Category Archives: Engineering
Some say we can solar-engineer ourselves out of the climate crisis. Dont buy it – The Guardian
As we arrive at Earth Day, there is renewed hope in the battle to avert catastrophic climate change. Under newly elected president Joe Biden, the US has reasserted global leadership in this defining challenge of our time, bringing world leaders together in Washington this week to galvanize the global effort to ramp down carbon emissions in the decade ahead.
So there is promise. But there is also great peril looming in the foreground.
Just as the world, at long last, is getting its act together, an ominous sun-dimming cloud has appeared on the horizon, threatening to derail these nascent efforts. That cloud comes in the form of technologies whose proponents call somewhat deceptively solar geoengineering.
So-called solar geoengineering doesnt actually modify the sun itself. Instead, it reduces incoming sunlight by other means, such as putting chemicals in the atmosphere that reflect sunlight to space. It addresses a symptom of global heating, rather than the root cause, which is human-caused increase in the atmospheres burden of carbon dioxide.
While it is certainly true that reducing sunlight can cause cooling (we know that from massive but episodic volcanic eruptions such as Pinatubo in 1991), it acts on a very different part of the climate system than carbon dioxide. And efforts to offset carbon dioxide-caused warming with sunlight reduction would yield a very different climate, perhaps one unlike any seen before in Earths history, with massive shifts in atmospheric circulation and rainfall patterns and possible worsening of droughts.
What could possibly go wrong? Elizabeth Kolberts book Under a White Sky documents case after case where supposedly benign environmental interventions have had unintended consequences requiring layer after layer of escalating further technological interventions to avert disaster. When the impacts are local, as in Australias struggle to deal with consequences of deliberate introduction of the cane toad, the spread of catastrophe can be contained (so far, at least). But what happens when the unintended consequences afflict the entire planet?
Then there is the mismatch of time scales. The heating effect of carbon dioxide persists for 10,000 years or more, absent unproven technologies for scrubbing carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere. In contrast, the sun-dimming particles in question drop out in a year or less, meaning that if you come to rely on geoengineering for survival, you need to keep it up essentially forever. Think of it as climate methadone.
And if we are ever forced to stop, we are hit with dangerous withdrawal symptoms a catastrophic termination shock wherein a century of pent-up global heating emerges within a decade. Some proponents insist we can always stop if we dont like the result. Well yes, we can stop. Just like if youre being kept alive by a ventilator with no hope of a cure, you can turn it off and suffer the consequences.
Geoengineering evangelists at Harvard have pushed for expanded consideration of such technology; as panic over the climate crisis has grown, so too has support for perilous geoengineering schemes spread well beyond Cambridge, Massachusetts. And the lines between basic theoretical research (which is worthwhile climate model experiments, for example, have revealed the potential perils) on the one hand, and field testing and implementation on the other, have increasingly been blurred.
Solar geoengineering has been cited in the Democratic Climate Action Plan. MITs Maria Zuber, incoming co-chair of Bidens presidents council of advisers on science and technology (PCAST) is on record as favoring an expanded federal geoengineering research program. And now the other shoe has dropped the US National Research Council has recently released a report going well beyond the very cautious, tentative recommendations for continued research in the 2015 NRC report one of us (Pierrehumbert) co-authored.
The new report pushes for a massive $200m five-year funding program. The growing support is based on a fundamental misconception, captured in the NRC reports justification statement: that we likely wont achieve the necessary decarbonization of our economy in time to avoid massive climate damages, so this technology might be needed.
Such Plan B framing is the worst possible justification for developing solar geoengineering technology. It is laden in moral hazard providing, as it does, an excuse for fossil fuel interests and their advocates to continue with business as usual. Why reduce carbon pollution if there is a cheap workaround? In The New Climate War, one of us (Mann) argues that geoengineering advocacy is indeed one of the key delay tactics used by polluters.
If the world fails to achieve net zero carbon dioxide emissions, then each years emissions will add to the stock of atmospheric carbon dioxide, requiring ever-escalating ratcheting up any techno-fix and ever-escalating increase in the damage wrought by termination shock. And meanwhile, other dangerous effects of accumulating carbon pollution, such as ocean acidification, continue to worsen over time.
If the world decarbonizes eventually but only after pumping out so much carbon dioxide that it renders the world lethally hot, then deploying sun-dimming as a survival tactic puts the world in a precarious state, one in which current and future generations would live in perpetual fear of sudden death by termination shock. The sad fact of the matter is that there is no viable plan B for the climate crisis; rapid decarbonization is our only safe path forward.
Advocates in the scientific community, for the most part, are only recommending research, not deployment, right now. But research wont solve any of the big unknowns. And it wont make any of the really big known problems millennial commitment and termination shock go away. Research that goes beyond basic climate modeling experiments, for example that involving field tests and trial runs, will likely only serve to boost development of engineering technologies that make deployment more likely. The Harvard group, in fact, has provided a whole roadmap to deployment including working on designs of aircraft to deliberately pollute the stratosphere. That can hardly be dismissed as merely research.
Advocates are generally clear in stating that sunlight reduction is no substitute for decarbonization, but they are naive in their professed belief that developing the technologies can be done without risk to the push for real solutions to the climate crisis.
In his own recent book, Bill Gates insists that renewable energy is inadequate to decarbonize our economy at present. Peer-reviewed research suggests hes wrong about that. But in being so dour about renewables he ends up advocating for the far riskier strategy of geoengineering a strategy that will shift needed resources away from safe clean-energy solutions.
It is said that desperate times call for desperate measures. But there is still a safe path forward to addressing the climate crisis as long as we avoid unwise detours and dead ends.
Ray Pierrehumbert, FRS, is the Halley professor of physics at the University of Oxford. He was an author of the 2015 NRC report on climate intervention
Michael E Mann is distinguished professor of atmospheric science at Pennsylvania State University. He is author of The New Climate War: The Fight to Take Back Our Planet
Excerpt from:
Some say we can solar-engineer ourselves out of the climate crisis. Dont buy it - The Guardian
Special Report: Structural engineers warnings over citys mandatory retrofits have gone unheeded for years – Mission Local
Yesterday, Mission Local published a special report on a pervasive problem among the citys thousands of mandatory soft-story seismic retrofits.
Building department officials have admitted that the encasing of aging gas lines in new, mandated concrete foundations could lead to catastrophic failures and fires in the event of a major earthquake.
This matter was discussed in a public meeting in 2017, during which Department of Building Inspection brass stated that this situation could become a San Bruno, referencing the lethal 2010 PG&E gas explosion in that neighboring city.
Seismic safety and fire safety is not an either-or. But sources both within the Department of Building Inspection and outside of it worry that the steps San Francisco took in its mandatory soft-story retrofit program has balanced the former against the latter.
Separate and apart from the gas line issue, the regions structural engineers have long held misgivings about the integrity of the retrofitting jobs thousands of San Francisco property owners have been required to undertake since the passage of the 2013 soft-story ordinance.
Members of the regions structural engineers association said they spent years attempting to land a meeting with Department of Building Inspection officials regarding concerns about poor engineering practices and sloppy construction on mandatory retrofits built on relatively tight deadlines.
These entreaties to meet were, for years, brushed off. And, when the two sides did gather in 2018 and 2019, the engineers say their concerns were by and large brushed off.
All the while, thousands of mandatory soft story retrofits were being undertaken and completed. As of April 2021, of the 4,934 mandatory construction projects, nearly 4,000 have been finished.
The citys Department of Building Inspection, says veteran structural engineer David Bonowitz, does not seem to have any interest in revealing how things went for this program.
Bonowitz, along with fellow members of the Structural Engineers Association of Northern California (SEAONC) in 2016 began attending building department subcommittee meetings and voicing concerns.
I was at those meetings back in the day, and the answer was always, we got it. Its good, recalled structural engineer and SEAONC member Randy Collins.
We had examples of pretty bad projects, pretty bad engineering and retrofit designs, and these got permitted, got built and got signed-off on. We were merely trying to press the building department on what were their quality assurance/quality control procedures? We kept asking, specifically, whats the plan? They never really provided one.
Every engineer seemed to have his or her own disturbing experiences with the general quality of the thousands of mandatory retrofits.
Thor Mattesons suspicions about the program were always there, in the abstract. But then the structural engineers own involvement on a city retrofit pushed his doubts into the concrete.
Yes, literally.
On a project that Matteson had designed, a city building inspector departed shortly before Mattesons assistant engineer arrived. The inspector, Matteson says, had signed off on the reinforcing of the projects concrete foundation. But heres the rub: The rebar that was supposed to be reinforcing that foundation was still piled in the driveway where it had been unloaded off the truck.
If its not 100 percent clear: Youre supposed to sign off on a rebar inspection after the rebar has been installed. Youre also supposed to write a movie review after you see a movie or grade a test after a student fills it out.
Inspecting rebar, it turns out, may not have been the Department of Building Inspections No. 1 priority. One building inspector recalls a supervisor walking up to his desk and asking him to attend a holiday work gathering to mingle with the builders and developers whose projects hed be inspecting. When the inspector demurred, saying he had soft-story rebar inspections to do, the supervisor leaned into his cubicle and said, in a stage whisper: rebar, shmeebar.
After the first wave of mandatory retrofits was done, the engineers began trading war stories. Things we saw. And, usually in situations like that, people dont tell stories about how great everything is, said Bonowitz. You tell about all the crap you saw. And as these stories keep coming in, you wonder if the Department of Building Inspection is doing anything about it?
Typical war stories beyond the rebar-shmeebar variety involved on-the-cheap fellow engineers making plans for buildings by looking at them on Google Street View instead of visiting them. Or submitting plans one-third to one-quarter as complete as normal forcing contractors, who may or may not be qualified even with the best of plans, into improvisational construction.
Disturbingly, in the engineers documented examples, these projects passed DBI inspections and received Certificates of Final Completion.
Some 2.5 years of engineers wheedling for a meeting finally came to fruition in December 2018 and April 2019. By the time we even got the meeting, says Matteson of the 2019 gathering, it was almost too late.
And, based upon several strongly worded formal letters and a flurry of follow-up emails, these do not appear to have been fruitful sessions.
SEAONC members continue to report instances of faulty design and construction on soft story projects in San Francisco, wrote then-president Tim Hart in a letter to building department leaders following the April 2019 meeting. For reasons that we have discussed previously, we still feel strongly that DBI can and must take action to improve quality assurance for the benefit of building owners, DBIs own reputation, and the Citys retrofit programs generally.
Inspection data provided by the building department was vague and incomplete, the engineers complained.
It does not address the specific construction issues that our members have identified as having quality control problems, reads Harts 2019 letter. The data also does not identify the issues that DBI inspectors found during their spot check process or how those issues were resolved. Finally, the data does not include any projects that were inspected prior to 2018.
Then-chief building inspector Patrick ORiordans request of the engineers to provide specific addresses clearly didnt encompass the engineers graver concerns about systemic problems.
Engineers offers to ride along with inspectors or perhaps review the work on their own were received coldly. Nowhere in the code is there an allowance for inspecting the same work again, when its been approved once already, ORiordan stated in a May 2019 email. Please keep in mind building inspections are scheduled by the stakeholder, and are not generally set up by the Senior Building Inspector.
Writing via a spokesman, ORiordan this week characterized the meetings to Mission Local as productive, citing an expanded commitment for senior inspectors to spot check soft-story projects.
SEAONC members, however, countered that spot-checking was not something they asked for nor felt adequate. Claims of increased inspections did not assuage the engineers, as inconsistent or faulty inspections were one of their primary concerns.
I also want to note that DBIs first priority is public safety, read the April 2021 statement from ORiordan. In that meeting, SEAONC representatives said they knew of properties that were not in compliance with soft story requirements. At that time and in subsequent conversations, we requested those property addresses so we can investigate.
Engineers countered that its not their job to report cases to the building department or, if it comes to that, to police the building department.
We gave information as examples to show the need for a more systematic review, explains Bonowitz. Whats more, confidentiality agreements with clients generally prevent engineers from informing on them.
Regarding ORiordans response, Bonowitz writes, With respect to the issue at hand how to quantify the actual quality program-wide this is a bullshit answer.
I regret we didnt anticipate a program like this would draw more bad actors.
The structural engineers association helped develop the mandatory soft-story program. And, in retrospect, Bonowitz says not enough thought was put into ensuring corner-cutting and dishonesty didnt taint the undertaking.
The foisting of costly, mandatory construction work onto thousands of unenthusiastic property owners led to conditions that are perfect for owners to hire the cheapest bid they can get, and contractors and even engineers to say I can do this, he says.
As developers of the program, I dont think we thought through enough at the beginning the nature of quality control. I regret we didnt anticipate a program like this would draw more bad actors.
As it is, engineers are left to wonder just what would be uncovered if 10, 20, 50, or however many projects were randomly subjected to post-facto quality control. How closely does the actual situation on the ground resemble the building departments documented inspections? How safe are these buildings?
That remains unknown and, for now, unknowable.
Go here to see the original:
Hennessey’s Chief Engineer Updates Us on the Venom F5 – Car and Driver
This content is imported from YouTube. You may be able to find the same content in another format, or you may be able to find more information, at their web site.
We've previously told you about Hennessey's ambition to prove that the forthcoming Venom F5 is the fastest production car in the world. That milestone is still a way off, presuming the Hennessey manages to beat the Bugatti Chirons 304-mph record. But the Texas company has announced that the F5 has already passed the 200-mph mark during testing, and with its 6.6-liter twin-turbocharged V-8 making just half of what will be its eventual 1817-hp output.
"We have been working up to the full output," John Heinricy, Hennessey Performance's chief engineer, explained. "It's much easier to do the basics at a lower output to get the learnings in, and we can then build on that . . . But if you look at 900 horsepower and the [3053-pound] weight of the car, there's no lack of performance."
Development work has been done both at Hennesseys HQ in Texas and also on a 2.2-mile runway of a one-time U.S. Air Force base in Arkansas. Last year John Hennessey told us the F5 will make top speed runs on the 3.2-mile runway of NASAs Kennedy Space Center, but also on public roads if this proves insufficiently long to validate the car's aimed-for 311-mph top speed.
Although working toward the same ultimate performance goal, Heinricy is equally determined that the finished F5 will perform at lower speeds, with development work set to include both roads and technical race courses including Circuit of the Americas near Austin.
"Sure, we're focusing on top speed and being the fastest on the racetrack, but we're also looking at the whole balance," he said. "If you just look at top speed, you're not going to make a car that is capable of everyday driving, we're not going after just a single area . . . and if you get the basics together its going to be a lot easier to get the ultimate performance."
When asked to nominate a rival he particularly wants to beat, Heinricy said, "All of them." He elaborated: "Sure, we want to make a car that can be compared to a Bugatti or the Konigsegg, but not just on top speed. We want to create a decathlete."
Heinricy was previously development chief for the Chevrolet Corvette, and he told us the F5 will offer similar usability. "I've spent my career trying to make cars accessible for regular customers," he said. "It's very much my focus here to make sure the car has that capability."
We look forward to testing both sides of the Venom F5's character.
This content is created and maintained by a third party, and imported onto this page to help users provide their email addresses. You may be able to find more information about this and similar content at piano.io
Follow this link:
Hennessey's Chief Engineer Updates Us on the Venom F5 - Car and Driver
Engineering Profs’ Robotics and Composite Materials Research Win $1M in Funding – UMass Lowell
04/07/2021 By Edwin L. Aguirre
The CAREER grant is the NSFs most prestigious award in support of early-career faculty who demonstrate strong potential to lead research breakthroughs in their organizations.
They are among the 36 scientists and engineers from 27 research institutions across the country selected by the Air Force for the recognition. Aside from UMass Lowell, the other awardees include researchers from Johns Hopkins University, Carnegie Mellon University, Stanford University, Virginia Tech, the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and the University of California San Diego.
Legged Robot Locomotion
Using her CAREER grant, Gu will draw upon dynamic modeling, state estimation, feedback control and theory of hybrid systems to advance the control theory of legged robots in order to realize and prove stable, legged locomotion on dynamic rigid surfaces that is, surfaces that move but do not deform.
Yan Gus NSF-funded research will help keep legged robots stable and upright while walking on nonstationary surfaces. Shown here is NASAs R5 Valkyrie humanoid robot.
Empowering legged robots with such new functionality will allow them to negotiate complex, dynamic human environments, which are very challenging for robots equipped with wheels or tracks, Gu explains.
This will enable them to assist in critical, high-risk situations such as fighting fire aboard ships as well as cleaning and disinfecting public transportation vehicles to contain the spread of infectious diseases such as COVID-19, she says.
Faster than the Speed of Sound
Maiarus YIP project focuses on ceramic matrix composite (CMC) materials, which consist of reinforcing ceramic fibers embedded in a ceramic matrix. They are used for high-temperature, high-strength applications, such as components for gas turbines and heat shields for hypersonic aircraft, missiles, rockets and spacecraft.
Maiaru will use experimentally validated process modeling to understand the mechanisms for the formation of residual stress induced by pyrolysis-infiltration-pyrolysis processes. Pyrolysis is the degradation of the ceramic at high temperatures in the absence of oxygen.
My goal is to establish a correlation between processing conditions, microstructure and mechanical performance of the composite, which currently is not clearly shown, she says. This work strongly supports ongoing research efforts at the Air Force Research Laboratory and NASAs Langley Research Center.
According to Maiaru, process modeling for CMCs manufactured through the pyrolysis-infiltration-pyrolysis cycle is a relatively undeveloped field.
This project will help enhance the performance of high-temperature composites, optimize their manufacturing process and lead to the discovery of new materials that would establish U.S. leadership in hypersonic applications, she says.
It has great potential for advancing materials research for extreme environments and for overcoming the costly and time-consuming trial-and-error design that is being used today.
Maiaru is currently working on process modeling of advanced composites for structural applications under the sponsorship of the NSF, NASA and the Air Force Research Laboratory.
Read more:
Engineering Profs' Robotics and Composite Materials Research Win $1M in Funding - UMass Lowell
Capgemini brings together its engineering and R&D expertise with the launch of Capgemini Engineering – Express Computer
Capgemini unveiled today Capgemini Engineering, which consolidates a unique set of enhnaced capabilities in engineering and R&D. Along with the Groups deep industry expertise and cutting-edge technologies in digital and software, it will support organizations as the digital and physical worlds converge. The global business line, with its 52,000 engineers and scientists and a presence in all major engineering hubs across the world, builds on the integration of Altran, one year on from its acquisition by Capgemini.
Todays leading organizations understand that Engineering and R&D is fast-moving and ever evolving.As a result an end-to-end partnership with clients is needed for developing, launching, managing and modernizing breakthrough products,comments Aiman Ezzat, CEO of the Capgemini Group.The launch of Capgemini Engineering builds on the integration of Altrans capabilities into the Group, a year on from its acquisition. It perfectly complements the Groups already well-established portfolio of business offerings and supports our leadership position in intelligent industry.
Capgemini Engineering helps the largest innovators in the world engineer the products and services of tomorrow, and cope with disruption by embedding into products digital and software technologies.
William Roz, CEO of Capgemini Engineering and member of the Group Executive Committeesaid: R&D is the new battlefield. It must be connected and data-driven to optimize innovation and accelerate development. Capgemini Engineerings services have been devised to address exactly that need, toharness the power of data to foster innovation, create new customer experiences and deliver new sources of value.
The capabilities combined under the Capgemini Engineering brand are already recognized as market leading. Numerous clients are also benefiting from Capgemini Engineerings ability to implement technology at scale, its deep product engineering skills and extensive industry expertise. One such organization is Hyperloop TT, an innovative transportation and technology company developing a disruptive high-speed transportation system based on electromagnetic propulsion.
We work with Capgemini Engineering to develop the first transportation breakthrough in a century and we value their top-tier engineering expertise in aerospace, aeronautics, and systems engineering. They provide us with a broad range of high-end services in mechanical and physical engineering, systems architecture, software development, as well as project managementsaid HyperloopTT CEO, Andres De Leon.
The global business lines services cover three key domains: product and systems engineering; digital and software engineering; and industrial operations.
If you have an interesting article / experience / case study to share, please get in touch with us at [emailprotected]
Original post:
Illuminating Engineering Society And National Park Service Partner On Night Sky – Facility Executive Magazine
In a collaboration focused on developing night sky friendly lighting standards, the Illuminating Engineering Society (IES) and the National Park Service (NPS) have taken on the challenge to improve outdoor lighting in national parks without affecting night sky viewing, the fastest-growing visitor activity in parks.
Night sky viewing is incredibly popular, and Americas national parks offer some of the best views of night skies, said Karen Trevino, the National Park Services chief steward of natural sounds and night skies. Staring at the night sky with the Milky Way streaking overhead is a quintessential experience for many national park visitors. Even national parks near urban centers often serve as night sky sanctuaries for those who live in our most populated cities.
National Park Service staff along with staff and members of the IES will, in the coming months, develop lighting standards and best practices for parks and other protected areas. Those standards will be available to help plan night sky friendly lighting in future construction projects in parks of the national park system.
American National Standards (ANSI standards) for lighting through the IES will be designed for resource protection and to keep park staff and visitors safe where light is needed. Communities that promote star gazing have these same needs and the standards and best practices developed by the NPS/IES collaboration will be available to those communities, counties, and states.
This partnership between the National Park Service and IES will promote a shared understanding of the importance of the natural night sky and the effects of light on national park resources and values including wildlife, cultural resources and values, wilderness character, and visitor experience and enjoyment of these same resources, said Brian Liebel, IES Director of Standards and Research.
The partnership will also promote collaborative research and educational opportunities for park staff and partners, IES members, and the public.
Established in 1906, the IES is the recognized technical and educational authority on illumination. The strength of the IES is its diversified membership including engineers, architects, designers, educators, students, contractors, distributors, utility personnel, manufacturers, and scientists in 64 countries. The IES is a 501(c)(3) non-profit professional society.
More:
California and Oregon engineering teams take first place in SourceAmerica Design Challenge – Johnson City Press (subscription)
VIENNA, Va., April 8, 2021 /PRNewswire/ --Student engineering teams from Los Angeles, California and Portland, Oregon won the top prizes at the 2021 SourceAmerica Design Challenge for their efforts to address workplace obstacles facing people with disabilities.
The two winning teams took top honors from a strong group of national finalists during a virtual showcase event...
A team from California State University, Los Angeles, in partnership with the National Taipei University of Technology in Taipei, Taiwan, was honored with the first-place prize in the college division. Their project Zeno Effect, a web-based data tracking platform, uses facial and object recognition to assist in an assembly process and helps managers spot areas needing attention. This demonstrates how data analytics can be leveraged to better achieve production goals for all employees.
"This was a wonderful opportunity," said California State University, Los Angeles team member Sandra Garcia. "We worked countless hours and it was worth it all!"
Catlin Gable School in Portland took first place in the high school division for their project ZipBag, which presents a safe and easy way for people with limb differences and lower dexterity to better handle the opening and closing of resealable bags.
"We decided to participate (in Design Challenge) because we wanted to use our engineering skills to help others," said Catlin Gable team member Keola Edelen Hare. "The ZipBag is a step toward a more inclusive environment for those with disabilities."
The SourceAmerica Design Challenge is a national engineering competition that showcases the STEM skills these students utilize to develop concepts and prototype assistive technologies to support people with disabilities in their workplaces. The two winning teams took top honors from a strong group of national finalists during a virtual showcase event held Wednesday.
"I would like to congratulate the winning teams from California State University, Los Angeles and Catlin Gable School," said SourceAmerica Interim President and CEO Richard Belden. "The 2021 SourceAmerica Design Challenge presented an opportunity for these students to use their imagination and ingenuity and show the world how assistive technology can make a difference. I think they did an awesome job."
The virtual finals event featured presentations from three college and five high school finalist teams. SourceAmerica subject matter experts in workforce development and productivity engineering judged the teams' submissions based on their potential impact in the workplace.
In addition to the judge's picks, the 300-plus attendees had the opportunity to vote live for their favorite project. Catlin Gable earned this year's first-ever People's Choice Award for their ZipBag.
The Design Challenge background
Student teams chose from a list of SourceAmerica's pre-approved projects spanning several engineering disciplines such as mechanical engineering and software development. The teams then designed technology to address project requirements. For most of the year, the teams worked together virtually to fine-tune and document their progress until they submitted a final design.
Below are the finalists who also participated in the program:
College Team Finalists:
The second and third place college teams are:
Second Place - California State University, Los Angeles, and the National Taipei University of Technology
Project: Midas Touch
Third Place - California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo San Luis Obispo, California
Project: Just Kitting Workstation
High School Team Finalists:
The second place and additional high school teams included:
Second Place - Poolesville High School Poolesville, Maryland
Project: Time Clock
Third Place - Oswego East High School Oswego, Illinois
Project: Robo-Sticker
Fourth Place - Brentwood High School Brentwood, New York
Project: The Quick Stamper
Fifth Place - Diamond Bar High School Diamond Bar, California
Project: Time Clocking and Office Supply Jigs
For more information
For questions or additional details about the SourceAmerica Design Challenge, please visit https://www.sourceamerica.org/get-involved/design-challenge.
About SourceAmerica
SourceAmerica connects government and corporate customers to a national network of approximately 700 nonprofit agencies that hire a talented segment of the workforce people with disabilities. Established in 1974, SourceAmerica is committed to increasing economic and social inclusion and advocating for a more accessible future of work for people with differing abilities. As a leading job creator within the disability community and distinguished as an AbilityOne authorized enterprise, SourceAmerica harnesses the momentum and boosts the capability of its network and customers. To learn more, visit SourceAmerica.org and follow the organization on Facebook (@SourceAmerica), Twitter (@SourceAmerica), Instagram (@SourceAmerica), and LinkedIn (@SourceAmerica).
View original content to download multimedia:http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/california-and-oregon-engineering-teams-take-first-place-in-sourceamerica-design-challenge-301264644.html
SOURCE SourceAmerica
More:
How Karen Thole is paving the way for sustainable aviation, women in engineering – The Daily Collegian Online
Look up at the sky right now. Chances are, you might see an airplane somewhere a Penn State faculty member had a hand in designing.
Karen Thole, distinguished professor and department head of mechanical engineering, is a leading researcher in gas turbine efficiency.
Right now, Thole leads a research lab of about 12 graduate students and four full-time staff members who study turbine heat transfer.
Were looking at all kinds of ways to make sure that gas turbines are more efficient, Thole said, so they take less fuel and have less carbon dioxide emissions.
According to Thole, turbines power all aircrafts including commercial flights and military flights. Another function of gas turbines is the ability to generate electricity.
We have land-based turbines, and about 40% of our electricity right now is generated by natural gas in gas turbines, Thole said. As a matter of fact, the Penn State power plant has two gas turbines that produce all the power for Penn State.
There are three parts to a gas turbine: a compressor to compress the flow of energy, a combustor that burns fuel to raise the temperature of the flow, and the turbine, which extracts its power from the flow.
Thole said the goal of the turbine is to have a high temperature entering it to create maximum efficiency.
However, the temperature of the hot gas can be maybe 1000s of degrees hotter than the melting temperatures of the parts involved in the turbine, according to Thole.
What Thole works on is finding ways to cool the turbine so the parts dont melt. One way she said this can be done is by taking air from the compressor and bypassing the combustor. From there, the air is passed through the turbine, cooling it down.
Thole said she has her own patents on cooling strategies used in turbines, which are now on some engines flying through the sky.
Hard work has always been a part of Tholes ethos, and her peers respect her work ethic. Atul Kohli, senior technical at Pratt & Whitney, said he met Thole in 1989 they met at The University of Texas at Austin while working in the same research group.
Kohli said its amazing to see her story when thinking of her accomplishments.
Karen is easily the most hardworking person I have ever known, Kohli said. That is why she is where she is.
Growing up in a small farming community of 49 people ironically named Tholeville Thole spent her youth in southern Illinois. She was raised on a dairy farm and said her childhood was full of hard work.
By the time she was in fifth grade, Thole was on a tractor driving around the field by her house. When she started college, she didnt know anything about engineering.
MORE CAMPUS COVERAGE
Studying for her undergraduate degree at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Thole said one of her friends told her she should try engineering one day after a chemistry class.
I went home at Christmas break, and I called McDonnell Douglas [now Boeing] which was in St. Louis, which is about 40 miles from where I live called the operator and asked if I could talk to their engineer, Thole said. I thought they must have one engineer there, and she laughed and said, We have many engineers.
From there, Thole said she was introduced to one of the companys engineers and after a description of his day, she decided, OK, Im gonna be an engineer.
Thole said her love for aircraft came at a young age when her father used to take her to the airport to watch planes take off and land.
Her journey to becoming the Penn State mechanical engineering department head took her all over the country and the world.
Thole finished her bachelors and masters degrees at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, and after working for a few years in a national lab in California, she decided to get her doctorate at the University of Texas at Austin.
After finishing her doctorate, Thole said she completed post-doctoral work in Germany. From there, she became faculty at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and later at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University.
After her time at Virginia Tech, Thole found her way to Penn State and continued her research on gas turbines as a faculty member and department head.
Tholes expertise on turbines landed her a spot testifying before one of the nations highest offices Congress.
Thole testified before the United States House of Representatives Committee on Science, Space & Technology subcommittee on Space and Aeronautics on March 24. The hearing was dedicated to finding forms of sustainable aviation, according to Thole.
Because of her 2016 report where she and a committee of fellow engineers found ways to reduce carbon dioxide emissions from turbines Thole was called in as an expert to detail the findings of this report and give her own say on the matter.
Patricia Stevens, who works for Boeing and leads systems engineering for the cargo and utility helicopters programs, said she thought Thole testifying before Congress was outstanding.
MORE CAMPUS COVERAGE
Located north of Penn States campus in a scenic colonial house surrounded by sprouting fiel
Stevens said she and Thole have become close professional colleagues, and with her experience, Thole makes a great candidate to present before Congress.
With that combination of academic leadership in the department, as well as staying very current and prolific [in] her research, it made her a very qualified candidate to make a position before Congress, Stevens said.
But the winds of time altered Tholes career course: Thole will step down as the department head of mechanical engineering in August to pursue full-time research.
She will lead a research project funded by NASA, working in collaboration with other universities along with Pratt & Whitney.
Tholes time as the department head of mechanical engineering increased representation for women in the field.
We increased the diversity of our faculty, Thole said. We now have 29% of our professors [who] are women, [and] we have four other underrepresented groups who became professors in our department.
Among her peers, Thole is also viewed as a superb role model for women in engineering, according to Kohli.
Kohli said Thole is passionate about changing the dynamic for women in engineering.
Shes really a role model for what women in engineering can achieve, Kohli said.
Thole said she is excited about her future in research, but is also sad to leave the department of mechanical engineering.
We accomplished a lot, so I am very sad to step down as the department head, Thole said. But, now its somebody elses opportunity to take it to the next level.
If you're interested in submitting a Letter to the Editor, click here.
See original here:
Two MU professors, from journalism and engineering, surprised with Kemper awards – Columbia Missourian
Marty Steffens was teaching her business and financial journalism class when she was interrupted by visitors bearing a big surprise: the news she had won a 2021 William T. Kemper Fellowship for Teaching Excellence.
The afternoon announcement came from University of Missouri President Mun Choi, MU Provost Latha Ramchand and Steve Sowers, president and CEO of Commerce Banks central region. The award comes with a $15,000 stipend.
Steffens said she has never been so excited and spent a moment trying to bring her students attending via Zoom back to the main screen so they could be present with her. They typed their congratulations in the chat, and the in-person students applauded.
Steffens, who holds the Society of American Business Editors and Writers chair at the Missouri School of Journalism, was one of two professors to receive the prestigious Kemper Fellowship on Wednesday. Three more faculty members will be surprised with the award this week.
Before coming to MU 19 years ago, Steffens spent 30 years in the news industry, according to her biography. At MU, she helped establish an introductory-level economics course designed mainly for journalism majors. Steffens also has trained journalists in more than 40 countries.
I am just grateful to know and teach all these students, she said after Chois announcement. Im glad I get to help them and hopefully change their lives.
Earlier, Heather Hunt, an MU associate professor in the College of Engineering and a strategic initiatives fellow in the UM Systems Office of eLearning, was attending a virtual faculty meeting. Suddenly, a series of new faces appeared and Choi began talking.
Heather Hunt
Wiping away tears, Hunt thanked her colleagues for nominating her and recognized them for their dedication to teaching during the pandemic, whether in person or online.
Hunt has also won the outstanding instructor award from graduating seniors in 2015, 2018 and 2019, according to her biography. Hunt was awarded the 2015 College of Engineering Junior Faculty Excellence in Teaching Award.
I love to teach because I get a lot of joy out of seeing how students grow and change over time, Hunt said during the announcement. Im a professor because I love teaching and mentoring in addition to doing great research.
Her research is in engineering, engineering education and workforce development, she said. She also completed research in psychology, studying the retention rate of underrepresented minority students in engineering.
Read more from the original source:
Former mining engineering professor at Missouri S&T named to National Mining Hall of Fame – Missouri S&T News and Research
The National Mining Hall of Fame in Leadville, Colorado, has named Dr. Richard L. Bullock a member of its 2021 class of inductees. Bullock, who died in late 2020, was a graduate and former professor of mining engineering at Missouri S&T.
Bullock was the first Robert H. Quenon Chair of Mining Engineering at Missouri S&T, then known as the University of Missouri-Rolla (UMR), and served in the post from 1997 to 2002. After retiring from the classroom, he continued to teach online courses at the university for another 13 years while working as a mining consultant in the U.S. and around the world.
We are all very proud of Dr. Bullock for the National Mining Hall of Fame recognition on top of all his accomplishments as a mining professional, educator and mentor, says Dr. Kwame Awuah-Offei, professor and interim director of mining and explosives engineering at Missouri S&T.
An alumnus of Missouri S&T, Bullock earned a bachelors degree from what was then known as the Missouri School of Mines and Metallurgy in 1951, a masters degree in mining engineering in 1955 and a doctor of engineering degree in mining engineering from UMR in 1975.
Bullock had over 60 years of experience in the mining industry, achieving success as a miner, mine foreman, mine and plant superintendent, director of mining research, manager of mine evaluation, mine project executive, and vice president of engineering and research.
Bullock received many awards, including the Society for Mining, Metallurgy & Exploration (SME) Jackling Award in 2011, Distinguished SME Member, and the Distinguished M&E Division Member, as well as numerous teaching awards from SME and Missouri S&T. He was a registered engineer in three states and a qualified person in public reporting of mineral reserves.
In 2018, Bullock self-published his memoir, From Hard Knocks to Hard Rocks: A Journey in My Shoes, as an e-book. He published a second volume, also as an e-book, in 2019.
Link: