Professor Thomas Webster Elected to College of Fellows of AIMBE
The College of Fellows of AIMBE is comprised of an exemplary group of approximately 900 medical and biological engineers. Founded in 1991, AIMBE has earned a reputation as a prestigious public policy leader on issues impacting the medical and biological community and is regarded as the preeminent voice in the field.
Webster received his bachelor of science degree in chemical engineering from the University of Pittsburgh, and his master’s degree and and Ph.D. in biomedical engineering from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. Professor Webster directs the Nanomedicine Laboratory which designs, synthesizes, and evaluates nanophase materials for various implant applications. Nanophase materials are central to the field of nanotechnology and are materials with one dimension less than 100 nm. Materials investigates to date include nanophase ceramics, metals, polymers, carbon fibers, and composites. Organ systems evaluated to date include orthopedic, cartilage, vascular, bladder, and the central and peripheral nervous systems.
His lab group has generated four books, 33 book chapters, 85 invited presentations (including tutorials), 215 literature articles and/or conference proceeding, and 245 conference presentations. Professor Webster has been awarded 11 full patents plus four provisional patents in his 11 years in academics (five years at Brown and six years at Purdue). His technology has resulted in one start-up company. He is the founding editor-in-chief of the International Journal of Nanomedicine and is on the editorial board of ten other journals. He has organized over 25 symposia at academic conferences. Dr. Webster was the 2002 recipient of the Biomedical Engineering Society Rita Schaffer Young Investigator Award, the 2004 recipient of the Outstanding Young Investigator Award for the Schools of Engineering at Purdue University, the 2004 finalist for the Young Investigator Award of the American Society for Nanomedicine, and the 2005 recipient of the Wallace Coulter Foundation Early Career Award.
Anastassia Astafieva ’12 and Karine Ip Kiun Chong ’12 Win Halpin Prize
Fifth Annual SWE Extreme Gingerbread House Competition
Twenty-two teams of 3-5 students and professors will be allowed to pre-register for the competition. Any additional teams that express interest will be placed on a waitlist in the event that a team does not arrive. If the team has not arrived within five minutes of the beginning of the event, their spot will be given to a team on the waitlist or a team that has shown up at the event without registering.
Each team will be supplied with two boxes of graham crackers, two Ziploc bags of royal icing, and a tray on which to construct their house. Additionally, all teams will be provided with an empty sandwich size Ziploc bag for taking the communal supplies. Foods such as candy canes, M&Ms, teddy grahams, shredded coconut, etc., will be kept on a central table. At the start of the one hour time slot of building, one member of each team will be allowed to take the empty Ziploc bag to the communal table and fill the bag with whatever supplies they feel are most valuable for their team’s house. All food items will be provided by SWE at the event; teams are NOT allowed to bring any of their own food.
The teams will have one hour to construct their houses out of the provided food. Houses should be designed to follow the criteria listed below:
- The house must fit on the provided tray and not cover the drilled-in holes.
- House dimensions must exceed 6”x6”x6”.
- The house must be hollow.
- The maximum wall thickness is 1”.
- The house must be glued/pasted to the tray; the house may not slide around the tray.
- The house should be designed to withstand earthquakes.
Teams are allowed to bring any tools that they think will be helpful such as knives, drills, etc. Teams are responsible for bringing the necessary power connections/extension cords. If you plan on using tools, please ensure you know how to use them safely and plan on bring the necessary personal protective equipment, such as safety glasses. No chemicals can be used during the manufacturing of the house; the house and all its contents must remain edible at all times.
After exactly one hour, the teams will be forced to stop construction on their houses. The houses will initially be judged before a panel of three faculty judges on (1) Attractiveness of the House [1-10 points] (2) Novel use of Building Materials [1-5 points] (3) Use of Available Space (ie decorations other than the house) [1-5 points]. Additionally, judges will have the option to select one “wildcard” house after viewing all the completed houses. Judges will award a bonus of three points to the house if they feel that one house was exceptional in a way that was not represented in the other scores; this is optional and at the judges discretion. The sum of these components will be used as the team’s aesthetic score.
The second portion of judging will be on the ability of the house to withstand a simulated earthquake. The tray will be attached to a shake table and cycled through a regimen moving from a low frequency to a high frequency. After every 15 seconds, the frequency will increase. Time will start when the shake table is turned on, and will be stopped when part of the house falls off the main structure; this includes decorations attached to the house, but not “environmental decorations” that are simply on the tray. The final call on whether a house has "failed" will be at the judges' discretion. Houses will not be judged until tables and floors are clean.
After all the houses have been tested, the maximum amount of time on the shake table to make a gingerbread house break will be used to calculate the scores, as shown below:
GroupTime
----------------------- x 50 = Total
Maximum Group Time
Total group scores will be calculated by combining the aesthetic score (out of 25 points) and the stability score (out of 50 points) for a total score out of 75 points. The team with the most points will be considered the winner. The team with the second highest number of points will be given second place and so forth. The top three teams will be awarded a prize.
When registering, each team will be asked to pay a registration fee of $6.00 to enter the event.
Nanowrinkles, nanofolds yield strange hidden channels
Qunyang Li ScM ’07 PhD ’08 and Jin Qian ScM ’09 PhD ’10 Recognized by Chinese Government
Dr. Qunyang Li and Dr. Jin Qian, who received their Ph.D. degrees in Engineering (Solid Mechanics) in 2008 and 2010, respectively, from Brown University have been selected among 143 Young Scholars (younger than 40 in Science and Engineering) of 2011 by the Chinese government. Their selection is part of the "Thousand Young Talents Program" of the Chinese government, in which only 25 engineers were selected from all areas of engineering. The program was created by the Chinese government and aims to attract the best global young researchers to work in China. According to the program, each selected awardee will be awarded 500,000 RMB of living subsidies and up to 3,000,000 RMB for scientific research funding.
Qunyang Li |
Jin Qian |
Is Solid or Engineered Hardwood Flooring Best for Your Home?
Wall-to-wall carpeting is mundane and gives a room a soft, fuzzy appearance. The material adds little to no character to the space and is not easy maintenance. Hardwood flooring, on the other hand, gives a room a warm and bright glow. Wood grains contrast from the furniture and give the space a distinct character. From light to dark wood to species with varying grain, hardwood flooring contributes just as much to the room as the walls and furniture. If adding wood to your home seems like a risk, here is some basic information about hardwood flooring.
Hardwood flooring is sold in solid and engineered varieties for nearly all species. Made fully out of wood, both types give your home the look of hardwood, but engineered flooring can be placed in more locations where moisture can be an issue.
Solid hardwood flooring is cut directly from a wood log into a solid plank, and tongues and grooves are added to all four sides. For installation purposes, solid flooring is 5/16ths to 3/4ths of an inch thick and should be nailed down over a wood-type subfloo. Solid hardwood, however, is sensitive to changes in humidity, and if you decide to add any solid species to your home, locations at or above the ground floor are ideal. Solid should not be added over a radiating heat source or over concrete unless it is a rift and quartered or shorts product.
Engineered flooring is also 100-percent hardwood but can be used in more places and has a different composition. Three to nine thin wood plys bonded together through heat and pressure make up a piece of engineered hardwood flooring. The engineered wood is more dimensionally stable and can be installed at or below ground level in a dry space. Engineered flooring can withstand dry basements and being placed over concrete slabs or a radiating heat source without warping.
Erik Taylor Wins BMES Graduate Student Award
This award consists of a certificate, a stipend of $500, and complimentary registration for the 2011 BMES Annual Meeting. The certificate was presented at the awards ceremony at the BMES Business Meeting on Thursday, October 13, 2011, in Hartford, Conn. The award has been presented each year since 1992 in recognition of outstanding biomedical engineering research.
Taylor, who was selected for a Fulbright Fellowship, will be leaving for India next semester to work on biofilm research and anti-infection strategies at IIT-Bombay in Mumbai for nine months. He will be working with Dr. Rinti Banerjee from IIT-Bombay through the Indo-U.S. Center for Biomaterials for Healthcare, co-directed by professors Bikram Basu and Thomas Webster.
Brown University and University of Rhode Island Team Wins $6.17 Million DOE EPSCoR grant
“This award represents a truly interdisciplinary research effort that brings together solid mechanics, chemistry and materials science,” said Guduru. “The research effort presents an opportunity for Brown and URI researchers to contribute to a technological area of national importance and forge strong collaborations with national labs and industry.”
“This new award contributes to the growing portfolio of engineering research at Brown in the energy and nanoscience fields,” said Dean Larry Larson. “These new fields are changing the way we live in thousands of different ways. Congratulations to all the faculty, post-docs, staff and students involved in these successful efforts.”
The objective of the reserach funded under the DOE EPSCoR grant is to establish a comprehensive research program at Brown University and University of Rhode Island to develop fundamental and quantitative understanding of degradation mechanisms that limit the performance and cycle life of LIBs; and use the insights gained to help develop materials and architectures with significantly improved performance.
The research program encompasses critical challenges in the three major battery components: anodes, electrolytes and cathodes. Mechanical and chemical degradation of electrodes associated with large volume changes during charging and discharging is a critical factor that limits their capacity and lifetime. However, the degradation mechanisms are not well-understood quantitatively, which is a critical obstacle in developing the next generation of LIBs. The research team will address the fundamental issues of mechanical behavior & performance, controlling electrochemical side-reactions, formation and stability of solid-electrolyte interphase (SEI) layers. Through a combined experimental and computational approach, the team plans to develop the necessary quantitative understanding, which can help make battery materials design a well-controlled, principle-based process with predictable outcomes, in contrast to the largely trial and error based empirical approach being followed currently. The PIs will work with collaborators in national laboratories and battery industry in addressing the relevant problems of highest impact for developing the next generation of higher energy density battery systems.
Brown University Wins $6.25 Million MURI grant from Army Research Office
Brown and Cal State Northridge are teaming up on a $6.25 million Multi-University Research Initiative (MURI) grant from the Army Research Office (ARO) to study “Stress Controlled Catalysis via Engineering Nanostructures”. The five-year project will be led by principal investigator Bill Curtin, with collaborators Pradeep Guduru and Sharvan Kumar in the School of Engineering, Shouheng Sun in Chemistry and Engineering, and Gang Lu in Physics at Cal State Northridge. Four graduate students and six postdocs will join the faculty in executing the research.
Professor Bill Curtin '81 |
The goal of the research is to demonstrate that macroscopic applied mechanical loading can be used to actively control and tune catalytic reactions through the use of innovative nanoscale material systems.
The challenge lies in obtaining stresses in the catalytic metal materials that are large enough to significantly influence the rates of selected chemical reactions in an overall catalytic process.
Associate Professor Pradeep Guduru |
Professor Sharvan Kumar |
If the principle is demonstrated, then it may be possible to increase catalytic efficiencies by using time-varying stresses to actively control the reactions during operation, opening up the field of catalysis to an entirely new space of materials design.
Nanomaterials Studies Advance Cancer Research
Behind the purple doors of a sixth-floor Barus and Holley Lab, Thomas Webster, associate professor of engineering, works small but thinks big. His work with nanomaterials, tiny devices implanted into the human body, has led to a potential breakthrough in cancer research.
Webster, director of the University's NanomedicineLaboratory, has been studying and developing nanotech implants for the past 11 years. His team had created rough implants covered in tiny "nano-features"— microscopic bumps — to "mimic the natural roughness of healthy skin," he said. "Current orthopedic implants are flat and smooth, but healthy skin and bone have bumps."
Two years ago, graduate student Lijuan Zhang approached Webster with a radical idea — exploring how nano-features would interact with cancer cells.
"Being the adventurous person I am, I said, ‘Let's try it,'" Webster said. It was completely new territory for Webster, but he said he was excited to see what would happen.
Within a year of research, a blink of an eye in lab time, Zhang approached Webster with results they both found fascinating. The addition of 23nm nano-features to a petri dish with both cancerous and healthy cells caused a significantly lower density of cancer cells over time.
Webster said he was pleased and intrigued by the results, but he knew the tests needed to be run at least three more times to verify any findings.
Zhang ran another trial and again found a lower density of cancer cells, but she also found something new — the nano-features inhibited the synthesis of a protein that aids in tumor growth.
The tests had initially been conducted with lung cancer cells, but later tests used breast cancer and bone cancer cells. Both reacted in the same manner — the nano-features lowered the density of cancer cells and decreased the synthesis of the tumor growth protein.
The next step is finding real-world applications, Webster said. "In order for any of this research to be useful, we need a company. We need to transition from the lab bench to a real product."
Webster said he hopes to apply their discovery to animal models and eventually human trials. "If all goes well, a product could appear in five years," he said.
By Hannah Kerman/BDH
Obama Agenda Item - Continue A Half-Century Of US Space Domination? Not On The List!
Associated Press item, April 7, 2010, "Cost for U.S. Astronauts to Ride on Russian Rockets Soars". The article explained that NASA has signed a contract to pay about $335 million for six US astronauts to be flown to the International Space Station in 2013-4, carried aboard the Russian Soyez capsule. This situation obtains because the Obama administration is quietly closing down America's space program and its supremacy in space. This will be the final year for the Space Shuttle, with no U.S. manned-space hardware to follow - leaving Russia with a monopoly. Mr. Obama ostensibly is killing the Space program to save money - at the peak of the Apollo program NASA was spending somewhat less than 4 percent of the federal budget (in terms of this year's budget, about $150 billion). Today the manned space program is being killed for want of $3 billion a year - 1/50th of the Apollo number and only 1/300th of Obama's stimulus package of last year.
For over fifty-eight years, since John Glenn's flight in 1962, the U.S. has dominated space, the final frontier - after the USSR took the initial lead in low-orbit flight (employing converted intercontinental-ballistic missile rockets to propel the first cosmonauts - the U.S. and NASA going for non-military rocket boosters). First there were orbits of Earth, a monkey, then a man, then multiple astronauts; then exploratory missions to the moon; then moon landings - all fraught with danger with many deaths; then came the International Space Station as an orbiting platform. National pride in such accomplishments was unsurpassed; however, as Charles Krauthammer, world affairs commentator, recently observed sadly, "Fifty years ago, Mr. Kennedy opened the New Frontier; Mr. Obama has just shut it."
While prior price arrangements between NASA and Russia for the ferrying of U.S. personnel were only about half as much per astronaut, the increase was demanded to enable Russia to build more Soyuz capsules (while the US justifies saving dollars by not building Space Shuttle follow-ons).
This drastic change in America's national program priorities has apparently been carried out below the radar screen of public awareness (the major media outlets keeping the story quiet), and it will probably be presented to the public as an economic and political benefit - after the pioneering effort by the government, it is now turning the launching of space vehicles to the private sector, while NASA'S efforts will be re-directed toward future ventures, such as landing on Mars. Augmenting the concept of viable private sector space activity, there are several private programs whereby civilians - at costs of several hundred thousands of dollars per traveler - are taken to the edge of space, carried by a sleek vehicle. These, however, achieve only altitude - no speeds as required for true space venturing. To escape Earth's gravity, space programs require tremendous rocket boosting for horizontal speeds of 18,000 miles per hour just for low orbit, and much greater speeds to escape Earth's gravitational force. There are some well-advertised private ventures to take civilians to space for several hundred thousand dollars each - however, these only achieve space altitude, there is no attendant booster-rocketry to acquire the necessary speed to achieve orbit, and much more for escape velocity, to reach the moon or Mars. (Note: The most meaningful concept of space orbital flight is that the vehicle must travel so fast that it is continually "falling" around Earth, gravity pulling the capsule into a circular trajectory. Higher speeds permit higher altitude orbiting - to escape Earth's gravity entirely for true space travel, more than 25,000 miles per hour speed is required. Of course, to return to Earth, there is then the problem of the extremes of re-entry heat, 2000 to 3000 degrees Fahrenheit; thus protective insulation of the occupants is required, and thus the extremely costly and fragile Shuttle re-entry tiles.)
Knowledgeable space engineers and scientists shake their heads sadly at the thought of a Mars venture - if the U.S. can't afford even a continuation of the hardware that achieved high orbit and the moon, it can only be ridiculous to minimize the astronomic increases in complexity, cost and risks of trying for a journey 150 times farther than the moon; only three days for a moon trip versus a half-year to reach Mars - with all the attendant dangers: effects of long-term weightlessness, exposure to cosmic rays, and the compounding hazards of complexity of mechanical hardware, software and the unknowns of space.
The curtain lowers quietly on one of the most glorious periods of United States history.
Aaron Kolom qualifies as a "rocket scientist" with over 50 years aerospace engineering: Stress Analyst to Chief of Structural Sciences on numerous military aircraft, to Corp. Director Structures and Materials, Asst. Chief Engineer Space Shuttle Program through first three flights (awarded NASA Public Service Medal), Rockwell International Corp.; Program Manager Concorde SST, VP Engineering TRE Corp.; Aerospace Consultant.