National Academies Press: OpenBook

The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations (1986)

Chapter: 3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions

« Previous: 2: Genesis of the Engineering Research Centers
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 59
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 60
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 61
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 62
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 63
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 64
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 65
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 66
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 67
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 68
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 69
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 70
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 71
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 72
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 73
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 74
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 75
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 76
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 77
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 78
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 79
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 80
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 81
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 82
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 83
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 84
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 85
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 86
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 87
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 88
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 89
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 90
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 91
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 92
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 93
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 94
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 95
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 96
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 97
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 98
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 99
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 100
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 101
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 102
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 103
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 104
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 105
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 106
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 107
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 108
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 109
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 110
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 111
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 112
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 113
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 114
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 115
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 116
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 117
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 118
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 119
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 120
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 121
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 122
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 123
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 124
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 125
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 126
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 127
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 128
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 129
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 130
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 131
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 132
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 133
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 134
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 135
Suggested Citation:"3: The Centers as a Reality-Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions." National Research Council. 1986. The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/616.
×
Page 136

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.

III The Centers as a Reality Plans, Mechanisms, and Interactions

Systems Research Center JOHN S. BARAS INTRODUCTION The University of Maryland and Harvard University are very pleased to have been selected for an Engineering Research Center award by the National Science Foundation. On the basis of this award a Systems Re- search Center (SRC) will be established at the College Park campus of the University of Maryland. The focal University of Maryland organi- zational unit participating in the activities of the SRC will be the College of Engineering. Broad participation by several departments is planned: the Electrical, Chemical, Mechanical, and Aerospace Engineering de- partments within the College of Engineering; and the Computer Science and Mathematics departments, along with the Institute for Physical Science and Technology and the Center for Automation Research. The focal Har- vard University organizational unit will be the Decision and Control pro- gram of the Division of Applied Sciences. In this paper I will summarize the research theme and the educational and research programs of the Systems Research Center. In addition, I will describe the planned industrial collaboration program, international program, information dissemination plans, and other aspects of the center. The Research Theme and Its Significance The theme of research conducted at the SRC is to promote basic research in the implications and applications of the three types of technology (VLSI, CAE, and AI)* involved in the engineering design of high-performance, *VLSI = very large scale integrated circuits CAE = computer-aided engineering AI = artificial intelligence 6

62 PLANS AND PROGRAMS OF THE EXISTING CENTERS complex, automatic control, and communication systems. Recent ad- vances in computer science (artificial intelligence, expert systems, sym- bolic computation), in microelectronics (VLSI circuits development, availability of computer-aided design tools for special-purpose designs), and in computer-aided engineering (enhanced interactive graphics, pow- erful work stations, distributed operating systems, and data bases) have created a unique environment for innovative research and development in the discipline known as systems engineering. For the purposes of the present paper, systems engineering is defined as the discipline that com- bines automatic control systems and communication and signal processing systems with certain areas of computer engineering. The major research thrust of the discipline at present is the design and implementation of high-performance electronic systems for automatic control and commu- nication. It is appropriate to describe some of the motivational and historical background that influenced our thinking and planning for the SRC. To begin with, the complexity of such systems has recently increased dra- matically. This is manifested, for example, in tighter engineering speci- fications, in the need for adaptation, in requirements for multisensor integration, in the need to account for contingencies (multiple modalities), in totally digital implementations, and in the need for a mix of numerical and logical computations. Some of the challenging design problems that we plan to address in the SRC further illustrate this point: 1. How do we control systems characterized by complex, often poorly defined models? Examples from our program include chemical process control, where often it is difficult to design "correct" loops and equations. 2. How should one automate the operation of systems defined by pre- cise, highly complex simulation models? Problems in flexible manufac- turing systems in our program represent generic examples, wherein time- precedence constraints and the need for adaptive automation further com- plicate design. 3. How should we design systems controlled by asynchronously op- erating, distributed, communicating controllers? Examples from our pro- gram include the computer-aided design (CAD) of computer/communication networks, dynamic capacity allocation in communication satellites, and efficient management of mixed traffic (voice, video, data). 4. How can we develop design tools for real-time, high-performance, non-Gaussian signal processors? Examples from radar, sonar, image, and speech signal processing are found in our program. 5. How can one integrate multiple sensors for robust, digital, feedback control of nonlinear systems? Our program includes many-degrees-of- freedom robotic manipulators with vision, force, and pressure sensors, as

PL&AlVS AND PROGRAMS OF THE EXISTING CENTERS 63 well as advanced aircraft flight controllers especially designed for the new generation of unstable aircraft. The SRC will focus on the development of powerful and sophisticated software systems that will help and guide engineers in the design of automation and information-processing systems. The significance of a well-coordinated long-range research program in this critical high tech- nology area is highlighted by the following considerations. First, within the last year the growing role of automation in manufac- turing (flexible manufacturing systems, automated factories, robotics, etc.) has attracted a great deal of publicity as the key to the health of the United States' economy and industry. Second, an information explosion has encompassed the widespread use of computing and communication equipment (including office automation, personal computers, mobile telephone networks, distributed computing systems, sophisticated telephone networks, satellite communications, video discs, video processors, fiber optics channels, and optical storage). Among the scientific-educational community this explosion has reached across the board, from high school to university to research laboratory. More significantly, it has also been extended to the broader public. Third, there is an increasing reliance on automatic control systems to perform precise and demanding tasks in such areas as air traffic control; advanced guidance and control systems (high-performance forward swept- wing aircraft, large space structures, and advanced space satellites); im- proved performance and reliability of power plants; improved control and operation of power distribution systems; sophisticated control devices for computer/communication networks; advanced electronic controllers for robot manipulators and computer vision systems; intelligent autonomous weapons and distributed sensor networks; and distributed decision systems for tactical/strategic management. Unfortunately, currently available theories and design methodologies for such problems are not in synchrony with the currently available or planned implementation media, be it special-purpose chips or computers with specialized architectures and capabilities. More precisely, the avail- able design theories and performance evaluation methods were developed for different (now often obsolete) implementation media such as analog circuits and sequential machines. Although for some problems-admit- tedly a small class it is feasible to develop improved designs using the new hardware capabilities and existing theory, in the majority of problems there is a substantial lag between the available hardware potential and its realization in the systems being built. That gap is precisely where the Systems Research Center intends to focus.

64 PLANS AND PROGRAMS OF THE EXISTING CENTERS Of course, there are examples of successful hardware solutions to some of the design problems already mentioned By this I mean the process whereby one adds hardware components, or "boxes," in an ad hoc fash- ion, then tests each addition and adds more components until a satisfactory system is built. I do not believe that a serious argument can be made that this method is a superior one for exploiting the hardware potential available today. On the other hand, substantial theoretical results and knowledge exist in the form of automatic control and communication systems theories that have not been directly linked to hardware implementations. The re- alization that a window of opportunity exists was a major motivating force in planning for the SRC namely, that advances in CAE, VLSI, and AI have made possible the transformation of "paper algorithms" from pow- erful theories into real-time electronic "smart" boxes (Bares, 1981~. A careful reexamination and development of new design theories that in- corporate component hardware advances and the related implementation constraints is long overdue. We can no longer separate the design of a system from the implementation problem. This is a major thrust of the SRC program. The significance of the SRC program can also be illustrated from a financial point of view. Huge investments have been made and will con- tinue to be made for research and development in microelectronics and computer hardware. It is important and prudent to make the comparatively small investment required for the development of design methodologies and software tools that will be used to build systems with this hardware. It is obvious that the sophistication and capabilities of the circuits and devices that we build will be limited by the power of the CAD tools that we use. Thus, the SRC theme encompasses two fundamental components of high-technology industries: automation and communications. It is impor- tant to emphasize that high-technology industries involved in automation and communication directly influence the competitiveness and perfor- mance of more traditional industries. Consider, for example, the influence that advances in automation may have on steel mill operation and auto- motive design and production. This consideration was an important factor in the development of our plans for the SRC. Educational Needs The Systems Research Center aims at the establishment of a strong advanced research and educational program in the above areas. Given the broad knowledge and intellectual background required by the SRC research theme, we have assembled an interdisciplinary team of scientists and engineers from the two universities involved. Members of the team include

PL^TS AND PROGRAMS OF THE EXISTING CENTERS 65 electrical, mechanical, and chemical engineers as well as mathematicians, numerical analysts, computer scientists, and microelectronics and artificial intelligence experts. At its projected full operational level the SRC research program will involve some 40 faculty, 120 graduate students, and at least 120 undergraduate students. A large number of students will be influenced by the Center's educational programs. We strongly believe that there is a real need, quite critical for the nation, to educate and train engineering students in the mix of disciplines and knowledge represented by the SRC research programs. A similarly critical need exists for retraining practicing engineers, and this need will be incorporated in our plans. THE RESEARCH PROGRAM The research program for the SRC is an expansion and natural extension of research work already under way by members of our interdisciplinary team. The research activities listed below served as the inspiration and provided much of the motivation for the planning and implementation of the ambitious research goals of the Center. They are in a sense the seeds for interaction and further development of the key ideas behind the con- ception of the SRC. The SRC will provide the fertilized ground for de- velopment of the major thrusts emanating from these early works, which are: · optimization-based design in chemical process control · perturbation analysis and AI modeling in manufacturing systems · symbolic computation and VLSI architectures for the design of real- time non-Gaussian detectors · design of a VLSI DFT processor · vision sensors and feedback in robotic manipulators. The research program implementation selected for the SRC was influ- enced by three factors. First, the areas of strength of the participating faculty; second, the expected impact of SRC research; and third, a strong commitment to a problem-driven interdisciplinary program. We have as a result selected five focus-application areas to help us measure the success of the basic research program, and to help motivate it by applying the design tools to a diverse set of complex, real-world problems. These areas are described below, together with the currently planned thrusts in each. "Intelligent" CAD of Stochastic Systems We shall combine CAE and AI methods for the design of advanced nonlinear signal processors capable of real-time operation. One thrust is toward the development of expert systems that can "reason" mathematically and understand a variety of signal and system models. The other two thrusts address questions of

66 PLANS AND PROGRAMS OF THE EXISTING CENTERS distributed computations in stochastic systems and implementation by "optimal" VLSI architectures. In particular, silicon compilation and spe- cial high-level signal manipulation languages will be studied. Chemical Process Control Here we shall investigate how CAE, AI, and optimization techniques can be applied to the design and control of chemical plants. Modeling and simulation questions will be analyzed and the models built, using the CAD process. In addition, we shall attempt to integrate reliability and safety considerations into the design software and work stations. Telecommunications There are two major thrusts here. The first cen- ters around the development of powerful simulation and CAD systems for computer/communication networks (local-area, flow-control, and recon- figurable networks). This will involve interactive graphics, expert systems, and high-level command languages. The second thrust involves image and speech processing problems and their hardware implementation. Nu- merical and hardware complexity will be studied, as well as fast digital implementations. Advanced Automation and Information Processing in Manufacturing Systems We shall investigate applications of CAE, AI, and optimization. In particular, an integrated program will be pursued that addresses sched- uling problems, adaptive resource allocation, AI systems in manufactur- ing, data-base integration, flexible manufacturing cells, CAD integration in manufacturing resource planning (MRP), optimization-based design, and advanced interactive simulation. CAD of Intelligent Servomechanisms Two major thrusts are the theory and design of an advanced prototype hand-eye machine, and the design of flight controllers for high-performance aircraft. Both involve the in- tegration of many "smart" sensor data and the control of systems with very complicated dynamics, often requiring the use of symbolic algebra for their derivation. Implementations by special-purpose VLSI processors will be examined. In the area of robotics, the program will address pri- marily feedback control of a mechanical hand with many-degrees-of-free- dom, based on integration of data from several sensors. In the design of flight controllers we will focus on optimization-based design for unstable aircraft. The common thread in all these areas is their emphasis on the devel- opment of advanced CAD tools that combine the specific theory and practice of systems engineering with the three technology drivers: CAD,

PLANS AND PROGRAMS OF THE EXISTING CENTERS 67 VLSI, and AI. These advanced design methods provide the intellectual bond in this diversified program. The program cuts across the boundaries of a great many engineering and computer science disciplines.* The program is interdisciplinary, problem-driven, and technique-spe- cific. We believe that the fundamental tools, and methodologies for their design, that will be developed as a result of the SRC research program will have a very broad applicability. Furthermore, it is expected that these generic CAD tools will evolve out of strong interaction among the research activities in the five focus areas. Each area includes systems of high complexity and design problems that cannot be attacked by conventional methods. As research progresses in each area we expect to see a cross- fertilization among the various efforts toward development of CAD tools. At the University of Maryland we have already witnessed that phenomenon in design projects on chemical process control and advanced aircraft. Still significant for the SRC's mission is the interaction between the three technology drivers (CAD, VLSI and AI) on the one hand, and, on the other, the disciplines of control and communication systems as rep- resented in the five focus-application areas. It is anticipated that the broadly interdisciplinary program will prompt a fundamental reexamination of control and communication systems theory and methodology. Further- more, it is expected that this latter interaction will foster a secondary level of interaction among the focus areas as hardware implementations for different applications are analyzed and compared. Thus, the research program of the SRC will have two major components: · in-depth investigation of the impact of VLSI, CAE, and AI · basic research in modeling, mathematical analysis, optimization, computational and numerical methods, control systems techniques, com- munication system techniques, and computer engineering techniques. The first component will address the following matters. Regarding VLSI (the implementation medium), we shall investigate algorithmic and ar- chitectural aspects of VLSI; signal processing chips; and control chips. The design methodologies to be developed must account for VLSI im- plementation constraints. Regarding CAE (the implementation environ- ment), we shall investigate the effects of interactive graphics, interfaces, *The disciplines include: chemical process modeling, polymers, bioreactors, chemical re- actors, aerodynamics, flight controllers, robotic manipulators, vision, sensor design, signal pro- cessing, communication networks, information theory, coding, optimization, control systems design, stochastic control, detection and estimation, algorithmic complexity, algorithm archi- tecture, VLSI array design, optimization-based CAD, numerical linear algebra, numerical math- ematics, rule-based expert systems, knowledge-based expert systems, computer algebra, stochastic processes, queueing systems, manufacturing, and mechanical machining.

68 PLANS AND PROGRAMS OF THE EXISTING CENTERS etc., in the design of sophisticated CAD systems. For example, in de- velopments related to the DELIGHT Marylin system (a powerful optim- ization-based design system we use at Maryland), the fact that advanced graphics were to provide the output enabled the numerical analyst to develop an interactive procedure that could handle multi-objective optim- ization. In addition, this environment permits the engineer to study a design problem in his own language, without being overburdened with compli- cated computer procedures. Regarding AI, we shall investigate the effects of symbolic computation and knowledge-based systems on design. The second component is needed because sophisticated new theories and methodologies are required in order to extract the maximum benefit possible from advances in microelectronics, CAE, and AI. As Roland Schmitt (1984) describes the situation: "In the technology of controls, . . . fundamental theoretical advances are needed to catch up with the speed and power of microelectronics." The impact of VLSI technology on signal processing and automatic control systems is emerging as very influential. However, for success in this direction very advanced CAD tools must be developed and popular- ized. The rapid developments we have seen in VLSI chip design and production were made possible by the development and rapid dissemi- nation of precisely such advanced CAD tools. The SRC program aims at producing similarly sophisticated CAD tools in the general area of control and communication systems engineering design. An important factor in future systems engineering theories and design techniques will be the development of expert systems for CAD (Stefik and de Kleer, 1983~. In applying expert systems to design tasks the idea is to pit knowledge against complexity, using expert knowledge to whittle complexity down to a manageable scale. It is anticipated that expert sys- tems will eventually be applied in many design areas; but their use in digital system design, particularly in CAD, will be a major advance. The planned SRC program will develop a broad research activity in this area. AI and symbolic computation promise to revolutionize design. There are very sound reasons for this prediction. First, the cost of generating special-purpose Fortran-based codes is fast getting out of hand. Massive investments in design tools can become either a brake on innovative designs or an argument against further development. AI symbolic com- putation transfers mathematical models of the physics of the system being designed from the code side (applications code) to the data side of the system, where they can be used, manipulated, shared, modified, and even created by the system as easily as numerical data elements. This transfer is essential for the attainment of cheap, easily reconfigurable design tools. Second, AI and symbolic computation prevent the designer's entrainment in specific design procedures and processes provided by custom-coded

PLANS AND PROGRAMS OF THE EXISTING CENTERS 69 Fortran programs, and thus allow for a very flexible approach to the design. Symbolic manipulation has immediate and powerful applications in CAD. For example, the amount of nuisance programming required to develop and maintain large design packages can be reduced to a practically neg- ligible part of the overall code. Furthermore, increasing the level of ab- straction at which data and code are specified reduces significantly the complexity of code transportability. Finally, symbolic manipulation per- mits entire mathematical models- logic as well as its numerical param- eters to be treated as data capable of being manipulated, examined, and modified, as well as being executed like a Fortran subroutine. Further advantages offered by AI include natural language processing, automatic deduction, cognitive models, and learning and inference. An excellent example for an application of AI and symbolic computation in aerospace design is given in Elias (1983~. Systems engineers today are called upon to solve complex control and communication design problems for systems often described by huge sim- ulation models. The traditional approach has been to reduce the complexity to a small number of mathematical equations and eventually apply rather simple elements of available theories. Clearly we can do much better than that if we utilize the full power of techniques from CAD and AI. Fur- thermore, the speed provided by VLSI arrays promises to support the often real-time processing need of advanced control and communication sys- tems. For systems of the complexity seen today it is often difficult to write and manipulate the governing equations correctly. Think, for example, of the task facing a chemical engineer who is trying to describe a complex industrial chemical process, starting from simple, elemental chemical re- action equations. His final goal is to design a process controller. Or consider the aerospace engineer who is developing a mathematical model for a large, complex, multi-body, flexible structure in space. Again, his final goal is to design a controller. Both have to manipulate a large number of equations (often more than 100) of different types (algebraic, differ- ential, partial differential, Boolean, etc.~. Symbolic manipulation and rather elementary AI techniques (such as search heuristics, "sup-inf" decision procedures, etc.) can readily reduce these tasks to routine and permit the engineer to concentrate on the design issues. More generally, there is clearly an established need for utilizing AI methodologies in CAD. In the design of flexible manufacturing systems, for example, one en- counters coordination problems that can benefit enormously from the use of automated reasoning programs. The latter can supervise the lower-level numerical CAD programs. To ask such a systems engineer to solve the complex design problems of today without such a combined arsenal of tools is similar to asking a VLSI chip designer to design the chip without the expert CAD tools now available.

70 PLANS AlID PROGRAMS OF THE EXISTING COMERS In this discussion I have tried to convey the basic ideas behind the research program of the SRC. However, research is not the only purpose of the Engineering Research Centers. Our plans for the SRC educational program are equally important. THE EDUCATIONAL PLAN The basic theme of the SRC educational programs is that the Center supports and enhances educational programs and is a source of new courses and material. Furthermore, the SRC and the two universities involved are committed to the principle of lifelong education (see Bruce et al., 19821. The SRC will establish within the first two years a modern environment for rapid information dissemination via a local computer/communication network, appropriately connected to the University of Maryland univer- sity-wide network and other industrial and government networks. Ade- quate work stations and advanced terminals will be provided to support sophisticated computer-assisted instruction tools. Software libraries, case studies, and design examples will be maintained and updated. We plan to utilize, in a timely manner, powerful educational tools such as video discs, video tapes, personal computers, and work stations. The recently initiated university-wide drive for such an environment will accelerate and support this effort. Similar efforts are under way at Harvard University, and the electronic linking of these two educational networks will establish a superb educational environment. The Harvard University faculty group will participate in the develop- ment of course material.We plan to maintain these materials in computer files (in a "troff" standard format) and to exchange'them, together with other course materials developed at Maryland, through computer mail. This will permit rapid revision and reproduction of lecture notes and other materials. Each research project at the SRC will generate a research seminar on related background and research topics. The seminars will be flexible, and will attempt to produce lecture notes on the research performed. Successful projects and seminars will then endeavor to produce polished versions of these lecture notes for publication and wide distribution. Seminars will involve graduate as well as undergraduate students. In fact, we plan to utilize the software systems developed by the SRC as educational tools for students. This will serve two important purposes: timely codification of new knowledge and research results, and continuity in training and education for the students participating in the Center. In the current planning, all courses affiliated with the Center will be initially of the seminar or independent study type, and closely linked to

PLANS AND PROGRAMS OF THE EXISTING CENTERS 71 ongoing research projects. Undergraduate students will participate in every research project. The SRC will maintain strong and active visiting programs for scientists from both academic and industrial as well as governmental research lab- oratories. Outside scientists will be utilized extensively as instructors. The Center will organize an advanced-level retraining program for prac- ticing engineers from industry, government, and other institutions. In addition, cooperative programs will be established with industrial affiliates that will provide summer employment to students at government or in- dustrial research laboratories. Dissemination of research results from the SRC will be implemented via technical research reports, a quarterly technical magazine, software systems, and lecture notes on specific subjects. In addition, the Center will hold yearly working seminars and colloquia on focused research areas (one per year), with wide participation from outside scientists and students. The Center will also utilize short, intensive courses (7 to 10 days) and the University of Maryland's Instructional Television (ITV) System in order to popularize and disseminate its research findings. The educational plan of the Center is designed to blend naturally with the academic offerings of the participating units. Periodic reviews, per- formed in collaboration with participating academic departments, will ensure that information and knowledge are transferred to the regular ac- ademic curricula in a timely manner. INDUSTRIAL COLLABORATION PLAN There is growing acceptance of the fact that technological and industrial innovation are central to the economic well-being of the United States. Universities are one of the major performers of the fundamental research Cat underlies technological innovation. Industry puts this research to work, and also identifies problems requiring new knowledge. The flow of people and information between the campus and industry is thus an important element in both scientific and technological advancement. A broad col- laboration with industry in the research areas of the SRC is expected. Industry-university partnership has become a national objective, and this new environment is particularly helpful to the Center's program. The significance placed on a healthy and strong industrial collaborative pro- gram is manifested in the establishment, within the SRC, of an industrial liaison office for managing this program. CoIporations with strong research and development (R&D) activities in areas related to the SRC research program will be invited to join in a group known as Systems Research Affiliates (SRA). Its purpose will be

72 PLANS AND PROGRAMS OF THE EXISTING CENTERS to provide for continuous strong scientific and educational interaction and to support the Center's activities. There will be three grades of membership in this group, depending on the kind and level of involvement with SRC activities: sustaining affiliate, sponsoring affiliate, and affiliate. The Harvard University team will participate in this activity by assuming responsibility for the initiation of contacts with high-technology firms in the Boston area. It is anticipated that such contacts could lead to involve- ment of these firms in the activities of the Center, both at Harvard and at Maryland. Industrial participation will occur in many modes: joint research projects (both with and without private funding); exchange of scientific personnel for limited periods of time; sharing of advanced equipment; joint devel- opment of a software library and "software club"; use of private industry laboratories and test beds for SRC projects; specialized education for practicing engineers; cooperative employment programs for SRC students; work-study programs; fellowship programs; and industrial funding of equipment, students, faculty, and workshops at the SRC. Our strategy for developing a strong industrial collaboration program is based on the build- ing of strong technical ties with industrial research engineers. The col- laboration between the two universities, and the unique characteristics of their respective regions, offer distinct advantages to the SRC. It is a somewhat innovative feature of the planning for the SRC that a synergistic research, development, and education effort will be undertaken in a critical high-technology area by the three most concerned communities: univer- sity, industry, and government. Industry will be appropriately represented in the administrative, man- agement, and research structure of the SRC. There will be industry rep- resentatives in the administrative and research councils of the SRC, professional resident fellows from the sustaining affiliates, and visiting scientists from industry. It is worth reiterating the importance of university-industry collaboration in the programs of the SRC. First, we believe that a key to innovation is a close coupling between the researchers and developers of technology and its users. This coupling must be in place during the entire innovation process. Second, certain of the technology drivers of the SRC, such as VLSI and AI, have been vigorously pursued by industrial research labs because of their enormous potential commercial value. Third, lack of skilled manpower is particularly acute in the mix of disciplines underlying the SRC. Strong industrial research participation in the proposed SRC will enhance considerably the probability that the Center will succeed in its . . mission.

PLANS AND PROGRAMS OF THE EXISTING CENTERS CONCLUSION: A FORMULA FOR SUCCESS 73 The Systems Research Center links two major universities that possess broad intellectual, engineering, and scientific expertise. It also links two major and complementary high-tech centers. Two exceptionally strong and complementary groups of systems scientists and engineers will col- laborate in an ambitious program that is expected to interact with and impact all other Engineering Research Centers established to date. In addition to the $16 million in NSF support for the first five years, the SRC has strong commitments from both universities and from the State of Maryland. The University of Maryland has committed 12 new faculty positions, 10,000 square feet of new space, $1 million in operating funds, $1 million in dedicated equipment, and another $1.6 million in shared equipment. Harvard University has committed two new faculty positions, 1,550 square feet of new space, and computer networking. The Maryland Department of Economic and Community Development will assist with the establishment of the SRC and, in particular, its industrial collaboration plan. The SRC will collaborate on research, education, and industrial programs with the University of Maryland Engineering Research Center (established by the State to provide an engineering extension service, equipment grants, and an incubator facility), with the University of Mary- land Institute for Advanced Computer Studies, and with the National Security Agency (NSA) Supercomputing Research Center at the Maryland Science and Technology Park. I will end with a brief recapitulation of our goals. The future design of electronic control and communication systems must be performed by so- phisticated computer-aided methods, all the way from problem definition to blueprint specifications for the electronic circuit or the software im- plementing the design. This vertical integration should be accomplished in the next decade, and is indeed the driving goal in the research program of the SRC. With the utilization of expert systems and CAD tools across different application areas, substantial cross-fertilization occurs as the experience and expertise pass from area to area in an unending loop, each time improving the power and efficiency of the design methodology. This type of interaction is not possible without the utilization of these tech- nologies. We believe that the interdisciplinary program of the SRC will spark a fundamental reexamination of control and communication systems design as we develop the design tools for the electronic "smart" boxes of the future. I emphasize again that the proposed research program includes a sub- stantial component of fundamental research in mathematical modeling, analytical studies in optimization and dynamics, sophisticated methods

74 PLANS AND PROGRAMS OF THE EXISTING CENTERS from statistics and probability, and advanced computational methods and numerical algonthms. These are essential if we are going to demand that the designs produced offer a substantial improvement in performance over conventional ones. Indeed, we hope to develop CAD tools that will be able to produce special-purpose software and hardware implementations utilizing very advanced, albeit expensive, technology. Without a sophis- ticated analytical/computational foundation, the advisability of such de- signs is questionable. To put it simply, engineers are going to need very advanced analytical/computational tools in order to squeeze out of the final implementation (be it hardware or software) every possible perfor- mance improvement. CAD is clearly the economical way to go the alternative being a sequence of untested teal-and-error experimental de- signs. Essentially, it affords extensive testing and evaluation at a low cost. The harmonious marnage of powerful analytical/computational meth- odologies with the three technology drivers described in the SRC research program summary is bound to produce what we would like to call the ultimate systems engineering technology. Finally, the SRC is dedicated to the education and Gaining of a new generation of control and com- munication systems design engineers. REFERENCES Baras, J. S. 1981. Approximate solution of nonlinear filtering problems by direct imple- mentation of the Zakai equation. Pp. 309-311 in Proceedings of the 20th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control. New York. Bruce, J. D., W. M. Siebert, L. D. Smullin, and R. M. Fano. 1982. Lifelong Cooperative Education. Report of the Centennial Study Committee, Department of Electrical Engi- neering and Computer Science, MIT. Cambridge, Mass. Elias, A. L. 1983. Computer-aided engineering: the AI connection. Astronautics & Aero- nautics 21 (July/August):48-54. Schmitt, R. W. 1984. National R&D policy: an industrial perspective. Science 224 (June): 1206 1209. Steak, M. J., and J. de Kleer. 1983. Prospects for expert systems in CAD. Computer Design 22 No. 4 (April):65-76.

Center for Intelligent Marlufactunng Systems KING-SUN FU, DAVID C. ANDERSON, MOSHE M. BARASH, and JAMES J. SOLD ERG SUMMARY The focus of Purdue University's new Engineering Research Center is on intelligent manufacturing systems a phrase intended to describe the next generation of automated design/manufacturing systems. That gen- eration will emerge in the 1990s as fully integrated, flexible, self-adaptive, computer-controlled systems covering the full range of factory operations from product concept through delivery. The Center is organized to support the long range cross-disciplinary effort in research and education needed to bring this technology into wide use in American industry. Twenty to 30 professors will conduct the research, working in project teams with as many as 120 graduate students and, through a novel ar- rangement, another 80 undergraduates. National Science Foundation (NSF) funding for the program is approximately $1.6 million dollars for the first v~.nr the. implant will inure veer hv vear totaling as much as $17 ~ _ _^ ~ _A A _ _~ ~ ^ _ _ ^ A _ . ~ ~ ~ ~ _ ~ _ _~ _ ~ ~ _ __ ~ million dollars over the first five years. The new Center for Intelligent Manufacturing Systems builds upon Purdue's success with the Computer Integrated Design, Manufacturing, and Automation Center (CIDMAC), which broke new ground in organ- izing cross-disciplinary, joint university-industry research. The new Center complements the activity of CIDMAC to achieve broader technical cov- erage and wider industrial impact. It also addresses the problems of ed- ucational innovation that must accompany a new style of engineering. INTRODUCTION This Engineering Research Center represents a serious effort on the part of Purdue University to address the needs of the American manufacturing 75

76 PLANS AND PROGRAMS OF THE EXISTING CENTERS industry in meeting competitive challenges. It is motivated by an awareness of both the importance of a healthy manufacturing base to society at large and the essential role of engineering education and research in meeting industrial needs. It is now widely recognized that the American manufacturing industry is facing competitive pressures that literally threaten its survival. Fur- thermore, it is clear that our engineering education system must undertake significant revisions to meet the new challenges. Recent studies, such as that of the National Research Council's Committee on the Education and Utilization of the Engineer, have clearly identified and characterized these needs. The overall problem is systemic in nature. Small-scale, narrowly fo- cused programs dealing with one or another of the many aspects of the problem cannot adequately confront the global issues involved. Four ov- erriding requirements stand out: 1. There is a need for new mechanisms to provide closer linkage be- tween industry and the academic community, in order to close the im- plementation gap and ensure the smooth flow of information in both directions. 2. Greater emphasis on the integration of engineering knowledge (in both research and education) is needed to deal with the increasingly per- vasive systems nature of problems. 3. The methods and structure of engineering education must be reno- vated in order to provide the kind of engineer that industry will need in the future. 4. A large-scale cross-disciplinary effort will be required if the program is to have sufficient impact to benefit a wide spectrum of manufacturing practices at a national level. Taken together, these requirements dictate a significant departure from the traditional behavior of most universities. Even with sincere, dedicated efforts by highly competent people there are countless ways to fail. The viability of any effort of this kind depends critically upon a well-selected focus, a wisely constructed organization, and a carefully planned system of program management. Figure 1 depicts the way in which the Center is embedded within the Purdue University organization. The relationships and functions of contributing entities will be described in later sections of this paper. FOCUS OF THE CENTER The new Center will focus on intelligent manufacturing systems. The phrase "manufacturing system" is sometimes used in a narrow sense by

PLAAtS AND PROGRAMS OF THE EXISTING CENTERS r----- l Heads of l Engineering l Schools Dean of I Engineering Center I Director I l Faculty and l l Research and l Staff _ _ _ ~Educational l Programs 1 1 1 1 1~ me= t-~~{ L ~_J Policy Advisory Board Technical Advisory Board Industry Engineers FIGURE 1 Place of the Center in the Purdue University Organization. 77 machine tool suppliers to refer to integrated production machinery. The meaning here is broader. It encompasses all those activities associated with making products, including design, planning, processing, manage- ment, inventory control, and every other aspect of the product realization process. Although the kinds of products considered will not be limited, our primary emphasis will be on mechanical and electromechanical prod- ucts that are made in discrete units. The continuous-process industries (e.g., paper and steel) have unique problems that we do not intend to address, although the Center will address some generic issues that would apply equally well to both discrete and continuous production. Background To gain a better understanding of what the word "intelligent" means in the context of manufacturing systems it is useful to trace the historical development of manufacturing. From the earliest times through the first stages of the Industrial Revolution the dominant feature of manufacturing was human labor. Later, when mechanical automation was first coming into common use, the center of attention was on fixed automation for high-volume production; the conveyor belt is an example. Beginning in the l950s numerically controlled machines and electronic process controls began to take over some of the low-level supervisory burden from people. Starting in the 1970s and continuing today, the emphasis has been on flexibility (i.e., the ability to adjust to changing requirements) and inte- gration of computer software. It could be said that we have passed though three generations of manufacturing technology and are now in the midst of the fourth generation (see Figure 2~. Looking ahead to the next 20

78 PLANS AND PROGRAMS OF THE EXISTING CENTERS 1st generation (pre-20th century) manual labor 2d generation (early 20th century) fixed automation ad generation (1950s)-numerical control 4th generation (1970s) flexible automation 5th generation ( 1 990s) intelligent systems FIGURE 2 Stages of evolution of manufacturing technology. years, what novel features are likely to characterize the fifth generation of manufacturing? The historical evolution of manufacturing over the past century reveals two major long-term trends. First, there has been a shift in emphasis away from labor and machinery concerns toward more abstract information concerns. Today the single most significant feature of manufacturing is the complexity of the inflation involved. Thus, a major new problem faced by all manufacturing businesses is how to engineer properly the information structures that feed and control all of the product-realization processes. We may expect fifth-generation manufacturing systems to uti- lize major advances in the technology of information engineering. The second major trend is an increasing awareness of the significance of systems phenomena. Whereas early manufacturing sought to segment, or decompose, the many steps of product realization in order to simplify the management of the overall enterprise, it is now recognized that many problems can be attributed to inadequate attention to the interfaces between these steps. The gap between design and manufacturing is a notorious one; but there are many other examples as well. Fifth-generation manu- facturing systems will involve a far greater integration of technologies to achieve true system optimization. The term we use to describe this next major advance in production technology this fifth generation is "intelligent manufacturing sys- tems." The words are intended to carry the connotation of higher-level computer control, flexibility, and integration. All sectors of manufacturing will be impacted by these changes, some sooner than others. The Center will conduct research, education, and technology transfer activities to facilitate expeditious progress toward the goal of greater control, flexi- bility, and integration. Research Focus What would an intelligent manufacturing system entail? Where should a university-based research program focus its attention? In order to develop

PLANS AND PROGRAMS OF THE EXISTING CE=ERS 79 a comprehensive picture to guide consideration of these questions, consider first the manufacturing functions themselves. These can be conveniently grouped into three categories: design, processing, and planning and con- trol. Together, these three labels cover all the functions that transform concepts, requirements, raw materials, and resources into products. A1- though they are carried out in various ways and with varying degrees of success by different industries, it is clear that the three categories are logically distinguishable and that all are absolutely essential to the reali- zation of products. In addition to participating in these functions directly, engineers in industry have concerned themselves with supplying equipment to improve these processes. We will call this kind of improvement process "auto- mation engineering." It is external to the manufacturing function itself, in the sense that it is more concerned with modifying the processes than with making products. Historically, the attention given to automation has been hardware-intensive, and generally localized to individual components of the larger manufacturing system. Even the most modern flexible man- ufacturing systems can be fairly characterized in this way. Our focus on intelligent manufacturing systems requires a new emphasis on the information aspects of the system. Information engineering is sim- ilar to automation engineering in its objective to improve the direct man- ufacturing functions; but it is distinctly different in its emphasis on logic, procedures, organization, and software instead of equipment. Because it . is impossible to deal with these latter aspects In Isolation, Information engineering also requires a completely integrated approach to the entire manufacturing system, including all of the pieces mentioned above. Figure 3 illustrates the overall concerns of our research program, emphasizing the integrated nature of the elements (this is not the only way to structure the Center's approach, of course). Detailed technical work will be carried out in all of the areas. However, it should be understood that the wholeness of the program is more im- portant than any one part; it is this feature that distinguishes the Center for Intelligent Manufacturing Systems from a mere collection of projects. A typical project within the Center will involve the faculty of two or more disciplines dealing jointly with research issues that cut across traditional boundaries. THE RESEARCH PROGRAM The traditional reliance upon individual investigators or small teams of investigators works quite well for well-defined single-discipline projects. There is no need to criticize that approach; any other that we might plan

80 PLANS AND PROGRAMS OF THE EXISTING CENTERS ~ :'N Information Engineering Plan and Control Design Process Automation Engineering \ > FIGURE 3 Elements and interactions in the intelligent manufacturing system. would needlessly undermine it. However, a cross-disciplinary Center of- fers opportunities for research that are not otherwise possible. One of the principal reasons for conducting research in a Center organization such as ours is to coordinate activity within the group so as to achieve more than separate projects alone would permit. That is, the synergism itself has value. Moreover, the dialogue about research priorities that automat- ically accompanies the organization of such a Center serves as a self- regulating, unobtrusive force to ensure relevance of the separate com- ponents. This is particularly true when industrial representatives with knowledge and vision can enter the dialogue, as has been and will continue to be the case in planning for our Center. Of course, a cross-disciplinary Center introduces a need for program management of a kind not ordinarily faced in conducting academic re- search. Aside from the mechanical details of organization and operations, it is important that clear guidelines, or a philosophy, be established for selection of the specific research topics to be investigated. Obviously, the topics should have intrinsic merit, a strong cross-disciplinary flavor, and a clear relationship to the focus of the Center. Beyond these points two additional guidelines should be followed.

PLAITS AND PROGRAMS OF THE EXISTING CENTERS 81 First, it is important to be very selective about the projects undertaken. Although this Center will represent an undertaking of considerable mag- nitude, the total effort can be no more than a small fraction of the national research effort in manufacturing. We cannot hope to do more than con- tribute to the overall effort. Furthermore, the needs are so great in so many areas that it is pointless to compete with other universities or research institutions who are already excelling in certain areas. Generally, we want to pursue those projects that are in line with our central mission and that we are best equipped to undertake in terms of background, talent, facilities, and circumstances. We will concentrate our resources and attention on exploiting our present strengths. A second guiding principle in selecting research projects is to maximize leverage. This Center will identify problems that offer the possibility of a very large payoff for a reasonable amount of work. These problems tend to coincide with the most critical needs in industry the bottlenecks to productivity but are not necessarily short-term or easily overcome obstacles. Generally, universities are best suited to working on the frontiers of knowledge, where the commercial incentives are not yet clear enough to encourage private initiatives. Although most engineering research is carried out with the conviction that it will eventually prove beneficial, the manufacturing arena imposes special requirements to make explicit the costs, benefits, and timing of research. The fact that the benefits may be long-term does not diminish the responsibility of engineering research for consciously addressing these issues, because the ultimate penetration of any innovation in manufacturing depends as much on economic factors and timing as it does on technical success. Therefore, all of the Center's research projects will be evaluated in terms of their potential economic benefits as well as their purely tech- nical aspects. It would be counterproductive to detail in advance a rigid, permanent structure for all of the research to be undertaken. Creating an environment that encourages innovation requires a flexible organization that is clearly and openly receptive to new ideas. Furthermore, the target we are trying to hit is moving. It is possible to provide a sample listing of likely projects to indicate the general flavor of the work the Center will support. Of course, it will be the responsibility of the individual investigators to form teams and organize their own proposed efforts, which will then undergo review before funding. Some likely research areas are: · computer-integrated system for product design/analysis · data-base system for CAD/CAM integration · automatic intelligent process planning and production preparation · "virtual manufacturing" software for intelligent manufacturing

82 PLANS AND PROGRAMS OF THE EXISTING CENTERS · process technology integration · intelligent error compensation in precision machining · intelligent control for automated production and assembly · integrated microsensors for intelligent control · advanced intelligent assembly and inspection. These are only examples, of course, and even such inherently cross- disciplinary project clusters as these must address the long-range objective of total system integration. THE EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM In education as in research it is essential to have a guiding philosophy. It is neither necessary nor desirable to build an educational program from scratch. The existing engineering programs have evolved over years and have developed strengths that it would be foolish to ignore. On the other hand, it would be equally foolish to pretend that our engineering educa- tional system is adequate to meet the new demands that are emerging from concerns about national competitiveness. In concert with the research program and with the more directed technology transfer program to be described later, our Center will explore fresh approaches to providing the human resources that will be needed in the future. It will do this through a combination of traditional and nontraditional educational programs. It should be noted that many of the education delivery mechanisms that are just now coming into vogue nationally have been in place at Purdue for some time. We have had a widely praised engineering co-op program enrolling more that 1,300 students annually, and involving approximately 650 corporations. An undergraduate program in interdisciplinary engi- neering, involving about 125 students a year, provides an opportunity for custom-tailored curricula to meet special needs in such areas as biomedical engineering, transportation, and energy. We have long had an extensive continuing engineering education program. Our on-campus conference facilities are among the largest of such facilities at any university and are fully utilized. Television instruction has been fully developed for both on- campus and statewide off-campus learning. Notwithstanding this strong background of programs in place, we rec- ognize that new initiatives are needed to focus and structure an educational program that specifically addresses manufacturing requirements. Because the subject is evolving rapidly, the program must stress fundamentals rather than fads. It should foster the spirit of innovation, and prepare the student to live comfortably in a world of constant technical change. We should strive to make the program attractive to the very best students, because the regimen is likely to prove more demanding than a traditional program.

PLANS AND PROGRAMS OF THE EXISTING CENTERS 83 It is easy to identify narrowness of disciplinary perspective as one of the major educational problems in engineering today. It is also easy to structure a cross-disciplinary program that permits students to pick and choose from a wide selection of courses. What is difficult is to build a cross-disciplinary program that avoids superficiality. Thus a new curriculum plan is needed, drawing on the expertise of several engineering disciplines. No existing engineering program can han- dle this challenge alone. Furthermore, the programs that are most closely related to the need are already hard-pressed to satisfy the demands for teaching and research in their traditional areas of expertise. New initiatives and new resources are needed. Aside from the curricular changes that are already under study at Purdue, and which will be aided by the new Center, we have devised a plan that squarely addresses the dilemma of how to involve undergraduates directly in research- something they normally have little opportunity to do. It is a difficult problem, because undergraduates have little time to devote to research while meeting graduation requirements, and they usually lack sufficient in-depth knowledge to have much to offer in advanced work. However, we have devised a strategy to permit the most capable students to become genuine members of a research team. The Center will offer to qualified students the opportunity to become Summer Undergraduate Research Interns (SURIs). During one summer, probably between the junior and senior years, a SURI will join an ongoing research project team (along with faculty and graduate students who have been working throughout the year). He or she will be paid a salary of up to $2,500, and will be expected to make a positive contribution to the research. To qualify the student must have taken certain courses (beyond the usual required courses) and have earned good grades. These qualif~- cations are to ensure both adequate preparation and seriousness of intent. This is a position to be earned, not a financial aid program. We expect as many as 80 SURI positions to be awarded, and have included the cost of student wages in the budget. The SURI program is highly experimental. If the plan can be made to work, it promises benefits to both the students and the research projects. Moreover, it may serve to encourage the best students to pursue graduate studies. At the graduate level, Purdue has developed and is currently in the process of implementing a Masters-level core program in manufacturing systems of engineering. This program, which was developed jointly by the Schools of Engineering under a grant from the Westinghouse Foun- dation, emphasizes the integration of technologies of design, manufac- turing, and automation. The program will be administered by the Schools of Engineering, with guidance by a policy board consisting of the heads

84 PLANS AND PROGRAMS OF THE EXISTING CENTERS of the Mechanical, Electrical, and Industrial Engineering departments. An advisory committee of corporate representatives will be formed. This committee will participate in major policy discussions and review program plans. Academic administration will be handled by individual schools and will be consistent with graduate school policy. In the category of continuing education, Purdue has recognized the need for new delivery mechanisms to address the problem of technical obso- lescence of mid-career engineers. The president of the university has spoken often of the need for fresh approaches to this increasingly important challenge, and has declared it to be a high priority item for the entire university. The Center will participate in the full range of new offerings that are being developed toward this end. Beyond these initiatives the Center will develop its own program, to be specifically targeted at en- gineers in the manufacturing industries most affected by our research. INDUSTRIAL PARTICIPATION Fulfillment of the mission of this Center will require the direct partic- ipation of industry. Financial contributions are important, of course, as they are needed to support Center operations. The financial commitment also ensures the continued active attention of important people in the companies. But it would be a mistake to think of the relationship as merely a financial transaction, in which a company is buying something of value from Purdue. Rather, the arrangement should be considered a joint venture, in which all parties contribute and share. CIDMAC has proven that such a concept can work. Mechanisms The new Center for Intelligent Manufacturing Systems will offer two levels of industrial participation. The existing CIDMAC program will become a part of the ERC, and will be expanded to include more member companies. This form of participation requires a significant commitment because it involves maintaining a close working relationship, including a full-time site representative. The site representative is a technically ori- ented employee of the company who resides at Purdue and engages in the day-to-day activities of the Center. In addition, each member company will have representation on the Policy Advisory Committee and on the Technical Advisory Committee. It is understood that the individuals on these committees represent not just their own companies' interests, but those of American manufacturing industry as a whole. There is a reason- able limit to the number of companies that could participate in this manner- probably in the range of 12 to 15.

PLUS AND PROGRAMS OF THE EXISTING CENTERS 85 The other form of participation in the Center is as an "affiliate." Affiliates receive a newsletter and reports, and may attend an annual research forum. Generally speaking, they will be observers of the activities of the Center rather than direct participants in the research. The obligation of an affiliate to the Center involves no more than the payment of an annual fee. Technology Transfer Compared to other industrialized nations, the United States has not provided very well for routine technology transfer between universities and manufacturing companies. This fact alone is one of the major reasons for lagging productivity gains. Any comprehensive strategy that is intended to improve U.S. manufacturing productivity must address this issue. The on-site industrial representatives of our principal industrial partners, as well as the affiliate program just described, will serve as effective conduits for the exchange of information and technology arising out of the Center's work. Other, more commonplace means of information/tech- nology transfer, such as workshops and conferences, will be organized from time to time as appropriate. The usual practices of publication and presentation will also be carried out. The philosophy that must guide all of the research done within the Center is that it be available to all U.S.- based companies. Although our industrial participants may enjoy special advantages by virtue of their direct involvement in the work as it occurs, the Center will not restrict dissemination of results to just those few companies. Indeed, it is part of the mission of the Center to actively disseminate its results so as to improve the competitiveness of American manufacturing industry.

Center for Robotic Systems in Microelectronics SUSAN HACKWOOD INTRODUCTION The Center for Robotic Systems in Microelectronics, located at the University of California at Santa Barbara (UCSB), brings together two technologies of vital importance to U.S. industry: robotic systems engi- neering and microelectronics manufacturing. By working in this cross- disciplinary area the center will generate advances in applied as well as fundamental research. The main goals of the Center are to create new technology in flexible automation for semiconductor device fabrication and to educate a new generation of engineers skilled in the implementation of robotic systems. The program being implemented at UCSB involves faculty and students from four different engineering departments, and has a unique method of interacting with industry. The educational program now under way will produce graduate and undergraduate students who will be familiar with the needs of industry, and who will be capable of designing and building automation systems. UCSB, located about 100 miles north of Los Angeles and 250 miles south of Silicon Valley, is geographically well situated to become a major research focus for California's high-technology industries. A high level of university commitment, along with National Science Foundation (NSF) funding, will ensure the success of the Center during the start-up period. However, the eventual goal of the Center is to become self-sufficient through funding from industrial sources. 86

PLANS AND PROGRAMS OF THE EXISTING CENTERS ROBOTICS AND MICROELECTRONICS 87 We define "robot" as a computer-controlled machine which is self- reprogrammable via sensory inputs. Mechanical arms are examples of robots; but within this broad definition semiconductor processing equip- ment can also be regarded as a robot if the equipment is endowed with sensory-based control. The pursuit of automation in microelectronics can have two distinct goals. The first is process investigation. Here robotics is used to control a fabrication sequence automatically and reproducibly to obtain optimum results. The second goal is increasing yield, while maintaining quality and reliability. As very large scale integrated circuit (VLSI) features continue to shrink (1-micron features will be standard in the future) and complexity increases, production costs will be the critical factor for competitiveness in microelectronics. Thus, of these two aspects of automation in elec- tronics-process investigation and increasing yield the Center will em- phasize the latter, although without neglecting the first. This emphasis was chosen because productivity is economically the most critical aspect, and because it is not currently being researched. Accordingly, we have chosen research areas that will result in reduced costs in semiconductor device fabrication. To accomplish this, robotic systems that allow more accurate alignment, reduction of particles and defects, and better control of complex processes are being developed. Three general research areas have been selected for focus: (1) robotic systems for material transfer, (2) robotic systems for process control, and (3) robotic systems for assembly and packaging. Many universities have realized the extreme importance of robotics research and education for the survival of our economy. Unique to the UCSB Center is the emphasis on systems. We define a robotic system as "a collection of interacting robots and peripherals that together achieve a definite purpose." Recently, it has become apparent that the bottleneck in robotics is not so much in the science as it is in the implementation. The United States may still lead in the fundamentals, but it is lagging behind Japan in system design and application of robotics in industry, as Figure 1 makes clear. The Center, while advancing the basic knowledge of robotics in mechanics, in control, and in sensors, will stress the inte- gration of robotic systems into real-life environments. The result, as sug- gested by Figure 2, should be an accelerated reduction of manufacturing costs and an improved U.S. competitive position. MANAGEMENT AND RESEARCH METHODS The Center is led by a three-person team. The type of university-industry cooperation envisioned for this Center requires a range of leadership tasks

88 PLANS AND PROGRAMS OF THE EXISTING CENTERS ROBOT INSTALLATIONS U.S. 0 JAPAN 45,000 32,000 7,000 .~ 1982 1 0,000 1983 1 4,000 1984 FIGURE 1 Application of robots in Japanese industry compared to application in U.S. industry. that are best carried out by a team. In this way it is possible to maintain the executive effectiveness of the leadership without sacrificing its tech- nical expertise. (Such a sacrifice is inevitably made whenever the executive function resides in one person alone, as is often seen in the case of university leaders who, in order to administer, have irreversibly lost con- tact with research.) The Center also proposes a new method of engineering research. The usual procedure is to go from the general to the specific, to do first research and then development. Typically, research is done freely in academia, and out of the results produced industry picks those worthy of develop- ment. Robotic systems research cannot be done this way. The procedure used by the Center is to go from the specific to the general, doing appli- cations first and gaining fundamental knowledge later (see Figure 31.

PLANS AND PROGRAMS OF THE EXISTING CENTERS CD go . of o o Robotic Systems Research [Pi' 89 by Humans by Robots TIME from this ~ ~ to this t \4 FIGURE 2 Effect of robotic systems research on speed of application of robotics to U.S. manufacturing and on cost reduction. Research focused on real applications does not, however, deny the im- portance of pertinent basic underlying principles. Research is carried out by a multidisciplinary team of 16 professors from four departments (Electrical and Computer Engineering, Mechanical Engineering, Chemical Engineering, and Computer Science). Projects are under way in the basic disciplines of robotics (mechanics, control, and machine perception), as well as on applied research in flexible automation of microelectronics manufacturing.

go PLANS AND PROGRAMS OF THE EXISTING CENTERS Specific Problem New Technology (Short-Term) General Problems New Knowledge (Long-Term) FIGURE 3 The Center's approach to robotic systems research, involving the creation of new knowledge by generalization from specific tasks. INDUSTRIAL INTERACTION "Systems House" Approach A strong interaction with industry is the key to the success of the Center. The Center operates as a "systems house." This systems house is the missing link between the robot builder and the robot user. The concept involves several key features. First, an automation project is selected jointly by a private company and the Center faculty. The project is chosen for its importance to the company, relevance to the advancement of robotic systems engineering, level of difficulty, time scale for execution, and amount of industrial commitment. Project design and execution occur at the Center. Industrial participation includes the company's assigning en- gineers to work with the Center. Implementation takes place on location in industry. In the systems house mode of operation the Center can become finan- cially self-sufficient in the following way. The company purchases the equipment necessary for the system to be implemented. The equipment is then loaned to the Center. Equipment is loaned rather than donated because the end product of a research effort is the successful transfer of the same equipment, in the form of a complete system, back to the com- pany. In return for the completed system the company is asked to fund students and faculty for the next project in proportion to the complexity of the system. The total cost to industry is substantially less than the cost of commercial systems houses, and the university benefits since the Center

PLAlVS AND PROGRAMS OF THE EXISTING CENTERS 91 receives student/faculty support and is assured of always having the most up-to-date equipment available for research, at no cost. Current Industrial Participation At present the Center is supported by approximately 15 companies. These include: (1) large semiconductor and/or equipment manufacturers (Intel, Rockwell, Varian, and Bell Communications Research); (2) local industries (Renco, Circon, Santa Barbara Research Corporation, and Delco); and (3) robot manufacturers (GMF, Intelledex, Automatix, Microbot, and Digital Automation Control). One project that has already been initiated, in collaboration with Bell Communications Research, is the development of a standard way to handle long-wavelength semiconductor lasers. Semiconductor lasers are expen- sive ($200 to $400) because the production yield is so low. This project is aimed at designing robots capable of inspecting, testing, and handling these fragile devices. In particular, a four-axis, modular micromanipu- lating robot with vision capabilities is being constructed. This is also an example of self-support achieved via the systems house method of op- eration. Bell Communications Research will purchase the system upon completion. FACILITIES The university has leased an Engineering Centers building at the edge of campus. The Center for Robotic Systems in Microelectronics will oc- cupy 14,000 square feet of this space. A major new acquisition of the Center is a 1,400-square-foot class 100 clean-room, which has just been purchased by the university and will be installed by mid-June. These facilities greatly enhance the Center's chances of success. A further 4,000 square feet of space in the newly constructed engineering building on campus will also be allocated to the Center, for undergraduate teaching. The university has allocated approximately $1 million for initial equip- ment purchases, and has also allocated several faculty positions to the Center. EDUCATION The Center is stimulating the teaching of new courses in subjects rel- evant to robotic systems in microelectronics. Both undergraduate and graduate courses are offered. The research program will involve approx

92 PLANS AND PROGRAMS OF THE EXISTING CENTERS imately 10 percent of all engineering graduate students at UCSB. Mul- tidisciplinary engineering methods are assimilated by example, through participation in the university-industry joint projects. The Center will stress undergraduate education. It has already established a one-year, senior- level complete curriculum for robotic systems specialization. The Center provides funds to pay undergraduates as technicians in the implementation stages of projects. It will also make extensive use of videotaped instruction to illustrate robotic systems implementations on the factory floor. In ad- dition, the Center is open to members of industry to continue their edu- cation, and invites the participation of other schools in the same geographical area. p

Center for Composites Manufactunng Science arid Engineenng R. BYRON PIPES The College of Engineering of the University of Delaware, in association with Rutgers University and with funding by the National Science Foun- dation, will develop a Center for Composites Manufacturing Science and Engineering. This Center is intended to provide cross-disciplinary engi- neering research and training to support national needs in the commercial aircraft and aerospace industries, the ground transportation industry, the electronics industry, and other consumer products industries. The initial impetus for a national emphasis on composite materials came from the need for new materials to meet the extreme and exacting re- quirements of the aerospace programs of the 1960s. The demands on materials in these applications were so diverse and severe that no single existing material could satisfy the requirements. The development of new stiff, strong, and lightweight materials systems, consisting of high-per- formance fibers unified by advanced binders, played a key role in the success of the space program as well as in the development of new military systems. Today, while such materials continue to be important in space and military applications, they are also being required to play much broader technological and economic roles with regard to national needs in the commercial sector. OVERVIEW: THE CENTER'S GOALS AND CAPABILITIES The new Center intends to provide a cross-disciplinary approach to the conduct of engineering research and to the development of engineering graduates at the bachelor, master, and doctoral levels. As a partnership 93

94 PLANS AND PROGRAAiIS OF THE EXISTING CENTERS among university, government, and industry, the primary goal of the new Center will be to accelerate technological advancement through discipline synergism, scholarship, sustained basic research, graduate and under- graduate education, unique facilities, faculty excellence, technical ex- change, and documentation of the evolving technology. The primary roles of the university center will be in the development of new knowledge and the transmittal or transferal of knowledge and technology. Since univer- sities are not self-sufficient in the evolution of technology, the active participation of industry is imperative. The University of Delaware has been a pioneer in the development of the center concept. The Center for Composite Materials, founded in 1974, was the precursor of the new Engineering Research Center (ERC). In addition, a Center for Catalytic Science and Technology was founded in 1978 and has developed a strong national program in catalysis research, supported by the National Science Foundation and the petrochemical in- dustry. The facilities developed under ERC sponsorship are maintained for the joint use of all faculty and students involved in Center projects. A profes- sional staff is provided for maintenance of research facilities and tools. The Center provides services not typically accessible to students and most faculty, such as graphics services, a research professional staff, technician services, enhanced clerical service, and access to unique facilities. OVERVIEW: THE RESEARCH PROGRAM The research program of the Center for Composites Manufacturing Science and Engineering will focus on fundamental engineering research problems that represent the primary barriers to the growth of this important new high-technology industry. Five primary research programs make up the Center: (1) Manufacturing and Processing Science; (2) Mechanics and Design Science; (3) Computation, Software, and Information Transfer; (4) Materials Design; and (5) Materials Durability. The interaction between design and manufacturing science in composite materials requires the careful integration of the first two programs, while the remaining three programs will form the cross-disciplinary foundation of the Center. The affiliate program of Rutgers University will allow for extension of the research to encompass ceramic matrix composites, in addition to polymeric and metallic systems.

PLANS AND PROGRAMS OF THE EXISTING CENTERS Manufacturing and Processing Science 95 Contemporary manufacturing processes all share one characteristic: greater control of material microstructure brings higher manufacturing costs. Yet it is through the careful control of material microstructure that the greatest improvements in material properties can be obtained. Significant oppor- tunities for composite materials lie with the development of automated manufacturing methods whereby control of microstructure can be achieved. Thus, the primary objective of the Manufacturing and Processing Science research program is to develop the fundamental engineering and science basis to support the development of manufacturing methods for composite materials. Particular emphasis will be given to development of active control of material microstructure and properties. Three primary areas of focus will be manufacturing process studies, quality assurance and nondestructive evaluation, and fundamental process variables. Net shape forming pro- cesses to be studied include: robotic fiber placement, laminate sheet form- ing, injection and compression molding, textile forms, powder processing, pultrusion, and reaction injection molding. Quality assurance and non- destructive evaluation studies will focus on the simultaneous monitoring of in situ material properties and defects utilizing sensing techniques that include optical, piezoelectric, and radiation sources and sensors. A robotic work station will be developed for computer-aided interrogation of com- plex geometric forms. Tomographic, holographic, and advanced ultrasonic techniques will be utilized in this program. Fundamental process-variable studies will examine the Theological properties and processes of composite materials. In addition, the development of material microstructure will be examined through such studies as the measurement of crystallite dimen- sions in semicrystalline polymers and cross-link density in thermosetting polymers. Mechanics and Design Science The Mechanics and Design Science program will develop mechanics models for several emerging composite material forms of interest, and will integrate the models into a computer-aided design methodology. The material forms will include: textile structural composites, ceramic matrix composites, flexible (elastomeric) composites, and hybrid composites. For each form, constitutive relations will be derived and the failure process modeled. Computed design science research involves the integration of not only materials models, but also processing and manufacturing sci- ence models. In this way the computer-aided design research will permit the simultaneous design of material microstructure and external geome- tries.

96 PL41VS AND PROGRAMS OF THE EXISTING CENTERS Computation, Software, and Information Transfer The availability of high-speed, large-capacity computers has changed many of the traditional approaches in engineering education and practice. The heuristic methods of the past have given way to numerical simulation, which permits the solution of field equations that describe the complex, coupled phenomena involved in manufacturing, processing, and design of composite materials. To advance this process, the Computation, Soft- ware, and Information Transfer program will develop computational mod- els for the prediction of material behavior, and will provide for transfer of technology to industry by means of computers. Accordingly, this pro- gram emphasizes research on computational analysis, materials modeling, advanced computer graphics, computer-aided design, and materials data base. Materials Design The aim of the Materials Design program is to generate concepts and methodologies that link materials processing to performance. This end will be accomplished through coordinated research efforts directed at re- lating process-induced variations in a hierarchy of structures to material behavior. The structural-hierarchy approach offers the potential of con- necting molecular structure to macroscopic behavior through the coupling of the behavior of key structural elements associated with differing scales of interaction. At the macrocomposite scale the arrangement of reinforcing elements is considered. The focus at the microsystems scale will take into account inhomogeneities in the internal structure of the reinforcing agents and matrix, as well as the possibility of a perturbed interphase region near the surface of the reinforcing element. The development of explicit mo- lecular theories to describe the properties of ordered regions of crystallitic materials will be considered in the molecular systems research effort. Materials Durability The Materials Durability program is directed at the rational design of composite materials to prevent premature failure. Primary thrusts of the research are, first, to define microscopic failure detail experimentally and thus produce microscopic failure models; and second, to develop quan- titative computer models relating microscopic detail to macroscopic fail- ure. The two primary material forms considered are continuous and discontinuous fibers embedded in homogeneous matrices. Phenomena in- vestigated will include those associated with the actions of the environ

PLANS AND PROGRAMS OF THE EXISTING CENTERS 97 meet, mechanical stress, electrical stress, and foreign body contact. These include rupture, creep, wear, fatigue, and dimensional instability. Char- acterization of the initial and degraded states of the material, using the advanced tools of electron microscopy, infrared spectroscopy, nuclear magnetic resonance, dynamic mechanical spectroscopy, local chemical measurement (ESCA,* Auger, or x-ray fluorescence), and x-ray or light scattering, will permit proper model development. Ceramics Research at Rutgers University The Affiliate University program involves faculty and students of the Ceramics Department of Rutgers University in studies to enhance tough- ness of ceramic materials through fiber reinforcement and to develop methods for injection molding of ceramic preforms from powder starting materials. The benefits to the two universities will be substantial in that the University of Delaware expertise in composite materials will be com- bined with that of Rutgers University in ceramics; thus, the overall program will be expanded to add the important class of ceramics to those of poly- mers and metals. ACADEMIC PROGRAM Embedded in the educational program of the College of Engineering, the new Center will involve undergraduate students, beginning in the sophomore year, in participation as undergraduate research assistants. In 1985 a total of 30 undergraduate students will be employed to assist graduate students, faculty, and/or research professionals for 10 hours per week each. In the summer after the sophomore year students are to be engaged full time at the Center, while in the summer after the junior year they are to be placed in an industrial or federal laboratory to gain practical research experience. Senior students normally elect to conduct an inde- pendent research effort under faculty guidance. Considering the special opportunities it represents, this program for undergraduates is directed toward the academically accomplished student, and provides a vehicle for recruitment to graduate programs. The focal point for involvement of students in the Center for Composites Manufacturing Science and Engineering will be as graduate research as- sistants. In 1985 a total of 33 graduate students throughout the College of Engineering will be supported by Center funds, and by 1990 a total of 50 graduate research assistants will be active in Center programs. As degree candidates in the curriculum departments of Chemical Engineering, *Electron spectroscopy for chemical analysis.

98 Plains AND PROGRAMS OF THE EXISTING CENTERS Civil Engineering, Electrical Engineering, Materials Science and Metal- lurgy, and Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, the students will re- ceive specialization through cross-disciplinary research projects and Trough specialized course work. Research projects will culminate in theses and dissertations, as well as research progress reports. Primary objectives of the educational program will be the development of Ph.D. degree-holders to carry out industrial and federal research and to set up similar academic programs at other universities, along with M. S .- and B.S.-level graduates to carry out engineering practice in the emerging composites industry. The interdisciplinary awareness of these graduates should be a key factor in their success in each of these endeavors. Finally, the educational program will provide for the continuing education of both engineering practitioners and young entrants to the field from other profes- sions through short courses and specially prepared text materials. INDUSTRIAL INTERACTION Industrial participation in the Center for Composites Manufacturing Science and Engineering will have a pervasive influence upon the program. It will take many forms: direct financial support for facility development, financial support of consortia programs, financial support of individual research projects, participation in advisory boards, and exchange of per- sonnel through industrial internships. Financial support through a joint University/Industry Research Program known as "Application of Composite Materials to Industrial Products" will provide approximately $1 million per year. Industrial funds will also be provided for the purchase of facilities for a Composites Manufacturing Science Laboratory (CMSL); the initial investment will be approximately $1 million, to be provided during the first two program years. Ten blue- chip companies are participating in this way. Exchange of personnel will be extensive. The residence of industrial personnel within the Center for periods of 6 to 18 months to conduct joint, open research with Center personnel will provide an important mechanism for interaction with the Center. In addition, a Visiting Scholar Program will provide for the place- ment of university faculty or research professionals in industrial or federal laboratories. It is anticipated that, in all, 30 to 40 industrial organizations will interact with the Center in various ways through the University/ Industry Research Program. Three mechanisms are provided for industrial review of Center pro- grams. They are an Industrial Advisory Board, a Manufacturing Science Advisory Board, and a Science Advisory Board. Membership in the In- dustrial Advisory Board will be open to industrial organizations who join the University/Industry Research Program described above. This board

PLANS AND PROGRAMS OF THE EXISTING CENTERS 99 will be comprised of seven subcommittees: research, technology transfer, computer software, student honors, patent policy, long-range planning, and facilities. Vehicles for the transfer of technology to the industrial sector include the production of a composites design encyclopedia, annual workshops, an annual research symposium, computer software, site visits, and industrial internships. FUTURE DEVELOPMENT PLANS To support the development of the new Center, the University of Del- aware will establish three new tenure-track faculty positions in the College of Engineering. Support for the new faculty positions will be borne by the Center during the life of the program; the university will take financial responsibility upon program completion. The Center for Composites Manufacturing Science and Engineering will expend approximately $4 million from 1985 to 1990 in the devel- opment of facilities to support the research program. The renovation of more than 6,000 square feet in Newark Hall will provide for new labo- ratories: a Nondestructive Evaluation and Quality Assurance Laboratory, a VAX 11-785 Computing Facility, a Publications Production Laboratory, and the first phase of the Composites Manufacturing Science Laboratory (CMSL). Construction of approximately 13,000 square feet of new space will provide for an office and laboratory structure, as well as for completion of the CMSL. Approximately $1.5 million will be spent in support of equipment for the new laboratories.

Engineering Center for Telecommunications Research MISCHA SCHWARTZ SUMMARY The Engineering Center for Telecommunications Research was estab- lished May 1, 1985 at Columbia University by a major grant from the National Science Foundation (NSF). The focus of the Center's research efforts will be on integrated tele- communication networks of the future. Two major thrusts are planned. One is on developing new systems and concepts for these networks, which will handle, in an integrated fashion, data, voice, video, and other com- munications traffic. Technological advances in very large scale integrated (VLSI) circuits, microelectronics, and electrooptical devices will be re- quired to achieve the degree of integration we are proposing. These needed advances provide the second, and concurrent, thrust. To explore the network aspects of integration, we are implementing a highly flexible network test bed called MAGNET, which is capable of supporting data, facsimile, voice, and video communications. At the same time we are developing work stations designed to access a network such as MAGNET, thus providing an interactive multimedia environment with real-time voice and video as well as data and graphics. Our microelec- tronics and electrooptical devices group has begun development of some novel electrooptical devices. New laser-beam microfabrication techniques will be used to build these devices. We plan to explore and implement new VLSI and multimicroprocessor architectures in order to meet the processing demands posed by real-time voice and video traffic within the work stations and network switches. 100

PLAlVS AND PROGRAMS OF THE EXISTING CENTERS 101 We expect to involve 200 undergraduate and 200 graduate students in course work, project work, and research activities associated with the Center. New courses and curricula of a multidisciplinary nature will be developed, based on Center activities. Industry will be closely involved: appointments will be made to an industrial advisory board; new adjunct positions will be created; an industrial visitors program will be established; and short courses for industry will be developed. INTRODUCTION The U.S. telecommunications industry is one of the largest in terms of gross product; it is also among the world leaders in the development and use of high technology. The field has been expanding explosively world- wide, and it is now at a critical juncture in its evolution because of two recent developments with far-reaching significance. First, during the past decade the marriage of communications and computer technology, to- gether with the accelerated pace of breakthroughs in microelectronics and lightwave technology, have produced a proliferation of new devices, sys- tems, and services, ushering in what is often termed the "information age." Second, the competitive environment in the U.S. has been changed fundamentally by deregulation, by the AT&T divestiture, and by impres- sive advances in high technology on the international scene Japan being the outstanding example. What have been the consequences of these developments? Until very recently the U.S. was the undisputed leader in telecommunications re- search, and a few large industrial organizations dominated the scene. Under those circumstances the output of a small number of industrial and university research laboratories was sufficient to maintain that dominance. Today the situation is changing rapidly and dramatically. All computer manufacturers have entered the telecommunications field very actively, adding to the already heavy involvement of the traditional carriers and communications manufacturers. The field is now wide open to competi- tion, and non-U.S. manufacturers from Canada and Japan particularly- are making important inroads into U.S. markets. Members of the European Common Market the French and British in particular-have declared modern telecommunications to be a top-priority high-technology field. They are ahead of the U.S. in a number of areas of telecommunications services, and are also looking for ways to penetrate U. S . markets. German, Swedish, and Italian manufacturers are also actively involved. The new competitive atmosphere has spawned a wide variety of companies, many of them very small, that are actively engaged in the development of telecommunications products and services. Finally, in the face of the increasing complexity of the field as well as the new opportunities it offers,

102 PLANS AND PROGRAMS OF THE EXISTING CENTERS the large users of telecommunications services (the prime example being the financial community) have been driven more and more to develop their own systems and expertise. The result of these several trends is that an acute need has developed for the expansion of telecommunications research in the open atmosphere of the university, for the transfer of the results of this research to all industrial organizations- large and small- and for the training of a much larger group of specialists to keep pace with the proliferating needs of industry. How should the university respond to this challenge? An impressive array of disciplines is involved in the art of telecommunications. For example, knowledge of optics, acoustics, microelectronics, the psycho- physics of perception, and the mathematics of signal processing is needed for applications such as voice and image processing, recognition, and understanding. Queueing theory, combinatorial mathematics, economics, and law all contribute to the conception of new systems and services. It is clear that future advances in the state of the art will require an integrated approach demanding the combined efforts of systems engineers, theore- ticians, and specialists in solid-state devices, lightwave technology, VLSI circuit design, computer hardware and software, and other fields yet to be identified. Significant investment in laboratory facilities and support personnel is also required. (The communications industry worldwide has long recognized the need for this type of investment, as is illustrated by the massive efforts in VLSI technology at AT&T Bell Laboratories and at NTT and NEC of Japan.) In view of these characteristics of the field, it seems self-evident that an effective university organization for telecommunications research must be multidisciplinary in nature, with a strong experimental component and a close working relationship with industry. Particularly because of the experimental aspect of the work, such an organization requires a fairly high level of funding; and in order to insulate it from the exigencies of the industrial arena, it should be largely (although not necessarily exclu- sively) funded by government. We believe that the Engineering Center for Telecommunications Research, established at Columbia through a ma- jor grant of the National Science Foundation, meets these requirements. THE RESEARCH PROGRAM Overall Research Focus The key concept in future telecommunications systems is that of pro- viding integrated services for a variety of interconnected users. Future telecommunication networks will carry data, voice, graphics, facsimile, video, and other types of traffic in such a way that they are "transparent"

PLANS AND PROGRAMS OF THE EXISTING CENTERS 103 to the user. New systems and new concepts will be needed to make these networks possible. Integration within the network must go hand in hand with integration at the user interface. Future user terminals are expected to have built into them a real-time voice and video capability, in addition to the ability to handle data and graphics. Basic studies of this multimedia environment are required. Our Center research activities will focus on developing new concepts in integration within the network and at the user interface. Achievement of the degree of integration we are proposing will require technological advances on a number of fronts. The high-speed data-rate requirements set by integrating various forms of traffic dictate the use of optical transmission. Novel electrooptical devices will be required, inte- grating optical and electronic processing on the same chip. New laser- beam microfabrication techniques will be used to build these devices. The processing demands posed by real-time voice and video traffic within the user terminals and network switches require orders-of-magnitude increases in processing power over existing systems. New VLSI and multimicro- processor architectures will be required to meet this challenge. It is apparent that the research activities outlined above are multidis- ciplinary in nature. The research to be carried out ranges from the basic physics of materials and processes to the mathematics of systems analysis. Although the goals of the research are specific, focusing on integrated telecommunication networks of the future, the implications are broad and include the exploration of new directions in man/machine communication and in auditory and visual perception, as well as new means of organizing information services. In order to carry out these research activities most effectively the Center is organized into four major activity areas: systems and new concepts · VLSI circuits and architectures for telecommunications · microelectronics and electrooptical devices · analytical studies. Eighteen faculty members of the Columbia University School of En- gineering and Applied Science are participating in Center activities. De- par~nents involved are Electrical Engineering, Computer Science, Industrial Engineering and Operations Research, and Applied Physics. Students, full-time research staff, and industrial visitors will also participate in the four activity areas. Investigators in the systems and new concepts area will be exploring new concepts in integrated network architectures and integrated work stations (terminals). Work in both image processing and speech compres- sion will be carried out as part of this integrated services effort. Researchers

104 PLANS AND PROGRAMS OF THE EXISTING CENTERS in the VLSI circuits and architectures area will develop integrated circuits for telecommunications as well as new, automated techniques for reducing the functional specifications of a telecommunication system component to a circuit layout on a chip. They will work closely with the systems people on implementation of some of the new concepts and systems de- veloped, as well as on VLSI architectures for image and voice processing for real-time transmission over the integrated networks. It is noted above that electrooptical devices and lightwave technology will play a key role in research activities focused on integrated networks of the future. The researchers in the microelectronics and electrooptical devices area will be involved in a number of activities important to this aspect of telecommunications. These include studies in lightwave tech- nology and laser fabrication technology, the development of microelec- tronic devices for high-speed signal processing, and the design of new optical devices. The analytical studies group will carry out studies fun- damental to an understanding of telecommunication network performance and design. These studies are expected to provide feedback on and ideas for new concepts in integrated networks. A network simulation facility will be developed to provide additional support for these activities. MAGNET: An Example of Current Research Activity In beginning our studies of integrated networks we are implementing a highly flexible network test bed called MAGNET. MAGNET is a local area network of our own design capable of supporting integrated services such as data, facsimile, graphics, voice, and video communications. Through proper software design it will also emulate, at higher levels, integrated networks of various types. Once completed, it can be used to study in- tegration of services on local area networks, as well as to provide a test bed for trying out new system concepts as they are developed. The initial implementation is based on coaxial cable technology. Con- currently with the development of MAGNET, the electrooptics group is developing the optical components that will enable the network to be switched to fiber optic technology. The fiber optic implementation, con- sisting of two fiber optic rings, each operating at 100 megabits/sec trans- mission capacity, will enable wide-bandwidth video signals to be transmitted over the network, in addition to voice and data. There are plans to have 12 nodes on the network. These include a powerful minicomputer and several intelligent microcomputer work stations. To provide a truly integrated network that is, one that integrates data, voice, and video from the point of origin through the network to the destination integrated work stations must be available. Commercial work stations available to us in our laboratory do not have this capability. Work

PLANS AND PROGRAMS OF THE EXISTING CENTERS 105 is therefore proceeding on novel speech compression and image processing algorithms to enable work stations to handle real-time voice and video. Integration of real-time video services, in particular, is a formidable task. These studies will enable us to explore, with much better understanding, the requirements for integrated and multimedia work stations of the future. They should lead to the novel VLSI and multimicroprocessor concepts required to fully implement the integrated services environment that the future will bring. EDUCATIONAL/INDUSTRIAL PROGRAMS Along with these research activities focusing on new concepts for in- tegrated telecommunication networks and the technology required to sup- port them, the Center will also be pursuing a variety of related educational activities. Student project work at both the undergraduate and graduate level will be expanded considerably through the facilities of the Center. Full-time research staff, funded through the Center, will work jointly with faculty on a multidisciplinary basis to guide students in the conduct of projects and formal doctoral research studies. New courses and seminars in telecommunications and selected areas will be developed. We also plan to develop new curricula in the telecommunications area. Involvement of faculty, students, and researchers from the Columbia University School of Business's program on telecommunications policy, from the Law School, the School of International Affairs, and the School of Journalism should lead to particularly exciting new programs on telecommunications tech- nology and policy. We estimate that at least 200 undergraduates and an equal number of graduate students from the School of Engineering and Applied Science will be involved in a broad spectrum of research and educational activities once the Center is fully operational. Additional students will be drawn from the other schools noted above. Industrial involvement with both research and educational activities will be heavily stressed. We are particularly fortunate in our location. Many of the major industrial telecommunications and related research labora- tories are in close proximity to Columbia. These include, among others, Bell Laboratories, Bell Communications Research, IBM, RCA, ITT, and Philips Laboratories. Some 1,700 electronics companies, employing 50,000 engineers, are located within 50 miles of our campus. Already numbered among the industrial affiliates of our Center are Bell Communications Research, GTE Laboratories, Philips Laboratories, and Timeplex Corp. AT&T and IBM have provided us with major gifts. For a number of years we have had a close working relationship, through an NSF university- industry cooperative research grant, with a group at IBM Research (York

106 PLANS AND PROGRAMS OF THE EXISTING CENTERS town Heights). Close relationships have also been established with Bell Laboratories, IBM East Fishkill, Codex (a division of Motorola), and a number of other companies. We plan to expand these relationships and seek added financial support from these and other industrial organizations. Apart from nearness to telecommunications manufacturing, common carrier, and research organizations, our location in the heart of New York City also puts us in close proximity to the largest financial community in the world. These banks and financial institutions are, collectively, among the world's largest users of telecommunications. Merrill Lynch and Ci- ticorp have already provided us with financial support for our activities. We hope to have increased support from these sources in the future. What means can we use to ensure close cooperation with industry? Over the past few years our weekly seminar series on computer communications networks has regularly attracted speakers and many participants from industry, in addition to our own faculty and students. This series will be expanded to encompass the more multidisciplinary nature of Center ac- tivities. We plan to have workshops on a regular basis that are geared to industrial participation. Our graduate courses have always been well at- tended by part-time students from nearby industry. The new courses and curricula should generate even more interest. We are currently organizing an adjunct and industrial visitors program through which outstanding engineers and scientists from industry will participate in our research and teaching activities on a regular basis. One possibility, which has been viewed with favor, is to have a weekly grad- uate-credit seminar with a limited number of students, run jointly by an industrial visitor and a faculty member. A number of such seminars would be organized each semester; they would be expected to develop into co- operative research activities. We also plan to develop short courses for industry in order to provide practicing engineers with continuing education in this rapidly developing field. Finally, an Industrial Advisory Board made up of executives from a number of leading corporations is being set up. We plan to include on the board a number of government research leaders and representatives of other universities. This board will be expected to provide advice and suggestions as to research direction, industrial involvement, and educa- tional activities. It will also participate in the annual technical review of Center activities by attending research overviews, and by providing names of outstanding engineers and scientists to serve as peer reviewers of annual proposals for research support prepared by Center researchers.

Biotechnology Process Engineering Center DANIEL I. C. WANG INTRODUCTION Fundamental discoveries in the biological sciences during the past 10 years have been truly monumental. Through advances in molecular biology man's ability to manipulate biological activities and properties in both prokaryotic and eukaryotic organisms has created a new engineering field termed "biotechnology." This technology has enabled us to explore the potential impacts of biological systems across a range of applications, including human and animal health, agriculture, chemicals, food, energy, and environment. It has been forecast that by the year 2000 commercial biotechnology markets could reach $40 to $200 billion dollars. It is important to note that new and fundamental discoveries in molecular biology are emerging on a day-to-day basis. Many of these discoveries provide the enabling technology for new and important commercial prod- ucts; yet development of the necessary engineering technology has pro- gressed slowly. To overcome this barrier to process and product development, engineering research and training must be accelerated at a rate commen- surate with progress in the life sciences. It is the intention of the Biotechnology Process Engineering Center at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) to establish well-targeted efforts to advance the research and the training of engineers needed to solve the problems associated with utilization of biotechnology. There is no doubt that biotechnology will become a major manufacturing industry in the very near future. There is, therefore, an urgent need to develop technological concepts to implement this industry. There will also be a 107

108 PLANS AND PROGRAMS OF THE EXISTING CENTERS need for people to lead and maintain the international competitiveness of this new industry. It will be an infant industry, ideally suited for creativity and innovation. However, one should recognize that biotechnology will require both broad and cross-disciplinary training. Therefore, it is our goal to train a new breed of professionals through creative interdisciplinary education and research. These professionals will possess the necessary tools, from the molecular sciences as well as from engineering, to be at the crosscutting frontier of the new technology. We also plan to implement our educational and research programs through synergistic and imaginative cross-disci- plinary interactions. It is imperative that our programs maintain an active interface with the industrial sectors. Three MIT departments, and a total of 16 faculty members, are ready to make this major commitment to the Center's education and research programs. The three departments are: (1) Department of Chemical En- gineering (11 faculty members); (2) Department of Biology (3 faculty members); and (33 Department of Applied Biological Sciences (2 faculty members). The selection of these departments to participate in the proposed Bio- technology Process Engineering Center was appropriate for a number of reasons. First, the faculty and departments already have in place coherent educational and research programs directed toward biotechnology. Fur- thermore, the faculty, as well as the MIT administration, are committed to the development of biotechnology. Research interests of the faculty members participating in this Center are already addressing critical issues in biotechnology. We believe that the 16 faculty members represent the critical mass needed to enable us to execute and implement the programs of the Center. It should be said, however, that we believe opportunities will exist for the future expansion of the Center's activities. There are individual faculty members in other departments, such as Chemistry, Ma- terials Sciences and Engineering, Mechanical Engineering, and the Sloan School of Business Management, who have already expressed an interest in participating in the Center's activities at some point in the future. Collaborations with other universities and institutes are also envisioned. STRUCTURE, MANAGEMENT, AND PLANNING OF THE CENTER The overall structure of the Biotechnology Process Engineering Center is shown in Figure 1. The director of the Center will report directly to the dean of engineering. There are four formal committees and programs associated with the Center. These are the Policy Committee, the Operating Committee, the Industrial Advisory Board, and the Industrial Biotech- nology Liaison Program. To assist the daily operation of the Center, the

PLANS AND PROGRAMS OF THE EXISTING CENTERS Dean of Engineering Policy Committee Director Operating f Committee o Center Industrial Biotechnology Liaison Program Or · Associate Director · Coordinator · Administrator 109 Industrial Advisory Rr,~re1 FIGURE 1 Management plan for MIT's Biotechnology Process Engineering Center. director will have an associate director, and there will be an administrative staff to coordinate the Center's overall activities. The functions of the different committees should be explained. The Policy Committee consists of the dean of the School of Engineering and the dean of the School of Science, along with the three department heads (Chemical Engineering, Biology, and Applied Biological Sciences). The director of the Center is also a member. The role of the Policy Committee is to ensure the quality and excellence of the Center's activities. In ad- dition, this committee will coordinate institutewide policies for biotech- nology in the present, as well as for the future. This committee will also be responsible for the consolidation and allocation of laboratory space needed for the cross-disciplinary programs within the Center. Since par- ticipants in the Center programs cut across both departments and schools, the Policy Committee is in an excellent position to formulate optimal policies for joint appointments between departments and schools. Lastly, the Policy Committee will act as an interface with industry with respect to future cooperative programs and future gift programs in support of the Center's activities. To assist in the Center's overall operations and activities an Operating Committee has been formed. The members of this committee will serve on a two-year rotational basis. Members consist of the director of the Center as chairman, three participating faculty members from the De- partment of Chemical Engineering, and one member each from the de

110 PLANS AND PROGRAMS OF THE EXISTING CENTERS partments of Biology and Applied Biological Sciences. Three members from industry will also serve on this committee. The role of the Operating Committee is to ensure the technical excellence of the programs within the Center. This committee will set priorities for and coordinate both the educational and research activities of the Center. Prioritization could take the form of peer review of existing and future research programs both within the university and with industry. The multidisciplinary background of Operating Committee members ensures that they are well qualified to identify future needs such as new courses, textbooks, faculty, and scientific directions. This committee will also act as the formal link between the Biotechnology Process Engineering Center and the industrial sector, as represented in the advisory and liaison programs. Lastly, this committee will be responsible for relations and interactions with MIT's Interdisci- plinary Biotechnology Program, as well as for the student and industrial intern activities of the Center. To ensure meaningful collaboration and cooperation with the industrial sector, an Industrial Advisory Board has been formed. Members of this board will be senior managers from industry, including the chemical, pharmaceutical, and biotechnology industries. The role of the Industrial Advisory Board is to address the pressing needs of industry with respect to education and research in order to enhance and ensure our international competitiveness. The Industrial Advisory Board will serve two functions: to advise on the present and future activities of the Center relative to industrial needs, and to act as a catalyst for collaboration between the activities of the Center and the industrial sector at large. Lastly, the board will facilitate the identification of technical personnel for liaison between MIT and various private companies. To instill a more formal industrial collaboration there will be an In- dustrial Biotechnology Liaison Program. This program will have a broad industrial interface, with no fixed number of companies or participants. The purpose of the program will be to provide technical liaison between this Center and industry in the areas of education and research. This program will be coordinated carefully through the administrative office of the Center. Members of the Industrial Liaison Program will identify the mutual interests as well as the mutual collaborative opportunities of the Center and industry. Furthermore, through this program the sharing of facilities and exchange of personnel can be implemented. It should be noted that this program is to be quite broad in scope and not limited to any one sector of industry. For example, we have identified chemical, pharmaceutical, biotechnology, food, process engineering, instrumenta- tion, and equipment companies as representing the types of industry with which the Center would like to interact through its Industrial Liaison Program.

PLANS AND PROGRAMS OF THE EXISTING CENTERS EDUCATIONAL COMPONENTS Undergraduate Programs 111 An overview of the educational programs associated with this Center is shown in Figure 2. A strong educational program will be vital to the success of the Biotechnology Process Engineering Center. It is our belief that entering freshmen must be made aware of potential opportunities in the exploding biotechnology industry. This will be achieved through fac- ulty counseling and special seminars in biotechnology directed at the freshman level. We plan to have the Department of Chemical Engineering play an important role in undergraduate education associated with the Center. We will not initiate or develop a new degree program, because we believe that a strong chemical engineering base is ideal for subsequent education ~ Freshman Awareness | | Undergraduates rGraduates Chemical Engineering | Electives I Undergraduate Research L' Opportunity Program r Chemical Engineering |= M.S. Practice . . School _| Biochemical Engineering | l Labs I _1 Interdepartmental l I Biotechnology Program | Visiting Scientists and Engineers Postdoctoral and _ _ Special Summer Program Industrial Focal Topic Series | Industrial Interns ~ Degree Program Center for Advanced Engineering Study FIGURE 2 Overview of educational programs.

112 PLANS AND PROGRAMS OF THE EXISTING CENTERS in biotechnology. To instill the needed interdisciplinary perspectives, we envision the use of liberal elective course policies whereby existing bio- technology subjects at MIT can be incorporated into these undergraduate study programs. Faculty participation will play a vital role in counseling and advising undergraduates as to choices regarding graduate studies and industrial opportunities in biotechnology. Undergraduate research at MIT is an integral part of the overall edu- cational program. MIT has 15 years of experience with a unique Under- graduate Research Opportunities Program (UROP). The institute's UROP office will allow this Center to easily reach the entire undergraduate com- munity. The Center will thus be in an ideal position to offer the under- graduate a wide variety of opportunities to perform research with an interdisciplinary flavor. Graduate Programs The graduate educational program associated with this Center will be fulfilled in a number of ways. The Department of Chemical Engineering will have one of the major roles in graduate education. However, rather than initiating a new degree program in chemical engineering, we will first focus on the necessary core subjects in chemical engineering fun- damentals. To complement the graduate education associated with the Center, existing electives in biotechnology are ideally suited. At the pres- ent time the readily identifiable biotechnology electives include 7 graduate courses in chemical engineering, 6 in biology, 4 in applied biological sciences, and 2 in chemistry. We plan, in the future, to introduce new courses especially addressing advanced principles in biotechnology pro- cess engineering, to be presented either singly or jointly with cross-dis ciplinary relevancy. In the Department of Applied Biological Sciences, active M.S. and Ph.D. degree programs in biochemical engineering have been in existence for more than 20 years. The education of candidates in these programs is designed to incorporate interdisciplinary skills through courses from the departments of Applied Biological Sciences, Chemical Engineering, and Biology. The doctoral qualifying and written examinations are prepared by members of all three departments. Doctoral Examination Committee members are usually from more than two departments so as to ensure the cross-disciplinary nature of candidates' research. We envision even more interdepartmental interactions in the future arising from the activities of the new Center. The MIT Interdepartmental Biotechnology Program (IBP) is currently in the initial stages of planning and implementation. However, the for- mation of the new Center will accelerate the implementation of this pro

PLANS AND PROGRAMS OF THE EXISTING CENTERS 113 gram. In 1983 the concept of the IBP was developed to provide, at the doctoral level, educational skills that cross disciplinary boundaries. Thus, the liaison with the Center will strengthen graduate education and research in both activities. Postdoctoral and Industrial Programs Postdoctoral training in engineering has not been as common as it has in the sciences. The emergence of biotechnology has begun to change that situation. Recent years have seen an increased interest on the part of engineers in furthering their education in biological fundamentals, and in integrating this knowledge with engineering principles. The proposed Cen- ter will play a vital role in coordinating postdoctoral education and training of industrial personnel in biotechnology. This can be achieved in a number of ways. First, the Visiting Scientists and Engineers Program permits industrial and academic personnel to train and study for short or extended periods of time. However, these visiting scientists and engineers are gen- erally not enrolled in the formal degree program. A second and more formal education and training program offered to industry is through MIT's special summer courses. At MIT, the Office of Summer Sessions offers more than 50 programs per year. Many of the Center's faculty teach these courses, and several of the offered courses are already within the scope of the Biotechnology Process Engineering Center. They include, for example, a special summer course (now in its twenty-fifth year) entitled "Fermentation Technology." Several other courses, such as "Biotechnology: Microbial Principles for Fuels and Chemicals and Ingredients" and "Controlled Drug Release and Deliv- ery," are also offered to the industrial sector as formal training through this special summer program. In the future we are prepared to offer ad- ditional courses relevant to biotechnology as special summer courses. Furthermore, we plan to incorporate laboratory techniques in these special training programs for industrial personnel. We also envision special lecture series to be presented at industrial sites-often a practical approach for companies, as more of their personnel are able to participate. Special focal topics and seminars will also be presented at MIT for attendees from the industrial sector. These seminars, presented by participants of this Center as well as other MIT faculty, will also provide the ideal forum for infor- mation dissemination and technology exchange. Formal industrial and/or university internship programs will be estab- lished in the future. For example, industrial interns can presently matri- culate within a department's degree program at MIT. However, to provide flexibility to industry, internships not associated with degree programs are also possible. This option is ideally suited for our existing Center for

114 PLANS AND PROGRAMS OF THE EXISTING CENTERS Advanced Engineering Study (CAES). Lastly, having university interns at industrial sites could represent a fruitful educational tool for both student and faculty members of the institute. All of these programs can be readily implemented in the future under the auspices of the Biotechnology Process Engineering Center. RESEARCH PROGRAMS Overview and Rationale Discoveries in molecular biology especially in the development of genetic engineering have not only catalyzed interest in biotechnology, but have also provided the scientific basis for a new branch of the bio- chemical process industry. This new industrial branch, which revolves around recombinant DNA technology, is still in its infancy. There are many products for the human pharmaceutical and animal healthcare mar- kets currently undergoing clinical trials e.g., the interferons, human and bovine growth hormones, and tissue plasminogen activator (TPA). Other new therapeutic materials, agricultural products, and chemical materials that will be made through a combination of genetic engineering and bio- processing will have major benefits for mankind, and thus represent major commercial markets. When visualizing these potential benefits and mar- kets, one has to ask: What are the technical barriers preventing commer- cialization? Looking further ahead to the second- and third-generation products and processes that will evolve from the new biotechnology industry, two im- portant generalizations can be made. The first is that many important human therapeutic products are proteins with multiple polypeptide chains that are modified by complex biological reactions, often by the addition of complex oligosaccharides. Such modification occurs post-translation- ally and is required for biological activity and stability. The second gen- eralization is that many of the desired products have low specific activity (i.e., effectiveness per unit weight), and as a consequence will be required in large volumes at low cost. New principles for cost-effective manufac- turing processes are required. The problem has several parts. First, most of the current recombinant- based processes utilize bacteria as a means for production; not only are these processes expensive, but also the bacteria cannot glycosylate or otherwise modify the recombinant protein. Furthermore, when many an- imal proteins are manufactured in bacteria, they are produced in denatured and/or modified form with decreased biological activity. Second, although fe~entation or biosynthesis is the enabling technology, a significant frac- tion of the manufacturing cost is incurred during product recovery. If we are going to be able to economically synthesize the next generation of

PLANS AND PROGRAMS OF THE EXISTING CENTERS 115 products, then new approaches and new technologies must be developed. The establishment of the Biotechnology Process Engineering Center will create a unique locus for collaborative studies between engineers and scientists, focused on breaking new frontiers and developing the funda- mental scientific and engineering bases for advanced biochemical man- ufacturing technologies. To achieve these objectives the research program in the Center will focus on immediately critical issues in biotechnology. The goal of that research is to explore fundamental principles related to the manufacturing of products from biotechnology. The Center will not neglect concepts for the future that may be long-range in nature. We believe that a cross- disciplinary effort is ideal for deriving maximal and synergistic benefits. Within this research program four generic areas will be addressed (see Figure 31. They are: · genetics and molecular biology for protein synthesis, processing, and excretion in animal cells and yeasts · concepts of bioreactor design, scale-up, and operation · downstream processing for product isolation and purification · biochemical process systems engineering. Brief descriptions of each of these research areas are presented below. Genetics and Molecular Biology for Protein Synthesis, Processing, and Excretion in Animal Cells and Yeast The newest and perhaps most interesting class of pharmaceutical com- pounds are human proteins. Members of this class range from hormones Genetics andBiore actor Molecular ~ Design and Bio °9YOperi Itions Cell-Line_ Downstream Development _~ Processing Biochemical Process Systems Engineering FIGURE 3 MIT Biotechnology Process Engineering Research programs.

116 PLANS AND PROGRAMS OF THE EXISTING CENTERS (such as human growth hormones) and interferons (such as alpha, beta, and gamma) to specific proteases (such as tissue plasminogen activator) and protease inhibitors (such as alpha 1-antitrypsin, and monoclonal im- munoglobins). There are probably a hundred known human proteins that would be routinely used in the treatment of patients if available in pure form and at a reasonable expense. The development of recombinant DNA methodologies has made the isolation of DNA segments encoding these proteins almost routine. Development of technologies to synthesize active proteins, using mammalian cells and yeast engineered by recombinant DNA, is the objective of this segment of the research program. A number of important problems now restrict the use of recombinant cultured mammalian cells and yeast for industrial production of human (and animal) proteins. The specific problems to be addressed by the Center include: · production of specific proteins by animal cells -vectors for high-level expression -control of RNA processing and translation -active expression in stationary cells (bioreactor) modifications of recombinant derived proteins -post-translational events to control protein modifications -inter- and intrachain disulfide bonds -specific cleavages and additions genetic approach controlling protein excretion in yeast · fundamental understanding of protein misfolding -monoclonal antibodies to probe proper folding domain -variants with better protein folding ability (downstream processing). Concepts in Bioreactor Design, Scale-up, and Operation The bioreactor is the heart of the process in which value is added to the raw material through biosynthesis or biocatalysis. The bioreactor also interfaces with all other aspects of bioprocess development. The produc- tivity of cells results from the cell-line development, and the performance of the bioreactor may define new problems to be solved by genetics and molecular biology. Similarly, the productivity of the cells and the bio- reactor design is reflected in the purity and concentration of the product, which determines the difficulty of downstream processing. Lastly, optim- ization of bioreactor performance and its integration with separation pro- cesses require application of process systems engineering. A coordinated and integrated group of research projects will be carried out. Their selection was based upon a number of considerations. Future production of biologicals, especially animal and human proteins, will

PLANS AND PROGRAMS OF THE EXISTING CENTERS 117 require the use of eukaryotic (animal) cells. Although protein production by animal cells has been demonstrated using recombinant DNA and hy- bridoma technologies, previous industrial exploitation and the existing scientific and technical base are very limited for large-scale culture of animal cells as compared to fermentation of prokaryotes (e.g., bacteria). The overall goals of Center research are therefore (1) to develop funda- mental engineering principles for large-scale cell culture, including bio- reactor design, scale-up, and operation for animal cells and protein-secreting microorganisms; and (2) to develop strategies and designs which maxi- mize productivity and minimize cost. With regard to bioreactor systems for animal cells, the following list summarizes the specific research topics that will be investigated: · characterization of recombinant animal cells -physiology, biochemistry -cellular and intrinsic kinetics -mathematical modeling . . . . · engineering prlnclp es . . . -reaction engineering -fluid dynamics -transport phenomena -process control and optimization bioreactor design -suspension culture with hollow-fiber perfusion -microcarriers and microencapsulation -novel systems: foams, porous matrix. . Another category of Center research will concern computer control strategies for high-density fermentations using primarily recombinant DNA microorganisms (although the same issues will be of concern with animal cell bioreactors). Process control of feedbatch fermentations will be ex- amined with respect to the effect of control strategy on productivity and product concentration in the bioreactor effluent. Whereas scale-up studies in fermentations have traditionally involved simply increasing scale by an order of magnitude, new methodologies will be examined in which the effects of individual variables (e.g., poor mixing, pH, nutrient concen- tration, and temperature) are examined with well-characterized, instru- mented laboratory bioreactors. Lastly, the technology for maximizing production of excreted protein products by controlled recycling of cells will be studied with a computer- controlled bioreactor and microfiltration membrane system. This project will be integrated with the more detailed studies of microfiltration of cell suspensions carried out within the downstream processing research group.

118 PLANS AND PROGRAMS OF THE EXISTING CENTERS Downstream Processing for Product Isolation and Purification A problem common to all biochemical processes, whether based on fermentation or cell culture technology, is the need to recover the product. In the case of protein production, especially human therapeutic proteins, these products must be recovered in a highly purified form, with the molecule in its proper three-dimensional configuration. The need for ex- tremes in purity, for retention of molecular configuration, and for effi- ciency in recovery and process scale-up are major challenges facing the bioprocess engineer. As described above, the problem of recovery depends very much on the type of cell and how the bioreactor is designed and operated. Thus, the solution to downstream processing problems will come from collaboration between the biologist and the engineer. A unique aspect of the Center's program on downstream processing research is the close interaction between biologists and engineers, who must continually ask each other: Is this problem best solved through a biological or an engi- neering approach? The research will focus on developing broadly applicable, generic so- lutions to problems of protein recovery, using a variety of different pro- teins. This is necessary because protein recovery is a multifaceted problem (see Figure 4~. Close collaboration between biologists and engineers and interaction with industry will be increasingly necessary to solve new prob- lems today and in the future. Specific areas of Center research in down- stream processing are: cross-flow membrane filtration recovery of insoluble, intracellular proteins kinetic approach to adsorption chromatography · affinity escort chromatography · high-performance liquid chromatography · immunoadsorption chromatography · extraction in biphasic aqueous systems · protein recovery with reversed micelles · integration of downstream processing. A common theme throughout this effort on downstream processing is process integration. We plan to consider each unit operation available and Bioreactor ~epCareait`OnH Concentration H~3 FIGURE 4 Downstream processing.

PLANS AND PROGRAMS OF THE EXISTING CENTERS 119 formulate models that will be used in a complete systems approach to biochemical process development. The development of a systems strategy will greatly enhance our ability to design and operate the most advanced and competitive commercial processes. Biochemical Process Systems Engineering The proposed research in this area has been designed in such a way as to achieve the following objectives: (1) use of the fundamental scientific insights developed in the foregoing research efforts to provide systematic engineering approaches and tools for the analysis, synthesis, evaluation, optimization, and control of complete biochemical process flowsheets; and (2) identification of the critical phenomena and/or parameters that may inhibit the industrial realization of new biochemical processing con- cepts. The work in this area encompasses three types of research with unified themes. Conceiving Novel Biochemical Processes The objective here is to guide the systematic generation and evaluation of alternative biochemical pathways for the commercial production of desired chemicals. The value of this work is to be found in the expanded capability of the designer to search through the multitude of biochemical pathways in order to identify the most promising bioprocessing concepts. These in turn will determine the scope of laboratory research and development activities. Synthesis and Simulation in the Design of Complete Bioprocessing Systems The aim here is to develop systematic procedures for the syn- thesis of optimum bioreactor configurations, for the synthesis of the best sequence of separations, and for the integration of bioreactor and sepa- ration subsystems in order to yield the optimum overall process. Computer- aided simulation capabilities will be developed for the analysis and eval- uation of given complete processes. Such analysis will identify critical design and operational parameters leading to process optimization. Systematic Approaches to Modeling, Analysis, and Control of Biological Processes The two basic objectives here are the development of fun- damental insights into the operational characteristics of biological pro- cesses, and the design of optimum controllers for efficient operation of such processes. Specific technical issues to be covered are new approaches to bioprocess modeling, synthesis of optimum control strategies, and ex- perimental investigations.

120 PLANS AND PROGRAMS OF THE EXISTING CENTERS SUMMARY These four generic areas of research represent a major commitment of intellectual effort to the Biotechnology Process Engineering Center. The research and educational programs, coupled with industrial participation, should result in continuous leadership for the United States in biotech- nology manufacturing.

Methods for Ensuring Information and Technology Exchange Among the C:enters ~ ~ _ ~ ~ _ _ _ ~ ^-_ ~ ~ CARL W. HALL INTRODUCTION In considering possibilities for methods of information and technology exchange among the Engineering Research Centers (ERCs) I will take as my theme the words of a well-known and successful industry research manager, a person whom I was privileged to know: Charles F. Kettering. He said, "When you lock the doors of the laboratory, you keep out more than you keep in." That was a revolutionary view, in comparison to what most industry laboratory and research managers of his day believed. We need to keep the doors of communication open. The Centers rep- resent a large and long-term investment in engineering research and en- gineering education. We want to do all that is necessary to ensure that the Centers' activities benefit U.S. engineering schools and serve the national interest. That means finding effective and efficient ways to get research results and innovations in education transferred to users in in- dustry and academia. Although this might be obvious, there could be a temptation to emphasize research and to neglect education. By education I include the whole spectrum from undergraduate education, and perhaps even pre-undergraduate studies, through graduate education to continuing education. OPTIONS FOR INFORMATION EXCHANGE It should be emphasized that our plans for establishing additional Centers hinge on our ability to maintain a healthy balance between engineering 121

122 INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY EXCHANGE AMONG THE CENTERS research project support, support for Engineering Research Centers, and other special engineering project funding. These activities should reinforce each other; consideration needs to be given to how the exchange of in- formation between individuals and the Centers can help accomplish this. The National Science Foundation (NSF) has had considerable experience with the funding and oversight of research centers in diverse fields. These include the National Astronomy Centers, the Materials Research Labo- ratories, the Submicron Research Center, the National Center for Atmos- pheric Research, the Regional Instrumentation Centers for Chemistry, Cooperative Experimental Research (Computer) facilities (CERs), and the Industry/University Cooperative Research Centers. Of these, I believe that only the computer division's CERs are on a computer network. The pos- sibility of tying all the ERCs together for exchange of information should be considered. Center Directors' Meetings Our experience with other research center operations has convinced us that it is beneficial to center managers and to the NSF to convene periodic meetings of center directors. These are usually held annually, but at the beginning of a program holding such meetings twice a year often proves beneficial. Topics for an Engineering Research Center directors' meeting might include: a report of progress in implementing the Center; the status of industry participation; recruitment plans and discussion of problems associated with building research teams; discussion of education projects aimed at both graduate and undergraduate students; and a range of subjects dealing with the administration of the Centers. Contract administration, equipment purchase, and maintenance agree- ments, which have proven to be particularly fruitful areas for collaboration among centers because many of the problems in these categories are common to most center-type operations, might also be discussed. The benefits that can be realized from directorship meetings are well estab- lished, and we expect that this will also prove to be the case with the Engineering Research Centers. The NSF Role: Cooperator and Facilitator The Foundation's role in ERC directors' meetings would be to act as a facilitator. That is, we are a cooperator in this effort, and we want to assist the Center management as appropriate. We will, of course, be mindful of the adage "Too many cooks can spoil the broth." It should also be emphasized that the NSF is determined not to micro- manage the Centers. The planning principle might be stated as "Give the bird room to fly." Our desire is to create an environment in which NSF

CARL W. HALL 123 is viewed as a constructive cooperator in the effort to achieve the Centers' goals. This attitude will encourage exchange of information and help ensure the success of the Centers. We will try to avoid procedures and requirements that would cause more paperwork for the Centers. We want to extend the objectives of the Paperwork Reduction Act to our work with the Centers. With these goals in mind, we are considering the formation of a small technical group within NSF for each of the Centers. Each group would periodically visit the Center it is to monitor. The group would go to the Center with the objective of offering constructive suggestions on the tech- nical aspects of the research program, and helping in the exchange of information. Through this type of ongoing interaction we expect to accomplish the necessary monitoring without burdening the Centers with a lot of extra data-gathering or reporting requirements. If we do this correctly, the Cen- ters will look forward to the arrival of these teams and all parties will benefit from the interaction. Computer Networking In addition to management meetings and periodic visits by our technical teams, we want to explore the options for computer networking and for taking advantage of the availability of supercomputers through the Foun- dation's Advanced Scientific Computing program. Through computer net- works the Centers can benefit from the advantages of electronic mail, electronic bulletin boards, exchange of graphic data, and other capabilities offered by such networks. I have been told that five of the six ERC awardee institutions participate in BITNET, which is a network of more than 400 university computers, linked via leased telephone lines for exchange of information. Membership in BITNET is free, but new participants are responsible for the cost of both a 9,600-baud leased telephone line to a nearby site and two modems for that line. Thus, BITNET offers the potential for quickly hooking up the eight institutions that comprise the six Centers. However, there are about 60 computer information networks in operation in the United States today, with a wide range of capabilities; so the options are not limited. The need for a computer network must be completely justified. Ques- tions such as the following must be answered: What are the information needs of the Centers? Who will use the network? What types of messages will be sent over the system? What criteria would be used for accessing the system? Who should be permitted to access the network? Would any special services be offered to companies that contribute funds to the Center or Centers?

124 INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY EXCHANGE AMONG THE CENTERS The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) operates the DARPA NET, which is dedicated to researchers working on all aspects of computer science and engineering computer networking. NSF funds the Computer Science NET, or CS NET. About 130 academic institutions are participants in CS NET. This system has been limited to computer science and engineering researchers. CS NET participants have access to DARPA NET through an arrange- ment worked out between NSF and DARPA. These systems are worth noting because, under a new NSF-DARPA agreement, it is now possible for NSF grantees in any field of science or engineering to use DARPA NET directly. The criteria for accessing CS NET are being reviewed, and we expect that the Centers will be able to take advantage of CS NET services soon. The National Science Foundation is also well along with the develop- ment of a much more ambitious plan that calls for the establishment of what was referred to as SCIENCENET until recently. Someone has ap- parently already registered that name, so we are searching for another. I will refer to the system as NSF NET. NSF NET is an ambitious undertaking. In 1983 scientists and engineers from diverse fields participated in a workshop which focused on courses of action that might be taken to meet the need for computer and network resources in academic science and engineering research. The workshop concluded that there was an immediate need to make supercomputers more available to academic scientists and engineers, and that computer networks are necessary to link researchers to large-scale computing resources and to each other. Efforts to increase the availability and accessibility of supercomputers to engineers may be familiar to many. I believe that computer networks that provide the user with a wide menu of information transfer alternatives, plus access to a supercomputer, can dramatically enhance the engineering research and education potential in the United States. With a system such as NSF NET the entire United States could be viewed as a single region for research purposes. Given such a setting, in many situations a research colleague or collaborator is only a keyboard away; a researcher can, via the display screen, transmit simultaneous copies of graphics or other work to a number of interested researchers and teachers working on a particular topic. The physical lo- cation of a research facility is likely to become much less important. Communicating via a computer network will, I believe, completely rev- olutionize our thinking on this point. The goal of NSF NET is to provide a standardized network environment in which users physically remote from supercomputers or other computing resources enjoy levels of service indistinguishable from those of local users. The first phase of NSF NET is thus to make supercomputers quickly

CARL W. HALL 125 accessible to as many users as possible, employing as many existing computer networks as are available. The second phase will be standardized access. This involves standard gateways that will allow networks with different architectures to inter- connect, using standard interfaces and a set of standard protocols to support such user applications as file transfer, interactive graphics, remote terminal access, electronic mail, and remote job entry. Such a network would probably have to employ powerful work stations at the user's site, coupled via NSF NET to supercomputer centers. The potential of NSF NET is great, and it will be a key long-term consideration as we explore options for the Engineering Research Centers. The Engineering Research Center being established at Columbia Uni- versity will be pushing the state of the art in telecommunications. This Center will explore the network aspects of integration and will implement the highly flexible network test bed called MAGNET, described in Dr. Schwartz's paper. Whatever network is adopted for the Centers should be practical, easy to use, and relatively inexpensive. The major objective is to build com- munication links that will contribute to understanding and that will speed the knowledge process along. A major challenge is to harmonize the networks. If one speculates a little in this area, it is easy to envision a situation in which an investigator puts a question on the electronic bulletin board and shortly gets an answer from someone he has never met or knew existed. In a real sense, such networks can extend our research horizon, improve productivity in laboratories, and enhance instructional programs across the land. All six of the awardee institutions have considerable experience with information networks. So we are not starting from ground zero in this quest for the best information network. Other Exchange Mechanisms We must not limit our thinking to computer networks as a means of information transfer among Centers. Other important mechanisms include: · People transfer. The most effective means of transferring information is people whether they be students, faculty, or industry people. An uninhibited flow of people into and out of the Centers must occur. · Technology transfer (as distinguished from information transfer). Ex- perimental devices and instruments developed by one Center or its col- laborators should be made available to others, keeping in mind the importance of recognition of the creator, patent rights, etc. The "NIH" Not Invented Here syndrome must be overcome.

126 INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY EXCHANGE AMONG THE CENTERS · Written transfer (publications). The use of newsletters, project sum- maries, and electronic and conventional mail can be effective. The pos- sibility of developing new journals perhaps on computer disks-on various cross-disciplinary engineering subjects should also be considered. · Verbal transfer (seminars/symposia workshops). We do not expect computer networks ever to replace these important face-to-face discus- sions. The networks of exchange probably should not be limited to the estab- lished Engineering Research Centers and those to follow. The ERCs should be closely connected with other institutions. For example, many engi- neering schools do not have extensive research activities, but graduate a large proportion of American engineers; for this reason they are sometimes referred to as predominantly undergraduate institutions. Meeting the over- all goals of the ERCs with respect to national competitiveness will require a favorable working relationship of the Centers with some of these insti- tutions. Numerous methods of involving industry people, in both research and teaching, will be tried. Kettering said, in commenting on which fuel was best for the auto- mobile, "Let the engine decide." In situations involving other institutions and organizations, we should "Let the Centers decide." It is clear that we are going to have to use a variety of mechanisms to extend the benefits of the Engineering Research Centers to engineering schools across Amer- ica. BASIC PRINCIPLES Where does all this leave us? At this juncture it leaves us with more questions than answers. The important thing is that we do not overlook any of the important questions as we move ahead. 1. What are the information and management coordination needs of the Centers? 2. What types of networks and management coordination mechanisms will best meet those needs? 3. Who will use the networks, and who will participate in the man- agement coordinating groups if they are established? 4. What criteria for access will be used, especially for universities and industries that are not participating in the funding of the Centers? 5. What are the best techniques or mechanisms to use in determining potential users of Center research and educational program results? Emphasis should be given to a point that has occurred to me repeatedly as I have considered the matter of information and technology exchange

CARL W. HALL 127 among the Centers and between the Centers and their participants. It is not a new idea. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes put his finger on it a long time ago when he said, "Having science in the attic is fine, so long as you remember to use common sense in the living room." The success of the Centers will depend in large measure on the application of a great deal of common sense in their day-to-day operation. All of us- Center management, the NSF, industrial participants, and others who seek to take advantage of the research and educational potential of the Centers must use common sense unsparingly. For example, a prime purpose of the Engineering Research Centers is to develop fundamental knowledge that will give U.S. industry an edge in the race for better and improved technologies. If NSF were to attempt to establish safeguards over the transfer of information to protect U.S. interests, there could evolve such a snarl of paperwork that the Centers could be rendered ineffective even before they got started. We are counting on all the participants to use the rule of reason so that U.S. interests are served. To the maximum extent possible, NSF is pledged to avoid issuing guidance papers and other such directives that could impede and frustrate the ERCs instead of helping them to achieve their intended purpose. CONCLUSION It would be interesting to contemplate what Charles Kettering might say about the Engineering Research Centers. · I know that he would be in favor of university-industry cooperation, as he promoted this practice in his own activities. · I know that he would be in favor of cross-disciplinary research, as he received engineering degrees in two different fields. · I know that he would favor innovative approaches, as he did when he went against the conventional wisdom in using a small motor to operate the cash register. · I know that he would urge people to think-an attitude to be en- couraged by the Centers. Once when asked to what he attributed his success in innovation, he explained it this way: "As a youth, I had trouble with my eyes [in fact, he stayed out of school a while], so I couldn't spend a lot of time reading books and papers which said a thing couldn't be done. " Now I know that he read and studied a lot. What he was really saying was: also THINK and ACT. · I know that he would favor involving students in real-life situations. He once said, "It's one thing to produce something in the laboratory test tubes and another to manufacture it by the ton." · I know that he would favor using the experimental approach, as he did when he said "Let the engine decide."

128 INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY EXCHANGE AMONG THE CENTERS I believe that Charles Kettering would be a strong supporter and sales- man for the ERC concept. The story is told that at one point Kettering had a difficult time getting the production people to accept a fast-drying paint which, he knew, would greatly accelerate the manufacturing of automobiles. He took an important vice-president to lunch. "Now," he said to the vice-president, "if you could have another color of car, what would you select?" "Blue," came the answer. And at a signal the painters painted the V.-P. 's car blue. After a quick lunch they returned to the car, and there it was beautiful, blue, and dry. Kettering made his sale. I hope we have "made our sale" of the Engineering Research Center concept. It is an important purchase for the nation to make. DISCUSSION There was some discussion of the possibilities for networking and data exchange with respect to the Centers. Dr. Hall noted that each Center will determine its own networking program, but he would expect each Center to involve relevant sectors of industry in the network. Dr. Pipes com- mented that plans for this are already under way in each ERC; he gave the example of a "dial-up" service at the University of Delaware Center, which, when in place, will make data of all kinds available to participating companies at any time.

New Factors in the Relationship Between Engineering Education and Research TERRIER A. HADDAD It is taken as an article of faith that research ensures vitality and com- petence and thereby improves the pedagogical ability of faculty. However, this faith is not shared by everyone. There are those who subscribe to the "Mr. Chips" school of thought. In their minds, teaching ability is some- how separate and independent from the subject at hand, that is to say, "a good teacher can teach anything." In the engineering area this argument is further complicated by the dichotomy between "practitioners" and "academics." More than any other profession, engineering must rely for its continuing renewal on the 2 percent of its number who fundamentally do not practice, except for whatever engineering research they may do. Especially since World War II, faculty members have increasingly held the Ph.D., and have been selected for tenure only if they could show outstanding research capabilities. There is probably no set of issues that can stir more emotion than these at meetings of university trustees. Dis- cussions about the relationship between research and teaching ability or the difference between the academic and the practitioner have all the elements of an intellectual donnybrook. Can we strip away the emotional content of the debate and get to the heart of the matter? Most certainly! To begin with, there is simply too much evidence supporting the notion that an engineer or academic who does good research makes a superior teacher. Are there good teachers who do not do research? Certainly! Are there good researchers who are bad teachers? Certainly! How many good researchers are bad teachers? In this day of faculty evaluation by students and tenure procedures that evaluate teaching ability, there are not many. More often than not, student 129

130 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ENGINEERING EDUCATION ED RESEARCH evaluations of teaching ability and administrative evaluations of research ability point to the same people. The issue of the academic versus the practitioner is getting more com- plex, however, for a number of reasons: · Increasingly, practitioners must rely on the latest scientific knowledge to be competitive. This puts the practitioner in the position either of doing engineering research or of being in close touch with researchers. Most researchers who communicate with a range of industrial practitioners are career academics or governmental employees. Industrial researchers are much more constrained. · Engineering technology is progressing at a very fast rate, both in academe and in industry. Thus, to stay well informed engineers in industry must communicate with academics and vice versa. (Getting out of date is not exclusive to industrial practitioners.) · Engineering practitioners in government and industry specialize along many dimensions in addition to that of their primary engineering discipline. Their jobs will be in such diverse areas as applied research, product development, manufacturing, manufacturing research, manufacturing en- gineering, field engineering, engineering or manufacturing operations, service or maintenance, or a host of other engineering specialties. Even these jobs differ substantially in technical content depending on the given industry. This complexity of the engineer's job content makes relating to engineers in faculty positions quite difficult. Engineers in government or industry truly live in different worlds from their colleagues on faculties. It should come as no surprise that academe and industry are two very different cultures with different values and vastly different practices. It is a matter of some urgency that both groups learn more about each other, become more knowledgeable regarding each other's problems and depen- dencies, and, especially, learn how best to interact so that each can benefit from the other's empathy as well as its technical contribution. This is really a very important matter. Academics educate our successors and are the primary source of research that fuels the engineering engine. Practitioners do little research, but do most of the engineering work that fuels our economy, keeps us domestically and internationally competitive, and advances our manufacturing. The engineer in practice gets results in the most scientific manner possible. More often than not, however, project success is attained pragmatically, and, being based on insufficient knowl- edge, may contain surprises, sometimes of disastrous proportions. Such surprises point the way for further research, and so engineering leads to research just as research leads to engineering. The problem is to devise means that enable the academic researcher and the industrial practitioner to complement each other best without either

JERRIER A. HADDAD 131 having to forsake his own world or invade the other's. Clearly, the En- gineering Research Centers (ERCs) were devised as one solution. How will they affect engineering research and education? THE ERCs' EFFECT ON ACADEMIC SEARCH AND EDUCATION ERCs should greatly influence academic research. Industry's heavy participation should help communicate to researchers the problems of execution that stand in industry's way. While many of these problems would have been communicated to the campus in any event, the ERCs will clearly expedite the process and help ensure that the "two culture" syndrome does not slow or block the transmission. Many industry puzzles have stimulated research programs in academe, yielding beneficial results. To the degree that the ERCs can contribute to this process we will all benefit. Optimistic as we may be about the ERCs, we should not expect them to be a cure-all. To begin with, they can only involve a fraction of the faculty. Those faculty members in fields removed from the focus of an ERC will receive only fleeting benefit from the presence of that ERC on campus. Nonetheless, the values and practices in evidence at the ERC will be communicated through faculty club discussions, luncheon con- versations, and cocktail party chitchat. It is a stated objective of the ERC program to involve both undergraduate and graduate students-in the Centers' work. To the degree that this is done, those students will benefit greatly. This is a form of interning. The Committee on the Education and Utilization of the Engineer (CEUE) has concluded that all engineering students should have some form of interning since it has such a positive effect on the student's attitude toward the university experience (NRC, 1985a). Not only does interning bring in a practice component, but it also makes the students see the value of the knowledge they gain from their studies. Interning nurtures personal char- acteristics that come mainly from experience: positive attitudes, interests, values, needs and motives, and affective skills. These skills are listed as the most important interning goals even over technical knowledge by students, graduates, faculty, and supervisors. It is also an objective of the ERCs that the industry people assigned to them provide a two-way connection to industrial activities, moving campus research results to industry and industrial nonproprietary results to the campus. There is little doubt that ERCs will expedite this two-way com- munication. However, we should not lose sight of the fact that the industry people assigned will come from companies' applied research sections. Generally speaking, these individuals are quite far removed from the marketplace on the one hand and from the production operation on the

132 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ENGINEERING EDUCATION AND RESEARCH other. In general there has been little difficulty in arranging liaisons be- tween campus and industrial researchers. The problem has been and con- tinues to be putting campus researchers in touch with industrial professionals close to the market or the manufacturing scene. We should not expect the ERCs to have much effect in this regard. SUPPORT OF THE UNDERGRADUATE SCHOOLS There is a much more serious problem, however. It is not a problem unique to the ERC program. Rather, it involves the widespread and laud- able practice of rewarding already excellent institutions with further op- portunities to increase their excellence. It is hard to argue against this practice, and I certainly do not mean to. However, it completely ignores the more than 200 engineering schools that mainly educate undergraduates and that need help perhaps even more than the comparative handful of research institutions. It is a fact that schools that award 14 or fewer Ph.D.s a year award close to half the nation's B.S. engineering degrees (NRC, 1985a). The CEUE recommends that we invent better ways to support the undergraduate programs in this second tier of schools. The two tiers are a relatively new phenomenon, having come about largely after World War II as a result of contracting from the mission agencies and the newly created National Science Foundation. The largely undergraduate schools seem to be quiet institutions, lacking influence in the technical community and in government and industry. Nonetheless, they are important to the nation and add considerably to the diversity and richness of our engineering education system. It is certainly worthwhile to consider creative ways of improving their situation. A large problem in this regard is how to give the proper support without rewarding mediocrity and encouraging com- placency. These schools need help, but we must take care to help in ways that lift the standards and level of education. How to accomplish this is a tough problem that is yet unsolved. There are state programs of support for undergraduate schools that seem to be working rather well. Consideration could be given to having similar national programs. I will mention two New York State programs that differ in that one is focused on the student while the other is focused on the institution. The first is called the Tuition Assistance Plan, or TAP. TAP provides assistance to students based on financial need, if they are New York State residents and attend schools in that state. The great merit of this program is that the schools must be attractive to students. Students have a way of picking the best school within the range of their ability to pay. TAP does not attempt to distinguish the relative quality of the various schools, and

JERRIER A. HADDAD 133 also leaves untouched the different costs of state-supported and indepen- dent schools. Thus, students of a wide range of abilities are able to attend a wide range of schools. One of the great features of higher education in this country is the continuum of quality that is available to students. In my view, we must beware of any scheme, no matter how attractive, that stratifies higher education by means of a bureaucracy. I have much greater faith in the workings of a free marketplace that allows students to pick the programs best suited to their individual needs. Schools selected by TAP students are free to use the tuition money to do what they deem will make the particular school more attractive to students. As long as the burden of paying all tuition is not placed on the student, tuition costs can rise closer to the tuition the school actually needs in order to attain the excellence of instruction it seeks in the manner it judges best. With accreditation guaranteeing minimum quality, a diversity of schools can best satisfy the nation's needs. If, as a society, we judge that the accreditation minimum should be raised, the matter can be dis- cussed with the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET), which is composed of public-spirited engineers from a cross section of professional societies. The other assistance plan is called the Bundy Plan. Some years ago, while McGeorge Bundy was president of the Ford Foundation, he was asked by the state of New York to recommend a way to keep alive the colleges in the state. Then as now higher education was having its prob- lems. As implemented, the plan gave "Bundy Money" to degree-granting institutions according to the number and types of degrees they annually granted. In the beginning each bachelor's degree earned $400 for the college, each master's degree $400, and each Ph.D. $2,400. These amounts have been increased from time to time, until for the 1985-1986 academic year they will become $1,500 for the bachelor's degree, $950 for the master's degree, and $4,550 for the Ph.D. In addition, the two-year as- sociate's degree warrants $600. Here again the attraction of the plan is that the schools must use the funds to continue attracting the students they need for the degrees they want to grant. If standards are lowered to maximize the number of degrees granted, then the most talented students will stay away. If they are lowered significantly, then ABET will withhold accreditation. A powerful moti- vator is the attractiveness of graduates to graduate schools or the job market. In a free economy you cannot fool the marketplace for long. A significantly different approach would be to have programs aimed at giving each accredited engineering college at least some research funding. Proposals could be judged by people having no connection with the pro- posing college. A minimum amount, perhaps based on the student pop- ulation or faculty size, could be given to support the school's most deserving

134 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ENGINEERING EDUCATION AND RESEARCH faculty for their competitive standing at that school, independent of na- tional competition. In doing this we would be encouraging the most tal- ented department to raise its standards, thus fulfilling the goal of improving the preparation of engineers. Further, other faculty members would un- doubtedly be stimulated by the competition and seek to improve their research proposals and programs. I know that this flies in the face of the peer review system, which officially ignores the institution. However, our aim is to improve the preparation of our engineers, and to do this we must improve the institutions in the second tier, those educating half of the nation's engineers. If research will improve the pedagogical skill of the faculty, that purpose is just as valid and important to us as the more accepted purpose of adding to fundamental knowledge. A National Science Foundation program comes quite close to what I have just described. The program, called Research in Undergraduate In- stitutions, is only a year or two old, and it seems to be successful in many regards. It is designed to give awards to the smaller schools that are predominately undergraduate. "Predominately undergraduate" is in this case defined as granting 20 or fewer Ph.D.s annually in science and engineering. The disappointing thing is that engineering faculties have not responded with as many proposals as the science faculties. I strongly recommend that a survey study determine quickly why this is the case and how it can be remedied. There is still another approach to distributing the benefits of the ERCs to more colleges than will qualify to host them. As part of their proposals, host institutions could suggest creative ways of involving other, less for- tunate colleges-for instance, through faculty summer assignments, sab- batical leaves, student interning arrangements (both graduate and undergraduate), research subcontracts, brainstorming sessions, seminars, and review sessions. Certainly the most appropriate means to distribute benefits will depend on many things, such as area of research, geographic factors, laboratory space and equipment, and the areas of competence of faculty and students. Each situation will be different, and each will require different methods. NEW FACTORS AFFECTING ENGINEERING EDUCATION To sum up the considerations involved in the relationship between education and research, it is desirable to list those factors which are either new or have changed in importance in the last few years. 1. The breadth, depth, rate of change, sophistication, and importance of technology and engineering methods in industrial and governmental activities have created a new world for educators to deal with. To design

JERRIER A. HADDAD 135 a curriculum for today's engineering student that is as complete as that of two or three decades ago, and to keep it within four years, is difficult to the point of impossibility. 2. Engineering jobs in industry are highly diverse. The job categories of all employed engineers break down as follows (NRC, 1985b): Research Development (including design) R&D management Other management Teaching Production or inspection Other (consulting, computing, etc.) 4.7% 27.9% 8.7% 19.3% 2.1% 16.6% 20.7% Into this broad range of specialties must be factored an industrial specialty and a basic discipline. Educators cannot possibly be expert in all these activities. How to provide an education for these activities on top of an already crowded four-year program is mind boggling. Yet the increasing sophistication and importance of these activities decree that the education system somehow must accommodate them to a greater degree than before. 3. About 200 engineering colleges are predominately undergraduate institutions that produce half the B.S.s in engineering annually. These institutions lack the advantages that research institutions enjoy: world- class faculty, state-of-the-art laboratories and equipment, and the sup- porting infrastructure that these things bring. If we are to raise the quality and ability of the graduating engineer, we must focus on the graduates of these institutions as well as the research institutions. We cannot and should not aspire to make all engineering colleges into world-class research in- stitutions. However, we cannot stop short of improving the education experience for all engineering students in areas that count most. 4. Engineering in government and industry is becoming increasingly sophisticated in order to compete in an increasingly competitive world. Practitioners need to know the latest research findings, and researchers need to know the obstacles to engineering progress. Industrial concerns, except for the very large and affluent, cannot possibly do research in all the technical areas of importance to them. Consequently, as a nation we should use our government funds and education system to ensure that we appropriately cover the areas of research that are important to our success in the global marketplace. ---I 5. In the effort to hold the undergraduate engineering program to a nominal four years, courses in practical skills have had to all but disappear. The increase of engineering research on our campuses should involve as much student interning as possible so as to expose as many students as

136 RELATIONSHIP BE - EEN ENGINEERING EDUCATION ED RESEARCH possible to the real world of laboratory work. Such laboratory exposure is considerably better than the standard laboratory course. 6. A serious and perennial problem for faculty is to keep abreast of progress in engineering around the world. This makes faculty contact with practitioners essential. Any program that brings serious practitioners to the campus for technical dialogue is invaluable to the education process. Since an ERC cannot be expected to stimulate this type of interaction outside its technical area, special efforts should be made to introduce the industry people to other elements of the engineering college. Taken together, these points say that the ERCs represent an idea whose time has come. The ERCs are the first really creative response to a number of interrelated problems. We should labor hard to make them work. REFERENCES National Research Council (NRC). 1985a. Engineering education and practice in the United States: Foundations of our techno-economic future. Report of the Committee on the Education and Utilization of the Engineer. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press. National Research Council (NRC). 1985b. Engineering employment characteristics. Report of the Panel on Engineering Employment Characteristics, Committee on the Education and Utilization of the Engineer. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

Next: 4: The Future-Challenges and Expectations »
The New Engineering Research Centers: Purposes, Goals, and Expectations Get This Book
×
Buy Paperback | $65.00
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

Within the past decade, six Engineering Research Centers opened on university campuses across the United States. This book reviews the lessons learned as the centers got under way, and examines the interrelationship among universities, government, industry, and the research establishment. Leaders from business, government, and universities discuss in this volume the challenges now facing American industry; the roots and early development of the research center concept; the criteria used in selecting the six centers; the structure and research agenda of each center; the projected impact of the centers on competitiveness of U.S. technology; and the potential for further research in biotechnology, electronics, robotics, and related areas.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!