An Assessment of the National Institute of Standards and Technology Measurement and Standards Laboratories

FISCAL YEAR 2002

Board on Assessment of NIST Programs

Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences

NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES

THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS
Washington, D.C.
www.nap.edu



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page R1
An Assessment of the National Institute of Standards and Technology Measurement and Standards Laboratories: Fiscal Year 2002 An Assessment of the National Institute of Standards and Technology Measurement and Standards Laboratories FISCAL YEAR 2002 Board on Assessment of NIST Programs Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS Washington, D.C. www.nap.edu

OCR for page R1
An Assessment of the National Institute of Standards and Technology Measurement and Standards Laboratories: Fiscal Year 2002 THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20001 NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the Board and panels responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance. This study was supported by Contract No. SB1341-02-C-0004 between the National Academy of Sciences and the National Institute of Standards and Technology, an agency of the U.S. Department of Commerce. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the organizations or agencies that provided support for the project. Additional copies of this report are available from: Board on Assessment of NIST Programs National Research Council 2101 Constitution Avenue, N.W. Washington, DC 20418 Internet, http://www.nap.edu Copyright 2002 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America

OCR for page R1
An Assessment of the National Institute of Standards and Technology Measurement and Standards Laboratories: Fiscal Year 2002 THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES Advisers to the Nation on Science, Engineering, and Medicine The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts is president of the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Wm. A. Wulf is president of the National Academy of Engineering. The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Harvey V. Fineberg is president of the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts and Dr. Wm. A. Wulf are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council. www.national-academies.org

OCR for page R1
An Assessment of the National Institute of Standards and Technology Measurement and Standards Laboratories: Fiscal Year 2002 This page in the original is blank.

OCR for page R1
An Assessment of the National Institute of Standards and Technology Measurement and Standards Laboratories: Fiscal Year 2002 BOARD ON ASSESSMENT OF NIST PROGRAMS LINDA CAPUANO, Honeywell, Chair ROBERT M. NOWAK, Michigan Molecular Institute, Vice Chair DAVID C. BONNER, Cabot Corporation ROSS B. COROTIS, University of Colorado at Boulder HERWIG KOGELNIK, Bell Laboratories, Lucent Technologies THOMAS A. SAPONAS, Agilent Technologies SYED Z. SHARIQ, Stanford University Ex Officio Members ROBERT A. ALTENKIRCH, New Jersey Institute of Technology JANET S. BAUM, Health, Education & Research Associates, Inc. ALAN CAMPION, University of Texas, Austin CONSTANCE J. CHANG-HASNAIN, University of California, Berkeley RICHARD A. CURLESS, Cincinnati Machine, a UNOVA Company MARVIN F. DeVRIES, University of Wisconsin-Madison JAMES ECONOMY, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign ALBERT M. ERISMAN, Institute for Business, Technology, and Ethics JANET S. FENDER, Air Force Research Laboratory DAVID W. JOHNSON, JR., Agere Systems (retired) KENNETH O. MacFADDEN, Honeywell, Inc. DUNCAN T. MOORE, University of Rochester LORI S. NYE, Silicon Genesis, Inc. TONY SCOTT, General Motors Corporation JAMES W. SERUM, SciTek Ventures Board Staff DOROTHY ZOLANDZ, Director ELIZABETH L. GROSSMAN, Senior Program Officer BARBARA JONES, Administrative Assistant

OCR for page R1
An Assessment of the National Institute of Standards and Technology Measurement and Standards Laboratories: Fiscal Year 2002 This page in the original is blank.

OCR for page R1
An Assessment of the National Institute of Standards and Technology Measurement and Standards Laboratories: Fiscal Year 2002 Preface This assessment of the technical quality and relevance of the programs of the Measurement and Standards Laboratories of the National Institute of Standards and Technology is the work of the 165members of the National Research Council’s (NRC’s) Board on Assessment of NIST Programs and its panels. These individuals were chosen by the NRC for their technical expertise, their practical experience in running research programs, and their knowledge of industry’s needs in basic measurements and standards. Each has given of his or her time without remuneration to participate in this assessment process. I am continually impressed with the amount of time and energy that these review participants are willing to give to this assessment process. These individuals have taken fully six to seven days away from their jobs, on average, to participate in this assessment. Their willingness to do so speaks to the importance they attach to the NIST mission and to their commitment to the idea of striving for improved performance through performance measurement. I wish to thank the expert members of the Board and panels for their participation in and dedication to this process. Without their willingness to contribute their time and expertise, NIST would be deprived of a valuable management tool. I am also impressed with the responsiveness of NIST to the findings of the Board and its panels. Most NIST managers and scientists have treated the assessment process as an opportunity to gain fresh insight into their programs and customers and have modified their plans and programs according to these insights. It is reassuring to see a federal agency so committed to program excellence and responsiveness to customer needs. The success of this assessment is dependent upon NIST cooperation and receptiveness to the inquiries and activities of the Board and panels. We thank NIST staff for the time spent in meeting with Board and panel members, as well as the time spent in preparing background information for them. In carrying out this assessment, the Board and panels sought to meet the specific charge given by NIST and reproduced in Appendix A. Briefly, this charge calls for the Board and panels to address: The technical merit of the laboratory programs relative to the state of the art worldwide;

OCR for page R1
An Assessment of the National Institute of Standards and Technology Measurement and Standards Laboratories: Fiscal Year 2002 The effectiveness with which the laboratory programs are carried out and the results disseminated to their customers; The relevance of the laboratory programs to the needs of their customers; and The ability of the laboratories’ facilities, equipment, and human resources to enable the laboratories to fulfill their mission and meet their customers’ needs. I hope that the readers of this report find it to be fully responsive to the charge and that those with responsibility for oversight of NIST programs will regard this report as a useful tool in efforts to continually improve the programs of that respected institution. Linda Capuano, Chair Board on Assessment of NIST Programs

OCR for page R1
An Assessment of the National Institute of Standards and Technology Measurement and Standards Laboratories: Fiscal Year 2002 Acknowledgment of Reviewers This report has been reviewed by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with procedures approved by the National Research Council’s Report Review Committee. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the institution in making its published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets institutional standards for objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. We wish to thank the following individuals for their review of this report: Marylyn Bennett, International SEMATECH and Texas Instruments, Eric F. Burnett, Pennsylvania State University, Radford Byerly, Jr., Boulder, Colorado, Francois J. Castaing, Castaing & Associates, Josephine Cheng, IBM Santa Teresa Laboratory, Gregory R. Choppin, Florida State University, Uma Chowdhry, DuPont Company, Marc D. Donohue, Johns Hopkins University, David A. Dornfeld, University of California, Berkeley, William Eddy, Carnegie Mellon University, Richard J. Farris, University of Massachusetts, Placid M. Ferreira, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, John Fishell, U.S. Navy, John W. Fisher, Lehigh University, David W. Green, Albion College, James C. Holste, Texas A&M University, Larry J. Howell, General Motors (retired), James U. Lemke, Recording Physics, Inc.,

OCR for page R1
An Assessment of the National Institute of Standards and Technology Measurement and Standards Laboratories: Fiscal Year 2002 J. David Litster, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Robert Mazur, Solid State Measurements, Inc., John F. O’Hanlon, University of Arizona, C. Kumar N. Patel, Pranalytica, Inc., Alton D. Patton, Associated Power Analysts, Inc., Rose A. Ryntz, Visteon Automotive Systems, Kozo Saito, University of Kentucky, Arthur W. Sleight, Oregon State University, Rao R. Tummala, Georgia Institute of Technology, James Waldo, Sun Microsystems, Ronald L. Walsworth, Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, and Julia R. Weertman, Northwestern University. Although the individuals listed above have provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations, nor did they see the final draft of the report before its release. The review of this report was overseen by Norman Hackerman, the Robert A. Welch Foundation. Appointed by the National Research Council, he was responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with institutional procedures and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content of this report rests entirely with the authoring committee and the institution.

OCR for page R1
An Assessment of the National Institute of Standards and Technology Measurement and Standards Laboratories: Fiscal Year 2002 Contents 1   The State of the Laboratories   1     Technical Merit of Laboratory Programs,   2     Program Relevance and Effectiveness,   3     Impact of Resources on Technical Programs,   5     Major Observations of the Panels,   6 2   Electronics and Electrical Engineering Laboratory   13     Laboratory-Level Review,   15     Major Observations.   22     Divisional Reviews,   22     Electricity Division,   22     Semiconductor Electronics Division,   28     Radio-Frequency Technology Division,   35     Electromagnetic Technology Division,   40     Optoelectronics Division,   45     Magnetic Technology Division,   50     Office of Law Enforcement Standards,   54 3   Manufacturing Engineering Laboratory   57     Laboratory-Level Review,   59     Major Observations,   65     Divisional Reviews,   66     Precision Engineering Division,   66     Manufacturing Metrology Division,   71     Intelligent Systems Division,   75     Manufacturing Systems Integration Division,   80

OCR for page R1
An Assessment of the National Institute of Standards and Technology Measurement and Standards Laboratories: Fiscal Year 2002 4   Chemical Science and Technology Laboratory   85     Laboratory-Level Review,   87     Major Observations,   91     Divisional Reviews,   91     Biotechnology Division,   91     Process Measurements Division,   97     Surface and Microanalysis Science Division,   101     Physical and Chemical Properties Division,   110     Analytical Chemistry Division,   116 5   Physics Laboratory   127     Laboratory-Level Review,   129     Major Observations,   133     Divisional Reviews,   134     Electron and Optical Physics Division,   134     Atomic Physics Division,   138     Optical Technology Division,   142     Ionizing Radiation Division,   146     Time and Frequency Division,   156     Review of JILA,   161 6   Materials Science and Engineering Laboratory   179     Laboratory-Level Review,   181     Major Observations,   185     Divisional Reviews,   185     Ceramics Division,   185     Materials Reliability Division,   189     Polymers Division,   192     Metallurgy Division,   197     Review of the NIST Center for Neutron Research,   200 7   Building and Fire Research Laboratory   215     Laboratory-Level Review,   217     Major Observations,   226     Divisional Reviews,   227     Structures Division,   227     Building Materials Division,   233     Building Environment Division,   241     Fire Research Division,   251     Codes and Standards,   256     Office of Applied Economics,   258

OCR for page R1
An Assessment of the National Institute of Standards and Technology Measurement and Standards Laboratories: Fiscal Year 2002 8   Information Technology Laboratory   261     Laboratory-Level Review,   263     Major Observations,   271     Divisional Reviews,   272     Mathematical and Computational Sciences Division,   272     Advanced Networking Technologies Division,   277     Computer Security Division,   281     Information Access Division,   286     Convergent Information Systems Division,   292     Information Services and Computing Division,   297     Software Diagnostics and Conformance Testing Division,   301     Statistical Engineering Division,   305 9   Measurement Services   311     Purpose of the Review,   313     NIST Measurement Services Activities,   313     Assessment of NIST Measurement Services,   314     Major Observations,   319     Appendixes         A Charge to the Board and Panels   323     B Agendas for Meetings of the Board on Assessment of NIST Programs   327     C Functions of NIST   331     D NIST Organization   333     E Acronyms and Abbreviations   337     F Biographies of Board Members   345

OCR for page R1
An Assessment of the National Institute of Standards and Technology Measurement and Standards Laboratories: Fiscal Year 2002 This page in the original is blank.