Spring 2015 FRONTIERS OF ENGINEERING

The BRIDGE LINKING ENGINEERING AND SOCIETY

Progress in Self-Driving Vehicles Chris Urmson Personalized Medical Robots Allison M. Okamura and Tania K. Morimoto Electrochemical Prozac: Relieving Battery Anxiety through Life and Safety Research Alvaro Masias Lithium Ion Batteries and Their Manufacturing Challenges Claus Daniel The History of Heart Valves: An Industry Perspective Erin M. Spinner Biomaterials for Treating Myocardial Infarctions Jason A. Burdick and Shauna M. Dorsey Regulatory Perspectives on Technologies for the Heart Tina M. Morrison Microbial Ecology of Hydraulic Fracturing Kelvin B. Gregory

The mission of the National Academy of Engineering is to advance the well-being of the nation by promoting a vibrant engineering profession and by marshalling the expertise and insights of eminent engineers to provide independent advice to the federal government on matters involving engineering and technology. The BRIDGE

NATIONAL ACADEMY OF ENGINEERING

Charles O. Holliday, Jr., Chair C. D. Mote, Jr., President Corale L. Brierley, Vice President Thomas F. Budinger, Home Secretary Venkatesh Narayanamurti, Foreign Secretary Martin B. Sherwin, Treasurer

Editor in Chief: Ronald M. Latanision Managing Editor: Cameron H. Fletcher Production Assistant: Penelope Gibbs The Bridge (ISSN 0737-6278) is published quarterly by the National Aca­demy­ of Engineering, 2101 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20418.

Periodicals postage paid at Washington, DC. Vol. 45, No. 1, Spring 2015 Postmaster: Send address changes to The Bridge, 2101 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20418. Papers are presented in The Bridge on the basis of general interest and time- liness. They reflect the views of the authors and not necessarily the position of the National Academy of Engineering. The Bridge is printed on recycled paper. C © 2015 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

A complete copy of The Bridge is available in PDF format at www.nae.edu/TheBridge. Some of the articles in this issue are also avail- able as HTML documents and may contain links to related sources of information, multimedia files, or other content. The Volume 45, Number 1 • Spring 2015 BRIDGE LINKING ENGINEERING AND SOCIETY

Editor’s Note 3 From the Frontiers of Engineering and Beyond Kristi S. Anseth

Features 5 Progress in Self-Driving Vehicles Chris Urmson Self-driving vehicles offer the promise of reducing accidents, enabling people who cannot drive to get around, and reducing congestion. 9 Personalized Medical Robots Allison M. Okamura and Tania K. Morimoto Robotic devices can achieve the most minimally invasive trajectory possible, thus increasing accuracy, minimizing trauma, and decreasing recovery time and chance of infection. 13 Electrochemical Prozac: Relieving Battery Anxiety through Life and Safety Research Alvaro Masias The success of long-term vehicle electrification efforts will depend heavily on the performance of their batteries. 21 Lithium Ion Batteries and Their Manufacturing Challenges Claus Daniel Research is being conducted to address materials, manufacturing, and cost challenges that hamper broader use of lithium ion batteries. 25 The History of Heart Valves: An Industry Perspective Erin M. Spinner New materials, technologies, and methods are enabling the transcatheter replacement and repair of diseased heart valves. 31 Biomaterials for Treating Myocardial Infarctions Jason A. Burdick and Shauna M. Dorsey Injectable biomaterials are being developed as a minimally invasive approach to decrease damage after a heart attack. 37 Regulatory Perspectives on Technologies for the Heart Tina M. Morrison Manufacturers of innovative medical technologies for the heart can leverage different tools and techniques to meet regulatory requirements and get their devices to the market.

(continued on next page)

The BRIDGE

43 Microbial Ecology of Hydraulic Fracturing Kelvin B. Gregory Storage and transportation of wastewater from unconventional oil and gas production create challenges in microbial control of the water. 49 An Interview with . . . Henry Petroski

NAE News and Notes 56 Class of 2015 Elected 60 NAE Members Receive One National Medal of Science and Four National Medals of Technology and Innovation 62 NAE Newsmakers 64 2014 EU-US Frontiers of Engineering Hosted by Boeing in Seattle 67 Message from NAE Vice President Corale Brierley 70 National Academy of Engineering 2014 Donor Recognition 84 Mirzayan Fellows Join Program Office 84 In Memoriam 86 Calendar of Meetings and Events

86 Publications of Interest

The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self- The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National perpetuating society of distin­ guished­ scholars engaged in scientific Acade­my­ of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and appropriate pro­fes­sions in the examination of policy matters pertaining technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the author- to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility ­ity of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional char- has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal gov­ernment­ on ter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own scientific and technical matters. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is president of the initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. National Academy of Sciences. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president of the Institute of Medicine.

The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, The National Research Council was organized by the National under the charter of the Nation­ al­ Academy of Sciences, as a parallel Academy of Scienc­ ­es in 1916 to associate the broad community of organization of outstand­ ing­ engineers. It is autonomous in its adminis- science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of fur­ther­ing tration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National knowledge and advising the federal government. Func­tion­ing in Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal gov­- accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the ernment. The National Academy of En­gineer­ ing­ also sponsors engi- Council has become the principal operating agency of both the neering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages edu- National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engi- cation and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of neering in providing services to the government, the public, and the engineers. Dr. C. D. Mote, Jr., is president of the National Academy scientific and en­gi­neer­ing communities. The Council is administered of Engineering. jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. C. D. Mote, Jr., are chair ­and vice chair, respec- tively, of the National Research Council. www.national-academies.org FALL 2006 3 Editor’s Note

The session on co-robotics was organized by Brian Gerkey of the Open Source Robotics Foundation and Carmel Majidi of Carnegie Mellon University. Speak- ers described how recent advances in robotics technol- Kristi S. Anseth (NAE) is ogy have enabled safer interactions with humans and Distinguished Professor, Tisone are allowing robots to enter workplaces, hospitals, and Professor, and HHMI investigator homes. We learned about the frontiers in self-driving in the Department of Chemical cars, robots in the manufacturing environment, mini- and Biological Engineering at the mally invasive surgical robots, and biologically inspired University of Colorado Boulder. mobile robots. This issue features the papers of two speakers from this session, Chris Urmson of Google and Allison Okamura of Stanford. From the Frontiers of The second session, chaired by Dan Steingart of Princeton University and Jeff Sakamoto of the Uni- Engineering and Beyond versity of Michigan, was titled “battery anxiety,” which The twentieth US Frontiers of Engineering (FOE) Sym- was intended to capture the efforts and challenges in posium was hosted at the Beckman Center in Irvine, transitioning to an electrical energy economy. The ses- California, September 11–13, 2014. This annual pro- sion highlighted efforts to meet future energy storage gram brings together 100 or so exceptionally talented needs through both fundamental and applied materials young engineers, ages 30–45, representing the diversity research. The speakers covered topics about battery life of the engineering research community. The unique and safety issues, linking fundamental materials char- characteristic of the symposium is the opportunity to acterization to manufacturing issues and grid storage. network with researchers working in academia, industry, Alvaro Masias of Ford explains “why we need batter- and government and spanning engineering disciplines, ies,” but places this in the context of reducing concerns and to learn about cutting-edge research on topics that about predictions of their lifetime and safety. Claus stretch minds and thinking outside of one’s own exper- Daniel of Oak Ridge complements this discussion with tise. I have been privileged to chair this meeting for the a review of current and future chemistries for batteries past three years, and each event has been distinctively as well as challenges in transitioning between materials memorable. I hope you will consider nominating your discovery and energy storage technologies. eligible colleagues for next year’s symposium, which will The theme of the third session, organized by Kar- be organized by the new FOE chair, Professor Robert en Christman of the University of California at San Braun, from the Georgia Institute of Technology. Diego and Ashley Peterson of Medtronic Endovascular The 2014 meeting began with a special welcome from Therapies, was technologies for the heart. The session NAE President Dan Mote, who shared a brief history introduced the audience to the basic functions of the of the NAE and upcoming events to celebrate its 50th heart to provide an appreciation for the complexities anniversary. We were moved by a preview of some of the of engineering devices to interface with a living tissue. Engineering for You (E4U) video submissions (www. Erin Spinner of Edwards Lifesciences set the stage with nae.edu/e4u/#contestMenu) and the takeaway message a chronology of advances in devices to treat heart valve that “Engineering Is Amazing!” disease. Jason Burdick of the University of Pennsylvania We then commenced with the scientific program, then describes bench to bedside efforts in biomaterial which was organized into four sessions with the follow- design to treat the heart after an infarction. The session’s ing themes: co-robotics, battery anxiety, technologies closing talk, authored by Tina Morrison of the US Food for the heart, and shale gas and oil. Eight papers based and Drug Administration, explained the guidelines and on this year’s presentations are included in this issue of constraints of FDA regulation for those in the business of the Bridge. engineering products for placement in the human body. The 4 BRIDGE

The final session, chaired by Billy Bardin of the enough food for the world’s population and the impact Dow Chemical Company and Christopher Jones of the of the Haber-Bosch process. He challenged the audi- Georgia Institute of Technology, looked at the boom in ence to think about the most important problems fac- domestic production of gas and oil from shale resources, ing society today and how one might rethink traditional facilitated by the development and implementation of measures of research success to include impact in devel- hydraulic fracturing. Speakers provided an overview of oping solutions to global challenges in sustainability, the logistical and infrastructure challenges of transport- energy, and environment. ing these resources, introduced some environmental I would like to conclude by emphasizing what a dis- questions and challenges, and discussed the use of shale tinct pleasure it has been to serve as chair of the Orga- gas for chemical production. In this issue Kelvin Greg- nizing Committee for the US FOE Symposium for the ory of Carnegie Mellon University reviews some of the past three years. I extend my heartfelt gratitude to Janet water resource aspects related to hydraulic fracturing, Hunziker, NAE senior program officer, and Vanessa Les- specifically its impact on microbial communities.1 ter, program associate, who work tirelessly to ensure the Beyond the outstanding presentations, the FOE success of this program. I feel so very fortunate to have schedule was designed to provide ample time for lively been part of the FOE team for this brief period, and Q&A sessions, breakout discussions, and other activities Janet and Vanessa deserve many rounds of thank you’s to encourage conversation and networking. Another from me, the session organizers, speakers, and meeting highlight of this year’s program was the dinner speaker, attendees for their extraordinary efforts. Finally, I would Dr. Arun Majumdar, President Obama’s selection for like to recognize the generous sponsors of the 2014 founding director of the Advanced Research Projects symposium: The Grainger Foundation, National Sci- Agency–Energy (ARPA-E) and professor of mechani- ence Foundation, Defense Advanced Research Projects cal engineering and materials science and engineering Agency, Air Force Office of Scientific Research, DOD- at the University of California at Berkeley. Dr. Majum- ASDR&E Research Directorate–STEM Development dar gave a provocative talk on the notion of “what is Office, Microsoft Research, Boeing, Cummins Inc., and impact?” with some historical context about the use of individual donors. sources of nitrogen to tackle the problem of growing

1 Editor’s note: The topic of shale gas was addressed in the summer 2014 issue of the Bridge. Self-driving vehicles offer the promise of reducing accidents, enabling people who cannot drive to get around, and reducing congestion.

Progress in Self-Driving Vehicles

Chris Urmson

Automated driving has experienced a research renaissance in the past decade as investigators have been motivated by organized competitions to increase safety and mobility. Key advances that have shaped the field during this period have been in the application of machine learning, large- scale mapping, improved LIDAR (light detection and ranging remote sens- ing technology) and radar sensing capability, and, more recently, a deeper Chris Urmson is head of understanding of the human factors that will influence the form in which engineering for Google’s this technology comes to market. Self-Driving Car Project. Why Self-Driving Vehicles? Traffic accidents are the leading cause of death for individuals aged 4 to 34 in the United States (Hoyert and Xu 2012). More than 30,000 people are killed each year on the road, and over 90 percent of these accidents are due to human error. Furthermore, the ability to move in, through, and around cities is decreasing as more and more drivers, preferring individual mobility, flood roadways. Yet the importance of personal mobility in the United States is such that when individuals lose the privilege of driving, and the social connections it enables, their life expectancy drops precipi- tously (Edwards et al. 2009). And in developing cities the rise in traf- fic deaths and significant pollution is further evidence of the tragedy of the commons. The 6 BRIDGE

Self-driving vehicles offer the promise of addressing all of these chal- lenges: they should dra- matically reduce accidents, enable people who cannot drive to get around, and, when deployed as part of an efficient shared vehicle fleet, reduce congestion.

A Deep History As early as the 1939 World’s FIGURE 1 The top three finishers in the 2005 DARPA Grand Challenge: Stanley, entered Fair, General Motors by Stanford University (left), and H1ghlander (center) and Sandstorm (right), both entered by Carnegie Mellon University. showed a concept of the automated roadway of the future. In 1950 its research would not be achievable and that the Department of and development department introduced the Firebird Defense should pursue other strategies (NRC 2002). II concept car, capable of following buried cables that Thus DARPA’s Grand and Urban Challenges were born. emitted a radiofrequency signal. During the 1980s and The initial Grand Challenges were off-road races ’90s the introduction of the microcomputer enabled across the desert, with the notional goal of having practical, online computation on a mobile platform. autonomous vehicles drive from Los Angeles to Las Ernst Dickmanns was a pioneer in this space, intro- Vegas without remote assistance. In 2004 the challeng- ducing early versions of foveated stereovision systems ers went only 7 miles of the 150-mile course (Urmson (Dickmanns and Wünsche 2007). et al. 2004). The following year, several vehicles com- Soon machine learning began to be applied to the pleted the competition (Figure 1), which was won by a problem. RALPH (a rapidly adapting lateral position team from Stanford (Thrun et al. 2006). handler; e.g., Thorpe and Kanade 1990) was one of the The vehicles featured several notable technical earliest applications of machine learning (neural net- innovations. All of the competitors were given a rough works in this case) to automated driving. By 1997 the map of the route, but several of the successful teams combination of RALPH with a nascent forward-look- augmented the map data with information from other ing radar system enabled vehicles to drive thousands publicly available sources. The notion of fusing such of miles. Elements of this technology have found their information with onboard sensing data was novel at the way into lane keeping assist systems, forward collision time (Urmson et al. 2006). The approach was enabled mitigation braking, and adaptive cruise control systems. by newly available access to high-resolution aerial imag- ery, and gave the vehicles a degree of foreknowledge of DARPA’s Grand Challenges the terrain that resulted in better and safer driving. Much of the on-road automated driving work faded The Stanford team used machine learning techniques after the successful 1997 National Automated Highway extensively. For example, its vehicle used machine Systems Consortium demonstration. The technology learning to bolster its visual system with LIDAR sen- worked reasonably well, but automated driving research sors, enabling it to drive faster than was possible with funding turned toward the military while the automotive LIDAR alone. The vehicle was able to detect rough industry slowly commercialized driver assistance systems. terrain and slow appropriately using a learned model In 2003 the driving research community was reen- of “bumpiness.” The team’s success in the challenge ergized by the announcement of the DARPA Grand helped reinforce machine learning’s value in the field Challenges (http://grandchallenge.org/). The Floyd D. of autonomous driving. Spence National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2001 called for one third of all US military ground The Urban Challenge vehicles to be unmanned by 2015. In a 2002 report the While the Grand Challenge was indeed a grand chal- National Research Council indicated that this goal lenge, the vehicles operated in a world devoid of other SPRING 2015 7

moving vehicles: when Stanley, the Stanford vehicle, intersections. They were also able to use their limited passed H1ghlander, the Carnegie Mellon vehicle, to computation more efficiently. claim the victory, H1ghlander was paused and Stanley passed an inert vehicle. Post-Challenge Progress The Urban Challenge was thus the next evolution In the seven years since the Urban Challenge, indus- of the DARPA competition, in which the vehicles now try has taken up the gauntlet of advancing self-driving had not only to complete the challenge with moving technology. In 2009 Google started a program to devel- vehicles but also to obey a subset of driving rules that op self-driving vehicles and since then its vehicles have human drivers take for granted (e.g., stay in the lane, driven more than 700,000 miles autonomously on pub- follow precedence rules at intersections, avoid other lic roads. vehicles). The competition, staged in 2007, required The technology being developed by Google builds vehicles to drive 60 miles around a decommissioned on many of the themes developed during the DARPA Air Force base in Victorville, California. Six vehicles challenges. The vehicles use high-resolution maps (now finished the competition, with teams from Carnegie being developed at city scale) to help guide the onboard Mellon, Stanford, and Virginia Tech in the top three system’s perception and planning behaviors as well as a positions (Buehler et al. 2009). combination of LIDAR, camera, and radar sensors to Key technical advances came in the form of high- provide a partially redundant and multispectral model density LIDAR and further demonstration of the val- of the environment. The onboard software system lever- ue of high-density maps. Single-plane LIDAR sensors ages hundreds of thousands of miles of driving data and were used in the original Grand Challenge, sometimes machine learning techniques to predict the behavior of actuated to sweep volumes but generally carefully cali- other road users. brated to sweep scan lines through the environment as In parallel with Google’s efforts, the automotive the vehicle moved. The Urban Challenge introduced industry is broadly engaged in the development of the concept of high-density LIDARs through a sensor advanced driver assistance systems, with the major developed by Velodyne. The new sensor had a spinning car companies and their suppliers developing varying head that swept a set of 64 LIDAR emitters through degrees of automated driving. The largest difference space, generating over 1 million range measurements between the approaches of the classical automotive per second with relatively high angular resolution. This companies and Google is the degree to which the driv- style of sensor enabled a new level of precision model- er is engaged. Google is developing vehicles to be fully ling that had until then been difficult, if not impossible, self-driving, requiring a rider only to tell the vehicle to achieve in real time. where to go (Figure 2), whereas the automotive compa- The value of digital maps came to the forefront dur- nies are primarily focused on delivering advanced driv- ing the Urban Challenge. Using the maps, vehicles were er assistance systems that require the driver to remain able to anticipate the likely trajectory of other vehicles in the steering loop. The latter approach requires a and focus their attention in appropriate directions at smaller incremental technical step, but is challenged

FIGURE 2 Google’s prototype fully self-driving vehicle. The 8 BRIDGE by problems of driver attentiveness and skill atrophy systems: Drivers’ allocation of visual attention to the for- (Llaneras et al. 2013). ward roadway. Proceedings of the 7th International Driv- In the coming years advanced driver assistance sys- ing Symposium on Human Factors in Driver Assessment, tems and self-driving vehicles will become common- Training and Vehicle Design, pp. 92–98. place, delivering on the promise of making roads safer NRC [National Research Council]. 2002. Technology Devel- and more convenient for all. opment for Army Unmanned Ground Vehicles. Washing- ton: National Academies Press. References Thorpe C, Kanade T. 1990. Vision and Navigation. Dor- Buehler M, Iagnemma K, Singh S, eds. 2009. The DARPA drecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Urban Challenge: Autonomous vehicles in city traffic. Thrun S, Montemerlo M, Dahlkamp H, Stavens D, Aron A, Spring Tracts in Advanced Robotics, vol. 56. London: Diebel J, and 24 others. 2006. Stanley: The robot that won Springer. the DARPA Grand Challenge. Journal of Field Robotics Dickmanns ED, Wünsche HJ. 2007. Dynamic vision for per- 23(9):661–692. ception and control of motion. London: Springer. Urmson C, Anhalt J, Clark M, Galatali T, Gonzalez JP, Edwards JD, Perkins M, Ross LA, Reynolds SL. 2009. Driving Gowdy J, and 10 others. 2004. High speed navigation of status and three-year mortality among community-dwelling unrehearsed terrain: Red Team technology for Grand Chal- older adults. Journals of Gerontology Series A: Biological lenge 2004. Technical Report CMU-RI-04-37. Robotics Sciences and Medical Sciences 64A(2):300–305. Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh. Hoyert DL, Xu J. 2012. Deaths: Preliminary data for 2011. Urmson C, Ragusa C, Ray D, Anhalt J, Bartz D, Galatali National Vital Statistics Reports 61(6):1–51. T, and 16 others. 2006. A robust approach to high-speed Llaneras RE, Salinger J, Green CA. 2013. Human factors navigation for unrehearsed desert terrain. Journal of Field issues associated with limited ability autonomous driving Robotics 23(8):467–508. Robotic devices can achieve the most minimally invasive trajectory possible, thus increasing accuracy, minimizing trauma, and decreasing recovery time and chance of infection.

Personalized Medical Robots

Allison M. Okamura and Tania K. Morimoto

Many medical interventions today are qualitatively and quantitatively limited by human physical and cognitive capabilities. Robot-assisted inter- vention techniques can extend humans’ ability to perform surgery more accu- Allison M. Okamura rately and less invasively using novel physical designs and computer control. Hundreds of thousands of surgical procedures are now done annually using robots, typically teleoperated by human surgeons. Commercial surgical robots such as the da Vinci Surgical System (DiMaio et al. 2011) are designed as general tools that can be used for a variety of procedures and patient popula- tions. But because of their limited dexterity, high cost, and large footprint in the operating room, there are many scenarios in which current clinical robots cannot be used to perform minimally invasive medical procedures (Herron and Marohn 2008; Taylor and Stoianovici 2003). The next generation of medical robots will be much more personalized—capable of being rapidly designed, manufactured, and controlled for a specific patient and procedure.

Tania K. Morimoto Design of Personalized Medical Robots Each patient presents a design opportunity. A path from a feasible entry point on the surface of the body to the target, such as a cancerous tumor or kidney

Allison M. Okamura is an associate professor and Tania K. Morimoto is a graduate stu- dent in the Department of Mechanical Engineering at Stanford University. The 10 BRIDGE

FIGURE 1 Personalized medical robot design uses knowledge of patient anatomy (left) to select the number, shape, and length of robotic elements (right) to reach a target in the safest, most minimally invasive fashion possible. Adapted from Morimoto et al. (2013). stone, can be planned based on patient-specific anato- they do not require reaction forces to bend and can my and mechanical models of tissue acquired via new be used in free space. The concept for the active can- elastographic imaging techniques. Based on this path, a nula was simultaneously developed in 2006 (Sears and unique robotic steerable needle or catheter design will Dupont 2006; Webster et al. 2006), and recent work achieve the most minimally invasive trajectory possible, has provided a comprehensive analysis of concentric thus increasing accuracy, minimizing trauma, and ide- tube robot design and kinematics (Gilbert and Web- ally decreasing recovery time and chance of infection. ster 2013; Lock and Dupont 2011; Rucker et al. 2010; This capacity is particularly useful in addressing the Webster et al. 2008). needs of specialized patient groups, including children One example of concentric tube robot design is given and people with rare diseases, who may otherwise not in the context of accessing hard-to-reach upper-pole receive the optimal treatment. kidney stones in pediatric patients (Morimoto et al. In many procedures, the path of least resistance from 2013). Because of their smaller body surface area com- a feasible entry point on the surface of the body to a pared to adults, as well as the proximity of the upper target for treatment has multiple curved segments, so kidney to the diaphragm and the pleura, traditional a snakelike device with the ability to change its shape straight needle- and catheter-based approaches can along its length is ideal. To avoid the “curse of dimen- be dangerous. To eliminate these risks, the ideal path sionality” (the challenge of modeling and controlling a would begin below the 12th rib, snake up through the system with hundreds of individual degrees of freedom), renal pelvis, and curve toward the upper pole of the a useful robot design should require only a few input kidney. The exact dimensions for curvatures and seg- degrees of freedom, yet have the ability to achieve a ment lengths of the tubes can be gauged from patient- large variety of physical configurations. Steerable nee- specific CT scans. Based on kinematic models (Dupont dles (Reed et al. 2011) have this property, but require et al. 2010; Sears and Dupont 2007; Webster et al. 2008, relatively large reaction forces from tissue and cannot 2009), sets of tubes can be identified that follow the work in free space. desired path through patient tissue (Figure 1). One of the most promising approaches is the concen- tric tube robot (also known as the active cannula), which Manufacturing of Personalized Medical Robots consists of nested hollow, precurved, superelastic tubes A combination of modular robot architecture and (Figure 1). As the curved tubes are inserted and rotat- novel manufacturing techniques is beginning to enable ed with respect to each other, they interact such that fast manufacturing and assembly of robotic manipula- their common axis conforms to some combined curva- tors that can achieve a variety of design objectives. ture, causing the overall shape of the robot to change. Primarily these robots will be long, thin, flexible Because concentric tube robots derive bending actua- devices whose actuators remain outside the body and tion from the elastic energy stored in the backbone, whose components that enter the body are sterile SPRING 2015 11

and disposable—they are small, inexpensive, and do not speed, the use of multiple materials in a single part, and need to be overdesigned for repeated use. The nondis- the ability to embed sensors in a mechanical structure. posable base of the robot can consist of modular units. In the case of a modular concentric tube robot design, Control of Personalized Medical Robots a single module includes two motors that allow a tube to Surgical robots that go deep into the body require a be both inserted and rotated with respect to the tubes combination of low-level autonomous control and high- around it (Figure 2). The outermost tube to be inserted level human control. Human teleoperation directs the is clamped in the modular unit at the end of the base robot tip motions and treatments, while the underlying closest to the patient, while the subsequent tubes (with control system achieves the necessary robot configura- increasingly smaller diameters) are axially aligned in tion to minimize invasiveness. Seamless integration of units further behind. Units can be added or removed preoperative plans and real-time medical imaging pro- based on the number of tubes needed for the specific vide effective feedback to achieve the desired clinical procedure and patient. outcomes. Examples of control systems that involve The disposable components of the robot can be either both low-level autonomous control and high-level specifically designed for each patient or chosen from a human control include teleoperators that combine set that has been previously designed and optimized haptic (force feedback) guidance for steerable needles for a particular population of patients (e.g., children). (Majewicz and Okamura 2013) and operator tip control A patient-specific design requires the manufacture of for active cannulas (Burgner et al. 2011). numerous disposable components. In one method for active cannula manufacturing, superelastic (e.g., Niti- Conclusion nol) tubes are heat treated to take on the desired shapes. The next generation of medical robots will be personal- Recent work has taken advantage of advances in 3D ized to enable treatment using devices optimized for a printing to quickly and cheaply produce patient-specific particular patient’s body and malady. Advances in medi- devices (Figure 2). The use of 3D printing is becoming cal imaging, path planning, design, manufacturing, con- more widespread in the medical field for anatomy visu- trol, and human-machine interaction all contribute to alization to improve surgical planning (Dankowski et this goal. al. 2014; Schwaiger et al. 2012) and for the production of customized implants for patients with special require- References ments and size constraints (Abdel-Sayed and von Abdel-Sayed P, von Segesser LK. 2011. Rapid prototyping for Segesser 2011). 3D printing is also increasingly used training purposes in cardiovascular surgery. In: Advanced for manufacturing medical robots, from rehabilitation Applications of Rapid Prototyping Technology in Modern devices to minimally invasive surgical robots (Roppe- Engineering, ed. Hoque ME, Chapter 4. Rijeka, Croatia: necker et al. 2013). The benefits of 3D printing include InTech.

FIGURE 2 (Left) Active cannula-driving robot module. (Right) Example sets of 3D-printed tubes that can be used to construct an active cannula system. The 12 BRIDGE

Burgner J, Swaney PJ, Rucker DC, Gilbert HB, Nill ST, Rus- Reed KB, Majewicz A, Kallem V, Alterovitz A, Goldberg K, sell PT, Weaver KD, Webster RJ. 2011. A bimanual teleop- Cowan NJ, Okamura AM. 2011. Robot-assisted needle erated system for endonasal skull base surgery. Proceedings steering. Robotics and Automation Magazine 18:35–46. of the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Roppenecker DB, Pfaff A, Coy JA, Leuth TC. 2013. Multi- Robots and Systems, San Francisco, September 25–30, pp. arm snake-like robot kinematics. Proceedings of the 2013 2517–2523. IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robot- Dankowski R, Baszko A, Sutherland M, Firek L, Kałmucki P, ics and Systems, Japan, pp. 5040–5045. Wróblewska K, Szyszka A, Groothuis A, Siminiak T. 2014. Rucker DC, Jones BA, Webster RJ. 2010. A geometrically 3D heart model printing for preparation of percutaneous exact model for externally loaded concentric-tube continu- structural interventions: Description of the technology and um robots. IEEE Transactions on Robotics 26(5):769–780. case report. Kardiologia Polska 72(6):546–551. Schwaiger J, Kagerer M, Traeger M, Gillen S, Dobritz M, DiMaio S, Hanuschik M, Kreaden U. 2011. The da Vinci sur- Kleeff J, Feussner H, Lueth TC. 2012. Manufacturing of gical system. In: Surgical Robotics: Systems Applications patient-specific pancreas models for surgical resections. and Visions, Chapter 9. New York: Springer Science and Proceedings of the 2012 IEEE International Conference Business Media. on Robotics and Biomimetics, China, pp. 991–998. Dupont PE, Lock J, Itkowitz B, Butler E. 2010. Design and Sears P, Dupont PE. 2006. A steerable needle technology control of concentric-tube robots. IEEE Transactions on using curved concentric tubes. Proceedings of the 2006 Robotics 26(2):209–225. IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots Gilbert HB, Webster RJ. 2013. Can concentric-tube robots fol- and Systems, China, pp. 2850–2856. low the leader? Proceedings of the 2013 IEEE International Sears P, Dupont PE. 2007. Inverse kinematics of concentric- Conference on Robotics and Automation, Karlsruhe, Ger- tube steerable needles. Proceedings of the 2007 IEEE Inter- many, May 6–10, pp. 4866–4872. national Conference on Robotics and Automation, Italy, Herron DM, Marohn M. 2008. A consensus document on pp. 1887–1892. robotic surgery. Surgical Endoscopy 22:313–325. Taylor RH, Stoianovici D. 2003. Medical robotics in comput- Lock J, Dupont PE. 2011. Friction modeling in concentric- er-integrated surgery. IEEE Transactions on Robotics and tube robots. Proceedings of the 2011 IEEE International Automation 19(5):765–781. Conference on Robotics and Automation, China, pp. Webster RJ, Okamura AM, Cowan NJ. 2006. Toward active 1139–1146. cannulas: Miniature snake-like surgical robots. Proceedings Majewicz A, Okamura AM. 2013. Cartesian and joint space of the 2006 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intel- teleoperation for nonholonomic steerable needles. Pro- ligent Robots and Systems, China, pp. 2857–2863. ceedings of the IEEE World Haptics Conference, South Webster RJ, Romano JM, Cowan NJ. 2008. Kinematics and Korea, pp. 395–400. calibration of active cannulas. Proceedings of the 2008 Morimoto TK, Hsieh MH, Okamura AM. 2013. Robot-guided IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automa- sheaths (RoGS) for percutaneous access to the pediatric tion, USA, pp. 3888–3895. kidney: Patient-specific design and preliminary results. Pro- Webster R, Romano J, Cowan N. 2009. Mechanics of pre- ceedings of the 2013 ASME Dynamic Systems and Con- curved-tube continuum robots. IEEE Transactions on trol Conference, Palo Alto, October 21–23; doi: 10.1115/ Robotics 25(1):67–78. DSCC2013-3917. The success of long-term vehicle electrification efforts will depend heavily on the performance of their batteries.

Electrochemical Prozac Relieving Battery Anxiety through Life and Safety Research

Alvaro Masias

Global interest in electrified vehicles is sparked by both environmental concerns and, in practical terms, the relatively recent application of lith- ium ion battery technology to automotive applications. Mass adoption of automotive batteries will depend on performance improvements, so meth- ods to optimize the prediction and design of this technology for endurance and safety are an area of active research. New analytical test tools and Alvaro Masias is a methods are described in this article, and their refinement and adoption research engineer in the will enhance the ability of lithium ion technology to supplant liquid hydro- Energy Storage Research carbon fuels in the transportation sector and thus positively contribute to & Strategy Department at the global environment. Ford Motor Company. Introduction The governments of the United States, European Union, China, and Japan, among others, have announced increasingly strict fuel economy reg- ulations. Thus although the fossil fuel–powered automobile has been the subject of continuous engineering improvement for over 100 years (Ford 1988), electrified automobiles are a key component of virtually all auto- makers’ current and future product portfolios, and lithium ion batteries are enabling a new generation of electrified vehicles to be commercialized by global automakers. The 14 BRIDGE

In this article I explain battery performance require- and EV applications. But low-temperature, cost, and life ments for the broad range of electrified vehicles, togeth- challenges prevent lithium ion technology from sup- er with new tools to improve the identification and planting lead acid chemistries in the stop-start market. prediction of failure mechanisms. Safety testing and the The various EV types, with their different array of results of recent research in this area are also presented. electrified features, place very different power, energy, By addressing the sources of uncertainty in battery and cycle life demands on their batteries. For example, a failure mechanisms, whether performance (i.e., precise common EV design features more than 80 kW of power measurement of voltage, current, and time) or safety and 24 kWh of energy. Cycle life is strongly affected by (i.e., reaction to various types of mechanical and elec- the extent of the battery capacity used in each cycle. trical abuse) related, researchers will enable significant Likewise, designing for high energy has a direct impact improvements in future generations of battery-powered on the available power delivery as a tradeoff. vehicles. Designing a vehicle battery involves balancing com- peting performance figures, including energy and power. Transportation Battery Needs As a result, several automotive industry and govern- Electrified vehicle designs can be classified by their lev- ment organizations—the US Advanced Battery Con- els of electrification. In order of increasing power and sortium (USABC; information at www.uscar.org), the energy demands, common electrified vehicle features European Council for Automotive Research & Devel- include stop-start (maintaining normal vehicle func- opment (EUCAR; www.eucar.be), and the New Energy tions at a stop while allowing the engine to turn off), and Industrial Technology Development Organization regenerative braking (converting the kinetic energy (NEDO; www.nedo.go.jp)—have created EV perfor- of motion into stored electrical energy using the elec- mance targets for energy and power, designating targets tric machines to supplement friction braking), motor for pack-level specific energy (energy by weight) and assist, and electric vehicle (EV) drive (EVs run solely power (power by weight). on electricity). The ability of hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs), which can convert liquid fuel energy into Life Prediction either mechanical or electrical energy, to perform these When determining the ability of a battery technology to functions allows for differentiation between stop-start, meet future life requirements a high level of confidence mild (<20 kW), strong (>20 kW), and plug-in electric is required. Consequently, qualifying a new technology hybrids (PHEVs), which may consume some fossil fuel. for production can take several years of validation test- Until recently the performance and maturity of ing to meet the typical 10-year/150,000-mile vehicle life various battery chemistries determined their EV type requirement. Testing first distinguishes between battery suitability and commercialization. Now the recent mat- life decay mechanisms (use or calendar dependent) and uration of lithium ion technology is driving a migration then assesses the impacts of current levels (low, high) away from nickel metal hydride batteries for most HEV and temperature.

FIGURE 1 Coulombic efficiency (CE) required (L) and impact of tester imprecision (R). SPRING 2015 15

Battery Life Decay Mechanisms or 100 percent. If a cell delivered the exact amount of Battery life decay mechanisms can be categorized as coulombic efficiency (99.954 percent or a deviation of calendar or use dependent. The former are tested in high- 446 ppm from ideal) required to achieve 20 percent temperature protocols that take advantage of a battery’s capacity decay in 500 cycles, the curve shown on the Arrhenius kinetic mechanisms, which lend themselves left in Figure 1 would be achieved. Existing battery test- well to accelerated testing. Cycle life acceleration is ing equipment is subject to CE errors of nearly the same more problematic, as its decay mechanism is more diffi- order of magnitude (350 ppm). To be relevant to EVs, cult to accelerate through established techniques. High- where an order of magnitude improvement in cycles precision battery testing has recently been proposed as to 5,000 is desired, testers would need a correspond- a method to accelerate the understanding of cycle life– ing error improvement to approximately 50 ppm. The based decay mechanisms (Smith et al. 2010). To make righthand graph in Figure 1 shows that when the error future life predictions, it is necessary that the precision is of about the same order of magnitude (350 ppm) as of the test data be at least as good as the decay per cycle the allowable deviation (446 ppm), the predicted future that is being predicted. By closely measuring current, capacity is uncertain. However when the tester error is voltage, and time during a battery test, it is possible to reduced to 50 ppm, the predicted future capacity can be achieve the parts per million (ppm) level of measure- determined with more confidence. ment precision needed to predict hundreds and thou- Recognizing this opportunity for improvement, there sands of cycles into the future. has been growing interest in research on high-preci- sion battery testing. Current academic systems have Low Current achieved 100 ppm error in terms of coulombic efficien- To understand the impact of imprecise battery measure- cy, with a goal of 10 ppm for future systems (Dahn et al. ments, the example of coulombic efficiency (CE) in 2013; Smith et al. 2010). It should be noted that these consumer electronic cell life requirements is shown in systems are at low current rates (single-digit amps at the Figure 1. Coulombic efficiency is defined as the number most). The impact of using a 100 ppm system on the of electrons that leave a battery divided by the num- imprecision of CE measurements is shown in Figure 2: ber that entered. Based on this definition, a theoreti- the closer a battery’s CE gets to unity (right side), the cally perfect battery would have a CE value of unity flatter its capacity decay cycle over time (left side).

FIGURE 2 Capacity and high-precision Coulombic efficiency as a function of charge voltage. Reprinted with permission from Smith et al. (2010). The 16 BRIDGE

High Current TABLE 1 US Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 305 Requirements Automotive battery test- Section Requirement ing must demonstrate the capacity to support cur- S5.1 Electrolyte spillage from <5L spillage total, 0 into passenger cabin rents of at least several propulsion batteries 30 minutes after barrier test hundred amps, as would be S5.2 Electrical energy storage/ Energy device shall remain attached to vehicle typical of vehicle condi- conversion device retention and out of passenger cabin tions. The range of power S5.3 Electrical safety Maintain isolation >100 ohm/volt with and corresponding current monitoring or >500 ohm/volt without monitoring demands varies by vehicle type. Higher currents are Source: DOT (2008). achieved in power charac- terization patterns ranging TABLE 2 European Council for Automotive Research & Development from +300 to −120 amps (EUCAR) Battery Abuse Response Rating (A) for the various elec- Score Title Description trified vehicle types. To address the challenges asso- 0 No effect No effect. No loss of functionality. ciated with improving the precision of capacity predic- 1 Passive protection Cell reversibly damaged. Repair of protection device activated needed. But no defect; no leakage; no venting, fire, or tions at higher current and flame; no rupture; no explosion; no exothermic reaction or power levels, the Depart- thermal runaway. ment of Energy’s Advanced 2 Defect/damage Cell irreversibly damaged. Repair needed. But no Research Projects Agency– leakage; no venting, fire, or flame; no rupture; no Energy (ARPA‑E) has explosion; no exothermic reaction or thermal runaway. awarded a research contract to Ford, Arbin Instruments, 3 Leakage Weight loss <50% of electrolyte weight (electrolyte = (∆ mass < 50%) solvent + salt). No venting, fire, or flame; no rupture; no and Sandia National Labs explosion. to build a commercially viable 50 ppm 200A tester.1 4 Venting Weight loss of ≥50% of electrolyte weight (electrolyte = (∆ mass > 50%) solvent + salt). No fire or flame; no rupture; no explosion. Project progress is described below. 5 Fire or flame No rupture; no explosion (i.e., no flying parts).

Temperature 6 Rupture No explosion, but flying parts of the active mass. Another significant chal- 7 Explosion Explosion (i.e., disintegration of the cell). lenge in testing at high currents is mitigation of Source: Reprinted with permission from Doughty and Crafts (2005). the resulting temperature changes in the test cells and tester (e.g., shunts and the highly thermally conductive metals used). amplifiers). For the test automotive cell, a thermal To explore the impact of high current–driven thermal image can reveal temperature gradients. The order of gradients during high-precision testing, the Ford ARPA‑E magnitude of the gradient can vary widely depending team has been developing thermal control strategies, on cell design and test pattern run, but its orientation one of which involves two thermoelectric (TE) heater/ remains the same. At the top of the cell, the connecting cooler assemblies surrounding a single cell. By coupling terminals serve as excellent thermal wicks (thanks to the intimate cooling capacity of the TEs with feedback (cell temperature) and feedforward (current delivery pat- 1 Information about the project, for which I am principal inves- tern and resulting cell-driven temperature change), it is tigator, is available at ARPA-E, “Ultra-Precise Battery Tester,” possible to neutralize temperature fluctuations during the http://arpa-e.energy.gov/?q=slick-sheet-project/ultra-precise- testing and study their effect (e.g., dV/dT) on precision. battery-tester. SPRING 2015 17

Safety Prediction example, a score of 5 denotes a battery that experienced Current and evolving government regulations and a fire or flame event. industry standards cover all aspects of automotive The team performed a rigorous fault tree analysis design. In the United States, these regulations take the (FTA) to consider all the possible lithium ion–specific form of the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards faults a vehicle could experience and produced a ranked (FMVSS), of which FMVSS 305 addresses electrified list of priority hazards, from which the top three—crush, vehicles (Table 1). overcharge, and short circuit—were selected for proce- As the technology and systems have evolved, FMVSS dure development. A global survey of battery regula- 305 has been revised numerous times since it was first tions and industry standards provided a baseline for the issued in 2000. With the recent application of lithium development of draft test procedures, which were then ion batteries to automotive applications, the National tested at three US locations. The sites evaluated string, Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has module, and pack hardware built up with three types of conducted research on the safety behavior of the tech- lithium ion cells. The experimental testing and analysis nology. One of the NHTSA-sponsored research proj- allowed for significant test procedure refinement and ects, conducted by Ford in collaboration with Ricardo, confidence in battery responses. an international engineering and environmental consul- Battery abuse tests generally fall into one of three tancy, sought to develop recommendations for vehicle- categories: mechanical, thermal, and electrical. The level safety tests and performance metrics for NHTSA following sections present the range of testing for each consideration. The project, completed in November category and, where appropriate, the results and recom- 2014, included study of the behaviors of parts (e.g., cell mendations of Ford’s research. strings, modules, and packs) to determine quantifiable Mechanical Abuse vehicle-level recommended test procedures. The most common way to describe the response of a International battery safety mechanical test regulations lithium ion battery to abuse is to use the EUCAR rat- and standards vary significantly (Table 3). The most ing system (Table 2), which assigns a score of 0 to 7 common test combines mechanical shock and mechani- for a range of increasingly severe battery responses. For cal integrity testing, in which the battery is typically subjected to a mechanical crush event. TABLE 3 Mechanical safety test matrix

Industry standard Government regulation

Test type Freedom SAE SAE ISO ISO UN ECE Q/C-T KMVSS Car J2929 J2464 12405-1 12405-3 38.3 R100 743 1.48

Mechanical integrity • • • • • •

Mechanical shock • • • • • • • Penetration • • • Immersion • • • • • Rollover • • Drop • • • • • • • Vibration • • • • • •

Note: ECE = Economic Commission for Europe, ISO = International Organization for Standardization, KMVSS = Korea Motor Vehicle Safety Standards, Q/C-T = China Industry Standard, SAE = Society of Automotive Engineers, UN = United Nations. The 18 BRIDGE

Review of the large number of existing crush-relat- in particular crush performance development. Research ed tests led to selection of the FreedomCar procedure in this area should seek to couple experimental results as a starting point (INEEL 2003). The procedure was with simulations in the hopes of supplanting the need modified to stratify the battery response by breaking up for trial and error experimentation (Sahraei et al. 2014). the crush motion into 20 increments of 5 percent. By crushing in many small steps over approximately one Thermal Abuse hour, it was possible to determine the impact of a fault There is considerable variability in the use of thermal as it progressed. testing protocols (Table 4), with only two—the thermal All hardware was able to be crushed to more than shock and fire exposure tests—close to a consensus posi- 13 percent displacement without a EUCAR 5 (fire or tion among the regulatory and standards agencies. flame) response. The broad plane of the cell had the Thermal shock testing typically involves exposing a smallest ranges of response, indicative of testing con- battery pack to a cycle of warm and cold temperatures sistency. Designing a parts-level crush test for the other and then evaluating its performance, making it more of planes of the cell is nontrivial because of the tendency a durability evaluation procedure than an abuse failure of hardware to move out of the plane of crush when investigation tool. not constrained in a vehicle. As a result, it was con- For fire exposure investigation, an ECE regulation cluded that crush testing should be performed only at (R34) that calls for a fire exposure test on plastic fuel tanks the vehicle level and in the same manner as current in vehicles has been referenced, and the test, adapted for FMVSS crash tests. If a battery experiences mechanical battery abuse testing, incorporated in a new regulation damage during these tests, the extent of battery crush (R100) (Figure 3). It involves first directly exposing a bat- can be used to assess the result. tery to a burning pool of liquid fuel (Phase B) and then Improvements in computing power and modeling indirectly through a screen of refractory bricks (Phase C) capabilities have revolutionized automotive design and and evaluating the hardware response (Phase D).

TABLE 4 Thermal safety test matrix

Industry standard Government regulation

Test type Freedom SAE SAE ISO ISO UN ECE Q/C-T KMVSS Car J2929 J2464 12405-1 12405-3 38.3 R100 743 1.48 Thermal shock • • • • • • • Fire exposure • • • • • •

Thermal stability •

High- temperature • • • storage

Cycle without thermal • • • • • control

Humidity exposure • • •

Passive propagation •

Note: ECE = Economic Commission for Europe, ISO = International Organization for Standardization, KMVSS = Korea Motor Vehicle Safety Standards, Q/C-T = China Industry Standard, SAE = Society of Automotive Engineers, UN = United Nations. SPRING 2015 19

Phase A: Preheating Phase B: Direct exposure to flame 60 seconds 70 seconds

Phase C: Indirect exposure to flame Phase D: End of test 60 seconds 3 hours

FIGURE 3 United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) R100 fire exposure test. Reprinted with permission from UNECE (2013).

Electrical Abuse moment of battery response led to a start-stop approach The electrical subcategory of battery safety testing to overcharge electrical energy delivery using twenty (Table 5) shows the greatest consistency of application: 5 percent state of charge intervals. No hardware had an all the reviewed regulations and standards feature over- event before it reached 134 percent overcharge. Thus, charge, short circuit, and overdischarge tests. There are in the unlikely event that a vehicle allowed an over- minor differences in test details (e.g., in current, duration, charge to occur, the state of charge can be used to assess or resistance), but the general procedures are similar. the test’s outcome. The Ford team investigated battery responses to Short circuit abuse testing of batteries commonly uses overcharge and found that attempts at discretizing the shunts of specific resistances (e.g., 10mΩ), irrespective

TABLE 5 Electrical safety test matrix

Industry standard Government regulation

Test type Freedom SAE SAE ISO ISO UN ECE Q/C-T KMVSS Car J2929 J2464 12405-1 12405-3 38.3 R100 743 1.48 Overcharge • • • • • • • • • Short circuit • • • • • • • • •

Over- discharge • • • • • • • • •

High-voltage exposure •

Partial short circuit •

Separator shutdown •

Note: ECE = Economic Commission for Europe, ISO = International Organization for Standardization, KMVSS = Korea Motor Vehicle Safety Standards, Q/C-T = China Industry Standard, SAE = Society of Automotive Engineers, UN = United Nations. The 20 BRIDGE

of the test hardware details. This approach ignores the References Ohm’s law behavior of the short circuit reaction, which Dahn JR, Trussler S, Dugas S, Coyle DJ, Dahn JJ, Burns JC. dictates that the severity of the short is dependent on 2013. Accurate and precise temperature-controlled boxes the relative resistance of the hardware to the shunt. By for the safe testing of advanced automotive li-ion cells with exploring a range of relative resistance values it is pos- high precision. Journal of the Electrochemical Society sible to correlate test current and shunt resistance to the 160(2):A251–A258. likely test outcome. Review of a vehicle battery’s inter- DOT [US Department of Transportation]. 2008. Laboratory nal resistance and limits imposed by the pack’s fusing is Test Procedure for FMVSS 305, Electric Powered Vehi- informative of the likely abuse response. cles: Electrolyte Spillage and Electrical Shock Protection, TP-305-01. Washington. Conclusion Doughty DH, Crafts CC. 2005. FreedomCAR Electrical The success of long-term vehicle electrification efforts Energy Storage System Abuse Test Manual for Electric and will depend heavily on the performance of their bat- Hybrid Vehicle Applications, SAND2005-3123. Albu- teries. Batteries appropriate for automotive applications querque: Sandia National Laboratories. have to pass extensive validation procedures to demon- Ford H. 1988. Today and Tomorrow: Commemorative Edition strate durability, but there remain uncertainties—causes of Ford’s 1926 Classic. Cambridge: Productivity Press. for anxiety—about battery life and safety. New testing INEEL [Idaho National Engineering and Environmental tools are available to improve the prediction and iden- Laboratory]. 2003. FreedomCAR Battery Test Manual for tification of electrochemical failure mechanisms. Fur- Power Assist Hybrid Electric Vehicles, DOE/ID-11069. ther research can enhance the utility and international Idaho Falls: US Department of Energy. consistency of these testing procedures to align develop- Sahraei E, Meier J, Wierzbicki T. 2014. Characterizing and ments and progress. modeling mechanical properties and onset of short circuit for three types of lithium-ion pouch cells. Journal of Power Acknowledgments Sources 247:503–516. This work was supported by the US Department of Smith AJ, Burns JC, Trussler S, Dahn JR. 2010. Precision mea- Transportation’s National Highway Traffic Safety surements of the coulombic efficiency of lithium-ion bat- Administration (NHTSA) [DTNH22-11-C-00214] teries and of electrode materials for lithium-ion batteries. and the US Department of Energy’s Advanced Research Journal of the Electrochemical Society 157(2):A196–A202. Projects Agency–Energy (ARPA-E) [DE-AR000267]. UNECE [United Nations Economic Commission for Europe]. 2013. Electric Power Trained Vehicles. Regulation No. 100, Rev. 2. Geneva. Research is being conducted to address materials, manufacturing, and cost challenges that hamper broader use of lithium ion batteries.

Lithium Ion Batteries and Their Manufacturing Challenges

Claus Daniel

There is no single lithium ion battery. With the variety of materials and electrochemical couples available, it is possible to design battery cells specif- ic to their applications in terms of voltage, state of charge use, lifetime needs, and safety. Selection of specific electrochemical couples also facilitates the design of power and energy ratios and available energy. Integration in a large format cell requires optimized roll-to-roll electrode Claus Daniel is deputy manufacturing and use of active materials. Electrodes are coated on a metal director of the Sustainable current collector foil in a composite structure of active material, binders, Transportation Program and conductive additives, requiring careful control of colloidal chemistry, at Oak Ridge National adhesion, and solidification. But the added inactive materials and the cell Laboratory and associ- packaging reduce energy density. Moreover, degree of porosity and compac- ate professor of materials tion in the electrode can affect battery performance. science in the Bredesen In addition to these materials challenges, cost is a significant barrier to Center at the University widespread adoption of this technology. Pathways are being explored to of Tennessee at Knoxville. bring batteries from the commercially available 100 Wh/kg and 200 Wh/L at $500/kWh up to 250 Wh/kg and 400 Wh/L for just $125/kWh.

Fundamentals of Lithium Ion Batteries The lithium ion battery was made possible by the discovery of lithium cobalt oxide (LiCoO2), which allows the extraction of lithium ions and creation of large amounts of vacancies (without a crystal change) up to the removal The 22 BRIDGE

of half of the existing ions. The pairing of LiCoO2 with phosphates (e.g., LiFePO4) (Daniel et al. 2014). These graphite allows the intercalation of lithium ions between cathode materials all exhibit capacities in the range of the graphene layers that occupy the interstitial site 120–160 Ah/kg at 3.5–3.7 V, resulting in maximum between every hexagonal ring of carbon atoms (Besen- energy density of up to 600 Wh/kg. hard and Schöllhorn 1976; Mizushima et al. 1980; Whit- When packaged in real devices, however, much tingham 1976). inactive material mass is added and the energy den- The lithium ions travel during charge from the posi- sity tends to drop to 100 Wh/kg on the pack level. tive electrode (the cathode) through a solid or liquid To push for higher energy density, researchers have electrolyte to the negative electrode (the anode) and, sought higher capacity and higher voltage—and found during discharge, in the opposite direction. At each them in lithium- and manganese-rich transition met- electrode, the ion either maintains its charge and inter- al oxides. These compounds are essentially the same calates into the crystal structure occupying interstitial materials as NMC but an excess of lithium and higher sites in existing crystals on the anode side or reoccu- amounts of manganese replace nickel and cobalt. The pies a vacant site in the cathode that formed when the higher amounts of lithium (as much as 20 percent lithium ion left that crystal. While transferring the ion, more) allow the compounds to have higher capacity the host matrix gets reduced or oxidized, which releases (Thackeray et al. 2007) and a higher voltage, resulting or captures an electron.1 in cathodes with up to 280 Ah/kg when charged up to 4.8 V. However, these new compounds show stability problems and tend to fade fast.

Higher amounts of Balancing of Materials in Cells lithium enable higher Lithium ion batteries are made of layers of porous elec- trodes on aluminum and copper current collector foils capacity and voltage, but (Daniel 2008). The capacity of each electrode pair needs to be balanced to ensure battery safety and avoid they are associated with risk of overcharge of the anode (which can result in lithium metal plating and short circuiting) or overdis- stability problems. charge of the cathode (which can result in a collapse of the crystal structure and loss of vacancies for lithium to reintercalate, dramatically reducing capacity). Variety of Cathode Materials Graphite has a theoretical capacity of 372 Ah/kg, The search for new cathode materials is driven in part double that of the available lithium in NMC cath- by important disadvantages of LiCoO2. The battery has odes. So in balanced lithium ion batteries, the cathodes a core temperature of 40–70°C and may be susceptible typically exhibit double the thickness compared to the to some low-temperature reactions. But at 105–135°C anode. This inherent flaw of the cell design causes prob- it is very reactive and an excellent oxygen source for a lems with mass transport and kinetics, and thus prompt- safety hazard called a thermal runaway reaction, in which ed the search for high-capacity cathodes. highly exothermic reactions create temperature spikes To increase cell-level energy density, inactive materi- and accelerate rapidly with the release of extra heat als are being minimized in battery cells. For example, (Roth 2000). one way to reduce the current collector is to increase Replacement materials for LiCoO2 are less prone to the thickness of the electrodes, but this further drives that failure. The compounds replace parts of the cobalt transport problems and requires a highly engineered with nickel and manganese to form Li(NixMnyCoz)O2 porosity in the electrode. compounds (with x + y + z = 1), often referred to as NMC as they contain nickel, manganese, and cobalt; or Cost Challenges in Manufacturing Lithium Ion they exhibit a completely new structure in the form of Batteries The costs of lithium ion batteries are much higher than 1 If the ion changed its state of charge, it would be called a con- the automotive market will bear for full penetration version battery (e.g., an air battery; Daniel and Besenhard 2011). of electric vehicles and a cost-neutral product com- SPRING 2015 23

pared to cars run by internal combustion engines. The repel particles so that they do not form unacceptable US Department of Energy cost target for all electric agglomerates (Li et al. 2013). vehicle batteries is $125/kWh of usable energy (DOE Understanding the surface energy of metals and the 2013). The current cost of commercial batteries is surface tension of the slurry as well as their interaction $400–500/kWh and their projected cost with current allows for optimization of the pair. Atmospheric plasma experimental materials is $325/kWh. Most of the cost treatment of the metal surface through exposure to a reduction thus far has been achieved by energy density corona plasma removes organic compounds on the sur- increases at similar cost to the older-generation products. face and enables a slight etching and oxidation, which Further cost reduction is possible through optimiza- dramatically reduces the surface energy to values below tion of manufacturing schemes. Lithium ion batteries the surface tension of the slurry. This allows perfect wet- are manufactured in sets of electrodes and then assem- ting of the surface by the slurry and creates a coating bled in cells. Active material is mixed with polymer with optimized adhesion (Li et al. 2012). The result is a binders, conductive additives, and solvents to form a 75 percent operational and materials cost reduction in slurry that is then coated on a current collector foil the electrode manufacturing and a potential cost reduc- and dried to remove the solvent and create a porous tion of up to 20 percent at the battery pack level for electrode coating. The solvent of choice, N-methylpyr- automotive applications (Wood et al. 2014). This does rolidone (NMP), is considered an indirect material (it is not include the lower equipment cost: expenses associ- needed for production but not contained in the final ated with the plasma processing equipment are much device), but it is expensive, exhibits flammable vapors, lower than those for the solvent recovery system and and is highly toxic. the explosion-proof requirement. The flammable vapors of NMP require all process- ing equipment during the production of electrodes to be explosion proof, meaning all spark-producing elec- trical components need to be shielded from the vapors Water presents a tremendous and spaces need to be highly ventilated to keep vapor opportunity to reduce cost concentrations low. These measures increase the capital cost of such equipment considerably. in the production of lithium In addition, the electrode manufacturing plant is required to recapture the solvent from its exhaust ion batteries, but it comes stream, distill it, and recycle it. This is again an addi- tional cost. with challenges.

Cost Reduction by Water-based Processing The replacement of NMP by water is a tremendous Future Opportunities for Cost Reduction opportunity to reduce cost in the production of lithium Further cost reductions will be achieved through ion batteries. The cost of water is negligible compared greater knowledge of transport mechanisms and elec- to that of NMP; water is not flammable and does not trode architecture implications for electrochemical produce flammable vapors; and water is environmen- performance. Current research is largely focused on tally benign. However, water is a polar solvent and modeling and simulation to understand molecular its behavior is completely different from that of the mechanisms and improve the design of electrodes, elec- nonpolar NMP. Furthermore, active materials tend to trode stacks, and battery cells. Thicker electrodes and a agglomerate and metal current collector surfaces are tremendous reduction in inactive materials will improve hydrophobic, making the coating process more difficult. energy density at lower cost, reduce direct costs, and Knowledge of surface charges on particles (by mea- possibly enable much shorter and less energy intensive suring zeta potential) enables the design of surface battery formation cycling. polarity in the presence of water by introducing small amounts of surfactants. In the case of cathode intercala- Conclusion tion compounds, polyethylene imide has been success- Lithium ion batteries have tremendous potential for fully used to introduce a surface charge large enough to enabling partial to full electrification of the automotive The 24 BRIDGE fleet, diversifying energy sources for transportation, Daniel C, Besenhard JO, eds. 2011. Handbook of Battery and supporting large-scale energy storage for a higher Materials. Weinheim: Wiley-VCH. penetration of intermittent renewable energy supply. Daniel C, Mohanty D, Li J, Wood DL. 2014. Cathode mate- However, cost continues to be an issue and will need rials review. Review on Electrochemical Storage Materials to be addressed by the development of a robust supply and Technology: AIP Conference Proceedings 1597:26–43; chain, standards in manufacturing, high manufacturing doi: 10.1063/1.4878478. throughput, and streamlined low-cost processing meth- DOE [US Department of Energy]. 2013. EV Everywhere: ods. In addition to reducing costs, research can enhance Grand Challenge Blueprint. Available at http://energy.gov/ knowledge of molecular processes and transport issues sites/prod/files/2014/02/f8/eveverywhere_blueprint.pdf. in order to optimize the design and use of available Li J, Rulison C, Kiggans J, Daniel C, Wood DL. 2012. Superi- energy in batteries and increase their life time. or performance of LiFePO4 aqueous dispersions via corona As shown in this paper, an increase in energy content treatment and surface energy optimization. Journal of the and capacity in active electrode materials and a reduc- Electrochemical Society 159(8):A1152–A1157. tion of indirect materials in production are two ways to Li J, Armstrong BL, Kiggans J, Daniel C, Wood DL. 2013. impact cost. Lithium ion cell performance enhancement using aque- ous LiFePO4 cathode dispersions and polyethylenei- Acknowledgments mine dispersant. Journal of the Electrochemical Society Parts of this research at Oak Ridge National Labora- 160(2):A201–A206. tory (ORNL; managed by UT Battelle, LLC) for the Mizushima K, Jones PC, Wiseman PJ, Goodenough JB. 1980. US Department of Energy (under contract DE-AC05- LixCoO2 (0

mechanism of the MoO3 electrode in organic electrolytes. Wood DL, Li J, Daniel C. 2015. Prospects for reducing the Journal of Power Sources 1(3):267–276. cost of lithium ion electrode processing and cell formation Daniel C. 2008. Materials and processing for lithium-ion bat- steps. Journal of Power Sources 275:234–242. teries. Journal of the Minerals, Metals, and Materials Soci- ety 60(9):43–48. New materials, technologies, and methods are enabling the transcatheter replacement and repair of diseased heart valves.

The History of Heart Valves An Industry Perspective

Erin M. Spinner

The average heart beats 2.5 billion times in a human lifetime, during which its four valves must maintain unidirectional blood flow to maximize the heart’s efficiency and provide oxygenated blood to the entire body. Although heart valves were documented by Leonardo da Vinci in some of his early sketches over 500 years ago, they have been available for implanta- tion only since the 1950s. Erin M. Spinner is a bio- Valvular disease—usually associated with advanced age, but also caused medical research engineer by congenital defects—can interrupt, slow, or prevent the efficient function with Edwards Lifesciences. of the valves, which lose functionality if they cannot maintain a proper seal or open completely. When any one of the valves is not working properly it may affect a person’s ability to exercise or perform daily tasks and thus lead to a dramatic decrease in quality of life and even death. For these reasons, decades have been spent developing and perfecting devices to repair and replace the body’s valves when they no longer function properly. Innovation and development of replacement heart valves have largely focused on the aortic valve, which directs oxygenated blood from the left ventricle to the rest of the body. The structure of the aortic and (similar) pulmonary valves is simpler than that of the other valves—they have greater symmetry and lack the subvalvular components characteristic of the mitral and tricuspid valves—making them an attractive target for early research. The 26 BRIDGE

Whole Valves Allografts are valves trans- planted from another human, and xenografts are from another species. Cow and pig valves are usually selected for transplant as they best mimic the size and structure of human valves. Attempts have been made to transplant mitral valves (Gulbins et al. 2000, 2002; Kumar et al. 2000), but the most successful and frequently used valves are pulmonary and aortic valves, which are often used interchangeably due to their similar geometry. Developments in trans- planted valves have focused FIGURE 1 Anatomical comparison of the complexity of the aortic valve (black labels) and mitral on improving structural valve (white labels). Note the subvalvular structure, including numerous chords and papillary muscles, in the mitral valve. Modified from Anderson and Kanani (2007). support, which is necessary when the valve is removed The aortic and pulmonary valves consist of three leaflets from its native surroundings (Figure 2). of similar size and shape that are attached to the tubular Vast strides have been made in tissue cryopreserva- vessel; in contrast, the mitral and tricuspid valves have tion, which maintains high cell viability when thawed leaflets that vary in number and size. For the mitral and (O’Brien et al. 1987). But the appeal of allograft and tricuspid valves, these leaflets attach both directly to xenograft valves suffers from their limited availability the wall of the ventricle at the annulus and indirectly of size ranges and technically challenging procedure, in through numerous chords (Figure 1). the case of stentless designs, which require the physi- Whereas past efforts focused on the aortic valve, cur- cian to remove the entire valve along with a portion of rent technologies are being developed to create devices the aortic root to attach the replacement valve. for the more complex valves of the heart. Prosthetic Valves Past Technologies Transplanted whole valves remain a viable option, but Valve replacement devices can be classified into prosthetic valves, including both mechanical and peri- two categories: whole valves and prosthetic valves. cardial tissue valves, hold the largest share of the market. Whole valves consist of allografts and xenografts; Of valves implanted in the United States today, most prosthetic valves are composed of pericardial (tis- (approximately 60,000) are made of pericardial tissue; in sue) and mechanical valves. The valve designs vary contrast, only 10,000 mechanical valves were implanted in numerous aspects and have evolved over time, but in 2013 (Millennium Research Group 2013), although the goal has remained the same: an easily implantable design improvements are minimizing or often eliminat- and durable solution that increases blood flow while ing the disadvantages of mechanical valves (e.g., throm- decreasing the risk of associated complications such bogenicity requiring anticoagulation therapy). as thrombosis. Each type of valve has advantages and Both pericardial and mechanical valves consist of disadvantages, which are taken into consideration a sewing ring (for securing them in place), a support when deciding which device is appropriate for an structure, and leaflets. Mechanical valves are similar in individual patient. structure to tissue valves, but differ in the leaflet design SPRING 2015 27

ingrowth to the surround- ing anatomy to provide future fixation support. Although the overall design of the tissue valve has remained relatively unchanged throughout the years and mimics the design of the native aortic and pul- monary valves, the fixation process for the leaflets has been optimized. Various solutions are used to cross- link the collagen fibers and ensure durable leaflet struc- ture. The method by which tissue is fixed and preserved is a proprietary process FIGURE 2 Examples of (a) stentless xenograft that uses the native support structure of the guarded by each company. aorta and (b) supported xenograft with native aortic valve removed and added stent and sewing ring structure. As with any design, tis- sue valves also have limita- (Figure 3). Mechanical valves have seen the greatest tions, of which the most significant is durability. Typical variety in designs, optimized through geometry, hinge tissue valves currently on the market can last up to 20 mechanisms, and materials. years before the leaflets lose functionality and experi- These designs include ball and cage, floating/tilting ence structural deterioration, usually due to calcification disc, and bileaflet (Figure 3a); the latter is the leading (Schoen and Hobson 1985; Schoen and Levy 2005). design in today’s industry. These valves do not need to be replaced—indeed, they typically outlive the Current Technologies patient—but they require the constant use of antico- Over the past 10 years, noninvasive implantation of agulants, which is not appealing to most people and not heart valves has revolutionized the field. Implants an option for some. In contrast, tissue valves lack the traditionally required the chest to be splayed open to longevity of mechanical valves but do not require anti- allow access to the heart, but recent advances make coagulation, making them a preferred choice. it possible to access the valve through the femoral Unlike mechanical valves, pericardial tissue, the vein via an incision as small as an inch. This noninva- sac that lines the heart, is highly durable and there- sive approach, called transcatheter valve replacement, is fore used to construct the leaflets of a tissue pros- thetic valve. The leaflets are then sewn to the stent support structure attached to the sewing ring. The attachment of the tissue to the structure is crucial to ensure durability and requires each valve to be hand assembled and sewn. The sewing ring may con- sist of a silicone band and FIGURE 3 Examples of (a) bileaflet mechanical and (b) tissue prosthetic valves. Both valves shown cloth that support tissue can be used as replacements for all valves. The 28 BRIDGE

ensure that it is secured while avoiding the coronary ostia, which is crucial to supplying blood to the heart (Figure 4). Advances in noninvasive imaging allow for real-time imaging using multiple modalities, such as echocardiography to visualize the native anatomy and fluoroscopy to visualize the device.

Future Technologies The valve replacement industry is beginning to focus on the other valves in the heart and developing devices that will work in concert with the native anatomy to repair instead of replace native valve function. The number of repair procedures is on the rise as compared to replace- ment procedures, which have remained steady from year to year. Recent trends favor repairing the native valve as opposed to replacing it, with approximately 32,000 mitral repairs as compared to 21,000 replacement pro- cedures conducted in the United States in 2013 (Mil- lennium Research Group 2013). The introduction of transcatheter heart valves has brought new excitement to this area. Placed inside a FIGURE 4 Transcatheter heart valve using the surrounding cal- defective tissue valve, transcatheter valves provide cium in the native aortic valve to anchor. AV = atrioventricular. a way around the challenge of tissue valve durability: Source: Edwards Lifesciences. a tissue valve may be implanted in a younger patient with the idea that an additional valve can be placed if suitable for patients who are not candidates for open- needed at a later date. heart surgery and offers a faster recovery. Valve manufacturers are expanding the number of The first transcatheter delivery of a valve was diseases they can treat through transcatheter technolo- attempted in the 1960s, but it has only recently become gies; for example, companies are working to treat mitral accepted as a viable procedure, aided by advances in valve regurgitation, a much larger market compared to stent design and noninvasive imaging techniques. The aortic valve pathology. But, as mentioned, there are development of transcatheter heart valves showcases many hurdles in the transfer of technology and tech- the power of a multidisciplinary approach: it merges niques to the mitral valve because it is more complex technologies from numerous devices (e.g., coronary and patients tend to be in worse overall health with mul- stents and balloon angioplasty) and disciplines (e.g., tiple comorbidities. That said, technology has advanced interventional cardiology and cardiac surgery) to create such that it is possible to attack more subtle pathologies a paradigm-shifting advance. and not only a valve that is completely failing. There are many advantages to a transcatheter Mitral valve repair technologies today aim at correct- approach, but added complexity arises because the valve ing a specific pathology and do so by targeting any aspect must work with the patient’s diseased anatomy. In the of the valve, from replacing the chords, which attach the past the diseased valve was typically removed; now, the leaflets to the ventricle, to reducing the size of the annu- designs and their ability to succeed rely heavily on the lus and bringing the leaflets closer together to allow for patient’s anatomy. For example, a transcatheter aortic sealing. In attempts to replace the valve, designs require valve is secured in place by applying an outward force an anchoring location as they cannot be sewn in like on the calcium deposits on the native leaflets. a traditional surgical replacement. Engineers therefore An additional obstacle that transcatheter technolo- retain the native leaflets or annulus when possible as an gies have had to overcome is the loss of direct visualiza- anchor site for the replacement part. tion afforded by open-heart surgery. This is especially Because of the direct interaction with and reliance important when deciding where to place the valve to on the functionality of the native valve, engineers SPRING 2015 29

must expand their horizons and become experts in used to determine the success of the procedure both at tissue mechanics as well. The frontier of heart valve the time of implantation and in follow-up examinations engineering is less about engineering and more about to ensure the device’s continued functionality. applying engineering principles in a way that requires When heart valves were first implanted, regulatory understanding of anatomy and physiology. Collabora- requirements to review the process for implantation tions of engineers working side by side with clinicians, were minimal or nonexistent. Now extensive testing biomedical engineers, and biologists produce the best is required to ensure short- and long-term success prior heart valve designs. to implantation. The test data are submitted to a regu- The future of heart valves is also reliant on new latory body and reviewed before implantation can be engineering materials. In addition to progress in the cleared. Pending full approval for general use, a first- application of synthetic materials, especially with the in-human study may be conducted in compassionate mechanical valve, new biological and polymeric materi- cases, for patients who have no other options; these tri- als are being developed. With the advent of transcath- als are usually limited to about 10 patients. If they show eter valves, the limits of current materials are being success a much larger clinical study is initiated, which challenged. Tissue, polymeric, and even cloth designs can include hundreds of patients. From there the data are being pushed beyond what was previously thought are submitted to the regulatory body to get approval to possible in the effort to increase strength and durability commercialize the device and make it accessible to the and reduce the device profile. The latter requires thin- approved patient population, ensuring that the patient’s ner leaflets, which in turn require ingenuity to develop safety is the priority. When the device is made available a strong but thin material. for the masses it fulfills its original goal of saving lives. New tissue treatment processes are also being devel- As with many engineering creations, the design pro- oped and tested. A recent advance allows valves to cess is never complete. Once the device is implanted in be shipped dry, no longer requiring the leaflets to be humans, improvements are constantly made based on stored in solution. This development allows trans- evidence from the patients. Research and development catheter valves to be shipped on the delivery catheter efforts seek to recreate and simulate the human environ- and eliminates the need for an engineer to be present ment on the bench and in animals, but there are always at the procedure. lessons to be learned and from there improvements. These examples are a testament to the benefits of new technologies: they both enable and force develop- ment beyond what was previously thought possible. Using a combination of Designing for the Future Next generation heart valves have brought excite- imaging techniques, the ment to the field, but it is also important to understand how we as engineers go from a concept to a life-saving implantation team can device. We must first survey the patient population visualize both the device and identify a need, then develop a concept to address that need. Bench studies and animal studies are used in and the anatomy without conjunction to test the functionality and durability of a design. Then the materials are tested in animal models opening the chest. to ensure that no adverse effects arise as a result of inter- actions with the body. Complementing innovations in materials and design, Additionally, as new technologies and innovations new imaging protocols are being developed to ensure are introduced to the marketplace, even in different that a device is delivered to the correct location. Using industries, these are applied to existing devices for opti- a combination of imaging techniques (e.g., echocardiog- mization as necessary. A great example of this is the raphy, angiography, MRI, and CT), the implantation development of new biomaterials for orthopaedic and team can visualize both the device and the anatomy other cardiovascular applications, in which findings and without opening the chest. These techniques are also testing history can be leveraged for the valve area. The 30 BRIDGE

Conclusions Gulbins H, Anderson I, Kilian E, Schrepfer S, Uhlig A, Now is an exciting time for heart valve development Kreuzer E, Reichart B. 2002. Five years of experience with as companies are pushing the limits, expanding into mitral valve homografts. Thoracic and Cardiovascular new areas, and helping more patients than ever before. Surgeon 50:223–229. Advances continue to move heart valve development Kumar AS, Choudhary SK, Mathur A, Saxena A, Roy R, forward. As designs are optimized engineers are turning Chopra P. 2000. Homograft mitral valve replacement: Five their attention to other disease states with next gen- years’ results. Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Sur- eration designs and approaches. With increased confi- gery 120:450–458. dence in current device durability for both mechanical Millennium Research Group. 2013. US markets for heart and tissue valves, the focus is changing from surgical to valve devices 2014. Available at www.mrg.net/Products- transcatheter implants and from replacement to repair and-Services/Syndicated-Report.aspx?r=RPUS12HV13. devices implanted with transcatheter methods. O’Brien MF, Stafford EG, Gardner MA, Pohlner PG, McGif- Each advance requires greater understanding of the fin DC. 1987. A comparison of aortic valve replacement disease state of the valve. The greatest successes will with viable cryopreserved and fresh allograft valves, with involve technologies and techniques that work in con- a note on chromosomal studies. Journal of Thoracic and cert with the human body. Cardiovascular Surgery 94:812–823. Schoen FJ, Hobson CE. 1985. Anatomic analysis of removed References prosthetic heart valves: Causes of failure of 33 mechanical Anderson RH, Kanani M. 2007. Mitral valve repair: Criti- valves and 58 bioprostheses, 1980 to 1983. Human Pathol- cal analysis of the anatomy discussed. Multimedia Manual ogy 16:549–559. of Cardiothoracic Surgery (MMCTS)/European Associa- Schoen FJ, Levy RJ. 2005. Calcification of tissue heart valve tion for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery 2007(0219):mmcts 2006 substitutes: Progress toward understanding and prevention. 002147. Annals of Thoracic Surgery 79:1072–1080. Gulbins H, Kreuzer E, Uhlig A, Reichart B. 2000. Mitral valve surgery utilizing homografts: Early results. Journal of Heart Valve Disease 9:222–229. Injectable biomaterials are being developed as a minimally invasive approach to decrease damage after a heart attack.

Biomaterials for Treating Myocardial Infarctions

Jason A. Burdick and Shauna M. Dorsey

Biomaterials are gaining attention in the development of biomedical ther- apies for treating patients after a myocardial infarction (i.e., heart attack). These materials may serve as mechanical restraints, vehicles for the delivery Jason A. Burdick of therapeutics, or 3-dimensional scaffolds for tissue regeneration. This arti- cle focuses on one particular class of materials: injectable hydrogels, natural or synthetic water-swollen polymer networks that are a promising therapy to attenuate ventricular remodeling after myocardial infarction. They act both as acellular bulking agents to mechanically stabilize the myocardium and as delivery vehicles for cells and/or therapeutic molecules. Various materials, cells, and therapeutic molecules have demonstrated positive outcomes in the repair of cardiac tissue after infarction and provide insight for future material development and optimization. Further development of injectable hydrogels for cardiac repair will have considerable clinical impact by improving thera- pies to prevent progression to heart failure.

Shauna M. Dorsey Overview of Heart Disease Heart failure affects almost 23 million individuals worldwide (Bui et al. 2011), and nearly 70 percent of these cases are due to coronary artery

Jason A. Burdick is a professor and Shauna M. Dorsey a PhD candidate in the Department of Bioengineering at the University of Pennsylvania. The 32 BRIDGE disease, which causes myo- cardial infarction (MI) (Go et al. 2014). MI occurs after coronary artery occlu- sion, resulting in depletion of nutrients and oxygen to the cardiac tissue and sub- sequent cell death (Cleu- tjens and Creemers 2002). The death of cells (i.e., cardiomyocytes) leads to the recruitment of inflam- matory cells to remove the necrotic debris and the activation of bioactive molecules such as matrix metalloproteinases, which in turn cause degradation of the extracellular matrix (ECM) in cardiac tissue, weakening the myocardial FIGURE 1 Injectable hydrogel approaches for the treatment of myocardial infarction. Hydrogels wall and making it suscep- (shown in the center column) can be used as (A) acellular bulking agents or a vehicle for delivery tible to global geometric of (B) cells, (C) therapeutic molecules, or (D) a combination of cells and molecules. changes, including thin- ning and dilation (Buckberg 2005; Dobaczewski et al. gies to limit infarct expansion involved surgical recon- 2010; Holmes et al. 2005; Nahrendorf 2011; Spinale struction of the dilated LV and physical restraint of 2007). Infarct expansion occurs after the initial prob- the ventricle or infarct region using polymeric meshed lems and is a progressive pathologic process that causes materials to prevent dilation (Batista et al. 1997; Klodell abnormal stress distributions in the borderzone regions et al. 2008; Starling et al. 2007), but these approaches surrounding the infarct. The process, additional cell are highly invasive and require open-chest surgery. death, and increases in borderzone stress are termed left Injectable biomaterials are being developed as a ventricular (LV) remodeling and can lead to altered con- minimally invasive alternative to decrease damage tractile properties and heart failure (Epstein et al. 2002; to surrounding tissues. Among numerous potentially Jackson et al. 2003; Pilla et al. 2005). injectable biomaterials (e.g., microparticles), injectable hydrogels are particularly promising; they are water- Treatment Strategies swollen networks of polymer chains that have a high Building on understanding of the biological and degree of tunability and can be formed through numer- mechanical processes after MI, many strategies now ous crosslinking mechanisms (Ruel-Gariepy and Leroux utilize biomaterials for patient treatment. Several 2004). They have been shown to mechanically stabilize focus on treatment after significant tissue remodel- the myocardial wall and modulate LV remodeling either ing; for example, with tissue engineering, replacement alone or through the delivery of therapies such as cells cardiac tissue is developed in the laboratory and then and growth factors (Figure 1) (Nelson et al. 2011; Tous implanted to replace damaged tissue. Another prom- et al. 2011). ising approach involves treating the tissue during the acute phase to try to attenuate the remodeling response Acellular Approaches before significant damage. Many investigators believe that post-MI regional One option is to limit the initial infarct expansion, mechanical changes and stresses in the myocardium which has been identified as associated with the LV should be addressed when designing biomaterial-based remodeling that leads to heart failure. Previous strate- approaches for cardiac repair (Gupta et al. 1994; Holmes SPRING 2015 33

et al. 2005; Nelson et al. 2011). As described by the Law variations (Lutolf and Hubbell 2005). They can also of Laplace (Equation 1), stress (T) is directly propor- be modified with cell binding sites or adhesive ligands tional to pressure (P) and the radius of curvature (R) to encourage cell interaction (Davis et al. 2005). Vari- and inversely proportional to the myocardial thickness ous synthetic materials have been explored for cardiac (h). Therefore, the increase in R and decrease in h that repair therapy, including poly(N-isopropylacrylamide) occur after MI lead to an increase in T. (PNIPAm)- and poly(ethylene glycol) (PEG)-based P * R hydrogels (Tous et al. 2011). An example of an injected T = h (1) hydrogel based on hyaluronic acid is shown in Figure 2. Injectable biomaterials can limit infarct expan- sion by bulking the damaged myocardial wall through Cellular Approaches mechanical stabilization (Tous et al. 2011). Infarcts Myocardial infarction results in the loss of over 1 billion naturally stiffen over time as wound healing progresses cardiomyocytes in the infarct region, and cell delivery is and collagen is deposited; modifying the tissue proper- one strategy used for tissue repair (Beltrami et al. 1994). ties of the infarct region before the body compensates A variety of cell types have been delivered—fetal or for the remodeling process can limit infarct expansion neonatal cardiomyocytes, embryonic stem cells (ESCs), and post-MI remodeling (Tous et al. 2011). Injectable skeletal myoblasts, bone marrow–derived stem cells hydrogels act as bulking agents by increasing the myo- (BSCs), adipose-derived stem cells, and cardiac stem cardial wall thickness (h) to decrease LV dilation (as cells (Menasche 2005; Segers and Lee 2008). Each has measured by R) and in turn decrease wall stress (T). advantages and disadvantages for use in therapies. For Theoretical finite element models have confirmed this example, ESCs offer the advantage of differentiating mechanism of treatment by demonstrating that hydro- into both cardiomyocyte and vascular lineages, but their gels decrease both LV dilation and myofiber stresses efficacy is limited because of their immunogenicity, risk (Wall et al. 2006). of tumor development, and ethical concerns (Zimmer- Injectable hydrogels can be grouped into either natural mann 2011). BSCs are an autologous option that can be or synthetic materials. Natural materials offer advantages readily isolated and delivered to cardiac tissue, but their such as inherent biological properties, including recep- fate is not clear (Le Blanc and Pittenger 2005). tor-binding ligands and susceptibility to proteolytic deg- Although both animal models (Segers and Lee 2008) radation (Karam et al. 2012; Lutolf and Hubbell 2005). and clinical studies (Menasche 2005) have demon- For cardiac applications where the goal is to replace or strated some enhancement in cardiac function with repair the damaged ECM, natural biomaterials more cell delivery, these improvements are often insufficient closely mimic features of the native ECM and can also and transient, effects that are believed to result from be therapeutic in their degradation products through the unsatisfactory cell retention, survival, and engraftment recruitment of cells (Sui et al. 2011). Commonly used (D’Alessandro and Michler 2010). For example, less natural injectable materials for cardiac repair are fibrin, alginate, collagen, Matrigel, chitosan, hyaluronic acid, keratin, and decellular- ized matrices (Tous et al. 2011). But natural materials have limited tunability in properties. Synthetic materials have defined material properties such as molecular weight, gelation, hydrophilic/ hydrophobic properties, FIGURE 2 Acellular hydrogels as bulking agents for myocardial infarction repair. Injectable hyal- degradation, and mechan- uronic acid hydrogel distribution in cardiac tissue explant as shown by (A) magnetic resonance ics, without batch-to-batch imaging and (B) ex vivo sectioning. Scale bar = 1 cm. The 34 BRIDGE than 10 percent of BSCs delivered have been detected Kretlow et al. 2007). Hydrogels can both sustain local two hours after injection (Hofmann et al. 2005; Hou molecule release and prolong molecule bioactivity et al. 2005), and of those that stay at the injury site (Langer and Folkman 1976). For cardiac applications, approximately 90 percent die within the first week injectable hydrogels are useful to deliver antiapoptotic because of physical stress, ischemia (due to microvascu- molecules (which limit cell death after injury), angio- lature obstruction), inflammation, and release of cyto- genic factors to promote vessel formation, or chemoat- kines and reactive oxygen species (Robey et al. 2008). tractants to recruit cells for repair and attenuation of Injectable hydrogels have been explored to enhance post-MI remodeling (Tous et al. 2011). cell retention and engraftment for cardiac repair by improving cell attachment, migration, and survival Looking Forward upon delivery (Huang et al. 2005). They permit both As discussed here, a range of injectable hydrogels, cell high encapsulation efficiency (cells are entrapped dur- types, and molecules have been delivered with the ing gelation) and precise control over the biophysical intent of attenuating LV remodeling after myocardial and biochemical microenvironment surrounding cells infarction. Although many hydrogels have shown posi- after delivery (Bian et al. 2009). tive outcomes in animal models, only one (alginate) As with acellular hydrogels, both synthetic and natu- has progressed to clinical trials.1 Research is needed ral polymers have been investigated. Natural materials, to elucidate the effects of hydrogel properties, mode of such as fibrin, alginate, collagen, and Matrigel, are a delivery (e.g., direct injection vs. catheter delivery), popular choice for cell delivery because their inherent and timing of delivery (e.g., acute vs. chronic MI) on biological activity initiates cell-biomaterial interactions LV remodeling. Future studies should further inves- (Tous et al. 2011). Synthetic hydrogels can also be used tigate the mechanisms by which hydrogels act on the to deliver cells for cardiac repair. With their tunabil- heart, including both biological and mechanical effects, ity, synthetic materials can be modified to control both and focus on clinically relevant parameters to optimize adhesion for cell retention and degradation for desired repair outcomes. timing of cell release into the tissue environment. As with the acellular hydrogels, the primary synthetic References materials used for cell delivery are PNIPAm and PEG Batista RJ, Verde J, Nery P, Bocchino L, Takeshita N, Bhayana (Tous et al. 2011). JN, Bergsland J, Graham S, Houck JP, Salerno TA. 1997. Partial left ventriculectomy to treat end-stage heart disease. Injectable Hydrogels for Molecule Delivery Annals of Thoracic Surgery 64(3):634–638. In addition to the approaches described above to alter Beltrami CA, Finato N, Rocco M, Feruglio GA, Puricelli C, local mechanical stabilization and serve as a cell deliv- Cigola E, Quaini F, Sonnenblick EH, Olivetti G, Anversa ery vehicle, injectable hydrogels can deliver therapeutic P. 1994. Structural basis of end-stage failure in ischemic molecules to address post-MI LV remodeling. cardiomyopathy in humans. Circulation 89(1):151–163. Tissue repair is a complex process controlled in part Bian W, Liau B, Badie N, Bursac N. 2009. Mesoscopic hydro- by numerous molecules, such as growth factors and gel molding to control the 3D geometry of bioartificial cytokines, and the delivery of such molecules can mod- muscle tissues. Nature Protocols 4(10):1522–1534. ulate post-MI endogenous biological responses (Segers Buckberg GD. 2005. Architecture must document functional and Lee 2010). Delivery of therapeutic molecules alone, evidence to explain the living rhythm. European Journal of by either direct myocardial injection or systemic intra- Cardio-Thoracic Surgery 27(2):202–209. venous circulation, has helped restore cardiac function Bui AL, Horwich TB, Fonarow GC. 2011. Epidemiology and in some animal models, but the short half-life of the risk profile of heart failure. Nature Reviews Cardiology molecules and off-target complications limit clinical 8(1):30–41. application (Urbanek et al. 2005). Because of these limitations, injectable hydrogels 1 Information about the trials is available at http://clinicaltrials. have been used as delivery vehicles to localize mol- gov/ct2/show/NCT01226563 (“IK-5001 for the Prevention of Remodeling of the Ventricle and Congestive Heart Failure after ecules and tailor release kinetics through changes in Acute Myocardial Infarction”) and at http://clinicaltrials.gov/ polymer-molecule interactions, polymer hydrophobic­ ct2/results?term=Safety+and+Feasibility+of+the+Injectable+ ity, and hydrogel degradation (Chen and Mooney 2003; BL-1040+Implant&Search=Search. SPRING 2015 35

Chen RR, Mooney DJ. 2003. Polymeric growth factor delivery delivery: Implications for current clinical trials. Circula- strategies for tissue engineering. Pharmaceutical Research tion 112(9 Suppl):I150–I156. 20(8):1103–1112. Huang NF, Yu J, Sievers R, Li S, Lee RJ. 2005. Injectable bio- Cleutjens JP, Creemers EE. 2002. Integration of concepts: Car- polymers enhance angiogenesis after myocardial infarction. diac extracellular matrix remodeling after myocardial infarc- Tissue Engineering 11(11–12):1860–1866. tion. Journal of Cardiac Failure 8(6 Suppl):S344–S348. Jackson BM, Gorman JH 3rd, Salgo IS, Moainie SL, Plappert D’Alessandro DA, Michler RE. 2010. Current and future sta- T, St John-Sutton M, Edmunds LH Jr, Gorman RC. 2003. tus of stem cell therapy in heart failure. Current Treatment Border zone geometry increases wall stress after myocardial Options in Cardiovascular Medicine 12(6):614–627. infarction: Contrast echocardiographic assessment. Ameri- Davis ME, Hsieh PC, Grodzinsky AJ, Lee RT. 2005. Custom can Journal of Physiology: Heart and Circulatory Physiol- design of the cardiac microenvironment with biomaterials. ogy 284(2):H475–H479. Circulation Research 97(1):8–15. Karam JP, Muscari C, Montero-Menei CN. 2012. Combining Dobaczewski M, Gonzalez-Quesada C, Frangogiannis NG. adult stem cells and polymeric devices for tissue engineering 2010. The extracellular matrix as a modulator of the in infarcted myocardium. Biomaterials 33(23):5683–5695. inflammatory and reparative response following myocardial Klodell CT Jr, Aranda JM Jr, McGiffin DC, Rayburn BK, Sun infarction. Journal of Molecular and Cellular Cardiology B, Abraham WT, Pae WE Jr, Boehmer JP, Klein H, Huth 48(3):504–511. C. 2008. Worldwide surgical experience with the Paracor Epstein FH, Yang Z, Gilson WD, Berr SS, Kramer CM, French HeartNet cardiac restraint device. Journal of Thoracic and BA. 2002. MR tagging early after myocardial infarction Cardiovascular Surgery 135(1):188–195. in mice demonstrates contractile dysfunction in adjacent Kretlow JD, Klouda L, Mikos AG. 2007. Injectable matri- and remote regions. Magnetic Resonance in Medicine ces and scaffolds for drug delivery in tissue engineering. 48(2):399–403. Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews 59(4–5):263–273. Go AS, Mozaffarian D, Roger VL, Benjamin EJ, Berry JD, Langer R, Folkman J. 1976. Polymers for the sustained Blaha MJ, Dai S, Ford ES, Fox CS, Franco S, Fullerton HJ, release of proteins and other macromolecules. Nature Gillespie C, Hailpern SM, Heit JA, Howard VJ, Huffman 263(5580):797–800. MD, Judd SE, Kissela BM, Kittner SJ, Lackland DT, Licht- Le Blanc K, Pittenger M. 2005. Mesenchymal stem cells: man JH, Lisabeth LD, Mackey RH, Magid DJ, Marcus GM, Progress toward promise. Cytotherapy 7(1):36–45. Marelli A, Matchar DB, McGuire DK, Mohler ER 3rd, Lutolf M, Hubbell J. 2005. Synthetic biomaterials as instruc- Moy CS, Mussolino ME, Neumar RW, Nichol G, Pandey tive extracellular microenvironments for morphogenesis in DK, Paynter NP, Reeves MJ, Sorlie PD, Stein J, Towfighi tissue engineering. Nature Biotechnology 23(1):47–55. A, Turan TN, Virani SS, Wong ND, Woo D, Turner MB, Menasche P. 2005. Stem cells for clinical use in cardiovascu- American Heart Association Statistics Committee and lar medicine: Current limitations and future perspectives. Stroke Statistics Subcommittee. 2014. Heart disease and Thrombosis and Haemostasis 94(4):697–701. stroke statistics–2014 update: A report from the American Nahrendorf M. 2011. Imaging of infarct healing predicts Heart Association. Circulation 129(3):e28–e292. left ventricular remodeling and evolution of heart failure: Gupta K, Ratcliffe M, Fallert M, Edmunds L, Bogen D. 1994. Focus on protease activity. Circulation: Cardiovascular Changes in passive mechanical stiffness of myocardial tissue Imaging 4(4):351–353. with aneurysm formation. Circulation 89(5):2315–2326. Nelson DM, Ma Z, Fujimoto KL, Hashizume R, Wagner WR. Hofmann M, Wollert KC, Meyer GP, Menke A, Arseniev L, 2011. Intra-myocardial biomaterial injection therapy in Hertenstein B, Ganser A, Knapp WH, Drexler H. 2005. the treatment of heart failure: Materials, outcomes and Monitoring of bone marrow cell homing into the infarcted challenges. Acta Biomaterialia 7(1):1–15. human myocardium. Circulation 111(17):2198–2202. Pilla JJ, Blom AS, Gorman JH 3rd, Brockman DJ, Affuso Holmes JW, Borg TK, Covell JW. 2005. Structure and J, Parish LM, Sakamoto H, Jackson BM, Acker MA, mechanics of healing myocardial infarcts. Annual Review Gorman RC. 2005. Early postinfarction ventricular of Biomedical Engineering 7:223–253. restraint improves borderzone wall thickening dynamics Hou D, Youssef EA, Brinton TJ, Zhang P, Rogers P, Price during remodeling. Annals of Thoracic Surgery 80(6): ET, Yeung AC, Johnstone BH, Yock PG, March KL. 2257–2262. 2005. Radiolabeled cell distribution after intramyocardial, Robey TE, Saiget MK, Reinecke H, Murry CE. 2008. Sys- intracoronary, and interstitial retrograde coronary venous tems approaches to preventing transplanted cell death in The 36 BRIDGE

cardiac repair. Journal of Molecular and Cellular Cardiol- Tous E, Purcell B, Ifkovits JL, Burdick JA. 2011. Injectable ogy 45(4):567–581. acellular hydrogels for cardiac repair. Journal of Cardiovas- Ruel-Gariepy E, Leroux JC. 2004. In situ-forming hydrogels: cular Translational Research 4(5):528–542. Review of temperature-sensitive systems. European Journal Urbanek K, Rota M, Cascapera S, Bearzi C, Nascimbene A, of Pharmaceutics and Biopharmaceutics 58(2):409–426. De Angelis A, Hosoda T, Chimenti S, Baker M, Limana Segers VF, Lee RT. 2008. Stem-cell therapy for cardiac disease. F, Nurzynska D, Torella D, Rotatori F, Rastaldo R, Musso Nature 451(7181):937–942. E, Quaini F, Leri A, Kajstura J, Anversa P. 2005. Cardiac Segers VF, Lee RT. 2010. Protein therapeutics for cardiac stem cells possess growth factor-receptor systems that after regeneration after myocardial infarction. Journal of Car- activation regenerate the infarcted myocardium, improving diovascular Translational Research 3(5):469–477. ventricular function and long-term survival. Circulation Spinale FG. 2007. Myocardial matrix remodeling and the Research 97(7):663–673. matrix metalloproteinases: Influence on cardiac form and Wall ST, Walker JC, Healy KE, Ratcliffe MB, Guccione JM. function. Physiological Reviews 87(4):1285–1342. 2006. Theoretical impact of the injection of material into Starling RC, Jessup M, Oh JK, Sabbah HN, Acker MA, Mann the myocardium: A finite element model simulation. Cir- DL, Kubo SH. 2007. Sustained benefits of the CorCap Car- culation 114(24):2627–2635. diac Support Device on left ventricular remodeling: Three Zimmermann WH. 2011. Embryonic and embryonic-like year follow-up results from the Acorn clinical trial. Annals stem cells in heart muscle engineering. Journal of Molecu- of Thoracic Surgery 84(4):1236–1242. lar and Cellular Cardiology 50(2):320–326. Sui R, Liao X, Zhou X, Tan Q. 2011. The current status of engineering myocardial tissue. Stem Cell Reviews 7(1):172–180. Manufacturers of innovative medical technologies for the heart can leverage different tools and techniques to meet regulatory requirements and get their devices to the market.

Regulatory Perspectives on Technologies for the Heart

Tina M. Morrison

With advances in materials science, manufacturers are able to develop medical devices1 from stronger, superelastic materials and tissue (patient- specific or otherwise), opening the door for less invasive surgical thera- pies and personalized medicine. Moreover, access to computers with substantial processing power enables manufacturers to use computational tools paired with patient-specific diagnostic images to simulate treat- Tina M. Morrison is regu- ment options, almost in real time. In addition, with the increasing cost of latory advisor of compu- health care alongside the aging baby boomer population, there is a need to tational modeling in the improve quality of life, decrease the number of doctor visits and length of Center for Devices and Radiological Health at Note: The symposium presentation on regulatory perspectives was given by Sonna Patel- the US Food and Drug Raman of Halloran Consulting Group, Inc. Administration. 1 The FDA (www.fda.gov/aboutfda/transparency/basics/ucm211822.htm) defines a medi- cal device as “an instrument, apparatus, implement, machine, contrivance, implant, in vitro reagent, or other similar or related article, including a component part, or accessory which is: • intended for use in the diagnosis of disease or other conditions, or in the cure, mitiga- tion, treatment, or prevention of disease, in man or other animals, or • intended to affect the structure or any function of the body of man or other animals, and which does not achieve any of its primary intended purposes through chemical action within or on the body of man or other animals and which is not dependent upon being metabolized for the achievement of any of its primary intended purposes.” The 38 BRIDGE

life sustaining and/or life supporting. Class III implant- BOX 1 able devices include pacemakers, defibrillators, heart America’s Heart Disease Burden valves, coronary stents, ventricular assist devices, and artificial hearts. Manufacturers that wish to market • About 600,000 people die of heart disease in the United States every year—that’s 1 in every Class III devices in the United States need to demon- 4 deaths (Murphy et al. 2013). strate that there is a reasonable assurance of both safety • Heart disease is the leading cause of death for (i.e., the probable benefits to health outweigh any prob- both men and women. More than half of the able risks) and effectiveness (i.e., the device will provide deaths due to heart disease in 2009 were in men clinically significant results). (Murphy et al. 2013). Comprehensive evaluation of a premarket submission • Coronary heart disease is the most common type of heart disease, killing nearly 380,000 people for a therapeutic, high-risk medical device is typically annually (Murphy et al. 2013). supported by a combination of valid scientific evidence • Every year about 720,000 Americans have a from four types of models: animal, bench, computation- heart attack; of these, 205,000 have already had al, and human. These models can be leveraged at differ- one (Go et al. 2014). ent stages of a medical device’s life cycle to demonstrate • Coronary heart disease alone costs the United States $108.9 billion each year (Heidenreich et al. attributes of performance. Because each model has 2011) in healthcare services, medications, and lost different strengths and limitations for predicting real- productivity. world clinical outcomes, the data portfolio for different devices and use conditions will vary. Some advantages hospital stays, and provide more efficient treatment of each model are shown in Table 1. options that reduce costs for people living with heart disease, as highlighted in Box 1. Regulatory Evaluation The objectives of this paper are to explain the regu- Selecting the Appropriate Model for Evaluation latory process for medical devices from an engineer- A firm that decides to manufacture a medical device ing perspective, how manufacturers of medical devices should consider the regulatory pathway that will allow can leverage different tools and techniques to get their the device to be marketed in the United States. For devices to the market, and how regulators might evalu- many implantable devices to treat heart disease, a pre- ate innovative medical technologies for the heart. market approval (PMA) application is the appropriate pathway; PMA is “the FDA process of scientific and Background regulatory review to evaluate the safety and effective- The US Food and Drug Administration’s Center for ness of Class III medical devices.” 3 Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH) is respon- The firm must also develop a plan to gather the nec- sible for regulating medical devices that are manufac- essary valid scientific evidence to demonstrate a reason- tured, repackaged, relabeled, and/or imported to be sold able assurance of safety and effectiveness. The basis of in the United States. Its mission “is to protect and pro- this plan will depend on the indications for use—the mote the public health. We facilitate medical device disease to be treated, the affected patient population, innovation by advancing regulatory science, providing the location of the implanted device, the expected industry with predictable, consistent, transparent, and duration and in vivo conditions of the implant, and efficient regulatory pathways, and assuring consumer the surgical procedure. With this information, the firm 2 confidence in devices marketed in the U.S.” The cen- can use tools such as the Device Evaluation Strategy ter’s purview includes regulation of technologies for the (FDA 2013, section 6.3) and Failure Modes and Effects heart, cardiovascular devices that treat a range of dis- Analysis (FMEA) for Medical Devices (ISO 2007) to eases that affect the heart. address fundamental questions about device failure and Most implantable devices to treat heart disease are potential consequences (Box 2). classified as the highest risk, Class III, because they are

3 Information about the PMA is available at www.fda.gov/ 2 Information about the Center for Devices and Radiological Medicaldevices/Deviceregulationandguidance/Howtomarket Health is available at www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/CentersOffices/ yourdevice/Premarketsubmissions/Premarketapprovalpma/ OfficeofMedicalProductsandTobacco/CDRH/ucm300639.htm. Default.Htm. SPRING 2015 39

TABLE 1 Comparison of models used to assess high-risk medical devices

* There is a recognized potential. Computational modeling in medical devices, as compared to other industries, is nascent and is the one model with the most potential for refinement and improvement because other models are fairly mature.

Depending on the function of the device, the firm steel, polyurethane), whose behavior is well understood, identifies an attribute, the potential failure mode of that the regulatory expectations tend to be straightforward. attribute, potential device and clinical effects, the design Additional engineering and regulatory questions may characteristic intended to mitigate the risk of the failure arise when complex materials are introduced and their mode, and the model (animal, bench, computational, or behaviors are not well established. For example, there human) that will be used to demonstrate that the func- has been a shift from bare metal stents to drug-eluting tion of the device will be attained and/or that the failure and, more recently, absorbable stents. mode will not likely occur. Questions about drug-eluting stents have focused In vivo animal studies provide anatomic and clini- on understanding the elution and absorption rates of cal pathologic information about local and systemic the drug, in addition to the mechanical performance responses to device use. Larger animal models, such of the stent. With absorbable devices, a major concern as pigs and sheep, are typically used for cardiovascu- is the rate of degradation: absorbable devices are not lar applications because the size and response of their anatomy more closely match those of human anatomy. Bench and computational models can act as surrogates BOX 2 for the in vivo environment and are useful because they Questions from a Failure Modes can challenge an isolated feature of the device (e.g., and Effects Analysis implant integrity after deployment, long-term durabil- ity). Clinical trials are used for a variety of purposes, • What is the device intended for? but for Class III devices they are mainly to demonstrate • What could go wrong? safety and effectiveness in the clinical setting and evalu- • Why would the failure happen? ate the device in the in vivo human environment.4 • What would be the consequences of failure? • What is the likelihood of occurrence? Unique Material Considerations • What is the likelihood of detection? When a firm uses traditional materials (e.g., stainless • What is the severity of the failure mode? Source: ISO (2007). 4 For other applications of clinical evaluations see FDA (2013). The 40 BRIDGE

intended to be permanent implants like metallic stents, Changes to Surgical Approaches but they do need to maintain a certain amount of struc- Another aspect of device design that can affect regu- tural integrity. Computational methods can be used for latory questions is a change in surgical technique or stress analysis, but they require more complex constitu- approach. For example, a recently introduced percu- tive models. Other challenges arise for drug-eluting and taneous (transcatheter) approach for implanting heart absorbable products when the manufacturing process valves for high-risk patients engendered new questions changes, because this can affect the elution and absorp- about deliverability, deployment accuracy, migration, tion rates for the drug or the degradation time frame for integrity, and durability. The latter two are especially the absorbable material, which could result in addition- important with the new approach and are specifically al testing. Identification of byproducts and their biologi- assessed through a process called preconditioning: The cal effects is another common consideration, and can heart valve is loaded onto a delivery system and guided involve complex in vivo (animal model) evaluations. through the arterial system, a process that subjects it to stresses and strains that do not occur in the traditional open surgical approach, in which the heart valve is directly implanted in the annulus. Preconditioning can Valid scientific evidence greatly affect the integrity and durability of the implant from animal, bench, and determine whether it is suitable for clinical use. Unlike surgical bioprosthetic heart valves, transcath- computational, and human eter heart valves vary greatly in design, so the effects of preconditioning can be different for each design. models is needed to support a Moreover, unlike surgically implanted mechanical heart marketing application. valves, transcatheter valves do not usually remain cir- cular upon implantation because the diseased leaflets and the calcium nodules are not removed, so the frame experiences noncircular deformations in vivo. The For medical devices that are tissue-engineered or computational model is the only tool that can be used regenerative medicine products, the regulatory frame- to determine changes in the stress (or strain) state of a work is a bit different. Reviewers have to consider device under different preconditioning states or implan- “purity, potency, and identity” for biologically derived tation configurations. It can also predict the effects of 5 products, and this requirement can pose limitations to preconditioning and implantation on fatigue perfor- traditional testing. For example, the long-term dura- mance (Duraiswamy et al. 2013). These predictions are bility of permanent metallic implants (e.g., stents and then confirmed through accelerated durability testing. heart valve frames) can be evaluated using accelerated durability bench testing and computational modeling, Summary and the resulting data complement the outcomes from Firms must provide valid scientific evidence from ani- the clinical study regarding mechanical performance. mal, bench, computational, and human models to sup- This is not the case for tissue- and cell-based materials port their marketing applications, and the amount of because the bench model does not allow for the cell and data collected from each model depends on the disease tissue adaptation process that occurs in vivo (e.g., cell to be treated, the affected patient population, the loca- infiltration and extracellular matrix deposition) and tion of the implanted device, the expected duration of that may enable the product to repair itself in a nor- the implant, and the surgical procedure. The data port- mal timed setting in vivo. Therefore, manufacturers of folio may change even more as companies expand their biologic products must rely on extensive in vivo animal use of high-performance scientific computing to reduce testing for performance evaluation. time and cost in their efforts to bring safe and effective devices to patients in the United States.

5 Information about this requirement is available at www.fda. Treatment Planning in the 21st Century gov/AboutFDA/CentersOffices/OfficeofMedicalProductsand The practice of medicine is being shaped by powerful Tobacco/CBER/ucm133072.htm. imaging capabilities, high-performance computation, SPRING 2015 41

wireless transmission of data, and massive storage of effectiveness of a given medical product for an individu- information. Physicians are now able to continuously al patient, thereby truly realizing personalized medicine. monitor a patient’s health from a distance and deter- However, the regulatory burden for medical devices that mine whether a coronary lesion is relevant and treat- have the potential to predict patient-specific outcomes ment necessary, whether a patient is at risk of losing remains to be determined. heart rhythm, and whether a patient will benefit from cardiac pacing (Miller 2014). In the near future, they will be able to select the optimal heart valve size and placement and to assess treatment options within a mat- Regulators are challenged ter of hours (Simulia Community News 2014). with trying to determine which Several companies make such options available in the United States. Graphium Health uses cloud computing advances in computing and and mobile technology to help physicians, adminis- trators, and patients make better pre- and postsurgery software are medical devices. decisions about care. HeartFlow uses patient-specific anatomy and physiological conditions to computation- ally estimate the amount of coronary burden due to a Conclusions stenosis, alleviating in moderate cases the need for cath- New materials and surgical approaches are generating eterization, an invasive procedure that is currently the more treatment options for patients with heart disease. standard of care. Moreover, there is a huge opportunity for imaging and Thanks to these and other tremendous advances, doc- high-performance computing to improve net health tors have access to more data, information, and knowl- outcomes in the United States through treatment plan- edge, and the potential to offer more clinical benefit to ning and better patient understanding of options. FDA’s their patients. However, regulators are challenged with engagement with industry and academia early on in the trying to determine which advances in computing and development of innovative products can help acceler- software are medical devices and, for those that are, what ate the field. The agency can provide the structure to data are needed to support their entrance to the market help guide firms to determine appropriate models and in the United States (FDA, FCC, and HIT 2014). data portfolio needs for evaluating their products. Early From an engineering perspective, scientific com- engagement also enables FDA to share its regulatory puting is mature enough to simulate multiple design experience and to raise important questions that will parameters and use conditions, and to visualize complex protect patients and promote the overall health of the processes to revolutionize the way medical devices are US population. investigated, treatments planned, and patient data uti- lized. With access to “digital patients,” device designers Acknowledgments can download anatomic and physiologic computer mod- The author is grateful for the assistance of numerous els of patients with a given disease.6 They can then take contributors: Maureen Dreher, Carmen Gacchina- their new device concepts and “deploy” them in the Johnson, Victor Krauthamer (in developing Box 1), digital patients to simulate device performance, leading Ken Skodacek, Jeremiah Wille, and Changfu Wu. to more effective bench testing, in vivo animal stud- ies, and (actual) clinical trials. The simulations enable References detection of “soft failures,” failures that occur virtually Duraiswamy N, Ekrami Y, Weaver J, Retta S, Wu C. 2013. before the devices are implanted in patients. Non-circular configurations increase heart valve leaf- Finally, from a clinical perspective, physicians will let stresses and alter leaflet kinematics: A computational soon be able to use simulation to predict the safety and approach. Proceedings of the ASME 2013 Conference on Frontiers in Medical Devices: Applications of Computer Modeling and Simulation, September 11–13, Washington. 6 Two such resources are available from the Virtual Physiologi- cal Human (www.vph-institute.org) and the Foundation for FDA [US Food and Drug Administration]. 2013. Investi- Research on Information Technologies in Society (IT’IS) (www. gational Device Exemptions (IDEs) for Early Feasibility itis.ethz.ch/services/anatomical-models). Medical Device Clinical Studies, Including Certain First in The 42 BRIDGE

Human (FIH) Studies. Center for Biologics Evaluation and statement from the American Heart Association. Circula- Research. Bethesda. Available at www.fda.gov/downloads/ tion 123:e933–e944. medicaldevices/deviceregulationandguidance/guidanced- ISO [International Organization for Standardization]. 2007. ocuments/ucm279103.pdf. 14971:2007 Medical devices—Application of risk manage- FDA, FCC, and HIT [US Food and Drug Administration, ment to medical devices. Geneva. Available at www.iso. Federal Communications Commission, and Office of the org/iso/catalogue_detail?csnumber=38193. National Coordinator for Health Information Technology]. Miller K. 2014. Doing the heart good: Translating models 2014. FDASIA Health IT Report: Proposed Strategy and to the clinic. Biomedical Computation Review (Spring): Recommendations for a Risk-Based Framework. Available 20–28. Available at http://biomedicalcomputationreview. at www.fda.gov/aboutfda/centersoffices/officeofmedical- org/content/doing-heart-good-translating-models-clinic. productsandtobacco/cdrh/cdrhreports/ucm390588.htm. Murphy SL, Xu JQ, Kochanek KD. 2013. Deaths: Final data Go AS, Mozaffarian D, Roger VL, Benjamin EJ, Berry JD, for 2010. National Vital Statistics Reports 61(4). Hyatts- Blaha MJ, and 41 others. 2014. Heart disease and stroke ville, MD: Division of Vital Statistics, Centers for Disease statistics—2014 update: A report from the American Heart Control and Prevention. Available at www.cdc.gov/nchs/ Association. Circulation 129:e28–e292. data/nvsr/nvsr61/nvsr61_04.pdf. Heidenreich PA, Trogdon JG, Khavjou OA, Butler J, Simulia Community News. 2014. Looking deep into heart Dracup K, and 11 others. 2011. Forecasting the future valve replacement. May, pp. 14–15. Available at http:// of cardiovascular disease in the United States: A policy feops.com/sites/default/files/simulia-scn-1405.pdf. Storage and transportation of wastewater from unconventional oil and gas production create challenges in microbial control of the water.

Microbial Ecology of Hydraulic Fracturing

Kelvin B. Gregory

Advances in drilling and stimulation technologies have greatly improved the economics of oil and gas production from deep, tight, hydrocarbon-rich shale formations. But the unconventional drilling required for this produc- tion is associated with challenges in the management of both the wastewater that is coproduced at the surface and the microbial communities in this water. The focus of this article is on the microbial ecology and biogeochemical Kelvin B. Gregory is an processes that impact the production of oil and gas, management of waste­ associate professor in the water (both flowback and produced water), and product quality from hydrau- Department of Civil and lically fractured wells. Hydraulic fracturing is discussed from the perspective Environmental Engineer­ of water management, including the volume and makeup of fracturing fluids ing at Carnegie Mellon that give rise to produced water microbiology. Recent studies of the chemis- University. try and microbiology of produced water from the Marcellus and Barnett shale regions are discussed. Microbial ecology present at wellheads is described as well as that of stratified impoundments for produced water. The concluding section considers the implications of microbial control for unconventional production and identifies research needed to address them.

Hydraulic Fracturing Overview Horizontal drilling, a technology that has been broadly applied since the 1980s, allows access to a far greater portion of a formation than vertical wells by following the horizontal contour of the formation for thousands The 44 BRIDGE of meters. In this manner, horizontal wells also greatly water present in the formation. The quantity and qual- reduce surface impacts by minimizing the number of ity of flowback vary among unconventional oil and gas wells required to develop a particular area. Hydraulic plays and according to the hydraulic fracturing proce- fracturing (often called fracking) is used in conjunction dure used. In the Marcellus shale, for example, flow- with horizontal wells to increase the permeability of back returns 9–53 percent (average 10 percent) of the a formation and extend the radius of influence of the injected volume (Vidic et al. 2013). In terms of the wellbore for an overall increase in the productive area quality of the fluid, the concentration of total dissolved of the reservoir. solids (TDS, including salts and metals) in the water Hydraulic fracturing entails the pumping of fluid into that returns to the surface varies over time; the earliest the wellbore at a rate that exceeds the capacity of the flowback (e.g., the first 2 days) resembles the hydraulic formation to accept without fracturing. A number of fracturing fluid itself and has the lowest concentration fracturing fluids exist, the most common of which is a of TDS, while the later flowback (e.g., after day 10) and mix of water (as a solvent for chemical modifiers), sand the produced water have much higher TDS, more like (for proppant), and chemicals. This fluid is pumped into the chemistry of the formation water. the wellbore at pressures of 500–900 atm, depending on Generally speaking, the composition of produced the needs of the target formation. The proppant flows water from a formation is similarly variable (Barbot et into preexisting and newly initiated fractures and holds al. 2013). The study by Barbot and colleagues reveals them open after pumping has stopped and pressure that the TDS in produced water from the Marcellus decreases. In the Marcellus shale region, hydraulic frac- varied from ~1 to 345 g/L, with an average of 106 g/L. turing may require 6–15 million liters of water, depend- The authors also found that the TDS in the produced ing on the depth to the target formation and length of water was predominantly from the ions (Cl−, Na+, and the horizontal leg of the well (Gregory et al. 2011). Ca2+) and further characterized by high concentrations of magnesium, barium, and strontium. Organic com- pounds in produced water include those introduced with the fracturing fluid as well as polycyclic aromatic A wide variety of hydrocarbons (PAHs), heterocyclic compounds, alkyl organic compounds in phenols, aromatic amines, alkyl aromatics (alkyl ben- zenes, alkyl biphenyls), long-chain fatty acids, and ali- produced water contribute phatic hydrocarbons (Orem et al. 2014), all of which may be used as carbon sources and electron donors for to bacterial growth. bacterial growth.

Disposition of Fluid Flowback and Produced Water Most produced water in the United States is disposed Generation of Fluid through deep-well injection (Clark and Veil 2009). After the pumping for hydraulic fracturing but before However, because there are few deep-well injection the production of hydrocarbons, the pressure in the options in Pennsylvania, reuse of flowback as the make- well is allowed to dissipate; fluid returns to the surface up water for subsequent hydraulic fracturing has become through the wellhead and is collected and stored. This the preferred management option in the Marcellus initial fluid, which is produced to the surface for about region. This reuse also reduces both the need for fresh- 14 days before product recovery, is called flowback. water withdrawals and the costs incurred for transporta- Thereafter, water produced to the surface (along with tion and treatment or disposal. Produced water brines hydrocarbon products) over the lifetime of the well is are used for subsequent hydraulic fracturing, diluted called produced water. The difference between flowback with a freshwater source, and treated to remove solids and produced water is largely operational; the rate at and divalent cations before reuse. Although the reuse which flowback returns to the surface is greater and the of flowback (and produced) water for hydraulic fractur- strength lower than that of produced water. ing is a novel technology and management solution for In terms of content, both flowback and produced oil and gas wastewater brines, a recent analysis of data water are a mixture of hydraulic fracturing fluid and from the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental SPRING 2015 45

Protection revealed a ~90 percent reuse rate of oil and gas brines from the Mar- cellus (Maloney and Yox- theimer 2012). Flowback is typically impounded at the surface before disposal, treatment, or reuse. While treatment or disposal may take place immediately, reuse for sub- sequent fracturing requires storage of a variable volume of wastewater (from 10,000 to 60,000 m3, depending on the intended use and the number of wells served) for variable periods of time (weeks or months); for this it is either transported by FIGURE 1 Heat map revealing the relative abundance of bacterial taxa in water samples associated truck or pumped to central- with hydraulic fracturing of the Marcellus Shale as revealed by 454 pyrosequencing. FF = fracturing ized impoundments that fluid; FB1, 7, 9 = flowback on days 1, 7, 9; PW = produced water on day 187; SW = source water. serve multiple wells or mul- tiple pads with multiple wells. From Aerobic to Anaerobic Bacteria In storage, microbes in the flowback and produced A recent study of wellhead samples of Marcellus flow- fluids evolve and give rise to water management chal- back and produced water reveals that the microbial lenges such as malodorous compounds, biofouling of community changes over time together with the geo- the formation and production equipment and infra- chemistry (Murali Mohan et al. 2013b). On day 1 of structure, biocorrosion, and alteration of the solubility the flowback the community closely resembles that of of metals including radionuclides. Issues associated with the fracturing fluid and the source water (Figure 1). The the proliferation of bacteria during oil and gas produc- microbes are most similar to species associated with tion are ubiquitous, manifest themselves throughout nonhalophilic, aerobic, and phototrophic metabolisms, the production infrastructure, and are costly to manage all of which would be expected in water from a fresh- (Ollivier and Magot 2005). water surface source. However, later in the flowback period, the TDS increase as do the number of bacte- Microbial Communities in Produced Fluids rial species that are most closely related to halophilic, Microbial processes that impact oil production from thermophilic anaerobes. The rise in the abundance of conventionally developed reservoirs are well docu- halophilic anaerobes occurs at the expense of the non- mented (Van Hamme et al. 2003). In these reservoirs, halophilic aerobes and phototrophs and at the expense the stimulation of bacteria may result in reservoir foul- of microbial diversity (Murali Mohan et al. 2013b). ing, biocorrosion, and product souring (sulfidization), Figure 1 shows a gradual decrease in Rhodobacterales or, conversely, provide benefit by enhancing product (freshwater phototrophs) and increase in Halanaero- recovery and the removal of soured product and paraf- biales (anaerobic halophiles) during hydraulic fractur- fins. The microbial ecology of these processes in con- ing of a well in the Marcellus shale. The emergence of ventional reservoirs is well understood, but there are the halophiles was concomitant with the emergence few studies of the detrimental or beneficial impacts of of anaerobic geochemistry (e.g., Fe2+ and HS−) in the bacteria or the microbial ecology of unconventional water and led to the loss of virtually all species pres- oil and gas development, despite similar concerns and ent in the initial flowback except the Halanaerobiales, knowledge that the microbiology is costly to control. which eventually represented more than 99 percent of The 46 BRIDGE the community (Cluff et al. 2014). Bacteria identified natural fractures (which may serve as pathways for the in a sample of produced water were closely associated exchange of fluids, as in the Antrim basin in Michigan) anaerobic, fermentative, and sulfur-reducing bacteria are more likely to have a native community (Martini in the Halanaerobiales. A study of flowback from the et al. 1998). Barnett shale revealed a community that was similarly Regardless of the source of organisms at the wellhead, changing with time, adapting to anoxic and saline con- they come in contact with equipment for handling and ditions (Struchtemeyer and Elshahed 2011). transporting fluids and eventually are in an impound- ment where new geochemistry, impacted by manage- Possible Sources of Bacteria ment strategy and the surface environment, drives It is important to note that next generation sequencing further changes in these adaptive bacterial communities. revealed that the anaerobic and halophilic species pres- ent in great abundance in the produced water were also Microbial Communities in Impoundments present in very low abundance in hydraulic fracturing Impoundments for storage of flowback and produced fluid. This suggests that the organisms in the produced water have robust and dynamic microbial communities water may originate at the surface and be introduced by that correspond to the geochemistry of the impound- hydraulic fracturing rather than native to the connate ment water. Impoundments receive water and bacteria water in the deep subsurface reservoir. But there is a from a variety of sources, including wells, source water, chicken and egg problem: trucks and equipment used drilling fluids (Struchtemeyer et al. 2011), equipment, for handling the water likely were exposed to brines and the environment (e.g., rain, dust, animals, runoff). from hydraulic fracturing, so the source of the organisms Which species are capable of surviving depends on their could be any equipment used for hauling the water. It is ability to adapt to brine concentrations above 100 g/L therefore difficult to pinpoint the source of the organ- and to the spatially and temporally dynamic geochemis- isms in flowback and produced water. try that results from environmental processes and human intervention during impoundment management. The only study of the microbiology in flowback Organisms in the produced water impoundments finds that such microbial com- munities stratify with the impoundment chemistry and water may originate at the are impacted by management strategy (Murali Mohan et al. 2013a). The onset of anaerobic conditions in an surface and be introduced by impoundment may be detected by malodorous com- hydraulic fracturing. pounds from bacterial activity associated with volatile fermentation products and sulfide gas; this aesthetic issue is commonly controlled by the addition of biocides Although bacteria are well known to inhabit deep or aeration of the impoundment. subsurface environments (Fredrickson and Balkwill Samples collected at depths ranging from the surface 2006), their presence in connate brine from the Mar- to the bottom of aerated and unaerated impoundments cellus and Barnett formations has not been document- revealed that the geochemistry and microbiology in the ed. Obtaining representative samples that are assured aerated impoundment were homogeneous throughout to be free of bacterial contamination from drilling or (Figure 2). Moreover, findings show that the microbial sampling is difficult and costly as the source formations community at all depths contained species that were are in extremely low permeability rock. Any bacteria most similar to known aerobes and phototrophs. This that were present when the formation sealed were at follows from the expected vertical mixing of the com- temperatures and pressures sufficient to produce natu- munity between the bottom and surface depths from vig- ral gas from biosolids—more than 120°C for millions of orous aeration. In contrast, the untreated impoundment years. With those temperatures, durations, and limited was geochemically and microbially stratified: bacteria permeability for nutrient delivery, the rapidly evolving that were most similar to aerobes and phototrophs were robust microbial communities in wellhead samples are confined to the surface layer and anaerobes (such as sul- not likely. However, shallow and lower-temperature fidogenic and methanogenic bacteria) were confined to hydrocarbon-rich formations and those that contain the anoxic middle and bottom layers. In all samples, SPRING 2015 47

regardless of treatment or depth, the species present were most similar to taxa that are known halophiles, showing that the brine con- ditions of the water are an overarching driver of the ecology. The study does not reveal the activity of the organisms, but it does sug- gest that the bacteria in impoundments adapt to the conditions imposed, despite the addition of bio- cides to the initial fractur- ing water (Murali Mohan et al. 2013a), as reported from studies of flowback from the Barnett shale as well (Struchtemeyer and Elsha- hed 2011).

Implications for FIGURE 2 Relative abundance of bacterial taxa in flowback water impoundments at various Unconventional Oil depths. Data generated by clone libraries and subsequent sequencing of 16s rRNA genes recovered and Gas Production from samples. Sequences with similarity to Archaea were recovered only from the bottom of the Research into the micro- unaerated impoundment and are shown in black and white. Data adapted from Murali Mohan et al. (2013a). biology of unconventional oil and gas development is a nascent focus area for Studies have also shown the presence and abun- engineers and scientists. There are some similarities dance of species that are similar to Halanaerobium with conventional petroleum microbiology, but many congolense, a sulfidogen. Sulfide production in wells is research questions remain about water management associated with human and environmental health risks, associated with unconventional development. Their corrosion, and costly degradation of product quality. answers will affect the practice as well as the economic This organism has been identified in produced waters and environmental sustainability of hydraulic fracturing from conventional development, but is of significance for oil and gas production. here because it cannot reduce sulfate and instead uses Most importantly, studies to date indicate that thiosulfate and sulfur as electron acceptors for sulfide the microbial communities present in wellheads and production. Because standardized tests for assessing impoundments appear to be dynamic in time and space, sulfidogenic potential in produced water rely on the indicating that biocides may not be working or used as numbers of sulfate-reducing bacteria, they will yield intended. Moreover, microbial diversity drops sharply false negative reports for sulfide production potential, during flowback as it becomes enriched with survivor a risk for the industry. New tests that enable assessment species. The implication is that recycling of flowback of sulfide production from sulfur-reducing bacteria are and produced water for subsequent hydraulic fracturing needed for unconventional wells. may introduce to new wells deleterious bacteria that are adapted to the harsh environment of the well (and bio- References cides). These bacteria grow quickly, advance the onset Barbot E, Vidic NS, Gregory KB, Vidic RD. 2013. Spatial of sulfide production, and are more resistant to treat- and temporal correlation of water quality parameters of ment options. produced waters from Devonian-Age shale following The 48 BRIDGE

hydraulic fracturing. Environmental Science and Technol- Murali Mohan A, Hartsock A, Bibby KJ, Hammack RW, Vidic ogy 47:2562–2569. RW, Gregory KB. 2013b. Microbial community changes in Clark CE, Veil JA. 2009. Produced Water Volumes and hydraulic fracturing fluids and produced water from shale Management Practices in the United States. ANL/ gas extraction. Environmental Science and Technology EVS/R–09/1. Environmental Science Division, Argonne 47:13141–13150. National Laboratory. Ollivier B, Magot M. 2005. Petroleum Microbiology. Wash- Cluff MA, Harsock A, MacRae JD, Carter K, Mouser PJ. 2014. ington: ASM Press. Temporal changes in microbial ecology and geochemistry Orem W, Tatu C, Varonka M, Lerch H, Bates A, Engle M, in produced water from hydraulically fractured Marcellus Crosby L, McIntosh J. 2014. Organic substances in pro- shale gas wells. Environmental Science and Technology duced and formation water from unconventional natural 48:6508–6517. gas extraction in coal and shale. International Journal of Fredrickson JK, Balkwill DL. 2006. Geomicrobial processes Coal Geology 126:20–31. and biodiversity in the deep terrestrial subsurface. Geomi- Struchtemeyer CG, Elshahed MS. 2011. Bacterial commu- crobiology Journal 23:345–356. nities associated with hydraulic fracturing fluids in ther- Gregory KB, Vidic RD, Dzombak DA. 2011. Water manage- mogenic natural gas wells in North Central Texas, USA. ment challenges in development of shale gas with hydraulic FEMS Microbial Ecology 81:13–25. fracturing. Elements 7:181–186. Struchtemeyer CG, Davis JP, Elshahed MS. 2011. Influence Maloney KO, Yoxtheimer DA. 2012. Production and dis- of the drilling mud formulation process on the bacterial posal of waste materials from gas and oil extraction from communities in thermogenic natural gas wells of the Bar- the Marcellus shale play in Pennsylvania. Environmental nett Shale. Applied and Environmental Microbiology Practices 14:278–287. 77:4744–4753. Martini AM, Walter LM, Budai JM, Ku TCW, Kaiser CJ, Van Hamme JD, Sing A, Ward OP. 2003. Recent advances Schoell M. 1998. Genetic and temporal relations between in petroleum microbiology. Molecular and Microbiology formation waters and biogenic methane: Upper Devonian­ Reviews 67:503–549. Antrim Shale, Michigan Basin, USA. Geochimica et Vidic RD, Brantley SL, Vandenbossche JM, Yoxtheimer D, Cosmochimica Acta 62:1699–1720. Abad JD. 2013. Impact of shale gas development on region- Murali Mohan A, Hartsock A, Hammack RW, Vidic RW, al water quality. Science 340:1235009. Gregory KB. 2013a. Microbial communities in flowback water impoundments from hydraulic fracturing for recovery of shale gas. FEMS Microbial Ecology 86:567–580. An Interview with . . .

Henry Petroski (HP): I am honored. I have read the Henry Petroski first two interviews. RML: That is great. As with the others, we’re going to record this conversation, transcribe it, and send it for you to review. Does that sound all right? HP: That sounds fine. Cameron Fletcher (CHF): It’ll be a fairly short turn- around; is there any reason that might not be feasible for you? HP: Not over the next three weeks. RML: What happens in three weeks, Henry? I am just curious. HP: My editor is visiting this weekend and I expect that I am going to have a deadline. CHF: What is your new book? HP: I am taking a historical look at American infra- structure, all aspects of it—the usual, the condition of roads, potholes; I also go into some unusual details— where did lane markings come from, why are they the Henry Petroski (NAE) is a professor of both civil engineering colors they are. It turns out that this was a very impor- and history at Duke University and a prolific author. Photo by tant stage in the organization and control of traffic. Catherine Petroski. Early roads had no markings at all on them. There were a lot of accidents, especially going around blind curves; Ron Latanision (RML): Henry, we are very pleased putting a centerline down the road turned out to be an that you are willing to talk with us. Let me briefly enormous benefit to road safety. But then for decades, explain how this all came about. Last year Cameron and literally, there were debates about whether the lines I were thinking that we needed to add a new dimension should be white or yellow. I trace things like that, and to the Bridge. Engineers have an impact in all sorts of where the traffic light came from. Then I get into cur- ways in our culture, not only in terms of building bridges rent politics, or rather policy: How are we going to pay and developing new iPhones and the like. We thought for the infrastructure? Where do we get the money? Do it would be a good idea to look at what kinds of involve- we increase the gas tax? And so forth. ment engineers have had in the culture of the United The timing of this book is going to be pretty touchy States and the world. because these are developing issues. One of the things We began the series with an interview with Richard my editor and I have to talk about is exactly when this Blanco, a poet who is also a civil engineer. We learned book is going to be published so I can aim for some kind that there are politicians who are engineers and that of closure on the issues. led us to John Sununu. Hopefully, you will be followed CHF: Infrastructure is a hot topic these days. Are you by Charley Johnson, a former NFL quarterback. We are considering other aspects besides transportation? now very glad to have an engineer who not only teach- es engineering but also is a well-known writer. We are HP: Principally, I am doing roads and bridges because delighted that you are available to talk with us today. that is what I know the most. That alone is more than The 50 BRIDGE a book can handle, it turns out. I do touch on other We certainly try to teach our students that, as engi- aspects of infrastructure, but I don’t go into any depth neers, there are important public policy issues that about them. I want to keep this book focused, and I they are very close to and are expert in technically, and think spreading it out over all of infrastructure wouldn’t that gives them additional insight into where policy make for a very coherent book. should go. I do have one chapter where I talk about the Ameri- CHF: What do you think is a good way to encourage can Society of Civil Engineers and its report cards issued your colleagues and peers to expand their view of them- every three years or so. They cover the whole spectrum selves to the policy sphere? of infrastructure in the United States, so in that chapter I get away from the focus on transportation, but then I HP: I guess try to catch them as students before they get bring the discussion back to roads and bridges to talk indoctrinated the other way. For some reason, whether about infrastructure issues in a more focused way. it is early education or the environment in which they grow up, they have this mindset. That has been my RML: You mentioned in passing the politics of the experience. Some think that they should be involved issue. On both sides of the aisle in Congress, there is in everything, others think they should be involved agreement that the infrastructure and particularly bridg- in nothing. I think it has a lot to do with personality, es and roads in the United States need to be improved with personal confidence about whether you have the but disagreement on how to pay for it. self-assuredness of being correct in your conclusions. I HP: That is exactly right. But neither side wants to give do not think a lot of engineering education conveys to the other side an advantage politically. The president’s engineering students these ideas. federal budget was just released—in fact, it has a bridge I have been getting a little experience with first-year on the cover. I guess that shows how important the sub- students at the university. It is becoming clear over ject is to the politicians in Washington. the years that they are becoming further and further removed from current events. These are not just engi- RML: I hope in your book you might somehow encour- neers, I am talking about across the curriculum because I age policymakers to think rationally about the fact that, teach a freshman seminar in which I have students that if infrastructure is so fundamental to our standard of life are engineers and nonengineers alike. I have learned and commerce and other aspects of our culture, we real- that I can’t just make a reference to something that is ly need to take care of it and come together and figure happening. The students do not read the newspaper, out how to pay for it. they do not seem to follow the news, politics generally. They are not acting like engaged citizens. When I was in school (I guess I am showing my age I think engineers should when I say things like that) we used to take courses in citizenship, where we learned about the organization of think more about politics government and what the citizen’s responsibility was— not only to vote, but to know the issues. Your expertise and public policy. was a contribution to the exercise of government in some way. RML: Kids now use social media far more than they HP: I certainly agree with you. I also think engineers, at read the newspapers. least in my experience, should think more about politics and public policy. I have had arguments with some of HP: I have always thought of the local newspaper as my colleagues, not necessarily my current ones, about a collection of social media. I read our local newspa- whether they really were expressing their opinions per every day. It has a lot of letters to the editor, it is a enough about what is right and wrong with regard to public forum and there is a lot of local news. I cannot significant infrastructure policies. Some of them have imagine something being closer to the real issues of the told me they did not think that was their place. They neighborhood. Students today just don’t read papers. thought they were the technical people and that was it. But then, when I was young, neither did I do so closely. I think that is disappointing. I had a newspaper route; I folded the papers every day, SPRING 2015 51

but I didn’t really read them. I would read the headlines colleagues and of course with the students who were only because they were staring at me. I wrote a memoir studying civil engineering. about this. Before writing that book, I went back and That got me interested in a lot of things that I read the papers I had delivered and was amazed at what continue to have a deep interest in, like bridges and I had missed. infrastructure. I have been always very grateful for the opportunity to do so. It was sort of an accident, but it CHF: Looking at the range of topics you have cov- has worked out very well. ered in your books, it seems to me you could have pur- With regard to how I ended up in engineering: When sued a host of interests. What prompted you to choose I was going to college I had a circle of friends, and we engineering as your platform from which to explore all used to talk a lot, usually over a beer down at the local these topics? place. There weren’t standardized tests in engineering HP: I think the honest answer is that engineering found per se; they were in science and math and vocabulary me. It was precipitated by Sputnik. I was beginning to and language skills and so forth. We would ask ourselves, think about college and majors and so forth when Sput- If we are so good in science and math, how come we are nik went up in 1957. Afterward, there was a very con- studying engineering? Why aren’t we studying science scious effort in the country to encourage students to go and math? We became rather introspective about this into engineering and science and math so we could go stuff. I never changed my major to science or math, but I beat the Soviets. did vacillate between civil and mechanical engineering It is not unlike the emphasis today on the STEM and changed my major. I think I went back and forth a curriculum—science, technology, engineering, and couple of times. math—although I don’t think that what’s happening today is quite as focused. In the Sputnik era there were fellowships and scholarships given out to encourage stu- dents to study engineering and science. I guess there Today, it seems like were probably a lot of research grants that went to fac- a lot of the money is going ulty at that time, but that was outside my knowledge. Today, it seems like a lot of the money is going to cur- to curriculum as opposed riculum as opposed to students. to students. RML: I, too, am a product of that era. I think there was a great deal of fear on the part of the American public and the government, and that was a tremendous incen- I ended up in mechanical engineering largely because tive and motivation to produce more scientists and I had a fairly bad experience working for the New York engineers so that we could keep pace with the Soviets. I City Traffic Department one summer among a lot of think we both were beneficiaries of that in lots of ways. civil engineers who were just not inspiring, let’s put it I am curious about your teaching and your research that way. They watched the clock and the thermometer and then your transition to writing. You are a civil because there was a rule that if the temperature got to engineer— a certain degree, the work day was over. I still learned a HP: I am in a civil engineering department and I have lot working for them, I got out in the field a little bit. It the title of professor of civil engineering, but my degrees was very interesting. are in mechanical engineering and mechanics, theo- I would say my friends and I had a very liberal edu- retical and applied mechanics in particular. Mechan- cation even though we were majoring in engineering. ics historically has been taught in the civil engineering We took courses in philosophy, economics, literature, department at Duke, so when I was hired here to teach history—I enjoyed every course I took, except maybe mechanics I ended up in the civil engineering depart- thermodynamics. Everything was interesting. Whatever ment. In fact, I didn’t know much about civil engineer- was thrown at us we just soaked it up. ing at all when I was appointed. I took it upon myself CHF: It sounds like you are advocating more of a liberal to really study it, almost as if I were a student again, arts or humanities education. because I wanted to be able to communicate with my The 52 BRIDGE

HP: I wouldn’t go that far. We had to take a lot more myself because my professor did not have any research credit hours, and so we had plenty of room in the cur- grants at the time. I taught just about every year I was riculum back then. This was before computers pretty a graduate student. I ended up with the rank of instruc- much. I feel that my education was well rounded. As a tor while I was still a graduate student. Then I went to result, no subject really scared me off. You were asking the University of Texas at Austin for my first teach- before about the range of things I write about. I don’t ing job as an assistant professor. When I interviewed know if I would go so far as to say nothing intimidates for the job, it was in the Department of Engineering me, but I don’t say I can’t deal with something because Mechanics. When I arrived, I was informed that I was I don’t know anything about it. I didn’t know anything now in the Department of Aerospace Engineering and about engineering before I studied it. You study some- Engineering Mechanics. I did not expect that. I taught thing and you learn something. there for about five years. That’s when I transitioned to writing. I had three degrees in engineering, I had practiced engineering, and I was a registered professional engineer (while I was A neighbor asked me, at Texas, the legislature passed a law defining teaching What is engineering? as practicing engineering, so if you were teaching engi- neering you were supposed to be registered). However, I could not give a concise when one of my neighbors asked me, What is engineer- ing? I could not give a concise answer in lay terms. This answer in lay terms, and got me thinking about what is engineering. I wasn’t sure that got me thinking. I fully understood it. In all these courses I had taken and taught, in all of this education, that is never talked about. I guess it is sort of a meta-subject or something like that. I started thinking about it. RML: I bet you didn’t take a course in etiquette, Henry, I had been writing since I was an undergraduate, did you? I did as an undergraduate. when I had to do some writing for some of my literature HP: I did have “charm school” in graduate school. It courses, one in particular. The teacher encouraged me was not a formal course. I was a teaching assistant, and and I found that I enjoyed doing it. I continued to do anybody teaching a course for the first time had to go to what I would call recreational writing through graduate charm school, including professors. This was at the Uni- school and even while I was a young assistant professor. versity of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign. It was expected Mostly poetry actually, a lot of it published. that you would wear a jacket and tie to teach. We would Then I began to be attracted to prose. I’m not sure I have to demonstrate what our lecture was going to be can reconstruct right here how that transition occurred. for the coming week and we had to have the proper I began to write what I would call parodies or satires on demeanor to teach. It was all taken very seriously. public affairs, public policy relating to engineering and The jacket and tie didn’t bother me too much because science, energy bills in Congress, budget bills, and so I wore them all through high school, I was used to that. forth. I began to publish these in the New York Times; I But the idea of practicing and auditioning your lectures, didn’t have a regular column or anything, but I think it that was something new. Just teaching was something was a fair number of pieces. new. I still to this day don’t know how I taught my first I found that prose was more satisfying than poetry class because I didn’t feel comfortable in front of audi- mainly because it had a bigger audience; not too many ences at the time. people actually read poetry. I began to write longer piec- es and eventually ended up writing fairly regularly for RML: You taught at the University of Illinois and at Technology Review, the MIT magazine. At first I was writ- Texas… ing op-ed pieces, opinion pieces, point of view pieces, HP: That’s right. I went to the University of Illinois as a but more serious than what I was writing for the Times. graduate student. I received a fellowship, then they also The editor encouraged me to write some longer pieces, offered me an opportunity to teach, first as a teaching feature articles in particular, and I enjoyed doing it. fellow and later I became a teaching assistant to support I began writing expository pieces about engineering. SPRING 2015 53

One that I wrote was about failure. It was one of my have a responsibility for teaching and research, and at first ones because I had gotten interested in failure. This the same time you are a very prolific writer. was around the time the Hyatt Regency’s walkway col- CHF: Are you still writing two hours every morning? lapsed [Kansas City, 1981]. The editor asked me, Why don’t you write a little sidebar on that because it’s cur- HP: Yes, I write every morning if I can. If I am traveling, rent news? I did, and enjoyed doing that because I was I don’t always do it. I tend to read when I am traveling. able to explain what happened in nontechnical terms. I guess I am very lucky today. My institution, the Eventually, all this comes together. I never thought administrators, my dean, they all seem to see my value I could write a book because it was just too daunting as a writer about engineering and related things. They while I’m teaching and supposed to have a research pro- give me a lot of leeway. I don’t sit and talk to them gram and everything. The poetry worked fine because about this because as long as they leave me alone, I I could do that late at night before I went to bed, but leave them alone. longer stuff I really had to devote some time to. I remember when one of my books came out, I think it was The Pencil (1990), I was on “The Today Show” RML: It required some research. to promote it. Shortly after that, I was in a meeting—I HP: Research and dedicated time and so forth. What forget the details of what the meeting was about, but is engineering? I still was searching for that answer. it was people from across campus, and the president of Because I had learned that writing about something the university was there. I had to get up and leave early helped me think about it, I decided I was going to write because I had to teach. As I was leaving, the president a book on the topic. Actually, Samuel Florman’s Exis- said “Henry, congratulations on being on ‘The Today tential Pleasures of Engineering (1976) was not only influ- Show’ the other day. That was wonderful exposure ential but actually encouraging. I did not know Sam at for Duke” or something to that effect. He was clearly the time. Reading his book—and noting the fact that approving of what I was doing. Coming from the presi- it was reviewed in the New Yorker—reinforced the idea dent, that endorsed it to everybody in earshot. Since that a book was a way of talking about engineering to then, it has been a comfortable relationship I have with a much broader audience, clearly not a technical audi- the institution. ence alone. That was what I was aspiring to back then. One summer I disciplined myself to write for a couple of hours each morning before going to my office. I ended up with a book manuscript. That is where I discovered The short definition of what I think engineering is. It ended up being all about failure and avoiding failure. The short definition of engineering is the engineering is the avoidance of failure, design to obvi- avoidance of failure, ate failure, or however you want to put it. CHF: What was that book title? design to obviate failure. HP: To Engineer Is Human (1985). The subtitle is The Role of Failure in Successful Design. RML: I think that is entirely appropriate. I mentioned RML: You mentioned Sam Florman. I am going to quote at the outset that one of our goals with this column is from a recent message he sent me; he said, “If I ever form to demonstrate that engineers affect the culture of this a society of engineer writers, Henry will have to be the country. The books you’ve written can be read by a very emperor. Nobody else comes close.” You have one very broad audience. They emphasize engineering, but they large fan in Sam Florman, himself a very good writer. also emphasize familiar experiences, not just in terms of I am curious about a day in the life of Henry Petroski. pencils and paper clips and so on but also, for example, How do you put into your schedule teaching and the most recent one that I’ve seen, The House with Six- research and writing? With something like 18 books, teen Handmade Doors (2014). You touch on things that and maybe number 19 is in the works now, you must are in the experience of anyone who might pick up the have a good system for managing your time to get all book. That is a contribution in terms of the culture of this done. How do you do that? As an academic, you the country. I really enjoy reading them. The 54 BRIDGE

HP: Thanks. I’m pleased to know that. HP: I have thought about fiction, but have never really gone very far with the idea. I don’t read an awful lot of CHF: What kinds of feedback do you get from readers, fiction these days. When I was a student, I did, espe- particularly those who are not engineers? cially Russian literature, in translation of course. But HP: It ranges all over the place. Just the other day I got today I hardly read anything that isn’t related to what I an email from some guy who teaches creative writing am working on at the time. I read fiction if it is about an and he’s working on a novel, if I get this right, taking engineer or about engineering or some kind of related place in the 18th century. He is asking me if they still topic. But as a rule, I don’t read fiction. used paper knives back then. There was a time when I really admire a good plot. I admire how an author book pages were not fully cut and you had to use what will put together a story, but I don’t know that I’ve got was called a paper knife to cut them before you pro- it in me. I have enough on my plate right now. I have ceeded to read. He was trying to be correct technically no immediate plans. and not anachronistic in referring to these pages. That CHF: What fiction have you read about engineers? My kind of stuff comes out of the blue. curiosity is piqued. RML: What is the answer to that question, Henry? HP: There is a book called No Highway (1948) by Nevil Shute, about an aeronautical engineer. It was made into a movie titled No Highway in the Sky (1951) starring Jimmy Stewart. This guy works in the airplane industry, I was sitting in my study one and certain types of planes start exploding. Ron, you no evening, thinking, What am doubt know the de Havilland Comet story; the novel really is about the Comet. The hero is tracking down I going to write about next? I what was responsible for the lost planes. It turns out to have been metal fatigue. The book is very explicitly looked at the bookshelves and about engineering throughout. And Sam Florman has written a “novel of survival” saw them as little bridges. titled The Aftermath (2001), in which several hundred engineers attending a conference on a ship sailing off the southeast coast of Africa are among the few HP: I had to punt a little because I didn’t want to stop survivors of a comet’s impacting the other side of the and do any research. I happened not to address paper Earth. The engineers, along with a surviving agricul- knives explicitly in my book on books and bookshelves. tural community, set themselves the task of rebuilding I told him that I do remember reading books from the civilization. library in my own experience that were published in the CHF: How do you decide what topics to pursue for each 20th century that still had pages uncut and were clearly book? published that way. The question was, When did they start getting cut? I told him in this book I wrote, The HP: Something that interests me or catches my inter- Book on the Bookshelf (2000), there are two illustrations est. For The Book on the Bookshelf I was sitting in my that span two centuries. In one of them, the books are study one evening, thinking, What am I going to write being sold unbound; the printer would fold but not cut about next? and I looked at the wall of books, the book- the pages, the binder would. That was a demarcation shelves. Usually you see books when you do that, but point. Exactly when did that happen? Probably over a I saw the shelves that day. I saw them as little bridges. rather long period of time because, just like today, cer- Why is it that we store books this way? That was the tain publishers do things a little differently than other germ of the idea. There was enough interest there for publishers. Not everybody is going to do it the same way me to pursue the idea. I didn’t think there necessarily all of a sudden. That is just a recent example. was a book on it, but then I began to read—it was very interesting research, full of surprises. It turned out to be RML: What is next in terms of the kinds of writing you a pretty successful book. I get a lot of questions about do? Do you have novels anywhere in the inventory of the topics in that book. things you would like to write? SPRING 2015 55

And then another criterion is, Is there enough mate- in civil engineering and in history. You are looking at rial to fill a book? Is there going to be an engaging story? engineering objects and at the same time tracing their I like to think of the books as telling a story of some history and considering cultural implications. kind, though maybe not a novelistic type of story. As HP: Thank you. long as it is engaging to me, I hope it will be engaging to others. I have abandoned a lot of ideas because they RML: We promised we wouldn’t take more than an did not seem to go anywhere, but some just cry out to hour. One last question, Henry, and that is whether be pursued. With The Pencil, for example, early on in there is any comment or message you would like to trying to feel my way around this subject I discovered deliver to the other members of the NAE who will be that Henry David Thoreau had manufactured pencils reading this column. and was innovative in helping his father in his pencil business, which was a cottage industry in Concord, Mas- sachusetts. I knew that that alone made it a promising book. The question was, What else was going to be in I cannot make an outline of the book? It turns out that the Thoreau business is a chapter in the book, and I open with an anecdote about a book beforehand because Henry David. But once there was that connection to the it depends on where the general culture I began to think, What about the materi- als, what about the graphite of a pencil, what about the material takes the subject. wood? It turns out to be very interesting—whether the graphite is pure or not, whether the wood has the right properties. This turned it into a book about engineering. HP: I don’t want to presume to send a message to them. The Pencil has a very interesting story. I wanted to I really am so honored to be a member of the NAE, take a sabbatical and for that you have to have a project. given the distinguished people that are members. I was I usually don’t know much about my books when I begin blown away when I was elected and invited to sit on them, but in this case I had to know more if I was going committees. I got to know some of the members and to say I would like to write this book. I had to explain it. was just so overwhelmed and impressed with the vari- My first idea was that this was going to be a book about ety of qualities they would bring to a discussion—their engineering and culture. My idea was to use a pencil intelligence, knowledge, integrity, the depth of analysis as an introduction to a lot of different concepts—the they would engage in to make decisions about awards pencil is clearly associated with creativity, with artists and other matters. I have never been involved with a and architects and engineers. I would have a chapter group that has so impressed me. I hope I can live up to where I would start off talking about the pencil as this the standards that have been set by the members of the tool of creativity, and I would get into how engineers Academy. are creative. That was the germ of the idea. My working title was “With a Pencil” and that is what I applied for RML: I think that is a given, Henry, I really do. This fellowships with. column focuses on how practicing engineers affect the But I seldom think through the books that far. Usu- culture of the country and you are a perfect model of ally after I finish a book or at least a good draft of one, that. I am just delighted that we have had this opportu- then I make an outline and submit to a publisher. I can- nity to spend an hour with you. Thanks again, Henry, not make an outline of a book beforehand because I very much. deviate too much from my original ideas. It depends on CHF: Yes, indeed, Henry, thank you. What a pleasure. where the material is going to take the subject. HP: It has been good to talk with you, Ron and RML: Your books are a perfect marriage of engineering Cameron. and history. I can see why you have a joint appointment The 56 BRIDGE NAE News and Notes Class of 2015 Elected

In February 67 new members and 12 Howard Hughes Medical Institute; computational neuroscience, Mas- foreign members were elected to the John J. and Dorothy Wilson Profes- sachusetts Institute of Technology, National Academy of Engineering, sor of Health Sciences and Technol- Cambridge. For development of bringing the total US membership ogy and Electrical Engineering and neural signal processing algorithms to 2,263 and the number of foreign Computer Science, Massachusetts for understanding memory encod- members to 221. Institute of Technology; and direc- ing and modeling of brain states of Academy membership honors tor, Laboratory for Multiscale Regen- anesthesia. those who have made outstand- erative Technologies, Cambridge, Wesley G. Bush, chair, chief ing contributions to “engineering Massachusetts. For tissue engineer- executive officer, and president, research, practice, or education, ing and tissue regeneration technol- Northrop Grumman Corp., Falls including, where appropriate, sig- ogies, stem cell differentiation, and Church, Virginia. For engineering nificant contributions to the engi- preclinical drug evaluation. leadership in national security. neering literature,” and to the Cheryl A. Blanchard, chief Jonathan P. Caulkins, H. Guy- “pioneering of new and develop- executive officer, MicroCHIPS Inc., ford Stever Professorship of Opera- ing fields of technology, making Lexington, Massachusetts; and con- tions Research and Public Policy, major advancements in traditional sultant, Blanchard Consulting LLC, Carnegie Mellon University, Pitts- fields of engineering, or developing/ Fort Wayne, Indiana. For creation burgh. For contributions to the implementing innovative approach- and commercialization of bioma- analysis, modeling, and engineering es to engineering education.” terial products and gender-based of drug policy in the United States A list of the newly elected mem- medical devices for musculoskeletal and abroad. bers and foreign members follows, health. Anantha Chandrakasan, Joseph with their primary affiliations at the Kevin G. Bowcutt, senior techni- F. and Nancy P. Keithley Professor time of election and a brief state- cal fellow and chief scientist of hyper- of Electrical Engineering and head, ment of their principal engineering sonic design and applications, Boeing Department of Electrical Engineer- accomplishments. Co., Huntington Beach, California. ing and Computer Science, Mas- Harry A. Atwater Jr., Howard For development and demonstration sachusetts Institute of Technology, Hughes Professor of Applied Physics of air-breathing hypersonic vehicles Cambridge. For development of and Materials Science, California and implementation of design opti- low-power circuit and system design Institute of Technology, Pasadena. mization methods. methods. For contributions to plasmonics. Jonathan D. Bray, faculty chair Santosh K. Das, retired vice Hari Balakrishnan, professor of in earthquake engineering excel- president, Polymer Technologies computer science, Massachusetts lence and professor of geotechnical Inc., Randolph, New Jersey. For Institute of Technology, Cam- engineering, University of Cali- understanding of the composition, bridge. For contributions to wired fornia, Berkeley. For contributions structure, property, and processing and wireless networks and distrib- to earthquake engineering and interrelationships of rapidly solidi- uted systems. advances in mitigation of surface fied amorphous and microcrystal- Ewa A. Bardasz, president, faulting, liquefaction, and seismic line alloys. ZUAL Associates Consulting, slope failure. Ingrid Daubechies, professor and Mentor, Ohio. For novel automo- Emery N. Brown, Warren M. James B. Duke Professor of Math- tive lubricants, low-emission engine Zapol Professor of Anaesthesia, ematics, Duke University, Durham, development, and education of Harvard Medical School; Edward North Carolina. For contributions engineering professionals. Hood Taplin Professor of Medi- to the mathematics and applications Sangeeta Bhatia, investigator, cal Engineering and professor of of wavelets. SPRING 2015 57

Deepakraj M. Divan, presi- fessional development; and faculty Janet G. Hering, director, Swiss dent, chief technical officer, and director, Center for Image Systems Federal Institute of Aquatic Sci- cofounder, Varentec Inc., San Jose, Engineering, Stanford University, ence and Technology, Dübendorf; California. For design and commer- California. For contributions to and professor, Swiss Federal Insti- cialization of advanced power con- video compression, streaming, and tutes of Technology, Lausanne and version technologies for improved multimedia systems. Zürich. For contributions to under- quality and controllability of the Karen Klincewicz Gleason, asso- standing and practice of removal power grid. ciate provost and Alexander and I. of inorganic contaminants from Derek Elsworth, professor of ener- Michael Kasser Professor of Chemi- drinking water. gy and geoenvironmental engineer- cal Engineering, Massachusetts J. Jim Hsieh, chair and chief ing, Pennsylvania State University, Institute of Technology, Cambridge. executive officer, Sheaumann Laser University Park. For contributions For invention, application develop- Inc. (formerly Axcel Photonics to understanding natural processes ment, scale-up, and commercializa- Inc.), Marlborough, Massachusetts. affecting flow and transport proper- tion of chemically vapor-deposited For development and commercial- ties of fractured rocks. polymers. ization of long-wavelength lasers for Eric D. Evans, director, MIT Dan M. Goebel, senior research fiber-optic communication. Lincoln Laboratory, Lexington. For scientist, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Ming Hsieh, chair, chief execu- development of remote sensing sys- California Institute of Technology, tive officer, and cofounder, Ful- tems, improvised explosive device Pasadena. For contributions to low- gent Therapeutics, Temple City, (IED) detection, and ship antimis- temperature plasma sources for thin- California. For development and sile defense. film manufacturing, plasma materials commercialization of biometric Raymond J. Fonck, Steenbock interactions, and electric propulsion. identification systems. Professor of Physical Science and Robert H. Grubbs, Victor and S. Jack Hu, interim vice presi- professor of engineering physics, Elizabeth Atkins Professor of Chem- dent for research, J. Reid and University of Wisconsin, Madison. istry, California Institute of Tech- Polly Anderson Professor of Man- For advances in fusion plasma spec- nology, Pasadena. For developments ufacturing Technology, professor troscopy diagnostics and leadership in catalysts that have enabled com- of mechanical engineering, and of the US fusion program into the mercial products. professor of industrial and opera- burning plasma era. Supratik Guha, director of tions engineering, University of Tahir Ghani, Intel Senior Fel- physical sciences, Thomas J. Wat- Michigan, Ann Arbor. For methods low, technology and manufacturing son Research Center, IBM Corp., for predicting and diagnosing root group, and director, transistor tech- Yorktown Heights, New York. For causes of product quality variation nology and integration, Intel Corp., contributions to field effect transis- in multistage assembly systems. Hillsboro, Oregon. For develop- tor technology that allow continued Thomas M. Jahns, Grainger ment of transistor technologies for scaling of silicon microelectronics. Professor of Power Electronics and logic products. Ronald Hamburger, senior prin- Electrical Machines, and professor Morteza (Mory) Gharib, vice cipal, Simpson Gumpertz & Heger of electrical and computer engi- provost for research, Hans W. Liep- Inc., San Francisco. For advances in neering, University of Wiscon- mann Professor of Aeronautics, and seismic design principles and prac- sin, Madison. For advancement of professor of bioinspired engineering, tices for buildings through research permanent magnet machines and California Institute of Technology, and development of codes and drives for transportation and indus- Pasadena. For contributions to fluid guidelines. trial applications. flow diagnostics and imagery, and Robert E. Henry, emeritus senior Milan M. Jovanovic, vice presi- engineering of bioinspired devices vice president and Regent Consul- dent of research and development, and phenomena. tant, Fauske & Associates LLC, Burr Delta Products Corp., Research Bernd Girod, Robert L. and Ridge, Illinois. For understanding Triangle Park, North Carolina. For Audrey S. Hancock Professor of and analysis of severe power reac- efficiency improvements of AC-DC Electrical Engineering; senior asso- tor accidents and their impact on power supplies in information tech- ciate dean, online learning and pro- design and accident management. nology systems. The 58 BRIDGE

Robert L. Kleinberg, Schlum- Samir Mitragotri, director, Cen- Junuthula N. Reddy, distin- berger Fellow, Schlumberger-Doll ter for Bioengineering, and professor guished professor, Regents’ Profes- Research, Cambridge, Massachu- of chemical engineering, University sor, and inaugural holder of the setts. For contributions to forma- of California, Santa Barbara. For Oscar S. Wyatt Jr. Endowed Chair tion evaluation and development of development, clinical translation, in Mechanical Engineering, Texas pulsed nuclear magnetic resonance and commercialization of transder- A&M University, College Station. logging. mal drug delivery systems. For contributions to composite John Klier, distinguished fellow George Kenneth Muellner, structures and to engineering educa- and global research and develop- vice chairman of the board, the tion and practice. ment director, polyurethanes and Aerospace Corp., El Segundo, L. Rafael Reif, president, Mas- automotive systems, Dow Chemical California. For leadership in the sachusetts Institute of Technology, Co., Midland, Michigan. For contri- research, design, and development Cambridge. For technical and edu- butions to novel coatings, polymer of advanced air and space vehicles. cational contributions and for uni- dispersions, and low volatile organic Kyle J. Myers, director, division versity leadership. compounds technologies. of imaging and applied mathemat- Virginia M. Rometty, chair, Leonard F. Konikow, scientist ics, Center for Devices and Radio- president, and chief executive offi- emeritus, US Geological Survey, logical Health, US Food and Drug cer, IBM Corp., Armonk, New York. Reston, Virginia. For modeling of Administration, Silver Spring, For strategic applications of systems coupled groundwater and surface Maryland. For development of engineering and leadership in devel- water flow and of solute transport in analytical and regulatory science opment of services science and its groundwater. methods for accuracy and safety of application to business processes. Ellen J. Kullman, chair and chief medical imaging devices. Daniela Rus, Andrew (1956) and executive officer, E.I. du Pont de Radia Perlman, Fellow, EMC Erna Viterbi Professor of Electrical Nemours and Co., Wilmington, Del- Corporation, Hopkinton, Massa- Engineering and Computer Science aware. For leadership in the business chusetts. For contributions to Inter- and director, Computer Science and growth and transformation of a glob- net routing and bridging protocols. Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, al science and engineering company. Dana Auburn Powers, senior sci- Massachusetts Institute of Technol- Philip Li-Fan Liu, Class of 1912 entist, nuclear energy and fuel cycle ogy, Cambridge. For contributions Professor in Engineering, and direc- programs, Sandia National Labora- to distributed robotic systems. tor of the School of Civil and Envi- tories, Albuquerque. For contribu- David J. Srolovitz, Joseph Bor- ronmental Engineering, Cornell tions to commercial nuclear power dogna Professor of Engineering University, Ithaca, New York. For plant safety worldwide and to radio- and Applied Science, University coastal engineering research, educa- active source-term processes. of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia. For tion, computer modeling, and lead- Clayton J. Radke, professor of theory and simulation of micro- ership for tsunami and wave damage. chemical engineering, University structure and properties of materi- Nils Lonberg, senior vice presi- of California, Berkeley. For under- als and leadership in computational dent, immuno-oncology and biolog- standing of mixed-wettability and materials engineering. ics discovery, Bristol-Myers Squibb, foam-enhanced oil recovery through Graeme L. Stephens, director, Redwood City, California. For thin film and pore-scale models. Center for Climate Sciences, Jet development of fully human mono- Guruswami Ravichandran, Propulsion Laboratory, California clonal antibody therapeutics using John E. Goode Jr. Professor of Institute of Technology, Pasadena. innovative transgenic expression Aerospace, professor of mechani- For elucidation of Earth’s cloud sys- systems. cal engineering, and director, tem and radiation balance. Brian McClendon, vice president Graduate Aerospace Laboratories, Virginia C. Sulzberger, retired of engineering, Google Inc., Moun- California Institute of Technol- director of engineering, North tain View, California. For strategic, ogy, Pasadena. For contributions to American Electric Reliability Corp., technical, and managerial leader- mechanics of dynamic deformation, Livingston, New Jersey. For leader- ship resulting in widespread accurate damage, and failure of engineering ship and development of electric and useful geographic information. materials. power system reliability standards. SPRING 2015 59

Richard Szeliski, distinguished leadership of defense communica- understanding of stochastic systems scientist, Microsoft Corp., Red- tion systems. and their applications in engineer- mond, Washington. For contribu- Norman J. Wagner, Robert L. ing and service operations. tions to computer vision, computer Pigford Chair of Chemical Engi- Ajit P. Yoganathan, Regents’ graphics, and interactive image and neering, College of Engineering, and Professor, Wallace H. Coulter Dis- video rendering. joint professor, Department of Phys- tinguished Faculty Chair in Bio- Gabor C. Temes, professor, Elec- ics and Astronomy, University of medical Engineering, and director, trical Engineering and Computer Delaware, Newark. For understand- Center for Innovative Cardiovas- Science Department, Oregon State ing flow-induced microstructural cular Technologies, Georgia Insti- University, Corvallis. For contribu- transitions in complex liquids and tute of Technology, Atlanta. For tions to analog signal processing and invention of ballistic-resistant fab- improvements in the biomechanics engineering education. rics by strain-hardening suspensions. of prosthetic heart valves and the Doros N. Theodorou, professor Mark R. Wiesner, James L. development of heart repair devices. of chemical engineering, National Meriam Professor of Civil and Envi- Technical University of Athens, ronmental Engineering, and direc- New Foreign Members Greece. For statistical-mechanical- tor, Center for the Environmental Patrick Couvreur, professor and based strategies and simulation Implications of Nanotechnology, director, Physical Chemistry, Phar- algorithms to predict the structure Duke University, Durham, North maceutical Technology, and Bio- and properties of polymers and Carolina. For contributions to pharmacy Laboratory, University zeolites. membrane technologies for water of Paris-Sud (Paris-XI), Châtenay- Michael J. Todd, Leon C. Welch treatment and understanding of Malabry, France. For advances in Professor, School of Operations environmental behavior and risk of nanomedicine and commercializa- Research and Information Engi- nanomaterials. tion of targeted nanotechnology neering, Cornell University, Ithaca, Eric F. Wood, Susan Dod Brown systems for cancer treatment. New York. For contributions to the Professor of Civil and Environmen- R. Allan Freeze, president, R. theory and application of algorithms tal Engineering, Princeton Univer- Allan Freeze Engineering Inc., for continuous optimization. sity, New Jersey. For development White Rock, British Columbia, Gavin P. Towler, vice president of land surface models and use of Canada. For numerical modeling, and chief technology officer, UOP remote sensing for hydrologic mod- stochastic subsurface hydrology, risk LLC (a Honeywell company), Des eling and prediction. assessment, and optimization for Plaines, Illinois. For process designs James J. Wynne, program man- groundwater engineering. for commercial petrochemicals and ager, local education outreach, Lynn F. Gladden, pro-vice-chan- for leadership in refining and chem- Thomas J. Watson Research Center, cellor for research and Shell Professor ical research. IBM Corp., Yorktown Heights, New of Chemical Engineering, Universi- Michael Tsapatsis, professor York. For co-invention of excimer ty of Cambridge, United Kingdom. and Amundson Chair in Chemical laser surgery for vision corrective For contributions to chemical reac- Engineering and Materials Science, procedures. tor engineering through the unique- University of Minnesota, Minne- Vigor Yang, William R.T. Oakes ly specific application of magnetic apolis. For design and synthesis of Professor and chair, School of Aero- resonance imaging. zeolite-based materials for selective space Engineering, Georgia Insti- Graeme John Jameson, Laureate separation and reaction. tute of Technology, Atlanta. For Professor of Chemical Engineering Harry L. Van Trees, profes- contributions to combustion physics and director, Centre for Multiphase sor emeritus and director emeritus, in propulsion systems and to aero- Processes, University of Newcastle, Center of Excellence in Command, space engineering education. New South Wales, Australia. For Control, Communications, Com- David D. Yao, Piyasombat- development of innovative flota- puting, and Intelligence, George kul Family Professor and profes- tion technology for advanced min- Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia. sor of industrial engineering and eral processing. For contributions to detection, esti- operations research, Columbia Amable Liñán, professor emeri- mation, and modulation theory and University, New York City. For tus, motor propulsion and thermal The 60 BRIDGE fluid dynamics, School of Aero- David A. Nethercot, emeritus Center, IBM Corp., Yorktown nautical Engineering, Polytechnic professor of civil engineering, Impe- Heights, New York. For contri- University of Madrid, Spain. For dis- rial College London, United King- butions to silicon-on-insulator coveries using asymptotic analyses in dom. For contributions to structural complementary metal-oxide semi- combustion and for contributions to steel design and construction, and conductor (CMOS) technology. advance engineering science. for service to structural engineering M.C.M. (Mark) van Loosdrecht, Nelson Martins, assistant to the worldwide. professor and group leader, environ- director general and research con- Jens Kehlet Nørskov, Leland mental biotechnology, Delft Uni- sultant, electrical power systems, T. Edwards Professor of Engineer- versity of Technology, Den Haag, CEPEL, Brazilian Electrical Energy ing, professor of photon science, Netherlands. For the invention and Research Center, Rio de Janeiro. and director, SUNCAT Center for development of wastewater treat- For development of dynamic analy- Interface Science and Catalysis, ment systems for nutrient removal. sis software tools and techniques for Stanford University, California. For Martin Vetterli, professor, com- large electric power systems. theoretical approaches to design munication systems, Ecole Poly- Masayoshi Nakashima, profes- of heterogeneous catalysts, linking technique Fédérale de Lausanne, sor, Disaster Prevention Research reaction rates to microscopic cata- Switzerland. For development of Institute, Kyoto University, Japan. lyst properties. time-frequency representations and For large-scale dynamic testing of Ghavam Shahidi, IBM Fellow algorithms in multimedia signal pro- buildings that has advanced struc- and director of silicon technol- cessing and communications. tural earthquake engineering. ogy, Thomas J. Watson Research

NAE Members Receive One National Medal of Science and Four National Medals of Technology and Innovation

and innovators have expanded our understanding of the world, made invaluable contributions to their fields, and helped improve countless lives. Our nation has been enriched by their achievements and by all the scientists and technologists across America dedicated to discovery, inquiry, and invention.” Five NAE members were among the recipients of these prestigious awards. NAE member Thomas Kailath, Hitachi America Professor of Engi- neering Emeritus, Stanford Univer- sity, received the National Medal of Thomas Kailath, National Medal of Science Laureate. Science “for transformative contri- butions to the fields of information The 2012 National Medal of Sci- emony. The medals are the nation’s and system science, for distinctive ence Laureates and 2012 National highest honors for achievement and sustained mentoring of young Medal of Technology and Innova- and leadership in advancing the scholars, and for translation of sci- tion Laureates received their medals fields of science and technology. entific ideas into entrepreneurial from President Obama on Novem- In announcing the laureates, Presi- ventures that have had a significant ber 20, 2014, at a White House cer- dent Obama said, “These scholars impact on industry.” SPRING 2015 61

The National Medal of Technol- chemistry of zeolites, and molecular data in consumer electronics, mobile ogy and Innovation, which recog- sieve materials.” computing, and enterprise storage.” nizes those who have made lasting Thomas J. Fogarty, chair, direc- Cherry A. Murray, dean, Harvard contributions to America’s com- tor, and founder, Fogarty Institute University School of Engineering petitiveness and quality of life and for Innovation, was cited “for inno- and Applied Sciences, was honored helped strengthen the nation’s tech- vations in minimally invasive medi- “for contributions to the advance- nological workforce, was awarded to cal devices.” ment of devices telecommunica- four NAE members. Eli Harari, founder, retired chair, tions and the use of light for studying Edith M. Flanigen, retired fellow and CEO, SanDisk Corporation, matter, and for leadership in the and chemist, UOP LLC, received was recognized “for invention and development of the science, technol- the award “for innovations in the commercialization of flash storage ogy, engineering, and math (STEM) fields of silicate chemistry, the technology to enable ubiquitous workforce in the United States.”

Edith M. Flanigen, National Medal of Technology and Eli Harari, National Medal of Technology and Innovation Innovation Laureate. Laureate.

Thomas J. Fogarty, National Medal of Technology and Cherry A. Murray, National Medal of Technology and Innovation Laureate. Innovation Laureate. Photos courtesy of the National Science and Technology Medals Foundation. The 62 BRIDGE

NAE Newsmakers

The Optical Society (OSA) and the Professorship in Mining Engineer- on November 16. The Warren IEEE Photonics Society announced ing, named for Syd Peng, Charles E. K. Lewis Award recognizing con- that Paul Daniel Dapkus, W.M. Lawall Chair Emeritus. Peng hopes tributions to chemical engineer- Keck Distinguished Professor of the named professorship will “help ing education was awarded to L. Engineering at the University of attract and retain prominent schol- Gary Leal, Schlinger Professor of Southern California, is the recipient ars and/or promising scholars who Chemical Engineering, University of the 2015 John Tyndall Award, will continue to develop the depart- of California, Santa Barbara, “for one of the most prestigious recogni- ment to a higher level.” outstanding scholarship and aca- tions in the field of optics. Dapkus The Prince Sultan bin Abdulaziz demic leadership.” The William H. was selected for his “pioneering and International Prize for Water was Walker Award recognizing excel- sustained contributions to the devel- instituted to encourage scientists lence in contributions to chemical opment of metal organic chemical and researchers to make contribu- engineering literature was awarded vapor deposition and high perfor- tions to international efforts to to Gregory Stephanopoulos, W.H. mance quantum well semiconduc- preserve water resources. The prize Dow Professor of Chemical Engi- tor lasers.” The award recognizes an has five categories. In a colorful cer- neering, Massachusetts Institute individual who has made pioneer- emony in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, on of Technology, “for advancing the ing, highly significant, or continuing December 15, 2014, William W-G. fundamental chemical engineering technical or leadership contribu- Yeh, Richard G. Newman AECOM science supporting metabolic engi- tions to fiber-optics technology. Distinguished Professor of Civil neering as an enabling technology On November 24, 2014, Presi- Engineering, University of Califor- for the production of pharmaceu- dent Barack Obama presented the nia, Los Angeles, was awarded the tical and chemical products from Presidential Medal of Freedom to Water Management and Protection renewable resources.” The Award Mildred S. Dresselhaus, Institute Prize “for developing optimization for Service to Society, recogniz- Professor of Electrical Engineering models to plan, manage and operate ing outstanding contributions by a and Physics, Massachusetts Institute large-scale water resources systems chemical engineer to community of Technology, at a White House throughout the world.” service and to the solution of social- ceremony. The 27th International Min- ly oriented problems, was awarded Robert S. Langer, David H. Koch eral Processing Congress honored to Adam Heller, research professor, Institute Professor at the Massa- Roe-Hoan Yoon, University Dis- University of Texas at Austin, “for chusetts Institute of Technology, tinguished Professor, Virginia Tech, life contributions of medical prod- has been awarded the 2015 Queen with its 2014 Lifetime Achieve- ucts that have helped hundreds of Elizabeth Prize for Engineering for ment Award. Yoon was selected for thousands of patients suffering from his revolutionary advances and lead- his decades of work in fine particle diabetes and other diseases.” The ership in engineering at the inter- recovery and associated environ- Founders Award for Outstand- face with chemistry and medicine. mental benefits; his award lecture ing Contributions to the Field of He was the first person to engineer at the conference in Santiago was Chemical Engineering is presented polymers to control the delivery of titled “From Science to Design of to engineers who have had a pro- large molecular weight drugs for the Flotation Circuit Design.” found impact on the way chemical treatment of diseases such as can- The American Institute of engineering is practiced and whose cer and mental illness. The prize is Chemical Engineers (AIChE) pre- achievements have advanced the a £1 million award that celebrates sented its most prestigious awards profession in any of its aspects. Stu- engineers responsible for a ground- honoring eminent chemical engi- art Cooper, professor and chair of breaking innovation of global ben- neers for career accomplishments, the Department of Chemical and efit to humanity. service to society, and service to the Biomolecular Engineering at the West Virginia University has Institute at the 2014 Annual Meet- Ohio State University, received established the Syd and Felicia Peng ing Honors Ceremony in Atlanta the award “for innovative research, SPRING 2015 63

influential publications, strong and glassy water, and the theory of emy of Inventors at the California administrative leadership, effective hydrophobicity; and for a broad Institute of Technology in Pasade- mentoring of students and faculty, range of engineering applications of na. Fellows will be presented with and outstanding professional ser- these fundamental advances. He also a special trophy, newly designed vice.” The MAC Eminent Chemi- was honored for his inspired author- medal, and rosette pin in honor of cal Engineers Award was presented ship of groundbreaking articles and a their outstanding accomplishments. to Babatunde A. Ogunnaike, Wil- landmark textbook, for his talent in NAE members selected for induc- liam L. Friend Chaired Professor and commitment to education and tion are Ilhan A. Aksay, professor and dean, College of Engineering, mentorship, and for his dedicated of chemical and biological engineer- University of Delaware. Edward and multifaceted administrative ing, Princeton University; Jan P. L. Cussler, Distinguished Insti- service to his department, engineer- Allebach, Hewlett-Packard Distin- tute Professor, University of Min- ing school, university, and profes- guished Professor of Electrical and nesota, was awarded the Institute sion in ways that have profoundly Computer Engineering, Purdue Uni- Lecturer Award. Kristi S. Ans- shaped the education and careers of versity; Frances H. Arnold, Dick eth, Distinguished Professor and his students and peers. Also at the and Barbara Dickinson Professor of Howard Hughes Medical Institute conference, John White, chancellor Chemical Engineering, California Investigator, University of Colo- emeritus and Distinguished Profes- Institute of Technology; Nadine rado Boulder, received the Food, sor of Industrial Engineering at the N. Aubry, dean of engineering, Pharmaceutical, and Bioengineer- University of Arkansas, received Northeastern University; Joseph J. ing Division Award in Chemical the National Engineering Economy Beaman Jr., professor of mechani- Engineering. Antonios G. Mikos, Teaching Excellence Award, in cal engineering, University of Texas Louis Calder Professor of Bioengi- recognition of his accomplishments at Austin; Robert A. Brown, presi- neering, Rice University, was hon- as a scholar, administrator, and dent, Boston University; A. Robert ored as an AIChE Fellow. AIChE teacher. During his distinguished Calderbank, professor of computer also presented the newly renamed 50-year career, he coauthored three science, electrical engineering, and Andreas Acrivos Award for Pro- engineering economy textbooks and mathematics, Duke University; fessional Progress in Chemical taught over 4,000 students, both James J. Coleman, Distinguished Engineering, which recognizes sig- nationally and internationally. Chair, Erik Jonsson School of Engi- nificant contribution to the science Election to National Academy neering and Computer Science, of chemical engineering through of Inventors (NAI) Fellow status University of Texas at Dallas; Harold theoretical discoveries, the devel- is a high professional distinction G. Craighead, Charles W. Lake opment of new processes, products, accorded to academic inventors who Jr. Professor of Engineering, Cor- or inventions, and other forms of have demonstrated a highly prolific nell University; Mark E. Dean, distinguished service. spirit of innovation in creating or research chair, University of Ten- On June 16, 2014, at the annual facilitating outstanding inventions nessee, Knoxville; Russell D. conference of the American Society that have made a tangible impact Dupuis, professor of electrical and of Engineering Education, Pablo G. on quality of life, economic devel- computer engineering and Steve Debenedetti, Class of 1950 Professor opment, and the welfare of society. W. Chaddick Endowed Chair in in Engineering and Applied Science, They are named inventors on US Electro-Optics, Georgia Institute professor of chemical and biological patents and were nominated by their of Technology; Elazer R. Edelman, engineering, and dean for research at peers for outstanding contributions Thomas D. and Virginia W. Cabot Princeton University, received the to innovation in areas such as pat- Professor of Health Sciences and Benjamin Garver Lamme Award. ents and licensing, innovative dis- Technology, Massachusetts Insti- It was presented in recognition of covery and technology, significant tute of Technology; J. Gary Eden, his fundamental contributions to impact on society, and support and Gilmore Family Professor of Elec- modern engineering thermodynam- enhancement of innovation. NAI trical and Computer Engineering, ics/statistical mechanics, notably to Fellows will be inducted on March University of Illinois at Urbana- the understanding of the liquid state, 20, 2015, as part of the 4th Annual Champaign; Stephen R. Forrest, the thermodynamics of super-cooled Conference of the National Acad- professor of electrical engineering & The 64 BRIDGE computer science, physics, and neering, Franklin W. Olin College sity of Central Florida; Gordana materials science & engineer- of Engineering; Brij M. Moudgil, Vunjak-Novakovic, Mikati Foun- ing, University of Michigan; Elsa Distinguished Professor of Materials dation Professor of Biomedical Engi- Garmire, Sydney E. Junkins 1887 Science and Engineering, University neering and professor of medical Professor of Engineering, Dart- of Florida; Jose M.F. Moura, Philip sciences, Columbia University. mouth College; Maurice P. Her- L. and Marsha Dowd University The National Inventors Hall lihy, professor of computer science, Professor, Carnegie Mellon Univer- of Fame, which celebrates the life- Brown University; Jeffrey A. Hub- sity; Shuji Nakamura, professor changing achievements of US pat- bell, Barry L. McLean Professor for of materials and of electrical and ent holders, welcomed three NAE Molecular Engineering Innovation computer engineering, University members on May 21, 2014: Fran- and Enterprise, University of Chi- of California, Santa Barbara; Shree ces H. Arnold, Dick and Barbara cago; Trevor O. Jones, president Nayar, T.C. Chang Professor of Dickinson Professor of Chemical and CEO, International Develop- Computer Science, Columbia Uni- Engineering, California Institute ment Corporation; Jay D. Keasling, versity; Babatunde A. Ogunnaike, of Technology; Mildred S. Dres- Hubbard Howe Jr. Distinguished William L. Friend Chaired Profes- selhaus, Institute Professor of Elec- Professor of Biochemical Engineer- sor and dean, University of Dela- trical Engineering and Physics, ing, University of California, Berke- ware; Nicholas A. Peppas, Fletcher Massachusetts Institute of Technol- ley; Juan C. Lasheras, Stanford and Stuckey Pratt Chair in Engineer- ogy; and Ashok J. Gadgil, director Beverly Penner Professor of Applied ing, University of Texas at Austin; and faculty senior scientist, EETD, Sciences, University of Califor- Victor L. Poirier, professor, Insti- University of California Lawrence nia, San Diego; Asad M. Madni, tute for Advanced Discovery and Berkeley Laboratory. retired president, chief operating Innovation, University of South Four NAE members have been officer, and CTO, BEI Technologies Florida; Rebecca R. Richards- elected International Fellows of Inc.; Carver A. Mead, Gordon and Kortum, Stanley C. Moore Pro- the Royal Academy of Engineer- Betty Moore Professor of Engineer- fessor of Bioengineering, Rice ing: William F. Baker, partner, ing and Applied Science, Emeritus, University; B. Don Russell Jr., Dis- Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP; California Institute of Technology; tinguished Professor, Regents Pro- Thomas D. O’Rourke, Thomas R. Antonios G. Mikos, Louis Calder fessor, and Harry E. Bovay Endowed Briggs Professor of Engineering, Cor- Professor of Bioengineering and Chair Professor, Department of nell University; Richard F. Rashid, Chemical and Biomolecular Engi- Electrical and Computer Engi- chief research officer, Applications neering, Rice University; Jan D. neering, Texas A&M University; and Services Group, Microsoft Cor- Miller, Ivor Thomas Distinguished Marwan A. Simaan, Florida 21st poration; and Andrew J. Viterbi, Professor of Metallurgy, University of Century Chair and Distinguished Presidential Chair Professor, Uni- Utah; Richard K. Miller, president Professor of Electrical Engineering versity of Southern California, and and professor of mechanical engi- and Computer Science, Univer- cofounder, Qualcomm.

2014 EU-US Frontiers of Engineering Hosted by Boeing in Seattle

On November 10–12, 2014, the nizational support for the EU side Dr. Yves Caseau, head of the Digi- fourth EU-US Frontiers of Engineer- provided by the National Academy tal Agency of the AXA Group, was ing symposium was hosted by the of Technologies of France (NATF). cochair for the EU side. Boeing Company at the Fairmont NAE member Christodoulos Flou- The meeting brought together Olympic Hotel in Seattle. NAE das, Stephen C. Macaleer ’63 Pro- approximately 60 engineers, ages partnered with the European Coun- fessor in Engineering and Applied 30–45, from US and European uni- cil of Applied Sciences, Technolo- Science in the Department of versities, companies, and govern- gies, and Engineering (Euro-CASE) Chemical Engineering at Princeton ment labs for a 2½-day meeting to to carry out the event with orga- University, served as US cochair; discuss leading-edge developments SPRING 2015 65

EU-US FOE participants toured Boeing’s Everett plant. Photo courtesy of Boeing. in four topics: Smart Homes, Ener- nect smart home objects to the gies that could transform chemical gy Storage Across Scales, Atoms cloud, with a brief review of current production and fuels. The first two to Airplanes: Designer/Engineered wireless technologies; a new gen- talks addressed battery technolo- Aerospace Materials, and Protein eration of (1) electricity and water gies. One presenter discussed bat- Design for Therapeutic and Biotech sensing systems that can provide teries for grid-scale energy storage, Applications. In addition to the consumption data for each appli- with a focus on using the chemical United States, participants attend- ance or device from single sensing compound Prussian blue to meet the ed from 10 EU countries: Belgium, points and (2) low-power wireless challenges of both power and energy the Czech Republic, Denmark, Fin- sensors that use the electrical wir- applications. The next talk con- land, France, Germany, Italy, Lux- ing in a building as an antenna to cerned the role of novel materials embourg, Norway, and the United increase range and lower the power for battery separators in improving Kingdom. consumption of wireless sensors; the thermal stability of Li-ion bat- The session on Smart Homes smart environments for decision teries to enhance safety and energy covered recent developments in support in health care; and the link and power density. The second half miniature sensors, wireless sensors, between smart home technologies of the session concerned chemical and mobile computing and the and greater energy efficiency and energy storage technologies, with associated opportunities to instru- sustainability. talks on (1) options for hydrogen ment homes with systems that The transition of energy systems production and engineering chal- can use information about human from fossil to renewable sources lenges for the dynamic operation of behavior to support improvements presents many challenges, particu- chemical processes linked to inter- in everyday life. The speakers larly the intermittency of renewable mittent energy sources, and (2) the described emerging smart home energy, which requires large reserves use of biogenic feedstocks to synthe- technologies and provided their of energy storage. Speakers in the size suitable fuels as liquid energy perspectives on how these tech- session on Energy Storage across storage systems. nologies could transform homes Scales described the potential of Aerospace engineers strive to find from passive living spaces to inter- new battery innovations and their the right materials and manufactur- active, supportive environments. role in the coming decade as well as ing processes for airplanes to make Talks highlighted radio system the untapped potential and scope of them lighter, stronger, more durable, requirements to ubiquitously con- chemical energy storage technolo- and easy to manufacture. Presen- The 66 BRIDGE tations in the Atoms to Airplanes catalyzed by naturally occurring advances brought about by the use session described key components biocatalysts, their applications, and of composites, concurrent technolo- of this endeavor: multifunctional their impact on a sustainable future; gies driven by new materials devel- materials development (e.g., nano- new concepts and software tools opment, and what needs to be done enhanced composites and intel- for efficient and rational design to accelerate understanding and ligent materials with embedded of enzymes for biotechnological use of those materials. He closed by sensors), advanced manufacturing applications; and efforts to redesign emphasizing the critical need for a technology, and multiscale simu- biological systems—to understand skilled workforce and technology lation. The speakers reported on spatial and temporal regulation of pioneers to continue innovation efforts to harness the unique prop- the fundamental processes of life— in aerospace materials—something erties of nanoscale graphene struc- and impacts on control of kinase needed in all fields of engineering. tures to develop multifunctional activity in living cells. Financial support for the sympo- composite structures; the use of cel- A poster session on the first after- sium was provided by The Boeing lular architectures across scales to noon served as both an icebreaker Company, The Grainger Founda- develop a new class of lightweight and an opportunity for participants tion, US National Science Founda- materials with unprecedented struc- to share information about their tion, NATF, and various sponsors of tural properties; progress and chal- research and technical work. On EU attendees’ travel. lenges in the modeling of composite the second afternoon the group was The next EU-US FOE will be material fractures across scales; and privileged to have a VIP tour of Boe- held October 16–18, 2016, in Fin- the possible development of highly ing’s Everett plant, the largest build- land, with the Technology Academy novel designs from the emergence ing in the world by volume, where Finland taking on the organizational of integrated multiscale modeling Boeing’s 747s, 767s, 777s, and the role for the EU side. Chris Floudas methodology for aircraft. new 787 Dreamliner are assembled. will continue as US cochair of the In the past decade protein design This was followed by a stop at the organizing committee, and Harri has seen important methodologi- Museum of Flight where attendees Kulmala, chief executive officer of cal advances—for example, in viewed exhibits of 150 historic air- the Finnish Metals and Engineering the redesign of natural enzymes to and spacecraft and other aviation Competence Cluster in Tampere, extend their fields of application artifacts before having dinner in the will serve as EU cochair. and the design of novel proteins museum’s Red Barn, Boeing’s origi- NAE has been hosting an annual from scratch—and these technolo- nal manufacturing plant. US Frontiers of Engineering meet- gies have been integrated in rational The dinner speaker on the first ing since 1995. For more informa- engineering approaches for thera- evening was Dr. Greg Hyslop, vice tion about the symposium series peutic purposes. president and general manager of or to nominate an outstanding The final session of the meet- Boeing Research and Technol- engineer to participate in future ing, Protein Design for Therapeutic ogy. In his presentation, “Driving Frontiers meetings, contact Janet and Biotech Applications, included Innovation: The Future of Mate- Hunziker at the NAE Program three presentations on the design rials Development,” he outlined Office at [email protected]. of novel enzymes for reactions not the history of aerospace materials, SPRING 2015 67

A Message from NAE Vice President Corale Brierley

the public about the benefits and out these important funds, the NAE opportunities engineering presents would not have a solid foundation to people and society. Annual unre- from which to sustain our activities stricted support reached almost $2.5 and impact. Here are a few high- million, including $1.5 million to the lights of 2014. NAE Independent Fund—the over- whelming majority of it from NAE 50th Anniversary members. The number of donors In 2011, under the leadership of grew 9%, from 722 in 2013 to 786, Chuck Vest, the NAE embarked while at the same time sustaining the on a four-year fundraising effort to Corale Brierley 2014 annual member giving partici- celebrate 50 years of engineering pation rate at a high point of 30%. leadership and service to the nation. I was delighted to begin my tenure as Private funds not only provide We also used the occasion of the NAE vice president last July, and am core support for the NAE each year 50th Anniversary to raise aware- happy to report that 2014 was a suc- but allow us both to initiate new ness among the general public, cessful and productive fundraising projects that lack federal sponsor- and especially among students, of year. The year also marked the 50th ship and to expand the scope and engineering’s immense contribu- Anniversary of the NAE, culminat- impact of current programs. With- tions to society by launching the ing at the Annual Meeting, and the completion of our 50th Anniversary Campaign. The NAE relies heavily on philanthropy to provide almost 30% of the funding that enables the Academy to advance the well- being of the nation by promoting a vibrant engineering profession and providing independent advice to our nation. We sincerely appreciate your involvement, generosity, and continuous support! The spirited participation of our members—your generous ideas, time, and support—has always driven the NAE forward. Our members are vital to our success, by both making personal philan- thropic investments and serving as advocates for the NAE and the engineering profession to their communities—students, parents, educators, policymakers, business leaders, and the public locally, nationally, and globally. In 2014 the NAE raised over $7.4 million in new gifts and pledges to support our efforts to strengthen the engineering profession and engage The 68 BRIDGE

Engineering for You (E4U) video 2013, and 2014 to collectively give sary Campaign. We thank all the contest and commissioning a series $100,000 to enable a stronger, more donors who contributed so gener- of essays. The essays and the E4U proactive NAE. We are excited to ously to honor Chuck. (See pages contest winners were unveiled at report that over $300,000 was raised 75–76 for a full list of contributors.) the 2014 Annual Meeting and 50th for this challenge and the giving Thank you to everyone who Celebration, and received very posi- participation rate from the three contributed to the 50th Anniver- tive feedback. The Annual Meeting classes was 37%. Many thanks to sary Campaign and to our success. also had record attendance and par- Ursula and the members who joined Through your support, the NAE is in ticularly engaging speakers. in this initiative and assisted with an enhanced position to strengthen The occasion of our 50th Anni- our 50th Anniversary goal of 50% its voice on national policy; work versary also highlighted the impor- giving participation. to increase the number, quality, tant role of donors in the success and diversity of engineering gradu- of the NAE. As noted above, Charles M. Vest President’s ates; advance our quality of life; and approximately 30% of our annual Opportunity Fund enhance national capacity for inno- budget comes from private funds, As Chuck’s term as president was vation and global competitiveness. If and approximately 30% of you, our drawing to a close and in celebra- you have any questions or would like members, make a gift to the NAE tion of the 50th Anniversary, we to make a contribution to the NAE, each year. To build momentum for established the Charles M. Vest please contact Radka Nebesky at our giving program, we set several Opportunity Fund in 2012, to honor 202.334.3417 or [email protected]. ambitious fundraising goals around his presidency and his tireless efforts the theme of “50 for 50.” In 2012 in advocating for and promoting Outstanding Contributions we exceeded the Leadership goal of engineering. We were deeply sad- and Commitments securing 50 new gifts of $50,000 or dened to lose Chuck in December All contributions are greatly appre- more. By the end of 2013 we had 2013. I hope many of you were able ciated, and all of them make a differ- exceeded the goal of 50 new Golden to join us at the NAS Building on ence in the work of the NAE. The Bridge Society members. Sections 2, February 20, 2014, to celebrate his following gifts and commitments 4, 6, 8, and 12 met or surpassed the life and legacy. show extraordinary leadership and 50% giving participation goal for I’m pleased to report that $5 dedication to the Academy. Names the sections, and others were very million in gifts, pledges, and gift in bold are NAE members. close and have seen remarkable intentions were received for this • The Grainger Foundation improvement. Dedicated volunteers important fund in Chuck’s memory. pledged $3 million to support the from Sections 2, 3, 5, 8, 9, and 11 This past year, the fund helped sup- Frontiers of Engineering program stepped up to help—and spurred a port the EngineerGirl program and (FOE) and create The Grainger strong increase in their section’s par- some of the public understanding of Foundation FOE Grants, which ticipation—by personally encourag- engineering activities for the 50th help foster and enable new inter- ing their fellow section members Anniversary, including the E4U disciplinary collaboration among to make gifts in honor of the 50th. video contest. It will continue to FOE participants. And several corporate partners, list- supplement existing programs, seed ed on pages 81–83, helped celebrate new initiatives, and support explor- • Lockheed Martin Corporation this milestone by sponsoring some atory studies, as directed by future committed $1 million to sponsor of our 50th Anniversary activities. presidents, while at the same time the second Global Grand Chal- The graphs on page 67 illustrate our honoring Chuck and his work at lenges Summit, to be held in progress toward achieving the goals the NAE. This fund will empower China in September 2015. of our Anniversary Campaign. the NAE to be more proactive in • The NAE saw revocable and irre- leading and identifying initiatives vocable gift expectancies grow by Ursula Burns Challenge to benefit the nation and engi- $800,000, thanks to six members In 2014 Ursula Burns (’13), chair neering profession. Any gift to the who included the NAE in their and CEO of Xerox, challenged Vest President’s Opportunity Fund estate plans and/or as a beneficia- members of the classes of 2012, counted toward the 50th Anniver- ry of their retirement accounts. SPRING 2015 69

• Peter O’Donnell and the tion through a sustained dialogue • Raymond S. Stata (’92) con- O’Donnell Foundation contrib- among the emerging generation tributed close to $100,000 to the uted $500,000 to the Charles of innovative faculty. Since its NAE Independent Fund. M. Vest President’s Opportunity inception five years ago, FOEE Fund. has spurred the creation of a Loyal Donors community of engineering edu- Gifts made to the NAE year after • Irwin (’76) and Joan Jacobs cators whose innovative teaching year by our members and friends directed over $300,000 in 2014 methods are helping to improve demonstrate a steadfast commit- from their donor-advised fund at 21st century engineering educa- ment to our mission and work. As a the Jewish Community Founda- tion and strengthen our nation’s regular long-time donor to the NAE tion of San Diego to the Charles workforce. to support the work I so strongly M. Vest President’s Opportunity believe in, I am genuinely grateful Fund, bringing their total support • The United Engineering Fund to the people who have contributed of the Vest Fund to $1 million. (UEF) committed nearly for 20 years or more. Please see pag- $150,000 for a worldwide crowd- • The Charles Stark Draper Labo- es 76–77 for the complete list. sourcing competition called “The ratory provided over $300,000 for Private funds now make up almost Next MacGyver.” The project is expenses associated with award- a third of the NAE’s yearly budget. seeking ideas for a scripted tele- ing and presenting the Charles Simply put, we would not be able to vision show featuring a female Stark Draper Prize for Engineer- operate without them. Your support engineer character in a leading ing and in sponsorship of the 50th is essential not only in providing role. The goal of the competi- Anniversary. core support but also in expanding tion is to create a historic TV the scope and impact of current • ExxonMobil Corporation pro- series that inspires young peo- projects and initiating new ones. vided $250,000 to fund the next ple, especially women, to pursue On behalf of the NAE Council video contest, called Engineer- careers in engineering. Teaming and president Dan Mote, I thank ing for You 2 (E4U2), to engage up with the University of South- you for your participation in the young people in learning about ern California’s Viterbi School of 50th Anniversary Campaign and the opportunities engineering can Engineering (USC Viterbi), in throughout 2014. Our generous provide to people and society by collaboration with the MacGyver members, friends, partner corpo- addressing the Grand Challenges Foundation and Lee Zlotoff (cre- rations, foundations, government for Engineering. The deadline to ator of the popular TV series sponsors, and other supporters make enter was March 2, 2015. Win- MacGyver), the competition all the difference in our ability to ners will be announced at the was launched during the 2015 positively impact our world and to 2015 annual meeting. National Engineers Week and continue advocating for engineer- has received significant national • John F. McDonnell, member ing. I am deeply grateful for your and international press coverage of the Presidents’ Circle, and generosity, continued involvement, (Good Morning America, NPR, the JSM Charitable Trust gave and unwavering support of the the Los Angeles Times, New York $250,000 to the Frontiers of NAE mission. Times, ABC news, and Washing- Engineering Education sympo- I look forward to getting to know ton Post, among many others). sia in 2014, bringing their total more of our dedicated and generous support of the program to $1 mil- • Council member Fran Ligler members, donors, and staff as we lion. The FOEE program brings (’05) and her husband George work together to secure resources for together some of the nation’s have committed $100,000 for a the NAE’s important work. most engaged and innovative matching gift challenge over five engineering educators in order years to encourage current and to recognize, reward, and pro- future NAE Section 2 members mote effective, substantive, and to support the academy. inspirational engineering educa- The 70 BRIDGE

2014 Honor Roll of Donors

Annual Giving Societies The National Academy of Engineering gratefully acknowledges the following members and friends who made chari- table contributions to the NAE, and those NAE members who supported the Committee on Human Rights, a joint committee of the three academies during 2014. The collective, private philanthropy of these individuals has a great impact on the NAE and its ability to be a national voice for engineering. We acknowledge contributions made as per- sonal gifts or as gifts facilitated by the donor through a donor-advised fund, matching gift program, or family foundation. Ursula Burns (’13), Chair and CEO of Xerox, generously gave $100,000 to the NAE in celebration of the 50th Anniversary and to encourage philanthropy among newer NAE members. She challenged members of the classes of 2012, 2013, and 2014 to collectively give $100,000 to enable a stronger, more proactive NAE. The members who participated in the Burns Challenge are noted with the ◊ symbol.

Catalyst Society

$100,000 to $500,000 Joan and Irwin Jacobs Asta* and William W. Friends Mary and Howard* Kehrl Lang John F. McDonnell Raymond S. Stata Peter O’Donnell, Jr.

$50,000 to $99,999 Bharati and Murty James O. Ellis, Jr.◊ Jonathan J. Rubinstein John C. Wall Bhavaraju◊ Elisabeth Paté-Cornell David E. Shaw◊ Ken Q. Xie◊

Rosette Society

$25,000 to $49,999 Olivia and Peter Farrell◊ Asad M., Gowhartaj, and Jaya and Venky Richard P. Simmons George and Ann Fisher Jamal Madni Narayanamurti Arnold and Constance Kent Kresa Clayton Daniel and Richard F. and Terri W. Stancell Patricia L. Mote Rashid Gary and Diane Tooker

Challenge Society

$10,000 to $24,999 Gordon Bell Dotty and Gordon Michael W. Hunkapiller Roberto Padovani Daniel and Frances Berg England◊ Ray R. Irani◊ Larry* and Carol Papay Becky and Tom Bergman Nan and Chuck Geschke Jane and Norman N. Li Simon Ramo Barry W. Boehm Martin E. and Lucinda Frances and George Ligler Henry M. Rowan Lewis M. Branscomb Glicksman Robin K. and Rose M. Henry and Susan Samueli Lenore and Rob Robert W. Gore McGuire Maxine L. Savitz Briskman◊ John O. Hallquist Narayana Murthy and David B. and Virginia H. Lance and Susan Davis Hugh D. Hibbitt◊ Sudha Murty Spencer◊ Nicholas M. Donofrio Chad and Ann Holliday John Neerhout, Jr.

◊ Ursula Burns Challenge *Deceased SPRING 2015 71

Charlotte and Morris James M. and Ellen James A. Trainham and Ghebre E. Tzeghai◊ Tanenbaum Weston Tien Linda D. Waters Adrian Zaccaria Elias A. Zerhouni◊ Charter Society

$1,000 to $9,999 Linda M. Abriola James A. Brierley Carl de Boor Huajian Gao◊ Rodney C. Adkins Andrei Z. Broder Pablo G. Debenedetti Donald P. Gaver Ronald J. Adrian Andrew Brown, Jr. Raymond F. Decker Arthur Gelb Alice Merner Agogino John H. Bruning Thomas B. Deen Arthur and Helen John L. Anderson George* and Virginia Robert H. Dennard Geoffrion John C. Angus Bugliarello George E. Dieter Penny and Bill George,◊ Seta and Diran Apelian Ursula Burns◊ and Lloyd Daniel W. Dobberpuhl George Family Frank F. Aplan Bean Earl H. Dowell Foundation Kenneth E. Arnold Xianghong Cao Elisabeth M. Drake Louis V. Gerstner, Jr. Wm. Howard Arnold Federico Capasso Robert M. Drake, Jr. Paul H. Gilbert Thomas W. Asmus Stuart K. Card James J. Duderstadt Richard D. Gitlin Kamla and Bishnu S. Atal François J. Castaing Susan T. Dumais Eduardo D. Glandt Daniel and Monica Corbett Caudill Robert and Cornelia Earnest F. Gloyna Atkins◊ Sigrid and Vint Cerf Eaton Arthur L. and Vida F. David Atlas Selim A. Chacour Thomas F. Edgar◊ Goldstein Nadine Aubry Jean-Lou A. Chameau Charles Elachi Mary L. Good Ken Austin Chau-Chyun Chen Farouk El-Baz Joseph W. Goodman Wanda M. Austin Josephine Cheng Iraj Ershaghi◊ W. David Goodyear◊ Arthur B. Baggeroer Stephen Z.D. Cheng James L. Everett III Paul E. Gray William F. Baker Weng C. Chew◊ Robert R. Everett Hermann K. Gummel Martin Balser◊ Sunlin Chou Thomas E. Everhart John C. Hancock Margaret K. Banks◊ Uma Chowdhry James A. Fay James S. Harris, Jr. James E. Barger Richard M. Christensen Robert E. Fenton Kenneth E. Haughton Harrison H. and John and Assia Cioffi Gregory L. Fenves◊ Janina and Siegfried Catherine C. Barrett◊ Philip R. Clark Katherine W. Ferrara◊ Hecker Forest Baskett III G. Wayne Clough Leroy M. Fingerson Robert W. Hellwarth Craig H. Benson◊ James J. Coleman◊ Tobie and Daniel J.* Fink Larry L. Hench Leo L. Beranek Joseph M. Colucci Bruce A. Finlayson Chris T. Hendrickson Howard Bernstein◊ Harry M. Conger Anthony E. Fiorato John L. Hennessy Peter J. Bethell◊ Stuart L. Cooper Robert E. Fischell Narain G. Hingorani Lorenz T. Biegler◊ Ross and Stephanie Edith M. Flanigen David and Susan Hodges Mark P. Board◊ Corotis Samuel C. Florman Lester A. Hoel Mark T. Bohr Gary L. Cowger Robert C. and Marilyn G. Urs Hölzle◊ Rudolph Bonaparte Alan W. Cramb◊ Forney Edward E. Hood, Jr. Dushan Boroyevich◊ Natalie W. Crawford Heather and Gordon Leroy E. Hood Paul F. Boulos◊ Robert L. Crippen◊ Forward Edward E. Horton Kathleen and H. Kent Steven L. Crouch◊ Curtis W. Frank◊ John R. Howell Bowen Glen T. Daigger William L. and Mary Kay John R. Huff◊ Craig T. Bowman◊ David E. Daniel Friend J. Stuart Hunter Stephen P. Boyd◊ Ruth A. David Douglas W. Fuerstenau Mary Jane Irwin Corale L. Brierley L. Berkley Davis Theodore V. Galambos Kenji Ishihara

◊ Ursula Burns Challenge *Deceased The 72 BRIDGE

Leah H. Jamieson Thomas and Caroline Bradford W. and Virginia Jan C. Schilling◊ George W. Jeffs Maddock W. Parkinson John H. Schmertmann Barry C. Johnson Artur Mager Claire L. Parkinson Ronald V. Schmidt David W. Johnson, Jr. Arunava Majumdar Neil E. Paton Henry G. Schwartz, Jr. Michael R. Johnson George C. Maling, Jr. John H. Perepezko Lyle H. Schwartz G. Frank Joklik Henrique S. Malvar◊ Thomas K. Perkins Charles L. Seitz Anita K. Jones Hans Mark Pete Petit Martin B. and Beatrice E. James W. Jones◊ David A. Markle Emil Pfender Sherwin Chanrashekhar Joshi◊ W. Allen Marr Craig E. Philip◊ Daniel P. Siewiorek Norman P. Jouppi◊ Robert D. Maurer Julia M. Phillips Krishna P. Singh◊ David L. Joyce◊ Dan Maydan William P. Pierskalla Alvy R. Smith Eric W. Kaler Jyotirmoy Mazumder◊ Franz F. Pischinger Alfred Z. Spector and Paul and Julie Kaminski Larry V. McIntire Stephen M. Pollock Rhonda G. Kost Melvin F. Kanninen Kishor C. Mehta H. Vincent Poor Robert F. and Lee S. John and Wilma Edward W. Merrill◊ William F. Powers Sproull Kassakian Richard A. Meserve Donald E. Procknow Jery R. Stedinger◊ Jon E. Khachaturian Robert M. Metcalfe◊ William R. Pulleyblank Richard J. Stegemeier Diana S. and Michael D. R.K. Michel Henry H. Rachford, Jr. Gunter Stein King James J. Mikulski Prabhakar Raghavan Gregory Stephanopoulos James L. Kirtley Richard B. Miles Doraiswami Ramkrishna Kenneth E. Stinson Geraldine Knatz◊ Richard K. Miller Ekkehard Ramm William D. Strecker Albert S. Kobayashi Charles A. Mistretta◊ Bhakta B. Rath Ivan E. Sutherland Robert M. and Pauline W. James K. and Holly T. Buddy D. Ratner John and Janet Swanson Koerner Mitchell Raj Reddy James M. Symons Charles E. Kolb, Jr.◊ Nandita and Sanjit K. Kenneth and Martha Eva Tardos Demetrious Koutsoftas Mitra Reifsnider Ratan N. Tata◊ Lester C.* and Joan M. John A. Montgomery◊ Gintaras V. Reklaitis George Tchobanoglous Krogh Edward and Stephanie Eli Reshotko Matthew V. Tirrell David J. Kuck Moses Thomas J. Richardson John J. Tracy◊ Thomas F. Kuech Cherry A. Murray Ronald L. Rivest Richard H. Truly Richard T. Lahey, Jr. Dale and Marge* Myers Anne and Walt Robb A. Galip Ulsoy Louis J. Lanzerotti Cynthia J. and Norman A. Richard J. and Bonnie B. Raymond Viskanta Cato and Cynthia Nadel Robbins Thomas H. Vonder Haar Laurencin Albert Narath Bernard I. Robertson Robert and Robyn Enrique J. Lavernia◊ David Nash C. Paul Robinson Wagoner Hau L. Lee Robert M. and Marilyn R. Thomas E. Romesser John E. Warnock Raphael Lee◊ and Kathy Nerem Alton D. Romig, Jr. Darsh T. Wasan Kelley Robert E. Nickell* Howard B. Rosen Michael S. Waterman◊ James U. Lemke Paul D. Nielsen Murray W. Rosenthal Julia and Johannes Ronald K. Leonard William D. Nix William B. Russel Weertman Frederick J. Leonberger Ronald and Joan Andrew P. Sage Robert J. Weimer Burn-Jeng Lin Nordgren Vinod K. Sahney Andrés Weintraub Jack E. Little Matthew O’Donnell Steven B. Sample Pohorille◊ Robert G. Loewy Susan and Franklin M. John M. Samuels, Jr. Robert M. and Mavis E. Gerald H. Luttrell◊ Orr, Jr. Linda S. Sanford White Lester L. Lyles Kwadwo Osseo-Asare Robert E. Schafrik◊ Willis S. White, Jr. William J. MacKnight Bernhard O. Palsson Richard Scherrer Sheila E. Widnall

◊ Ursula Burns Challenge *Deceased SPRING 2015 73

Sharon L. Wood◊ William W-G. Yeh Mary Lou and Mark D. Neil and Natasha Chriss Herbert H. Woodson Yannis C. Yortsos Zoback Marilyn Heebner Edgar S. Woolard, Jr. A. Thomas Young Stacey I. Zones◊ Evelyn S. Jones Richard N. Wright William and Sherry Young Isabelle M. Katzer Wm. A. Wulf Zarem Foundation Friends Douglas Larson Israel J. Wygnanski Xingdong Zhang◊ Jo F. Berg Toby Wolf Beverly and Loring Wyllie Steven J. Zinkle◊ Kristine L. Bueche Anonymous

Other Individual Donors

Hiroyuki Abe Alfred Blumstein Esther M. Conwell* Essex E. Finney, Jr. H. Norman Abramson F. Peter Boer Richard W. Couch, Jr. Millard and Barbara Hadi Abu-Akeel William J. Boettinger Arthur Coury Firebaugh Kurt Akeley and Jenny Lillian C. Borrone Eugene E. Covert John W. Fisher Zhao Frank Bowman James Q. Crowe Peter T. Flawn Montgomery M. Alger Peter R. Bridenbaugh Lawrence B. Curtis Christodoulos A. Floudas Charles A. Amann James P. Brill Ernest L. Daman Maria Flytzani- Cristina H. Amon Frederick P. Brooks, Jr. Paul D. Dapkus Stephanopoulos◊ John G. Anderson Alan C. Brown Edward E. David, Jr. Robert E. Fontana Stig A. Annestrand Howard J. Bruschi Delbert E. Day G. David Forney, Jr. George E. Apostolakis Jack E. Buffington Morton M. Denn Harold K.* and Betty Ali S. Argon Ned H. Burns Joseph M. DeSimone Forsen Robert C. Armstrong Anne and John Cahn Robert C. DeVries Judson C. French Frances H. Arnold Robert Calderbank Frederick H. Dill Eli Fromm R. Lyndon Arscott James D. Callen Robert H. Dodds Shun Chong Fung James R. Asay Joe C. Campbell John E. Dolan Zvi Galil Jamal J. Azar Max W. Carbon◊ Albert A. Dorman Ronald L. Geer Donald W. Bahr E. Dean Carlson David A. Dornfeld◊ John H. Gibbons Rodica A. Baranescu Albert Carnesale Irwin Dorros Don P. Giddens Grigory I. Barenblatt John R. Casani E. Linn Draper, Jr. Maryellen L. Giger Mark A. Barteau William Cavanaugh T. Dixon Dudderar Jacqueline Gish Jordan* and Rhoda Don B. Chaffin James M. Duncan George J. Gleghorn Baruch A. Ray Chamberlain Floyd Dunn Fred Glover James B. Bassingthwaighte Douglas M. Chapin Ira Dyer Richard J. Goldstein Ray H. Baughman Vernon L. Chartier David A. Dzombak Steve and Nancy Zdenek P. Bazant Gang and Tracy Chen Peter S. Eagleson Goldstein Georges and Marlene Shu and Kuang-Chung Lewis S. Edelheit John B. Goodenough Belfort Chien Elazer R. Edelman◊ James A. Gosling Marsha J. Berger Anil K. Chopra Daniel C. Edelstein Roy W. Gould Toby Berger Andrew R. Chraplyvy Helen T. Edwards Robert K. Grasselli Philip A. Bernstein Virginia S.T. Ciminelli◊ Bruce R. Ellingwood Irene Greif Vitelmo V. Bertero Paul Citron and Margaret Richard E. Emmert Gary S. Grest John R. and Pierrette G. Carlson Citron Joel S. Engel Ignacio E. Grossmann Birge John L. Cleasby John V. Evans Karl A. Gschneidner Harvey W. Blanch Seymour B. Cohn Charles Fairhurst Laura M. Haas Jack L. Blumenthal Richard A. Conway Robert M. Fano Donald J. Haderle

◊ Ursula Burns Challenge *Deceased The 74 BRIDGE

Carol K. Hall Jindrich Kopecek Robert M. McMeeking William N. Poundstone William J. Hall Bill and Ann Koros Alan L. McWhorter Priyaranjan Prasad Thomas L. Hampton Richard W. Korsmeyer◊ Harry W. Mergler Michael Prats John M. Hanson Roger B. Krieger◊ Angelo Miele Ronald F. Probstein Alan J. Heeger Derrick M. Kuzak Antonios G. Mikos and Charles W. Pryor, Jr. Adam Heller Stephanie L. Kwolek* Lydia Kavraki◊ Roberta and Edwin Martin Hellman Bruce M. Lake James A. Miller Przybylowicz Arthur H. Heuer and Joan James L. Lammie Warren F. Miller, Jr. Robert A. Pucel Hulburt David A. Landgrebe Keith K. Millheim Rajagopal S. Raghavan George J. Hirasaki Robert S. Langer Arthur L. Money◊ Vivian and Subbiah John P. Hirth Carl G. Langner Carl L. Monismith Ramalingam J. Brent and Margaret Robert C. Lanphier III Francis C. Moon Eugene M. Rasmusson Hiskey Ronald G. Larson William B. Morgan Jean-Michel M. Rendu Allan S. Hoffman Alan Lawley John W. Morris John R. Rice Richard Hogg◊ Edward D. Lazowska Walter E. Morrow, Jr. Bruce E. Rittmann Stanley H. Horowitz Sidney Leibovich A. Stephen Morse Jerome G. Rivard Charles L. Hosler, Jr. Margaret A. LeMone Joel Moses Leslie E. Robertson and Salim M. Ibrahim Johanna M.H. Levelt Jose M.F. Moura◊ Sawteen See Izzat M. Idriss Sengers Jan and E. Phillip Muntz Lloyd M. Robeson Akira Ishimaru Milton Levenson Earll M. Murman Stephen M. Robinson Tatsuo Itoh Herbert S. Levinson Devaraysamudram R. Robert K. Roney Andrew Jackson and Salomon Levy Nagaraj Kenneth M. Rosen Lillian Rankel Paul A. Libby R. Shankar Nair Gerald F. Ross Linos J. Jacovides Peter W. Likins Tsuneo Nakahara Hans T. Rossby Paul C. Jennings Yu-Kweng M. Lin Hyla S. Napadensky Yoram Rudy Klavs F. Jensen Kuo-Nan Liou Alan Needleman Joseph C. Salamone Marvin E. Jensen Nathan and Barbara Stuart O. Nelson Gurmukh S.* and Harriet James O. Jirsa Liskov William New, Jr. Sarkaria Donald L. Johnson Andrew J. Lovinger Joseph H. Newman Peter W. Sauer James R. Johnson William R. Lucas Elaine S. Oran Thorndike Saville, Jr.* Keith P. Johnston Verne L. Lynn Julio M. Ottino Robert F. Sawyer Marshall G. Jones John W. Lyons David H. Pai George W. Scherer Angel G. Jordan J. Ross and Margaret Athanassios Z. Geert W. Schmid- Aravind K. Joshi Macdonald Panagiotopoulos Schoenbein Ahsan Kareem Malcolm MacKinnon III Stavros S. Papadopulos Fred B. Schneider Kristina B. Katsaros Alfred U. MacRae Louis C. Parrillo Jerald L. Schnoor Michael C. Kavanaugh Thomas J. Malone David A. Patterson William R. Schowalter Edward Kavazanjian◊ James W. Mar Donald R. Paul Walter J. Schrenk Leon M. Keer William F. Marcuson III Harold W. Paxton Albert and Susan Schultz Chaitan Khosla Robert C. Marini Donald W. Peaceman Mischa Schwartz Timothy L. Killeen John L. Mason P. Hunter Peckham Norman R. Scott Sung Wan Kim David K. Matlock Nicholas A. Peppas Bal Raj Sehgal◊ Judson and Jeanne King William C. Maurer George M. Pharr◊ Terrence J. Sejnowski Paul C. Kocher William J. McCroskey Mark R. Pinto Hratch G. Semerjian U. Fred Kocks M.D. McIlroy Karl S. Pister Robert J. Serafin Bernard L. Koff Ross E. McKinney Stephen and Linda Pope F. Stan Settles Max A. Kohler Diane M. McKnight◊ Harry G. Poulos◊ Don W. Shaw

◊ Ursula Burns Challenge *Deceased SPRING 2015 75

Thomas B. Sheridan Stanley C. Suboleski Jasper A. Welch, Jr. Tina Hedrick Ben A. Shneiderman Rodney J. Tabaczynski David A. Whelan Paul Hertelendy Michael L. Shuler Robert L. Taylor Margot and David C.* Theodore Irra Neil G. Siegel Lewis M. Terman White Arthur Kaufman Arnold H. Silver Spencer R. Titley Robert M. White Edward Kinner Peter G. Simpkins Neil E. Todreas J. Turner Whitted Kin Ping Lee Kumares C. Sinha Alvin W. Trivelpiece David A. Woolhiser Deborah Levey Jack M. Sipress Stephen D. Umans Eli Yablonovitch Kathleen Lynch Mills R. Wayne Skaggs John M. Undrill Les Youd Catherine McGraw Henry I. Smith Andries van Dam Laurence R. Young Shannon Meyer Gurindar S. Sohi Theodore Van Duzer Paul Zia Michele H. Miller Stuart L. Soled◊ Moshe Y. Vardi Ben T. Zinn Radka Z. Nebesky Soroosh Sorooshian Walter G. Vincenti Charles F. Zukoski John Noel Pol D. Spanos Harold J. Vinegar Anonymous (3) Andrew Oakley George S. Springer Irv Waaland Sallie O’Neill Dale F. and Audrey Stein Wallace R. Wade Friends Ryszard Pryputniewicz Dean E. Stephan Steven J. Wallach John Arganian Marlin and Dorothy George Stephanopoulos C. Michael Walton Harriet Bogdonoff Ristenbatt Thomas G. Stephens John D. Warner Steve S. Chen Georgia Scordelis Kenneth H. Stokoe II Warren and Mary Kwang Chin Kim Verna W. Spinrad Henry E. Stone Washington Richard Colman Elizabeth W. Toor Howard and Valerie Stone John T. Watson James Dixon Katherine Tracy Lawrence D. Stone Wilford F. Weeks Clara K. Ellert David Wilkie Brian Stott James Wei Frances P. Elliott Carol and David Williams Richard G. Strauch Sheldon Weinbaum Harold and Beverly Frost Peter, Denise, Amy, and Gerald B. Stringfellow Sheldon Weinig Sharon P. Gross Heather Williams

Charles M. Vest President’s Opportunity Fund In recognition of NAE members and friends who gave generously to the Charles M. Vest President’s Opportunity Fund in 2014 to honor and remember NAE’s ninth president, Chuck Vest. We acknowledge contributions made as personal gifts or as gifts facilitated by the donor through a donor-advised fund, matching gift program, or family foundation.

Linda M. Abriola Neil and Natasha Chriss Joan and Irwin Jacobs Larry* and Carol Papay Alice Merner Agogino Edward E. David, Jr. Michael R. Johnson David A. Patterson Seta and Diran Apelian James J. Duderstadt Leon M. Keer Stephen M. Pollock Wm. Howard Arnold Elazer R. Edelman Sidney Leibovich Ryszard Pryputniewicz Daniel and Monica Atkins Olivia and Peter Farrell Robert M. Metcalfe William R. Pulleyblank Zdenek P. Bazant George and Ann Fisher Richard K. Miller Marlin and Dorothy Daniel and Frances Berg Harold and Beverly Frost Edward and Stephanie Ristenbatt Howard Bernstein Arthur L. and Vida F. Moses Howard B. Rosen John H. Bruning Goldstein Cherry A. Murray Charles L. Seitz Ursula M. Burns and Paul E. Gray William D. Nix Ben A. Shneiderman Lloyd Bean James S. Harris, Jr. Ronald and Joan Richard P. Simmons Sigrid and Vint Cerf Janina and Siegfried Nordgren George S. Springer Jean-Lou A. Chameau Hecker Peter O’Donnell, Jr. Arnold and Constance Gang and Tracy Chen Andrew Jackson and Kwadwo Osseo-Asare Stancell Weng C. Chew Lillian Rankel Bernhard O. Palsson Raymond S. Stata

◊ Ursula Burns Challenge *Deceased The 76 BRIDGE

Richard H. Truly Sheila E. Widnall Carol and David Williams John C. Wall David Wilkie Laurence R. Young

Tributes In memory of Jordan Baruch – Rhoda Baruch and the Baruch Fund In memory of Robert R. Berg – Jo F. Berg In memory of Marjana Boroyevich – Dushan Boroyevich In memory of Esther M. Edelman – Elazer R. Edelman In memory of John Frank Elliott – Frances P. Elliott In memory of Howard S. Jones, Jr. – Evelyn S. Jones In memory of Charles C. Ladd – Craig H. Benson, Kwang Chin Kim, Richard Colman, James Dixon, Edward Kinner, Douglas Larson, Deborah Levey, Kathleen Lynch Mills, W. Allen Marr, Catherine McGraw, James K. and Holly T. Mitchell, Katherine Tracy, Peter Williams In memory of Shakunthala – Devaraysamudram R. Nagaraj In memory of Ernest Smerdon – Soroosh Sorooshian In memory of Chang-Lin Tien – Arunava Majumdar In memory of Baranimir von Turkovich – Subbiah Ramalingam

In honor of Martin Balser – Arthur Kaufman In honor of Lester C. Krogh – Joan Krogh In honor of Robert Langer – Cato and Cynthia Laurencin In honor of Gretchen Meyer – Shannon Meyer In honor of C. D. (Dan) Mote, Jr. – Cato and Cynthia Laurencin In honor of George Stegemeier – Harold J. Vinegar

Loyalty Society In recognition of members and friends who have made gifts to the National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, or Institute of Medicine for at least 20 years. We acknowledge contributions made as personal gifts or as gifts facilitated by the donor through a donor-advised fund, matching gift program, or family foundation. Names in bold are NAE members.

Herbert L. Abrams Diane and Norman Harold J. Fallon Ernest M. Henley H. Norman Abramson Bernstein Harvey V. Fineberg and David and Susan Hodges Andreas and Juana Lewis M. Branscomb Mary E. Wilson Joseph F. Hoffman Acrivos John and Sharon Brauman Tobie and Daniel J.* Fink William N. Hubbard, Jr. Bruce and Betty Alberts Donald D. Brown Robert C. and Marilyn G. J. David Jackson Clarence R. Allen Harold Brown Forney Andre T. Jagendorf Charles A. Amann Kristine L. Bueche Harold K.* and Betty Samuel L. Katz and Wyatt W. Anderson George* and Virginia Forsen Catherine M. Wilfert Edward M. Arnett Bugliarello T. Kenneth Fowler Max A. Kohler Wm. Howard Arnold William B. Carey Hans and Verena James S. and Elinor G.A. Daniel L. Azarnoff Purnell W. Choppin Frauenfelder Langer Jack D. Barchas James McConnell Clark Carl Frieden Louis J. Lanzerotti Jeremiah A. Barondess John A. Clements Theodore V. Galambos Gerald and Doris Laubach Stephen D. Bechtel, Jr. Michael D. Coe Joseph G. Gall Judith R. Lave John C. Beck Pedro M. Cuatrecasas David V. Goeddel Robert G. Loewy Gordon Bell Irwin Dorros Robert B. Griffiths Thomas and Caroline Paul Berg W.G. Ernst Adam Heller Maddock

*Deceased SPRING 2015 77

Anthony P. Mahowald Elena and Stuart William R. Schowalter Martha Vaughan Vincent T. Marchesi Nightingale Maxine F. Singer Raymond Viskanta Hans Mark Ronald and Joan Louis Sokoloff Andrew and Erna* James F. Mathis Nordgren Raymond S. Stata Viterbi Christopher F. McKee Peter O’Donnell, Jr. Rosemary A. Stevens Peter K. Vogt Mortimer Mishkin Gilbert S. Omenn and Lubert and Andrea Stryer George D. Watkins Arno G. Motulsky Martha A. Darling F. William Studier Julia and Johannes Elaine and Gerald* George W. Parshall Paul and Pamela Talalay Weertman Nadler Gordon H. Pettengill Charlotte and Morris Herbert Weissbach Jaya and Venky Frank Press Tanenbaum Robert M. and Mavis E. Narayanamurti Simon Ramo Anita and George White Philip and Sima Janet and Lester Reed Thompson Catherine M. Wilfert Needleman Jerome G. Rivard George H. Trilling Gerald N. Wogan Robert M. and Marilyn R. R. Duncan* and Carolyn Roxanne and Karl K.* Anonymous Nerem Scheer Luce Turekian

Lifetime Giving Societies We gratefully acknowledge the following members and friends who have made generous charitable lifetime contribu- tions. Their collective, private philanthropy enhances the impact of the Academies to advise the nation on issues of science, engineering, and medicine.

Einstein Society In recognition of members and friends who have made lifetime contributions of $100,000 or more to the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, or the Institute of Medicine. We acknowledge contribu- tions made as personal gifts or as gifts facilitated by the donor through a donor-advised fund, matching gift program, or family foundation. Names in bold are NAE members.

$10 million and above Arnold and Mabel Bernard M. Gordon George P. Mitchell* Beckman* Daniel E. Koshland, Jr.*

$5 million to $10 million Donald Bren William R. and Rosemary Fred Kavli* Dame Jillian Sackler B. Hewlett* Peter O’Donnell, Jr.

$1 million to $5 million Bruce and Betty Alberts Harvey V. Fineberg and Robert* and Mayari Raymond and Beverly Richard and Rita Mary E. Wilson Pritzker Sackler Atkinson Cecil H. Green* Richard L. and Hinda G. Bernard* and Rhoda Norman R. Augustine Joan and Irwin Jacobs Rosenthal* Sarnat Craig and Barbara Barrett Kenneth A. Jonsson* Jack W. and Valerie Rowe Leonard D. Schaeffer Jordan* and Rhoda Tillie K. Lubin* Fritz J. and Dolores Sara Lee and Axel Schupf Baruch John F. McDonnell H. Russ Prize Fund Anonymous (2) Stephen D. Bechtel, Jr. The Ambrose Monell of the Russ College Harry E. Bovay, Jr.* Foundation of Engineering and Gordon and Betty Moore Technology at Ohio University *Deceased The 78 BRIDGE

$500,000 to $1 million Rose-Marie and Jack R. Ralph J. and Carol M. Thomas V. Jones* Oliver E. and Gerda K. Anderson Cicerone Cindy and Jeong Kim Nelson* John and Elizabeth James McConnell Clark Ralph and Claire Landau* Gilbert S. Omenn and Armstrong Henry David* Asta* and William W. Martha A. Darling Kenneth E. Behring Richard Evans* Lang Shela and Kumar Patel Gordon Bell Eugene Garfield Ruben F.* and Donna William J. Rutter Elkan R.* and Gail F. Foundation Mettler Herbert A. and Dorothea Blout Penny and Bill George, Dane and Mary Louise P. Simon* Carson Family Charitable George Family Miller Raymond S. Stata Trust Foundation Philip and Sima Roy and Diana Vagelos Charina Endowment Fund William T.* and Catherine Needleman Alan M. Voorhees* Morrison Golden Anonymous (1)

$250,000 to $500,000 The Agouron Institute William R. Jackson* Kenneth H. Olsen* Judy Swanson W.O. Baker* Robert L. and Anne K. Ann and Michael Ramage Ted Turner Warren L. Batts James Simon Ramo Leslie L. Vadasz Clarence S. Coe* Mary and Howard* Kehrl Anne and Walt Robb Charles M.* and Rebecca Theodore Geballe Janet and Richard M.* Stephen* and Anne Ryan M. Vest Jerome H.* and Barbara Morrow Henry and Susan Samueli N. Grossman Ralph S. O’Connor H.E. Simmons*

$100,000 to $250,000 Holt Ashley* Ursula Burns and Lloyd Michiko So* and Margaret A. Hamburg and Francisco J. and Hana Bean Lawrence Finegold Peter F. Brown Ayala John and Assia Cioffi Tobie and Daniel J.* Fink William M. Haney III William F. Ballhaus, Sr.* Paul Citron and Margaret George and Ann Fisher George and Daphne Thomas D.* and Janice Carlson Citron Harold K.* and Betty A. Hatsopoulos H. Barrow A. James Clark Forsen John L. Hennessy H.H. and Eleanor F. W. Dale and Jeanne C. William L. and Mary Kay Jane Hirsh Barschall* Compton Friend Chad and Ann Holliday Elwyn and Jennifer John D. Corbett* William H. and Melinda M. Blakeman Ingle Berlekamp Lance and Susan Davis F. Gates III Richard B. Johnston, Jr. Diane and Norman Roman W. DeSanctis Nan and Chuck Geschke Anita K. Jones Bernstein Robert and Florence Jack and Linda Gill Trevor O. Jones Bharati and Murty Deutsch George and Christine Thomas Kailath Bhavaraju Paul M. Doty* Gloeckler Yuet Wai and Alvera Kan Erich Bloch Charles W. Duncan, Jr. Christa and Detlef Gloge Leon K. and Olga David G. Bradley George and Maggie Eads Estate of Avram Goldstein Kirchmayer* Lewis M. Branscomb Robert and Cornelia Robert W. Gore Frederick A. Klingenstein Sydney Brenner Eaton Paul and Judy Gray William I. Koch George* and Virginia Dotty and Gordon Corbin Gwaltney Gail F. Koshland Bugliarello England John O. Hallquist Jill Howell Kramer Malin Burnham Olivia and Peter Farrell Kent Kresa

*Deceased SPRING 2015 79

John W. Landis* G. William* and Ariadna Richard F. and Terri W. Gary and Diane Tooker Janet and Barry Lang Miller Rashid Martha Vaughan Gerald and Doris Laubach Stanley L. Miller* Henry M. Rowan Andrew and Erna* David M.* and Natalie Joe and Glenna Moore Joseph E. and Anne P. Viterbi Lederman David and Lindsay Rowe* John C. Wall Bonnie Berger and Frank Morgenthaler Maxine L. Savitz Robert and Joan Thomson Leighton Clayton Daniel and Wendy and Eric Schmidt Wertheim Frances and George Ligler Patricia L. Mote David E. Shaw Robert M. and Mavis E. Whitney and Betty Ellen and Philip Neches Richard P. Simmons White MacMillan Susan and Franklin M. Robert F. and Lee S. John C. Whitehead Asad M., Gowhartaj, and Orr, Jr. Sproull Wm. A. Wulf Jamal Madni David Packard* Georges C. St. Laurent, Jr. Ken Q. Xie Davis L. Masten and Charles and Doris Arnold and Constance Tachi and Leslie Yamada Christopher Ireland Pankow* Stancell Adrian Zaccaria Roger L. McCarthy Larry and Carol Papay Edward C. Stone Alejandro Zaffaroni* Robin K. and Rose M. Jack S. Parker* John and Janet Swanson Janet and Jerry Zucker McGuire Edward E. Penhoet Charlotte and Morris Anonymous (1) William W. McGuire Allen E.* and Marilynn Tanenbaum Burt and Deedee Puckett Peter and Vivian Teets McMurtry

Golden Bridge Society In recognition of NAE members and friends who have made lifetime contributions totaling $20,000 to $99,999. We acknowledge contributions made as personal gifts or as gifts facilitated by the donor through a donor-advised fund, matching gift program, or family foundation. Names in bold are NAE members.

$50,000 to $99,999 William F. Allen, Jr. Thomas E. Everhart Joan M. and Frank W.* Roberto Padovani Jane K. and William F. Robert C. and Marilyn G. Luerssen Elisabeth Paté-Cornell Ballhaus, Jr. Forney Darla and George E. Ronald L. Rivest Barry W. Boehm Michael W. Hunkapiller Mueller Ellen and George A.* Kristine L. Bueche Robert E. Kahn Cynthia J. and Norman Roberts William Cavanaugh Paul and Julie Kaminski A. Nadel Jonathan J. Rubinstein Joseph V. Charyk Rita Vaughn and Jaya and Venky Warren G. Schlinger Lester and Renee Crown Theodore C.* Kennedy Narayanamurti Leo John* and Joanne Ruth A. David Johanna M.H. Levelt John Neerhout, Jr. Thomas Nicholas M. Donofrio Sengers Ronald and Joan Julia and Johannes James O. Ellis, Jr. Nordgren Weertman Sheila E. Widnall

$20,000 to $49,999 Andreas and Juana Valerie and William A. Clyde and Jeanette Baker R. Byron Bird Acrivos Anders William F. Banholzer Diane and Samuel W. Rodney C. Adkins Seta and Diran Apelian David K. Barton Bodman Alice Merner Agogino Wm. Howard Arnold Daniel and Frances Berg Kathleen and H. Kent Clarence R. Allen Kamla and Bishnu S. Atal Becky and Tom Bergman Bowen

*Deceased The 80 BRIDGE

Rodney A. Brooks Martin E. and Lucinda Cato and Cynthia Eberhardt* and Deedee Harold Brown Glicksman Laurencin Rechtin Corbett Caudill Arthur L. and Vida F. Yoon-Woo Lee Kenneth and Martha Selim A. Chacour Goldstein Jane and Norman N. Li Reifsnider Josephine Cheng Mary L. Good Jack E. Little Jerry Sanders III Sunlin Chou Joseph W. Goodman Thomas and Caroline Linda S. Sanford Uma Chowdhry Paul E. Gray Maddock Roland W. Schmitt G. Wayne Clough Delon Hampton Artur Mager Donald R. Scifres Joseph M. Colucci Wesley L. Harris Thomas J. Malone Martin B. and Beatrice E. Malcolm R. Currie Janina and Siegfried James F. Mathis Sherwin Ruth M. Davis* and Hecker James C. McGroddy David B. and Virginia H. Benjamin Lohr Robert and Darlene Richard A. Meserve Spencer Mary P. and Gerald P.* Hermann James K. and Holly T. Joel S. Spira Dinneen David and Susan Hodges Mitchell Richard J. Stegemeier E. Linn Draper, Jr. Bettie and Kenneth F.* Van and Barbara Mow Henry E. Stone Mildred S. Dresselhaus Holtby Cherry A. Murray Stanley D. Stookey James J. Duderstadt Edward E. Hood, Jr. Narayana Murthy and Daniel M. Tellep Stephen N. Finger Edward G.* and Naomi Sudha Murty David W. Thompson Edith M. Flanigen Jefferson Dale and Marge* Myers James M. and Ellen Samuel C. Florman Min H. Kao Robert M. and Marilyn R. Weston Tien Bonnie and Donald N.* John and Wilma Nerem Raymond Viskanta Frey Kassakian Simon Ostrach Robert and Robyn Elsa M. Garmire and James R.* and Isabelle Arogyaswami J. Paulraj Wagoner Robert H. Russell Katzer Paul S. Peercy Daniel I. Wang Richard L. and Lois E. Robert M. and Pauline W. Donald E. Petersen Albert R.C. and Jeannie Garwin Koerner Dennis J. Picard Westwood Arthur and Helen James N. Krebs John W. and Susan M. Willis S. White, Jr. Geoffrion Lester C.* and Joan M. Poduska John J. Wise Louis V. Gerstner, Jr. Krogh Joy and George* Edgar S. Woolard, Jr. Charles C. Ladd Rathmann A. Thomas Young

Heritage Society In recognition of members and friends who have included the National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, or Institute of Medicine in their estate plans or made some other type of planned gift to the Academies. Names in bold are NAE members.

Andreas and Juana Harrison H. and Corale L. Brierley D. Walter Cohen Acrivos Catherine C. Barrett James A. Brierley Morrel H. Cohen Gene M. and Marian Stanley Baum Lenore and Rob Stanley N. Cohen Amdahl Clyde J. Behney Briskman Colleen Conway-Welch Betsy Ancker-Johnson Daniel and Frances Berg Kristine L. Bueche Ross and Stephanie John C. Angus Paul Berg Dorit Carmelli Corotis John and Elizabeth Elkan R.* and Gail F. Peggy and Thomas Caskey Ellis and Bettsy Cowling Armstrong Blout A. Ray Chamberlain Molly Joel Coye Norman R. Augustine Enriqueta C. Bond Linda and Frank Chisari Barbara J. Culliton Jack D. Barchas Daniel Branton Rita K. Chow Malcolm R. Currie Robert and Lillian Brent John A. Clements Peter N. Devreotes

*Deceased SPRING 2015 81

Mildred S. Dresselhaus Anita K. Jones Ronald and Joan Paul R. Schimmel Gerard W. Elverum Jerome Kagan Nordgren Stuart F. Schlossman Emanuel and Peggy Diana S. and Michael D. Gilbert S. Omenn and Rudi* and Sonja Schmid Epstein King Martha A. Darling Kenneth I. Shine Tobie and Daniel J.* Fink Norma M. Lang William* and Constance Robert L. Sinsheimer Robert C. and Marilyn G. Asta* and William W. Opie Arnold and Constance Forney Lang Bradford W. and Virginia Stancell Arthur and Helen Daniel P. Loucks W. Parkinson H. Eugene Stanley Geoffrion R. Duncan* and Carolyn Zack T. Pate Rosemary A. Stevens Paul H. Gilbert Scheer Luce Frank Press John and Janet Swanson Martin E. and Lucinda Thomas and Caroline Simon Ramo John A. Swets Glicksman Maddock James J. Reisa, Jr. Esther S. Takeuchi George and Christine Artur Mager Alexander Rich Paul and Pamela Talalay Gloeckler Jane Menken Emanuel P. Rivers John C. Wall Christa and Detlef Gloge Arno G. Motulsky Richard J. and Bonnie B. Robert and Joan Joseph W. Goodman Van and Barbara Mow Robbins Wertheim Chushiro* and Yoshiko Guido Munch C. Ruth and Eugene Maw-Kuen Wu Hayashi Mary O. Mundinger Roberts Wm. A. Wulf Larry L. Hench Philip and Sima James F. Roth Tilahun D. Yilma Thomas S. Inui Needleman Esther and Lewis Rowland Michael Zubkoff Richard B. Johnston, Jr. Norman F. Ness Sheila A. Ryan Anonymous (2)

Foundations, Corporations, and Other Organizations Lifetime In recognition of foundations, corporations, and other organizations that have given gifts or grants totaling $1 million or more to the National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, or Institute of Medicine. Names in bold have supported the NAE.

$25 million or more Carnegie Corporation of The Bill & Melinda Gates The Robert Wood W.K. Kellogg Foundation New York Foundation Johnson Foundation The Koshland Foundation The Ford Foundation W.M. Keck Foundation

$10 million to $25 million Arnold and Mabel The William and Flora The John D. and The Cynthia and George Beckman Foundation Hewlett Foundation Catherine T. Mitchell Foundation The Charles Stark Howard Hughes Medical MacArthur Foundation Alfred P. Sloan Draper Laboratory Institute The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation Foundation

$5 million to $10 million Michael and Susan Dell The Grainger Foundation The Kavli Foundation The Rockefeller Foundation The Irvine Company The Pew Charitable Trusts Foundation Kaiser Permanente

*Deceased The 82 BRIDGE

$1 million to $5 million American Board of Family Bristol-Myers Squibb The Greenwall The Ambrose Monell Medicine Company Foundation Foundation American Cancer Society, Burroughs Wellcome Fund The John A. Hartford Monsanto Company Inc. The California Foundation Gordon and Betty Moore American Legacy Endowment Hewlett-Packard Foundation Foundation California HealthCare Company National Multiple American Public Foundation Intel Corporation Sclerosis Society Transportation Margaret A. Cargill International Business Northrop Grumman Association Foundation Machines Corporation Corporation America’s Health Chevron Corporation Johnson & Johnson Nuclear Threat Initiative Insurance Plans Chrysler Group LLC The JPB Foundation O’Donnell Foundation Foundation The Commonwealth Fund JSM Charitable Trust The David and Lucile Amgen, Inc. The Dow Chemical Ewing Marion Kauffman Packard Foundation Association of American Company Foundation Peter G. Peterson Railroads E.I. du Pont de Nemours The Susan G. Komen Foundation AstraZeneca & Company Breast Cancer Pfizer, Inc. Pharmaceuticals LP Eastman Kodak Company Foundation Robert Pritzker Family AT&T Corporation The Ellison Medical Daniel E. Koshland, Jr. Foundation Atkinson Family Foundation Family Fund Research Corporation for Foundation ExxonMobil Corporation The Kresge Foundation Science Advancement The Atlantic ExxonMobil Foundation Eli Lilly and Company Rockefeller Brothers Fund Philanthropies (USA) Ford Motor Company Lockheed Martin Richard & Hinda Craig & Barbara Barrett General Electric Corporation Rosenthal Foundation Foundation Company Richard Lounsbery Raymond & Beverly Battelle General Motors Foundation Sackler Foundation S.D. Bechtel, Jr. Company Josiah Macy, Jr. Sanofi-Aventis Foundation GlaxoSmithKline Foundation The Spencer Foundation Blue Shield of California William T. Grant Merck & Company, Inc. The Starr Foundation Foundation Foundation Merck Company Robert W. Woodruff The Boeing Company Great Lakes Protection Foundation Foundation Fund Microsoft Corporation Xerox Corporation

Annual In recognition of foundations, corporations, or other organizations that made gifts or grants to support the National Academy of Engineering in 2014. Ruth and Ken Arnold The Baruch Fund Cummins, Inc. Employees Charity Family Fund at the Bell Family Foundation Carl de Boor Advised Organization of Houston Jewish David and Sharon Kuck Fund of the Orcas Northrop Grumman Community Foundation Family Fund of the Island Community ExxonMobil Corporation Arnold Charitable Fund Bessemer National Gift Foundation ExxonMobil Foundation at Schwab Charitable Fund The Charles Stark Draper Fortinet Fund The Boeing Company Laboratory GE Foundation Avid Solutions Industrial Card Family Foundation E.I. du Pont de Nemours General Aero-Science Process Control Castaing Family and Company Consultants, LLC Hood Family Fund of Foundation Ellis Family Charitable Geosynthetic Institute the Bank of America Cornell University Fund at Schwab Gerstner Family Charitable Gift Fund Foundation Charitable Fund Foundation SPRING 2015 83

The Geschke Foundation Margaret and Ross National Financial Ken and Ann Stinson at the Silicon Valley MacDonald Charitable Services Fund of the Omaha Community Foundation Fund of the Triangle Newmont Mining Community Foundation Google, Inc. Community Foundation Corporation Morris & Charlotte The Grainger Foundation Massachusetts Institute of Pfizer, Inc. Tanenbaum Family Gramp Foundation Technology Philanthropic Ventures Foundation Gratis Foundation Mayden Philanthropic Foundation The Engineering Center Greater Cincinnati SMPS Fund of the Jewish PJM Interconnection Education Trust Indo-US Science and Federation of Silicon The Procter & Gamble University of Toronto Technology Forum Valley Company USG Foundation Innovyze Medtronic Foundation Qualcomm, Inc. Weinig Foundation International Business Microsoft Corporation Robbins Family Fund at The White Family Trust Machines Corporation Gordon and Betty Moore the Seattle Foundation Xerox Corporation Joan and Irwin Jacobs Foundation Henry M. Rowan Family Xie Foundation Fund of the Jewish Dale and Marge Myers Foundation Zarem Foundation Community Foundation Fund at the San Diego Samueli Foundation Zerhouni Family W.M. Keck Foundation Foundation Southwest Research Charitable Foundation Kresa Family Foundation National Action Council Institute Lockheed Martin for Minorities in Ray & Maria Stata Family Corporation Engineering Charitable Fund

NAE 50th Anniversary Sponsors In recognition of foundations, corporations, or other organizations that made gifts or grants to support the 50th Anni- versary of the National Academy of Engineering in 2014.

We have made every effort to list donors accurately and according to their wishes. If we have made an error, please accept our apologies and contact the Development Office at 202.334.2431 or [email protected] so we can correct our records. The 84 BRIDGE

Mirzayan Fellows Join Program Office

loaded polymeric delivery vehicles for applications in the treatment of peanut allergy and brain cancer. She also completed a project encourag- ing graduate students and postdocs to seek out career-advancing expe- riences during their training as part of her participation in the Emerging Leaders Institute. She received a BS in physics from Harvey Mudd Col- Emily Hoffman Emily Roberts lege and worked as a postbaccalau- reate research fellow in biophysics Emily Hoffman holds a BS in bio- alumna, plays IM football, and loves at the National Institutes of Health. medical engineering from Case listening to podcasts. Through the She has cofounded several web- Western Reserve University and Mirzayan Fellowship and her work sites dedicated to personal finance is completing a PhD in materials with the National Academy of and recently started speaking on science and engineering at North- Engineering, she hopes to build her personal finance for early-career western University. Her PhD the- skills in communicating engineer- PhDs. In her free time, she enjoys sis focuses on the use of electron ing to the public and to understand playing tennis and board games microscopy to understand nanoscale the intersections of science and pol- and rooting for the Duke Blue Dev- wear and corrosion of biomedical icy. Her NAE projects include the ils. As a Mirzayan Fellow, Emily is materials. Throughout her academ- launch of “The Next MacGyver” excited to learn how science policy ic career, Emily has been involved competition and the Engineering is conducted at the various levels in both student government and Innovations Radio Series. of government and in the private the Society of Women Engineers, Emily Roberts received her PhD in and nonprofit sectors. While at and she is particularly interested in biomedical engineering from Duke the NAE, she is working with the outreach and inclusion of underrep- University in fall 2014. Her doctoral Center for Engineering Ethics and resented minorities. Outside of the research used microfluidic technol- Society on “Infusing Ethics into the lab, she is an active Delta Gamma ogy to generate hydrophilic drug- Development of Engineers.”

In Memoriam

ALBERT L. BABB, 88, professor Development, died on December semiconductor device industry and emeritus of nuclear engineering and 22, 2014. Dr. Beyster was elected to pioneering integrated optics and chemical engineering, University of the NAE in 1989 for outstanding organic conductors. Washington, died on October 22, scientific and engineering contribu- 2014. Dr. Babb was elected to the tions related to nuclear energy and RALPH L. DISNEY, 86, professor NAE in 1972 for engineering con- national defense. emeritus, Texas A&M University, tributions to the development of died on November 11, 2014. Dr. artificial kidney systems and medi- ESTHER M. CONWELL, 92, Disney was elected to the NAE in cal applications of nuclear energy. professor, University of Rochester, 1997 for contributions in the devel- died on November 16, 2014. Dr. opment of the field of queueing net- J. ROBERT BEYSTER, 90, Conwell was elected to the NAE works and its applications. founder, Foundation for Enterprise in 1980 for contributions to the SPRING 2015 85

ARMAND V. FEIGENBAUM, MARK V. MORKOVIN, 97, pro- Army Corps of Engineers, died on 94, retired president and CEO, fessor of aerospace and mechani- November 5, 2014. Mr. Saville was General Systems Company Inc., cal engineering emeritus, Illinois elected to the NAE in 1977 for died on November 13, 2014. Dr. Institute of Technology, died on leadership, vision, and innovation Feigenbaum was elected to the October 18, 2014. Dr. Morkovin in the field of coastal engineering. NAE in 1992 for developing con- was elected to the NAE in 1987 for cepts of “Total Quality Control,” contributions to the understanding HARVEY W. SCHADLER, 83, and for contributions to “Cost of of instability, transition, and turbu- retired technical director, GE Cor- Quality” and quality systems engi- lence through outstanding research porate Research and Development, neering and practice. and distinguished written reviews of died on November 30, 2014. Dr. the field. Schadler was elected to the NAE PHILIP G. HODGE, 94, professor in 1991 for exceptional leader- emeritus of mechanics, University GERALD NADLER, 90, IBM ship in development and applying of Minnesota, died on November Chair Emeritus in Engineering advanced materials and processes 11, 2014. Dr. Hodge was elected Management, University of South- for the electrical and aircraft engine to the NAE in 1977 for leadership ern California, died on July 28, industries. in the development of methods for 2014. Dr. Nadler was elected to the analysis and design of structures the NAE in 1986 for technical and S. DONALD STOOKEY, 99, stressed beyond the yield point. educational leadership in industrial retired director of fundamental engineering, interdisciplinary sys- chemical research, Corning Incor- PHILIP W. LETT JR., 92, retired tems planning, and design meth- porated, died on November 4, president, PWL Inc., died on June odologies, and for technological 2014. Dr. Stookey was elected to 6, 2014. Dr. Lett was elected to the literacy programs for nonengineers. the NAE in 1977 for invention of NAE in 1984 for 25 years of techni- glass, ceramics, and photo-sensitive cal and managerial contributions to FREDRIC RAICHLEN, 82, glasses. the development of US combat and professor of civil engineering and tactical vehicle systems. mechanical engineering emeritus, CHARLES F. TIFFANY, 84, California Institute of Technology, retired executive vice president, FREDERICK F. LING, 87, Earnest died on December 13, 2014. Dr. Military Airplanes, the Boeing F. Gloyna Regents Chair Emeritus Raichlen was elected to the NAE Company, died on October 12, in Engineering, University of Texas, in 1993 for contributions to coastal 2014. Mr. Tiffany was elected to died on November 8, 2014. Dr. Ling engineering research and practice the NAE in 1984 for sustained con- was elected to the NAE in 1977 for related to tsunamis, harbor oscilla- tributions to the government and contributions to the understanding tions, and wave defense of subma- industry to provide safe, longer-life of friction and wear, metal cutting rine pipelines. structures for aerospace systems. and forming, and the dysfunction in human joints. ANDREW P. SAGE, 81, Univer- LELAND J. WALKER, 91, found- sity Professor and First American er, Northern Engineering and Test- JAMES W. MAYER, 83, Galvin Bank Professor, George Mason ing Inc., died on December 31, Professor of Science and Engi- University, died October 31, 2014. 2014. Mr. Walker was elected to the neering, Arizona State University, Dr. Sage was elected to the NAE in NAE in 1984 for his outstanding died on June 14, 2013. Dr. Mayer 2004 for contributions to the theory practice as a civil engineer and for was elected to the NAE in 1984 and practice of systems engineering his distinguished service to the pro- for original contributions to ion and systems management. fession and engineering education. implantation, Rutherford back- scattering spectrometry, and other THORNDIKE SAVILLE JR., 89, major aspects of solid-state engi- retired technical director, Coastal neering research and education. Engineering Research Center, US The 86 BRIDGE

Calendar of Meetings and Events

April 1 Deadline for Nominations for 2015–2016 April 22 NAE Regional Meeting NAE Awards Columbia University April 9–11 Third Annual Integrated Network on Social New York Sustainability (INSS) Conference April 27 LinkEngineering Committee Charlotte; London; Lansing; Phoenix; Bend, Meeting 5 Oregon June 1–3 China-America Frontiers of Engineering April 10 Gordon Prize Award Ceremony Beckman Center Northeastern University Irvine Boston June 23–24 NAE Regional Meeting April 16–17 Understanding the Engineering Education- Case Western Reserve University Workforce Continuum Committee Meeting Cleveland April 16–18 German-American Frontiers of Engineering All meetings are held in National Academies facilities in Potsdam Washington, DC, unless otherwise noted. April 20–21 NAE Convocation with the Professional Engineering Societies Publications of Interest

The following reports have been National Academy of Engineering’s Development Planning: A Strategic published recently by the National 2014 US Frontiers of Engineering Approach to Future Air Force Capabili- Academy of Engineering or the Symposium. Every year the sympo- ties. The development and applica- National Research Council (NRC). sium brings together 100 outstand- tion of technology have been an Unless otherwise noted, all publica- ing young leaders in engineering to essential part of US airpower, lead- tions are for sale (prepaid) from the share their cutting-edge research ing to a century of air supremacy. But National Academies Press (NAP), and innovations in selected areas. that developmental path has rarely 500 Fifth Street NW–Keck 360, The 2014 symposium was held Sep- been straight, and it has never been Washington, DC 20001. For more tember 11–13 at the National Acad- smooth. This report provides recom- information or to place an order, emies Beckman Center in Irvine, mendations to improve development contact NAP online at or by phone at (800) 624-6242. were co-robotics, battery materi- projects, concepts not quite ready (Note: Prices quoted are subject to als, technologies for the heart, and for acquisition, corporate strategic change without notice. There is a 10 per- shale gas and oil. This book, a com- plans, and training of acquisition cent discount for online orders when you pendium of the presenters’ papers, is personnel. Developmental planning sign up for a MyNAP account. Add meant to convey the excitement of can provide the Air Force leadership $6.50 for shipping and handling for the this unique meeting and to highlight with a tool to determine, over the first book and $1.50 for each additional innovative developments in engi- next 20 years, what capability gaps book. Add applicable sales tax or GST neering research and technical work. must be filled and support develop- if you live in CA, CT, DC, FL, MD, NAE member Kristi S. Anseth, ment of the workforce skills needed NC, NY, PA, VA, WI, or Canada.) Investigator, Howard Hughes Medi- to think strategically to close the cal Institute, Department of Chemi- capability gap. Frontiers of Engineering: Reports on cal and Biological Engineering, NAE members on the study com- Leading-Edge Engineering from the 2014 University of Colorado Boulder, mittee were Paul G. Kaminski Symposium. This volume presents chaired the symposium steering (cochair), chair and CEO, Tech- papers on the topics covered at the committee. Paper, $44.00. novation Inc.; W. Peter Cherry, SPRING 2015 87

independent consultant, Ann storm–related losses have risen sub- missiles, and submarine-launched Arbor, Michigan; Robert J. Her- stantially during the past century, ballistic missiles. Despite domestic mann, private consultant, Bloom- largely due to increases in popula- consensus on the need to maintain field, Connecticut; Lester L. Lyles, tion and development in the most an effective deterrent, there is no independent consultant, Vienna, susceptible coastal areas. This report consensus on what that requires, Virginia; and Thomas E. Romesser, evaluates the effectiveness of coastal especially in a changing geopoliti- retired vice president and chief tech- risk reduction strategies and levels cal environment and with contin- nology officer, Northrop Grumman of protection along the country’s ued reductions in nuclear arms. This Aerospace Systems. Paper, $49.00. East and Gulf Coasts to reduce the report identifies the analytic issues impacts of coastal flooding associ- and factors that must be considered Future Directions for NSF Advanced ated with storm surges. The report in seeking both nuclear deterrence Computing Infrastructure to Support US calls for a national approach to of adversaries and assurance of Science and Engineering in 2017–2020: coastal risk management, with allies in the 21st century. It assesses Interim Report. Demand for advanced regional solutions and recognition tools, methods, and approaches for computing has been growing for all of the economic, social, environ- improving understanding of nuclear types and capabilities of systems, mental, and life safety benefits that deterrence and assurance and the from large numbers of single com- come from risk reduction efforts. extent to which failures in deter- modity nodes to jobs requiring thou- The report recommendations will rence or assurance might be averted sands of cores; for systems with fast help engineers, planners, and poli- or mitigated by the proper choice interconnects and for increasingly cymakers at national, regional, state, of nuclear systems, technological diverse applications that include and local levels move the nation capabilities, postures, and concepts data analytics as well as modeling from a primarily reactive stance to of operation of US nuclear forces. and simulation. New models of com- coastal disasters to an approach that NAE members on the study puting, including cloud computing invests wisely in coastal risk reduc- committee were John F. Ahearne, and publicly available/privately held tion and builds resilience among executive director emeritus, Sigma data repositories, open up new possi- coastal communities. Xi, The Scientific Research Society; bilities for NSF and the researchers NAE members on the study com- Gerald G. Brown, Distinguished who use its supercomputing centers. mittee were Gregory B. Baecher, Professor of Operations Research, To better understand the changing Glenn L. Martin Institute Profes- US Naval Postgraduate School; requirements of the science and sor of Engineering, Department of Albert Carnesale, chancellor emer- engineering community and the Civil and Environmental Engi- itus and professor, University of importance of new advanced com- neering, University of Maryland; California, Los Angeles; W. Peter puting infrastructure, NSF asked Ross B. Corotis, Denver Business Cherry, independent consultant, that the National Research Council Challenge Professor, Department of Ann Arbor, Michigan; and John A. examine anticipated priorities and Civil, Environmental, and Archi- Montgomery, director of research, tradeoffs for advanced computing tectural Engineering, University US Naval Research Laboratory. in support of NSF-sponsored sci- of Colorado Boulder; and Robert Paper, $40.00. ence and engineering research. This A. Dalrymple, Willard and Lillian report is an initial review of issues to Hackerman Professor of Civil Engi- The Postdoctoral Experience Revisited. be considered in the development neering, Whiting School of Engi- The percentage of PhDs who pur- of future NSF strategy, budgets, and neering, Johns Hopkins University. sue postdoctoral training is growing programs for advanced computing. Paper, $55.00. and spreading from the biomedical NAE member William D. Gropp, and physical sciences to engineer- Thomas M. Siebel Chair in Com- US Air Force Strategic Deterrence Ana- ing and the social sciences, and puter Science, University of Illinois lytic Capabilities: An Assessment of the average length of time spent at Urbana-Champaign, cochaired Tools, Methods, and Approaches for the in postdoctoral positions seems to the study committee. Paper, $29.00. 21st Century Security Environment. The be increasing. This report looks at US strategic nuclear posture com- current postdoctoral fellows—how Reducing Coastal Risk on the East and prises nuclear-certified long-range many there are, where they are Gulf Coasts. Hurricane- and coastal bombers, intercontinental ballistic working, in what fields, and for The 88 BRIDGE how many years—and makes rec- NAE members on the study com- NAE member Norman R. Augus- ommendations to improve their mittee were Gerald E. Galloway Jr. tine, retired chair and CEO, Lock- period of service, title and role, (chair), Glenn L. Martin Institute heed Martin Corporation, chaired career development, compensation Professor of Engineering, University the study committee. Paper, $52.00. and benefits, and mentoring. Cur- of Maryland, College Park; Gerald rent data on demographics, career G. Brown, Distinguished Professor Best Practices for Risk-Informed Deci- aspirations, and career outcomes of Operations Research, US Naval sion Making Regarding Contaminated for postdocs are limited, so the Postgraduate School; Charles R. Sites: Summary of a Workshop Series. report calls for better data collec- Cushing, president, C.R. Cushing The Department of Energy’s Office tion and sharing. A larger goal of & Co. Inc.; Charles F. Gay, found- of Environmental Management’s the study is to consider ways to sat- er, Greenstar Foundation; Thom J. (EM) mission is the safe cleanup of isfy some of the research and career Hodgson, Distinguished University sites associated with government- development needs of postdoctoral Professor, Fitts Industrial & Systems led development of nuclear weap- researchers, who are the future of Engineering Department, North ons and nuclear energy. The largest the research enterprise. The rec- Carolina State University; Kaushik and most complex of these legacy ommendations of this report will Rajashekara, Distinguished Professor sites have not been fully remediated, help clarify the role of postdoctoral of Engineering and Endowed Chair, although their cleanup is proceeding researchers and improve their status Erik Jonsson School of Engineering under legally enforceable agreements and experience. and Computer Science, University of with timelines for hundreds of mile- NAE member James D. Plum- Texas at Dallas. Paper, $56.00. stones. EM is reviewing alternatives mer, professor of electrical engi- to increase the effectiveness and cost neering, Stanford University, was India–United States Cooperation on efficiencies of its cleanup activities, a member of the study committee. Science and Technology for Countering especially for sites that will have Paper, $49.95. Terrorism: Summary of a Workshop. residual contamination when active India and the United States are the cleanup is complete. This report Force Multiplying Technologies for world’s two largest democracies, with summarizes two workshops, in Octo- Logistics Support to Military Opera- distinguished scientific traditions ber 2013 and January 2014, on best tions. Logistics provides the back- and experts in a wide range of sci- practices for risk-informed remedy bone for Army combat operations: entific-technical fields. Given these selection, closure, and postclosure without fuel, ammunition, rations, strengths and the ability to learn from control of radioactive and chemi- and other supplies, the Army would one another, the US National Acad- cally contaminated sites that present grind to a halt. Aircraft can move emy of Sciences and India’s National significant difficulty for remediation large amounts of supplies, but the Institute for Advanced Studies, in to unrestricted release. The report vast majority must be carried on Bangalore, held a joint workshop to examines holistic approaches for ocean-going vessels and unloaded at identify and examine potential areas (1) remediating sites with multiple ports that may be at a great distance for substantive scientific and tech- contaminant sources and postclo- from the battlefield, increasing costs nical cooperation that can support sure uses and (2) incorporating a sus- not only in economic terms but also counterterrorism efforts through the tainability framework into decision in terms of lives lost in the move- Homeland Security Dialogue and making regarding site remediation, ment of the materiel. This report through direct cooperation. This closure, and postclosure control. It describes new technologies and sys- summary of that workshop exam- also discusses postclosure controls, tems to meet demand at the point ines biological threats; protection of assessment of long-term performance of need, make maintenance more nuclear facilities; security (physical of site remedies, and best practices efficient, improve inter- and intra- and cyber) for chemicals, chemical for risk-based remediation decisions. theater mobility, and improve near- facilities, and other critical infra- NAE member Michael C. Kava- real-time, in-transit visibility. It structure; and monitoring, surveil- naugh, principal, Geosyntec Con- provides a logistics-centric research lance, and emergency response. The sultants, was a member of the study and development investment strat- report also identifies and examines committee. Paper, $50.00. egy and illustrative examples of promising areas for further Indian- improved logistics in the future. US cooperation.

The Periodicals BRIDGE Postage Paid (USPS 551-240)

National Academy of Engineering 2101 Constitution Avenue NW Washington, DC 20418