Assessment of Corrosion Education (2009)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Assessment of Corrosion eduCAtion Committee on Assessing Corrosion Education National Materials Advisory Board Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences 

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 committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance. This study was supported by Contract No. FA8501-06-D-0001 between the National Academy of Sciences and the Department of Defense. Any opinions, findings, 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. Cover design by Steven Coleman. Cover Image © Digital Vision/Cocoon. International Standard Book Number-13:  978-0-309-11703-6 International Standard Book Number-10:  0-309-11703-8 Library of Congress Control Number:  2008944165 Available in limited quantities from National Materials Advisory Board 500 Fifth Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20001 nmab@nas.edu http://www.nationalacademies.edu/nmab Additional copies of this report are available from the National Academies Press, 500 Fifth Street, N.W., Lockbox 285, Washington, DC 20055; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313 (in the Washington metropolitan area); Internet, http://www.nap.edu. Copyright 2009 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America 

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 govern- ment on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone 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. Charles M. Vest 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. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. Charles M. Vest are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council. www.national-academies.org 



Committee on Assessing Corrosion Education Wesley L. Harris, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Chair Ralph Adler, Army Research Laboratory Gordon P. Bierwagen, North Dakota State University DIANNE CHONG, The Boeing Company George E. Dieter, University of Maryland, College Park Fiona M. Doyle, University of California, Berkeley David J. Duquette, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute Gerald S. Frankel, The Ohio State University Richard B. Griffin, Texas A&M University Sylvia M. Johnson, NASA Ames Research Center Frank E. Karasz, University of Massachusetts Ronald M. Latanision, Exponent–Failure Analysis Associates, Inc. Glenn N. Pfendt, A.O. Smith Corporation Lee W. Saperstein, Missouri University of Science and Technology (retired) John R. Scully, University of Virginia Gary S. Was, University of Michigan Staff MICHAEL H. MOLONEY, Study Director EMILY ANN MEYER, Program Officer TERI G. THOROWGOOD, Administrative Coordinator  

NATIONAL MATERIALS ADVISORY BOARD KATHARINE G. FRASE, IBM, Chair LYLE H. SCHWARTZ, University of Maryland, Vice Chair PAUL BECHER, Oak Ridge National Laboratory (retired) EVERETT E. BLOOM, Oak Ridge National Laboratory (retired) BARBARA D. BOYAN, Georgia Institute of Technology PETER R. BRIDENBAUGH, Alcoa, Inc. (retired) L. CATHERINE BRINSON, Northwestern University JOHN W. CAHN, University of Washington DIANNE CHONG, The Boeing Company PAUL CITRON, Medtronic, Inc. (retired) GEORGE T. GRAY III, Los Alamos National Laboratory SOSSINA M. HAILE, California Institute of Technology CAROL A. HANDWERKER, Purdue University ELIZABETH HOLM, Sandia National Laboratories DAVID W. JOHNSON, JR., Stevens Institute of Technology ROBERT H. LATIFF, SAIC, Alexandria, Virginia KENNETH H. SANDHAGE, Georgia Institute of Technology LINDA SCHADLER, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute ROBERT E. SCHAFRIK, GE Aircraft Engines JAMES C. SEFERIS, GloCal Network Corporation, Seattle, Washington STEVEN WAX, Strategic Analysis, Inc. Staff GARY FISCHMAN, Director EMILY ANN MEYER, Program Officer ERIK SVEDBERG, Program Officer TERI G. THOROWGOOD, Administrative Coordinator LAURA TOTH, Program Assistant HEATHER LOZOWSKI, Financial Associate vi 

Preface The threat from the degradation of materials in the engineered products that drive our economy, keep our citizenry healthy, and keep us safe from terrorism and belligerent threats has been well documented over the years. The cost to the economy, as discussed in this report, is significant. And yet little effort appears to have been made to apply the nation’s engineering community to developing a better understanding of corrosion and the mitigation of its effects. At the direction of the Congress, however, the Department of Defense (DOD) has begun to pay more attention to the threat corrosion poses to the national secu- rity infrastructure. As part of that effort Congress instructed DOD to commission a National Research Council (NRC) report to assess the current state of corrosion engineering education in the United States. Subsequently the Committee on Assessing Corrosion Education was appointed. The committee’s charge was as follows: A committee of the National Academies will be convened to 1. Assess the level and effectiveness of existing engineering curricula in corrosion science and technology, including corrosion prevention and control, and 2. Recommend actions that could enhance the corrosion-based skill and knowledge base of graduating and practicing engineers. The committee’s membership was drawn from the corrosion engineering com- munity, the materials engineering community, and engineering more broadly to provide the committee as a whole with a balanced opening perspective on the status vii 

viii Preface and importance of corrosion education. All members of the committee (including those of us not from the corrosion field) were convinced by the evidence ­uncovered during the course of the study, first, that there is an urgent need to revitalize the corrosion education of our country’s engineering workforce and, second, that revitalization can be accomplished only in the context of a healthy corrosion engi- neering research community. The full committee met five times. First, the committee attended the NRC’s Materials Forum: Corrosion Education in the 21st Century, a separately organized activity held in March 2007, and met in closed session to consider how the views expressed at the forum impacted plans for the study. The committee’s next three meetings had open sessions that featured discussions with the Office of Corrosion Policy and Oversight at DOD (at the first meeting) and with four invited panels of experts (two academic panels at the second and third meetings, one industrial panel at the third meeting, and one government agency panel at the second meeting). In response to the lack of consolidated data on corrosion courses in engineering curricula around the country, the committee circulated a questionnaire to univer- sity departments to elicit data that would allow it to assess the state of corrosion education. The committee gathered data on short courses, on publication trends, and on the makeup of the corrosion community. It also gathered opinions and information from representatives of the engineering and materials communities who made up the four panels mentioned above and at town meetings convened by the committee at the March 2008 meetings of The Minerals, Metals and ­Materials Society (TMS) and NACE International. While the panels and town meetings provided anecdotal information rather than hard data, the committee found the opinions and information compelling and consistent. In addition, committee members gathered information between meetings with the assistance of two fellows of the National Academies’ Christine Mirzayan Science and Technology Policy Graduate Fellowship Program: Vikas Khanna and Shikha Gupta. The committee is grateful to all the participants at its plenary meetings: Reza Abbaschian, Aziz Asphahani, Kayle Boomer, Joseph Carpenter, Steven Carr, ­Robert Cottis, Dan Dunmire, Robert Hanrahan, William Hedges, Vincent Hock, Jo Howze, Bill Kepler, Alex King, Harriet Kung, Sue Louscher, Anthony Luscher, Michael J. Maloney, Robert Mroczkwski, Matthew O’Keefe, Michael R. Ostermiller, Michael Plumley, Vickie Plunkett, Ian Robertson, David Rose, Stephen Sharp, Robert S ­ inclair, Leslie Spain, Subra Suresh, Darrel Untereker, Peter Voorhees, Dan Walsh, and Ward Winer.  See National Research Council, Proceedings of the Materials Forum 2007: Corrosion Education for the 21st Century, Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press (2007). Available at http://books. nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=11948. Accessed June 2008. 

Preface ix The committee became convinced early on of the importance of its task. It is widely believed that significant savings will accrue for this nation and that safety and preparedness will be improved if corrosion prevention and control are made a national priority and tackled as such. But doing so will require a workforce of engineers and technologists who are knowledgeable, savvy, and expert in corrosion science and engineering and its application. In addition, the committee became convinced that such a goal will only be achieved if there is significant buy-in from government, industry, and academia. This report lays out a plan for developing just that. My personal thanks also go to the members of the committee for their consid- erable commitment of time and their efforts in writing this report. The committee is also grateful to Michael Moloney and Emily Ann Meyer of the NRC staff, who guided it through the study process. Wesley L. Harris, Chair Committee on Assessing Corrosion Education 



Acknowledgment of Reviewers This report has been reviewed in draft form 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 responsive- ness 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: Aziz Asphahani, Environmental Leverage, Inc., Rudy Bucheit, The Ohio State University, Robert Cottis, University of Manchester, L.S. (Skip) Fletcher, Texas A&M University, Sylvia Hall, Ameron International, Adam Powell, Oppenovation, Mark Rhoads, GE Aviation, Robert Sinclair, Stanford University, Ponisseril Somasundaran, Columbia University, Roger Staehle, Consultant, and Ward Winer, Georgia Institute of Technology. xi 

xii Acknowledgment of Reviewers Although the reviewers listed above have provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommenda- tions, nor did they see the final draft of the report before its release. The review of this report was overseen by Carl Lineberger, University of Colorado. Appointed by the NRC, 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. 

Contents SUMMARY 1 1 IMPORTANCE OF CORROSION ENGINEERING EDUCATION 9 Understanding the Impact of Corrosion and Corrosion Engineering Education, 9 Financial and Nonfinancial Costs of Corrosion, 10 Why Corrosion Engineering Education Is Important for Designers, Purchasers, and End Users, 13 Transportation Fuels Infrastructure, 15 Engineered Devices and Systems, 17 Energy Infrastructure, 17 Health Care, 17 Electronics and Computers, 18 National Defense, 18 Public Infrastructure, 19 Historical Interest, 19 In Our Homes, 20 In Summary, 20 Backdrop to the Study, 22 Government Concern About Corrosion and Corrosion Engineering Edu- cation, 23 Why a Corrosion Engineering Education Study Is Timely, 26 xiii 

xiv Contents Role of Corrosion Research, 27 Scope of the Study—Metals and Nonmetals, 28 Outline of the Report, 30 2 AN ASSESSMENT OF CORROSION EDUCATION 31 Undergraduate Corrosion Education, 34 The Dedicated Corrosion Course, 35 Survey Course That Includes Corrosion, 38 Senior Design Course, 39 Discussion, 39 Graduate Corrosion Education, 48 Continuing Corrosion Education, 56 Summary of Findings, 60 3 CONCLUSIONS AND A RECOMMENDED PATH FORWARD 63 The Importance of Corrosion Education, 64 Consequences of the Current State of Corrosion Education, 65 Graduating Engineers, 67 Practicing Engineers in Government and Industry, 68 Recommendations for a Path Forward, 81 Strategic Recommendations, 82 Tactical Recommendations, 83 APPENDIXES A TWO EARLIER REPORTS 97 B DATA GATHERED FROM UNIVERSITIES 106 C PUBLICATIONS DATA 124 D SHORT COURSES ON CORROSION 132 E AGENDAS FOR MATERIALS FORUM 2007 AND COMMITTEE 146 PUBLIC MEETINGS F SAMPLE LEARNING OUTCOMES 151 G COMMITTEE BIOGRAPHIES 155