Proposal for a Generic Materials Processing Course

MRS Bulletin ◽  
1990 ◽  
Vol 15 (8) ◽  
pp. 35-36 ◽  
Author(s):  
Merton C. Flemings ◽  
Klavs F. Jensen ◽  
Andreas Mortensen
Keyword(s):  
Materials Science ◽  
Building Blocks ◽  
Materials Processing ◽  
Structure Property ◽  
Science And Engineering ◽  
Specific Subject ◽  
Amorphous Phases ◽  
Property Relations ◽  
Materials Science And Engineering ◽  
The Subject

In the early 1950s when “materials science” was beginning to take shape in the minds of educators in materials departments, discussions were heated on the subject of how (and whether) intellectually rich courses could be developed with such broad coverage. It was argued by many that materials are too complex and vary too greatly from one another in their properties and in their applications to be treated in a single course. These individuals argued that if “materials” was to be taught, then it would have to be in courses or segments of courses broken down by materials classes-metals, ceramic, polymers, semiconductors.A full generation of faculty has passed through our ranks since those days, and the arguments regarding teaching of at least the beginning materials science subjects are now muted and perhaps moot. Few materials departments begin today with a materials-specific subject (e.g., metallurgy, ceramics) for either their own students or as a service subject for other engineering departments. Most begin with a subject in materials science or materials science and engineering that deals generically with all materials for at least a major portion of the subject. Examples are drawn from individual materials classes, and emphasis may shift to individual materials classes as the subject progresses.The key to development of these subjects, and the intellectual foundation on which they rest, is structure and structure-property relations. We can understand, and teach, how the building blocks of materials (atoms, molecules, grains, amorphous phases, etc.) fit together to build macroscopic structures.

Specific Materials Science and Engineering Education

MRS Bulletin ◽  
1987 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 30-33 ◽  
Author(s):  
D.W. Readey
Keyword(s):  
Materials Science ◽  
Academic Departments ◽  
Material Structure ◽  
Structure And Properties ◽  
Structure Property ◽  
Science And Engineering ◽  
Materials Engineering ◽  
Metallurgical Engineering ◽  
Materials Science And Engineering ◽  
Common Interests

Forty years ago there were essentially no academic departments with titles of “Materials Science” or “Materials Engineering.” There were, of course, many materials departments. They were called “Metallurgy,” “Metallurgical Engineering,” “Mining and Metallurgy,” and other permutations and combinations. There were also a small number of “Ceramic” or “Ceramic Engineering” departments. Essentially none included “polymers.” Over the years titles have evolved via a route that frequently followed “Mining and Metallurgy,” to “Metallurgical Engineering,” to “Materials Science and Metallurgical Engineering,” and finally to “Materials Science and Engineering.” The evolution was driven by recognition of the commonality of material structure-property correlations and the concomitant broadening of faculty interests to include other materials. However, the issue is not department titles but whether a single degree option in materials science and engineering best serves the needs of students.Few proponents of materials science and engineering dispute the necessity for understanding the relationships between processing (including synthesis), structure, and properties (including performance) of materials. However, can a single BS degree in materials science and engineering provide the background in these relationships for all materials and satisfy the entire market now served by several different materials degrees?The issue is not whether “Materials Science and Engineering” departments or some other academic grouping of individuals with common interests should or should not exist.

Views on a Comprehensive Materials Science and Engineering Education Program

MRS Bulletin ◽  
1987 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 28-29
Author(s):  
G.J. Abbaschian ◽  
P.H. Hollow
Keyword(s):  
Chemical Engineering ◽  
Materials Science ◽  
Electronic Materials ◽  
Main Theme ◽  
Structure Property ◽  
Science And Engineering ◽  
Processing Application ◽  
Societal Needs ◽  
Materials Science And Engineering ◽  
Evolutionary Growth

Educational programs in materials science and engineering (MSE) departments must be comprehensive, addressing the main theme of structure-property-processing-application relationships in all materials. In addition, the programs must be dynamic in order to improve materials according to the requirements of our society. Dynamic materials limits and societal needs require the materials field to change constantly over relatively short times. In this respect, education in MSE differs substantially from that in traditional departments such as chemistry, physics, mechanical and chemical engineering, and even the more narrow fields of metallurgical, ceramics and polymer engineering.It may be argued that all departments, scientific or engineering, are dynamic because they are constantly changing and maturing. Obviously, though, departments close to maturity change less rapidly than young departments. MSE, a young department, is changing rapidly from both steady evolutionary growth as well as quantum changes in scope (e.g., electronic materials). In fact, advances in MSE have necessitated a redefinition of scope for other fields. A good example is the field of computers and communication, which is directly tied to the growth, processing, and characterization of high purity semiconductor materials. The opposite is true as well (e.g., high transition temperature superconducting materials). The old adage of “a good design will be limited by the materials available” is true. As such, MSE plays a dual role—simultaneously advancing and impeding progress in other areas of science and engineering.

Web Modules Linking Mechanics and Materials Science

2001 ◽  
Vol 684 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Roylance ◽  
C. H. Jenkins ◽  
S. K. Khanna
Keyword(s):  
National Science Foundation ◽  
Materials Science ◽  
Aircraft Design ◽  
Engineering Curriculum ◽  
Science And Engineering ◽  
Industrial Practice ◽  
Mechanics Of Materials ◽  
National Science ◽  
Materials Science And Engineering ◽  
The Subject

ABSTRACTIn 1996, the MIT subject 3.11 Mechanics of Materials in the Department of Materials Science and Engineering began using an experimental new textbook approach, written with a strongly increased emphasis on the materials aspects of the subject. It also included several topics such as finite element methods, fracture mechanics, and statistics that are not included in most traditional Mechanics of Materials texts. These nontraditional aspects were designed to fit the curriculum in Materials Science and Engineering, although admittedly Mechanics instructors in other departments and schools might not find all of them suitable for their own subjects. Further, a number of topics may be of interest in educational curricula and industrial practice outside traditional Mechanics subjects.One approach to increasing the flexibility and adaptability of this materials-oriented text is to make discrete and coherent portions of it available as stand-alone, web-available modules. Instructors could then pick and choose among topics, and assemble a subject offering in whatever way they choose. It would also be possible for instructors of specialty engineering subjects, for instance bridge or aircraft design, to add modules on mechanics of materials aimed at their own needs.A series of such modules are now being developed under a National Science Foundation Course, Curriculum and Laboratory Improvement (CCLI) grant aimed at strengthening the links in the engineering curriculum between materials and mechanics. Each module is intended to be capable of standing alone, so that it will usually be unnecessary to work through other modules in order to use any particular one. This approach will be outlined and demonstrated, both as an approach to the specific topic of a mechanics-materials linkage, and as a possibility for more general implementation in distance learning.

Materials in Sports a New Concept for the Teaching of Materials Science and Engineering

1985 ◽  
Vol 66 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lynn J. Ebert ◽  
Gary M. Michal
Keyword(s):  
Engineering Students ◽  
Materials Science ◽  
First Year ◽  
Structure Property ◽  
Science And Engineering ◽  
Engineering Structures ◽  
Full Spectrum ◽  
Materials Science And Engineering ◽  
Sporting Activities ◽  
Common Items

ABSTRACTMost sports equipment in common use today represents highly developed engineering structures. Many of the equipment items have evolved empirically, but nonetheless can be used to illustrate basic principles of materials engineering, applied mechanics and kinetics. Using the most common items of sports equipment (footballs, tennis racquets, vaulting poles, etc.), a new course has been developed which introduces first year science and engineering students to materials science and engineering, as well as basic engineering, using a medium they can relate to personally—sports. Emphasis is placed upon the factors which make the equipment functional. These factors include both the basic materials from which the equipment is made and its fundamental design. Detailed treatment is given to the origin of the various species of materials. The processing used to produce the full spectrum of properties required of the various equipment items and the important structure-property relations in the equipment's use are presented. “Hands-on” experiments, guest lectures by world authorities in several fields of sporting activities and equipment use demonstrations compliment the lecture-recitations of the course.

scholarly journals PENELITIAN KEWIRAUSAHAAN DI INDONESIA : PEMETAAN PUBLIKASI DALAM PERSPEKTIF SCIENTOMETRIK (1972-2019)

AdBispreneur ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 207
Author(s):  
Agung Purnomo ◽  
Indrianawati Usman ◽  
Nur Asitah
Keyword(s):  
Materials Science ◽  
Subject Area ◽  
Research Data ◽  
Application Research ◽  
Science And Engineering ◽  
Bibliometric Method ◽  
Conference Series ◽  
Search Results ◽  
Materials Science And Engineering ◽  
The Subject

Entrepreneurship in Indonesia continues to grow and develop. However, there were no studies that review and map entrepreneurial studies from Indonesian affiliated researchers with data from year to year. This research aims to map entrepreneurial research by Indonesian institutional affiliated researchers that was published internationally in the Scopus indexed in a Scientometric perspective. The study conducted a bibliometric method and analyzed research data using the analyze search results service from Scopus and the VOSviewer application. Research data of 947 academic documents published from 1972 to 2019 were obtained from the Scopus database in March 2020. The results showed the most productive Indonesian-affiliated institutions and individual researchers in entrepreneurship publications were Institut Teknologi Bandung and Grisna Anggadwita. The subject area and sources of the most publications of entrepreneurship were business, management, and accounting; and proceedings of the IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering. There were five groups of research keywords, and three collaboration patterns of Indonesian affiliated researchers in the field of entrepreneurship. Kewirausahaan di Indonesia kian tumbuh dan berkembang. Namun, belum ada penelitian yang mengulas dan memetakan studi kewirausahaan hasil peneliti berafiliasi Indonesia dengan data dari tahun ke tahun. Riset ini bertujuan untuk memetakan penelitian kewirausahaan oleh peneliti berafiliasi institusi Indonesia yang dipublikasikan internasional bereputasi terindeks Scopus dalam perspektif Scientometrik. Studi melakukan metode bibliometrik dan menganalisis data penelitian menggunakan layanan analyze search results dari Scopus dan aplikasi VOSviewer. Data penelitian 947 dokumen akademik yang diterbitkan dari tahun 1972 hingga tahun 2019 yang diperoleh dari database Scopus pada bulan Maret 2020. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan institusi dan individu peneliti berafiliasi Indonesia paling produktif dalam publikasi bidang kewirausahaan adalah Institut Teknologi Bandung dan Grisna Anggadwita. Bidang studi dan sumber publikasi terbanyak ranah kewirausahaan adalah bisnis, manajemen, dan akuntansi; dan prosiding IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering. Ada lima kelompok kata kunci penelitian, dan tiga pola kolaborasi peneliti berafiliasi Indonesia pada bidang kewirausahaan. 

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document