Research and Development in the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers: Improving the Common Stock of Knowledge by Damon Manders Ordnance and Technical Services Branch U.S. Army Engineer District, St. Louis U.S. Army Corps of Engineers August 2011 Cataloging-in-Publication Data Manders, Damon. Research and development in the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers : Improving the common stock of knowledge / by Damon Manders. ix, 413 p. : ill. ; 28 cm. 1. Engineer Research and Development Center (U.S.)—Research--History. 2. United States. Army. Corps of Engineers—Research--History. 3. Engineering—Research--History. 4. Hydraulic engineering—Research--History. 5. Environmental engineering—Research- -History. 6. Military topography—Research--History. 7. Computer science—Research- -History. 8. Coastal engineering—Research--History. 9. Engineering geology—Research- -History. 10. Structural engineering—Research--History. 11. Engineering—Cold weather conditions—Research--History. 12. Information technology—Research--History. 13. Photogrammetry—Research--History. I. Engineer Research and Development Center (U.S.) II. United States. Army. Corps of Engineers. TA200 E8 2011 Foreword and Author’s Acknowledgments When Charles A. Camillo, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Mississippi Valley Division and U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center (ERDC) historian, approached me in 2007 about the possibility of working on a history of ERDC, I was excited about the potential of the project. He outlined a volume that would cover scientific research in engi- neering, hydraulics, computer science, topography, environmental science, and other techni- cal fields. As one raised by an engineer in a town with one of the highest concentrations of physicists, engineers, and computer developers in the country — Huntsville, Alabama — and as someone who had written about computers and technology for years, I saw the project as an opportunity to bring my personal interests and experiences to bear on describing one of the most unique organizations in the country. Discussing the project, he envisioned not just an organizational yearbook that is all too often the tone of Corps of Engineers histories, but a narrative of all research and development activities from the origins of the Corps to the modern day that would place ERDC in historical context. It was a sweeping topic requiring integration of a vast amount of information in a brief time — a little more than a year to meet the objective of the anniversary of the formation of ERDC. The result is the present volume. Although it falls short of a comprehensive history, a task that would have taken many years and many volumes to complete, it briefly treats the many Corps research and development activi- ties that led to the formation of ERDC in the context of U.S. engineering research, focusing primarily on the six fields that fall under ERDC: topography and photogrammetry, hydrau- lics and coastal engineering, geotechnology and structural engineering, construction research, cold regions research and engineering, environmental science, and information technology. I am extremely grateful for the opportunity to work on the project for a number of reasons. Aside from my personal interests and technical background, I am thankful for the opportu- nity to chronicle the histories of these influential research organizations, each with long pedi- grees and many accomplishments. I had, as has most anyone familiar with the Corps, heard of the U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station (WES) and appreciated its long history of important research. I would soon learn of the diverse activities of the other Corps labs that composed ERDC as my research proceeded. I knew that the Corps had for some years conducted research, though I was surprised to learn of the extent of such activities. I am also grateful for the ability to continue working in the field of the history of technology. The topic of Corps research and development lends itself more easily to a broader history of Corps technology than a simple organizational history would allow. As I described Corps research activities in context of early engineering and technological developments, I was able to com- ment widely on historiographical issues. Until recently the history of technology has received less attention than its importance to society has warranted. Many debates have surfaced over iii Improving the Common Stock of Knowledge the past quarter century addressing the relationship of science and engineering, the profes- sionalization of U.S. engineering, the evolution of engineering education, the place of indi- viduals in corporate entities, synergy between military and civil engineering, the utilization of computers, and other topics. The Corps was deeply involved in many of these issues. The knowledge, technology, and scientific approach the Corps developed to protect the country had vast influence on civil engineering practices. Mr. Camillo encouraged me to explore these issues within the overall historical context of the topic. The result is a different sort of history than most funded by the Corps, one that looks as much at broader historical trends and events as with the creation of the organizations. I greatly appreciate his vision that led to this history, which, I hope, will contribute in some small way to the history of technology by discussing the important but largely undocumented role the Corps played in the development of U.S. engineering science. I wish to thank Col. Richard B. Jenkins, the former ERDC command- er, who provided the initial impetus for this project, and Timothy D. Ables and the ERDC Board of Deputy Directors, who had the foresight to support and fund this worthy project. This volume is primarily a synthesis of existing material. Due to the complexity of the sub- ject, which embraces research accomplishments across a dozen engineering fields for more than two centuries, I relied heavily on those secondary works available to me for descriptions of many issues and especially on histories of the various laboratories. To those who came before me, I am, therefore, particularly indebted. Special mention should be made of Benjamin H. Fatherree, whose extraordinarily detailed histories of the WES hydraulics and geotechnical labs provided the basis for much of the descriptions of their research. The WES histories edited by Joseph Tiffany and authored by Gordon Cotton have also been of enormous help for the period prior to 1980. WES in general kept meticulous records, with annual historical or Lab of the Year reports available nearly every year since 1969. The histories of the Beach Erosion Board and Coastal Engineering Research Center by Mary-Louise Quinn and Jamie and Doro- thy Moore cover these organizations through the transfer of coastal research to WES in 1983. The Engineer Topographic Laboratories also had the advantage of detailed histories — edited or written by John Pennington, Edward C. Ezell, Andrew Hamilton, and Robert Hellman — covering the time of its formation to 1988. A brief history by Robert Livingstone discusses the formation and activities of the Engineer Detachment at Wright Field. For the Construction En- gineering Research Laboratory (CERL), Louis Torres wrote a well-documented history of that organization through 1988, while for the Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory, Edmund A. Wright completed a brief history of that lab through 1985, and a cursory update published by the lab takes the history through 1990. Also helpful was the important work of Frank Schubert on the topographical engineers, Lisa Mighetto and Wesley Ebel on the Bonn- eville Dam, Gregory Graves on the Institute of Water Resources, and Lawrence Suid on the Corps nuclear program, as well as the many district and division histories referenced in this text. I am also indebted to the pioneering inter-pretations of Hunter Rouse and Simon Ince, Todd Shallat, Martin Reuss, Brook Hindle, Silvio Bedini, Edwin Layton, and Terry Reynolds on early American and European science and engineering. These predecessors provided much of iv Foreword and Author’s Acknowledgments the groundwork without which this history would not have been possible in such a brief time- frame. I am extremely grateful for their efforts even when I disagree with their interpretation. Because of the dearth of secondary data in some areas or to reconcile conflicting testimony on specific issues, in several cases I conducted primary and archival research. In particular, I tried to review critical junctures, such as the founding of the labs or other events with larger political implications. Further, there were many eras and several organizations about which very little has been written. There is no detailed history of the early days of the Engineer School, of many Corps boards, and of the dozens of research organizations that seemed to keep cropping up in documents or mentioned in other histories. And of course, none of the current ERDC organi- zational histories cover the modern period; most cut off in the mid-1980s, in fact if not in name. In gathering the primary sources for this history, I must mention the support of Sheila DeVeydt of the St. Louis District, who helped track down documentation at the National Archives re- lated to the founding of WES and early board research in the Corps. Charles Camillo, with the aid of historian Larry Roberts and his assistant Janet Fisher, helped to track down reports and images from the U.S. Army Engineer School at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri. I wish to extend my appreciation to Matthew Pearcy, Michael Brodhead, Michelle Tyler, and James Gerber at the Corps of Engineers History Office for help in searching their archives for documents and imag- es, and also to John C. Lonnquest, chief of the History Office, for overall support and guidance. I also wish to thank the many public affairs officers and librarians at the many laboratory sites, including Deborah Quimby, Wayne Stroupe, Jackie Bryant, Marie Darling, and Dana Finney, as well as librarians Nancy Liston, Patricia Lacey, and Allan Wiley.