.  For our purposes, we will discuss methane only.

 Large amounts of methane, naturally frozen in this form, have been discovered in both permafrost formations and sea beds under the ocean’s floor.  Methane hydrates are believed to form by migration of gas from significant depths along geological faults, followed by precipitation or crystallization, upon contact with rising gas streams of cold sea water.   About 6.4 trillion (that is, 6.4×10¹²) tons of methane lie at the bottom of the oceans in the form of clathrate hydrate.  Each kilogram of fully occupied hydrate (actually only about 96% occupancy is found) holds about 187 liters of methane (at atmospheric pressure).  

 One significant fact, ice-core methane clathrate records represent a primary source of data for global warming research, along with oxygen and carbon dioxide.   This is one reason why there is research data available on the huge quantities of entrapped methane gas.   As mentioned above, Mr.  M.E. Benesh first proposed using this technique as a method of storing natural gas as early as 1942. At that time, the methodology of doing so was not available, now it very well may be as demonstrated by Mississippi State.  

There are several classifications of clathrates.  The table below will indicate those classifications with a depiction of the lattice structures given above the table:

Since methane clathrates are stable at higher temperatures than LNG, there is a great interest in converting natural gas into clathrates rather than liquefying it prior to transporting by seagoing vessels.  A significant advantage would be the production of natural gas hydrate from natural gas at the terminal.  This would require a much smaller refrigeration plant and less overall energy as compared to the production of LNG.  The only real issue seems to be the rate of production and the economic viability of production.   Both issues are being addressed at this time by Mississippi State University. 

The real benefits would come from incorporating this storage method for locations in which it is impossible to fabricate transmission piping or transmit the gas in an easy fashion other than tanker or truck.  It is something to be aware of and to think about.  At any rate, it is fascinating.  I hope you agree.

SPACE JUNK

SPACE JUNK

The following resources were used in writing this document:

• “Scientists Battle Space Debris Threat”: CBS News, 23 April 2011
• “Space Debris”: Wikipedia
• “Space Junk Endangers NASA Satellites”: Elizabeth Montalbano, Information Week, 2 September 2011
• “Space Junk Janitors Should Sweep Up 5 Dead Satellites”: Biology & Nature, 27 February 2012
• “Space Junk to Triple by 2030”: Lenord Davis, Space.com, 9 May 2011

I can’t stand dirt.  Dirty house, dirty car, dirty office, and I am making some changes.  Fortunately, my wife is a “neatnick”.  She also—CAN’T STAND DIRT.  To further demonstrate the point, one evening, just before sundown, she looked through our den windows towards the setting sun and pronounced “we WILL clean these filthy windows inside and outside tomorrow”.  I felt her “pane”.  (Pardon the clever play on words!)  Dirt is one thing, but I’m OK with a little clutter.  I have several editions of Machine Design, Design News, Science and Technology, etc. sitting around waiting on the spirit to move me towards picking them up to read.  The older ones I consider collector’s items.  This is perhaps the only way I cannot be considered a hoarder.  

The tiny blue dot we live on does have a significant problem with clutter SPACE JUNK–  I will demonstrate as follows:

The digital photograph above shows the approximate position of debris remaining as a result of exploits in space, both ours and other countries, having the technology to launch rockets that carry payloads.  Perhaps a more enlightening JPEG, given below, will be more helpful and further illustrate the issue faced by NASA and other space-related agencies.   Please keep in mind all objects are moving. None are stationary; consequently, any depiction of position must be an estimate of position. 

It has been estimated by Hugh Lewis from The University of Southampton that over this decade, there could be as much as a fifty percent (50%) increase in debris.  Already, the International Space Station has had to fire thrusters to avoid moving “garbage” orbiting earth.  The result would have been disastrous had this action not been taken.  Some experts from NASA and within several university systems state we have already reached the “tipping point” and corrections would be virtually impossible and remarkably expensive.   NASA estimates there are at least 500,000 pieces of debris orbiting earth and some of that debris is moving at 17,500 miles per hour.  Of course, any “strike” at these speeds could produce life-threating damage to personnel and systems.   Damage such as the one shown below could absolutely destroy delicate equipment and seriously injure, if not kill, astronauts.

The overwhelming number of particles are smaller than one centimeter; i.e., 0.39 inches, but others are of considerable size.  Estimates are as follows:

• 1,500 pieces of debris weighing more than 100 Kg or 200 pounds
• 19,000 pieces of debris measuring between 1 to 10 centimeters; 3.9 inches
• An unestimated number of particles, mostly dust and paint “chips” resulting from collisions that have occurred with larger objects also orbiting.  Some “guesses” put that number into the millions.

For the most part, the debris can be categorized as follows:

• Jettisoned garbage from manned spacecraft, purposefully disposed of into lower earth orbit
• Lost equipment; i.e. cameras, tools, measuring devices, fabric hold-down straps, nuts, bolts, cotter pins, etc.
• Debris from collisions tearing apart structures either jettisoned or lost
• Rocket boosters that orbit yet remain in space.  Some, over time, experience decaying orbits, eventually falling to earth. 
• Satellites that no longer function but still orbit in LEO (Low Earth Orbit) or HEO (High Earth Orbit). Generally satellites operate between 435 to 800 miles above the earth.  When these satellites “die”, they do not accomplish reentry but simply stay aloft as dormant objects.  Think of the number of telecommunication devices now orbiting the earth.    Most will eventually fade and no longer fulfill their purpose, being replaced with newer technology. 

With an ever increasing number of launches, engineers and scientists are designing into their products, systems that will provide for ultimate reentry when that system or component performs its function.   Let’s assume a satellite has performed properly for nine years but now is dormant due to programmed obsolescence.  What if, pulse jets could fire altering trajectory and orbit so reentry could be possible?  If that reentry could be a controlled, one “chunk” of debris would be eliminated; consequently, eliminating possible damage to other orbiting bodies or future launches.  This is the current mind-set being explored.

With at least fifty nations participating within the space environment, the amount of debris can only lessen but not be eliminated.  At the present time, over 20,000 pieces of debris are being tracked from facilities such as the one below:

Facilities such as this can at least estimate collisions and, more importantly, any debris that may be in a decaying orbit that will eventually create reentry into earth’s atmosphere.  Over the past ten to fifteen years several large pieces of debris have reentered although most fall into our oceans or uninhabited land.   It becomes ever so critical to remain aware of location to preclude injury on the ground or provide successful future launches.  Several government agencies, as well as universities, have undertaken programs to explore methodologies to reclaim or at least deflect debris that might be potentially dangerous.   Monetary estimates, technical risk and overall complexities of design are significant, and we seem to be a long way from even mounting demonstration programs that will indicate possible success.  This is one area that will be fascinating to watch over the next twenty years.  Stay tuned.

THE VEGA CHRONICLES

THE VEGA CHRONICLES

Evidence for Planets Around the Star Vega

Before we discuss the possibilities of any planet or planets existing around the star system Vega, let’s take a look at the star itself.  The following bullets will give some perspective as to position, size, mass, temperature, luminosity, etc relative to this celestial body.

• Vega is also know as Alpha Lyrae and is the brightest star in the Constellation Lyra.  The name itself is derived from “Wega” and is Arabic for “Swooping Eagle” (Al Nasr al Waki).  It is the lower right member of the Summer Triangle and is actually visible with the naked eye from the Northern Hemisphere.  The photograph below will show the position relative to other constellation

• Vega is the fifth (5^th) brightest star visible from Earth and the third (3^rd) brightest visible from mid-northern latitudes, after Sirius and Arcturus.
• It is 25.3 light-years from Earth and is the sixth (6^th) closest of the bright start if you exclude Alpha Centauri, which is not easily visible from most of the Northern Hemispheres.
• It has a very distinct blue color with an estimated surface temperature of 17,000 degrees F, making it about 7,000 degrees F hotter than our own Sun.
• Vega has a diameter roughly 2.5 times greater than our Sun and is slightly less in mass.  The internal pressures and temperature make it burn much faster, thus producing thirty-five to forty times the energy of the Sun.
• Around 500 million years old, it is already middle-age and will run out of fuel in another one-half billion years. 
• Vega radiates between thirty-seven (37 %) and fifty-eight (58 %) percent more ultraviolet light than our Sun, demonstrating a sixty-three (63%) greater abundance of elements heavier than hydrogen.

On January 10, 2005, astronomers using the infrared Spitzer Space Telescope announced that the dust ring around Vega was much larger than previously estimated.  The disk appears to be mostly composed of very fine dust particles that were probably created from collisions of protoplanetary bodies around 90 AUs (astronomical units) from the star but blown away by its intense radiation.  On the other hand, the mass and short lifetime of these small particles indicate the disk detected was created by a large and relatively recent collision that may have involved objects as big as the planet Pluto.   The irregular shape of the disk is the clue that it likely contains planets, maybe habitable planets.  Modeling suggests that a Neptune-like planet actually formed much closer to the star than its current position.  As it moved out to its current wide orbit over 56 million years, many comets were swept out with it, causing the dust ring to become “clumpy”.  This is exactly the same process that occurred during the formation of our own solar system.  The model estimates that the “clumps” in the disk will rotate around Vega once every three hundred years.  A rendition of this ring is given as follows:

It is very conceivable that this Neptune-like planet harbors some form of life.  Intelligent life, probably not as we define the term here on Earth, but life.   The irregular shape of the disk is the clue that it is likely to contain planets explains astronomer Mark Wyatt.   Although we can’t directly observe the planets, they have created clumps in the disk of dust around the star.  Another rendition of those “bumps” may be seen below.   This is an infrared photograph of the system with the position of the suggested planet being very prominent. 

Let us now take another look.  In March 2009, NASA launched the Kepler space telescope and as a result, astronomers have spotted two small, Earth-like planets orbiting, one called Kepler-20e and the other Kepler-20f.  Kepler 20-e is 1,000 light years away and in the constellation Lyra.  The very same constellation as Vega.   A graphic of the Kepler telescope is given below:

   Planet Kepler-20e is 1.03 times the diameter of Earth and three (3%) percent larger.   Researchers believe Kepler 20e orbits its sun every six days and is a blend of silicates and iron.  Kepler 20f, which orbits its sun every 20 days, is bigger and very well could have developed an atmosphere of water vapor.     Could it be possible that the star-system Vega is rightly positioned to support some form of life—intelligent or otherwise?   It would be a significant history-making event if life could be found on another planet.  The thought that we are really not alone in the universe would be shattering to some people—maybe most people.  I do think it is imperative that we continue looking with marvelous instruments like Hubble, Kepler and deep-space probes.  I also think SETI offers some aid although the Cosmos is expansive and one has to wonder where to look.  The age-old question of “why are we here”—“where did we come from” has yet to be answered.  Maybe Dr. Sagan was correct when he stated, “We are all made from star-stuff”. 

 

STANDING ON THE PRECIPICE

 

STANDING ON THE PRECIPICE

This blog was written using the following resources:

• FF JOURNAL; “Help Wanted, Skills Required” by Meghan Boyer-Editor-In-Chief, February 2012 Edition
• Manhattan Institute for Policy Research; “Leaving Boys Behind: Public High School Graduation Rates” by Jay P. Greene and Marcus A. Winters.
• “Suicide of a Superhero” by Patrick J. Buchanan

Over the last century, one of the strongest sectors of our economy has been  manufacturing.  “Made in America” has been molded into, printed on and adhered to billions of products used in the United States and shipped around the world.  We take a great deal of pride in the products we design and produce.  Manufacturing is making a comeback to American shores for several very good reasons; namely:

• Poor quality abroad. (After the first prototypes are accepted and first piece samples approved, the quality does seem to drop—at least with some companies.)
• Issues with communication
• Misuse of stated and agreed upon standards and specifications (This is becoming a huge issue.  Foreign manufacturers do not seem to understand that changing materials, fastener callouts, paint and coating specifications, etc. can create real problems.)
• Rising labor rates in other countries (Due to Facebook, U-Tube, Twitter, etc.  foreign workers are beginning to understand that they have been greatly short-changed relative to wages. )
• Difficult working conditions for individuals in other countries (Sweat shops!)
• Unrest around the world (If you do not believe this, go buy a tank of gas.  The unrest in the Middle-East is causing speculators to elevate the cost of petroleum. )
• Issues with transportation relative to “lean” manufacturing and inventory control (I retired from GE and I know air freight from China, India, etc. to keep the assembly lines operating can cost a fortune.)
• The effect foreign manufacturing has on national security (When you lose the ability to manufacturer products you lose the ability to control the assemblies you design.  You also relinquish a great deal of intellectual property.  Designers and engineers work very hard to develop products only to give the designs away to thieves waiting in the wings.  )

Fully, eighty-six (86%) percent of Americans believe manufacturing is important or very important to our standard of living BUT, only thirty-three (33%) percent would encourage their children to make manufacturing their profession.  Somewhat of a disconnect but traditionally, a job in manufacturing does not pay as much as other professions.   That fact is changing.

There are two very grave issues that affect manufacturing I would like to discuss at this time.  These are: 1.) Skilled labor available and 2.) High school dropout rates affecting the selection of personnel to fill the jobs available.  Let’s take a look.

• 2.7 million manufacturing workers are 55 years or older and will retire within 5 to 10 years.  These workers are retiring at a rate twice the rate as young people joining the work force.  People with years of experience need to be the “trainers” for those coming into the various skilled jobs.
• Right now, Deloitte, LLC estimates that 600,000 skilled positions are open and not being filled due to the lack of qualified applicants.  When we mean qualified, we mean individuals who have adequate reading, math and English skills.  Communication is an absolute must for high-tech employees—both written and spoken.
• 67% of manufacturing companies have a moderate to severe shortage of qualified workers.
• 56% of those companies expect the condition to worsen in the next three to five years.  As stated, “There is a worsening skills gap in manufacturing and it is impacting the ability of a company to grow, expand and remain competitive”.
• Hispanics are an increasing percentage of the work force.  By 2014, fifteen (15%) of the workforce will be Hispanic.  Between 2004 and 2014, this workforce will increase by 7 million, from 19 million to 26 million individuals.  (US Bureau of Labor Statistics).  As we will see later on, the graduation rates for Hispanics is deplorable.

Now we are going to look at the possible downside creating huge issues with the availability of skilled workers.  Here goes:

•  The national average for graduation rates: 70 %.  Of course, this means we have a dropout rate  approximately 30%  (HORRIBLE)
• Graduation rates for the following:

1. Whites = 78%
2. Asian = 72% (This seems extremely low but the data supports this number.)
3. African-American = 55%
4. Latinos = 53% (With an increasing percentage of Latinos entering the workforce over the next few years, few will be qualified for the skilled labor jobs.)
5. Graduation rates for female workers = 75%.  Graduation for male workers = 65%
6. Graduation rates for African-American girls = 59%. Graduation rates for African-American boys = 48% (Huge gender gap!)
7. Graduation rates for Latino girls= 49%.  Graduation rates for Latino boys = 49%
8. In New York City, the percentage of African-Americans proficient in English = 33%.  For Hispanic = 34%.  For Whites and Asians = 64%.  All of these numbers (including whites) indicate a complete and utter failure on the part of our public school system.

It should be readily apparent that we are losing the Latinos and African-Americans at an alarming rate.  One study indicates that there are several reasons why an adequate education is so difficult to provide if you are an African-American or a Latino:

1. Lack of parental guidance
2. Lure of the drug trade; consequently, no perceived need for training
3. Teachers pass students because they are intimidated by the student and just want to get them out of class
4. Single parent household with no male presence
5. Babies born to unmarried students, thus creating extremely difficult living circumstances

Truly, these conditions could and do exist in Asian and Caucasian families but not to the extent we find them in black and Hispanic households.  It seems to me that one “way out” would be a high school diploma and a college degree.  I think one very important missing ingredient is the will to make a bad situation better AND proper encouragement from peers and adults.   Whatever the solution, skilled jobs needing skilled labor is and will be affected for some time to come.  To some extent, adequate talent is recruited from immigrants coming into our country, but even that has diminished considerably since 911.  The solution remains very elusive.

COMPUTATIONAL ENGINEERING

Sir Isaac Newton once said in a letter to Robert Hooke, “If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants.”  His letter to Hooke was written in 1676 but still carries significant truth, certainly today.  Let’s face facts; technology is evolutionary and not revolutionary.  The Wright brothers flew a bi-wing airplane made from wood and fabric and not an SR-71.  The first “horseless carriage” was not a Lomborghani.   The use of leeches (for medicinal purposes only) definitely preceded penicillin.  The abacus was a very functional “counting device” centuries before the computer.  You get the picture.  Computational engineering is a fascinating technology, evolutionary in nature.  This discipline did not burst upon the scene overnight but evolved over the years to become one of the most truly viable research tools in today’s arsenal of investigative methodology.  The “proper” definition of computational engineering is as follows:

                “Computational engineering encompasses the design, development, and application of computational systems for the solution of physical problems in engineering and science.  These computational systems include not only the algorithms and software required for the solution of mathematical equations describing physical processes, but also the means and methods of visualizing, analyzing and interpreting computed results and other physical data. “ 

This definition is taken from the High Performance Computing Collaboratory facility at Mississippi State University.  Mississippi State has one of the most respected departments of computational engineering in the United States. 

Another excellent definition comes from The University of Auckland and is as follows:

                “Computational Science (called also Scientific Computing or Numerical Analysis) is the design, development, application, and analysis of computer algorithms and software to solve scientific and engineering problems. It includes not only numerical methods, probabilistic modeling, computer-based statistical inference, and computer simulation required for solving underlying systems of math equations, but also computer visualization, statistical analysis, and interpretation of computed solutions.”

All of this is well and good but why oh why do we need discovery techniques of this nature and why so detailed.  I cannot say it any better than the following statement from Dr. J. Tinsley Oden:

                “Near the end of the twentieth century, much of the industrialized world was becoming aware that the foundations of science and engineering were under rapid, dramatic, and irreversible change brought on by the advent of the computer. The steady increase in computer capabilities and the enormous expansion in the scope and sophistication of computational modeling and simulation place computational sciences as the third pillar of scientific discovery and revolutionize the way engineering is done. Computational engineering and science can impact virtually every aspect of human existence, along with the health, security, productivity, and competitiveness of the nation.”
        J. Tinsley Oden, Associate Vice President for Research, The University of Texas at Austin

  Let us now take a look at the results of computational engineering and the output derived from the process.

Formula 1 Racer

 

As you can see from the JPEG above, knowing the airflow around a Formula 1 race car can provide evidence of laminar flow that could provide a win when the checkered flag is dropped.  Disruption of airflow around an object could create resistance to lessen performance.

This is one of my favorite and shows the air flow around a shuttle craft re-entry vehicle.  Critically important information when considering the fact that re-entry is difficult enough and would be more so if surface-generated turbulence was an added problem.

 

Shuttlecraft

The JPEG below shows results of a study demonstrating the effect of “blunt force trauma” to the human skull.  Studies such as this are very important in understanding what happens when an NFL running back meets Ray Lewis.  We all know there is a class-action lawsuit against the NFL to compensate players who have experienced concussions during their playing years.  Computational engineering can aid efforts to fully understand what happens.

Human Skull

 

There are several schools that offer degrees in computational engineering (CmE), usually at the MS and PhD levels.  A BS degree in computer science, mathematics or engineering is almost always a minimum requirement with BS degrees in CmE not being offered.  Excellent schools offering course work and degrees in this field are as follows:

• University of Tennessee at Chattanooga—SIM Center
• Mississippi State University
• MIT
• University of Texas at Austin
• Georgia Institute of Technology
• Purdue
• Notre Dame
• University of Utah
• Arizona State University

 I am sure there are other, maybe many others, but these are noted for their contributions to the technology.   I certainly hope you will take a look at the possibilities and continue to study what is available relative to seminars and short courses.