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 220
APPENDIX A Presentations to the Committee at Workshops and Meetings The following presentations were given to the committee at public meet- ings and workshops. Each presentation may be viewed at www.trb.org/ PolicyStudies/NavalEngine21Century.aspx. MEETING, SEPTEMBER 30, 2009 Survivable Ship Structures, Roshdy Barsoum, Office of Naval Research (ONR) Computational Mechanics and Signatures, Luise Couchman, ONR ONR Ship Structural Reliability Program, Paul Hess, ONR Hull Performance/Undersea Hydromechanics, Ronald Joslin, ONR Propulsor Hydrodynamics and Hydroacoustics, Ki-Han Kim, ONR Ship Hydrodynamics, L. Patrick Purtell, ONR National Naval Responsibility—Naval Engineering (NNR-NE), John Pazik, ONR WORKSHOP: EXAMINING THE SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY ENTERPRISE IN NAVAL ENGINEERING, JANUARY 13, 2010 NAVSEA Perspective on Naval Engineering Needs, Heide Stefanyshyn- Piper, Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) Naval Engineering S&T Needs from Perspective of Ship Designer, Robert Keane, Ship Design USA Naval Engineering S&T Needs from Perspective of Naval Shipbuilder, Larry Dreher, Bath Iron Works 220
OCR for page 220
Presentations to the Committee at Workshops and Meetings 221 Navy Needs for S&T from a Workforce Perspective, Ronald Kiss, Webb Institute (emeritus) Navy S&T Needs—Academic Perspective, Michael Bernitsas, University of Michigan Navy S&T Needs—Academic Perspective, John Leonard, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Navy S&T Needs—Academic Perspective, Ronald Yeung, University of California, Berkeley Navy S&T Needs—Academic Perspective, Spyros Kinnas, University of Texas Navy S&T Needs—Research Community Perspective, Woei-Min Lin, Science Applications International Corporation Navy S&T Needs—Research Community Perspective, William Milewski, Applied Physical Sciences Corporation Navy S&T Needs—Naval Shipbuilder Perspective, John Hackett, Northrop Grumman Ship Systems The Naval Engineering S&T Infrastructure—Navy Labs Perspective, Scott Littleﬁeld, Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) The Naval Engineering S&T Infrastructure—Navy Labs Perspective, Pierre Corriveau, Naval Undersea Warfare Center The Naval Engineering S&T Infrastructure—Navy Labs Perspective, Bhakta Rath, Naval Research Laboratory The Naval Engineering S&T Infrastructure—DoD Perspective, Myles Hurwitz, CREATE Ship, U.S. Department of Defense The Naval Engineering S&T Infrastructure—Other Agency Perspective, Susan Kemnitzer, National Science Foundation The Naval Engineering S&T Infrastructure—Commercial Shipbuilding Perspective, Brian Carter, General Dynamics NASSCO The Naval Engineering S&T Infrastructure—Commercial Ship Design Perspective, Keith Michel, Herbert Engineering The Naval Engineering S&T Infrastructure—Offshore Industry Perspective, Peter Noble, ConocoPhillips The Naval Engineering S&T Infrastructure—Industry Perspective, Owen Oakley, Chevron The Naval Engineering S&T Infrastructure—Class Society Perspective, Kirsi Tikka, American Bureau of Shipping
OCR for page 220
222 Naval Engineering in the 21st Century The Naval Engineering S&T Infrastructure—Commercial Shipping Perspec- tive, Jan Otto de Kat, Maersk Maritime Technology MEETING, APRIL 6, 2010 ONR S&T Processes, John Pazik, ONR WORKSHOP: NEEDS AND OPPORTUNITIES IN S&T FIELDS SUPPORTING NAVAL ENGINEERING, MAY 5, 2010 Naval Game Changers, Norman Friedman Workforce and Education, Ronald Kiss, Webb Institute (emeritus) National Naval Responsibilities, Kam Ng, ONR Planning and Priority Setting for Basic Research, Kam Ng, ONR Undersea Weaponry NNR, Kam Ng, ONR Potential Technology Implications for the Navy’s Future, Ronald O’Rourke, Congressional Research Service Science and Technology Challenges and Potential Game-Changing Oppor- tunities, Michael Triantafyllou, Massachusetts Institute of Technology WORKSHOP: NEEDS AND OPPORTUNITIES IN S&T FIELDS SUPPORTING NAVAL ENGINEERING: TECHNOLOGY PUSH AND REQUIREMENTS PULL, JUNE 10, 2010 Researcher Perspectives: Hydrodynamics, Scott Morris, Notre Dame Uni- versity; Krishnan Mahesh, University of Minnesota; Thomas C. Fu, NSWC-Carderock; David E. Hess, NSWC-Carderock Researcher Perspectives: Power Systems, Robert Hebner, University of Texas; Steinar Dale, Florida State University Researcher Perspectives: Structures, Charbel Farhat, Stanford University; Joachim Grenestedt, Lehigh University; Christopher Earls, Cornell University Transitioning Technology to Naval Ships, Norbert Doerry, NAVSEA Composites Road to the Fleet—A Collaborative Success Story, John Hackett, Northrop Grumman Shipbuilding DDG 1000 Human Systems Integration, John Hagan, Bath Iron Works Research and Technology Challenges and Opportunities (Commercial Ship Design Perspective), Keith Michel, Herbert Engineering; Peter Noble, ConocoPhillips Naval Ship Design and Construction, Paul Sullivan, USEC, Inc.