View allAll Photos Tagged Engineering
Nearly 120 students, teachers and others attended Portland District’s Engineering Day event Feb. 18. During the day they rotated through a series of hands-on workshops and discussion panels and also toured the Park Avenue West Tower construction site hosted by TMT Development, KPFF and Hoffman Construction. The Society of American Military Engineers provided a complimentary luncheon and sponsored a mini job fair staffed by local engineering firms and Oregon state University. Students were split into groups during the day and were mentored by more than a dozen of the District's Engineer-in-Training employees. Students from 25 high schools participated some coming from far away north as Tacoma, Wash. and east from Hood River, Ore.
The Engineering Design Showcase is the culminating experience for engineering seniors who have completed their engineering coursework and applied their skills to a real-world problem or client-based project. The 2018 event featured the work of more than 700 students and nearly 200 student design teams and brought together more than 150 industrial professionals from 100 companies representing eight areas of research and expertise. The success of the Showcase was made possible by the sponsorship of Chevron and the support from Boeing and the UC Davis Internship and Career Center.
(Lucy Knowles/ UC Davis)
Ulsterbus Engineering shortened Leyland Tiger N type 1255, OXI 1255. It is seen here just back from conversion and painting into this livery. 1255 is based in Newtownabbey depot where it is seen here. The towbus in the backround is the pervious engineering vehicle, X type bodied Leyland Leopard 117, YAZ 6412 (previously ROI 117)
+++ DISCLAIMER +++Nothing you see here is real, even though the conversion or the presented background story might be based historical facts. BEWARE!
Some background:
The Gudkov Gu-1 was a Soviet fighter aircraft produced shortly after World War II in small numbers at the start of the jet age, but work on the Gudkov Gu-1 already started in 1944. Towards the end of World War II the Soviet Union saw the need for a strategic bombing capability similar to that of the United States Army Air Forces. The Soviet VVS air arm had the locally designed Petlyakov Pe-8 four-engined heavy bomber in service at the start of the war, but only 93 had been built by the end of the war and the type had become obsolete. By that time the U.S. regularly conducted bombing raids on Japan from distant Pacific forward bases using B-29 Superfortresses, and the Soviet Air Force lacked this capability.
Joseph Stalin ordered the development of a comparable bomber, and the U.S. twice refused to supply the Soviet Union with B-29s under Lend Lease. However, on four occasions during 1944, individual B-29s made emergency landings in Soviet territory and one crashed after the crew bailed out. In accordance with the Soviet–Japanese Neutrality Pact, the Soviets were neutral in the Pacific War and the bombers were therefore interned and kept by the Soviets. Despite Soviet neutrality, America demanded the return of the bombers, but the Soviets refused. Three repairable B-29s were flown to Moscow and delivered to the Tupolev OKB. One B-29 was dismantled, the second was used for flight tests and training, and the third one was left as a standard for cross-reference.
Stalin told Tupolev to clone the Superfortress in as short a time as possible. The reverse-engineering effort involved 900 factories and research institutes, who finished the design work during the first year. 105,000 drawings were made, and the American technology had to be adapted to local material and manufacturing standards – and ended in a thorough re-design of the B-29 “under the hood”. By the end of the second year, the Soviet industry was to produce 20 copies of the aircraft ready for State acceptance trials.
While work on what would become the Tupolev Tu-4 was on the way, the need for a long range escort fighter arose, too. Soviet officials were keen on the P-51 Mustang, but, again, the USA denied deliveries, so that an indigenous solution had to be developed. With the rising tension of international relationships, this became eventually the preferred solution, too.
While the design bureau Lavochkin had already started with work on the La-9 fighter (which entered service after WWII) and the jet age was about to begin, the task of designing a long range escort fighter for the Tu-4 was relegated to Mikhail I. Gudkov who had been designing early WWII fighters like the LaGG-1 and -3 together with Lavochkin. Internally, the new fighter received the project handle "DIS" (Dalnij Istrebitel' Soprovozhdenya ="long-range escort fighter").
In order to offer an appropriate range and performance that could engage enemy interceptors in the bombers’ target area it was soon clear that neither a pure jet nor a pure piston-engine fighter was a viable solution – a dilemma the USAAF was trying to solve towards 1945, too. The jet engine alone did not offer sufficient power, and fuel consumption was high, so that the necessary range could never be achieved with an agile fighter. Late war radials had sufficient power and offered good range, but the Soviet designers were certain that the piston engine fighter had no future – especially when fast jet fighters had to be expected over enemy territory.
Another problem arose through the fact that the Soviet Union did not have an indigenous jet engine at hand at all in late 1945. War booty from Germany in the form of Junkers Jumo 004 axial jet engines and blueprints of the more powerful HeS 011 were still under evaluation, and these powerplants alone did neither promise enough range nor power for a long range fighter aircraft. Even for short range fighters their performance was rather limited – even though fighters like the Yak-15 and the MiG-9 were designed around them.
After many layout experiments and calculation, Gudkov eventually came up with a mixed powerplant solution for the DIS project. But unlike the contemporary, relatively light I-250 (also known as MiG-13) interceptor, which added a mechanical compressor with a primitive afterburner (called VRDK) to a Klimov VK-107R inline piston engine, the DIS fighter was equipped with a powerful radial engine and carried a jet booster – similar to the US Navy’s Ryan FR-1 “Fireball”. Unlike the FR-1, though, the DIS kept a conservative tail-sitter layout and was a much bigger aircraft.
The choice for the main powerplant fell on the Shvetsov ASh-82TKF engine, driving a large four blade propeller. This was a boosted version of the same 18 cylinder twin row radial that powered the Tu-4, the ASh-73. The ASh-82TKF for the escort fighter project had a rating of 2,720 hp (2,030 kW) while the Tu-4's ASh-73TK had "only" a temporary 2,400 hp (1,800 kW) output during take-off. The airframe was designed around this massive and powerful engine, and the aircraft’s sheer size was also a result of the large fuel capacity which was necessary to meet the range target of at least 3.000 km (1.860 mi, 1.612 nmi).
The ASh-82TKF alone offered enough power for a decent performance, but in order to take on enemy jet fighters and lighter, more agile propeller-driven fighters, a single RD-20 axial-flow turbojet with 7.8 kN (1,754 lbf) thrust was added in the rear-fuselage. It was to add power for take-off and in combat situations only. Its fixed air intakes were placed on the fuselage flanks, right behind the cockpit, and the jet pipe was placed under the fin and the stabilizers.
Outwardly, Gudkov’s DIS resembled the late American P-47D or the A-1 Skyraider a lot, and the beefy aircraft was comparable in size and weight, too. But the Soviet all-metal aircraft was a completely new construction and featured relatively small and slender laminar flow wings. The wide-track landing gear retracted inwards into the inner wings while the tail wheel retracted fully into a shallow compartment under the jet pipe.
The pilot sat in a spacious cockpit under a frameless bubble canopy with very good all-round visibility and enjoyed amenities for long flights such as increased padding in the seat, armrests, and even a urinal. In addition, a full radio navigation suite was installed for the expected long range duties over long stretches of featureless landscape like the open sea.
Armament consisted of four 23 mm Nudelman-Suranov NS-23 cannons with 100 RPG in the wings, outside of the propeller arc. The guns were good for a weight of fire of 6kg (13.2 lb)/sec, a very good value. Five wet hardpoints under the fuselage, the wings outside of the landing gear well and under the wing tips could primarily carry auxiliary drop tanks or an external ordnance of up to 1.500 kg (3.300 lb).
Alternatively, iron bombs of up to 500 kg (1.100 lb) caliber could be carried on the centerline pylon, and a pair of 250 kg (550 lb) bombs under the wings, but a fighter bomber role was never seriously considered for the highly specialized and complex aircraft.
The first DIS prototype, still without the jet booster, flew in May 1947. The second prototype, with both engines installed, had its fuel capacity increased by an additional 275 l (73 US gal) in an additional fuel tank behind the cockpit. The aircraft was also fitted with larger tires to accommodate the increased all-up weight, esp. with all five 300 l drop tanks fitted for maximum range and endurance.
Flight testing continued until 1948 and the DIS concept proved to be satisfactory, even though the complicated ASh-82TKF hampered the DIS’ reliability - to the point that fitting the ASh-73TK from the Tu-4 was considered for serial production, even if this would have meant a significant reduction in performance. The RD-20 caused lots of trouble, too. Engine reliability was generally poor, and re-starting the engine in flight did not work satisfactorily – a problem that, despite several changes to the starter and ignition system, could never be fully cured. The jet engine’s placement in the tail, together with the small tail wheel, also caused problems because the pilots had to take care that the tail would not aggressively hit the ground upon landings, because the RD-20 and its attachments were easily damaged.
Nevertheless, the DIS basically fulfilled the requested performance specifications and was, despite many shortcomings, eventually cleared for production in mid 1948. It received the official designation Gudkov Gu-1, honoring the engineer behind the aircraft, even though the aircraft was produced by Lavochkin.
The first machines were delivered to VVS units in early 1949 - just in time for the Tu-4's service introduction after the Russians had toiled endlessly on solving several technical problems. In the meantime, jet fighter development had quickly progressed, even though a purely jet-powered escort fighter for the Tu-4 was still out of question. Since the Gu-1 was capricious, complex and expensive to produce, only a limited number left the factories and emphasis was put on the much simpler and more economical Lavochkin La-11 escort fighter, a lightweight evolution of the proven La-9. Both types were regarded as an interim solution until a pure jet escort fighter would be ready for service.
Operationally the Gu-1s remained closely allocated to the VVS’ bomber squadrons and became an integral part of them. Anyway, since the Tu-4 bomber never faced a serious combat situation, so did the Gu-1, which was to guard it on its missions. For instance, both types were not directly involved in the Korean War, and the Gu-1 was primarily concentrated at the NATO borders to Western Europe, since bomber attacks in this theatre would certainly need the heavy fighter’s protection.
The advent of the MiG-15 - especially the improved MiG-15bis with additional fuel capacities and drop tanks, quickly sounded the death knell for the Gu-1 and any other post-WWII piston-engine fighter in Soviet Service. As Tu-4 production ended in the Soviet Union in 1952, so did the Gu-1’s production after only about 150 aircraft. The Tu-4s and their escort fighters were withdrawn in the 1960s, being replaced by more advanced aircraft including the Tupolev Tu-16 jet bomber (starting in 1954) and the Tupolev Tu-95 turboprop bomber (starting in 1956).
The Gudkov Gu-1, receiving the NATO ASCC code “Flout”, remained a pure fighter. Even though it was not a success, some proposals for updates were made - but never carried out. These included pods with unguided S-5 air-to-air-rockets, to be carried on the wing hardpoints, bigger, non-droppable wing tip tanks for even more range or, alternatively, the addition of two pulsejet boosters on the wing tips.
There even was a highly modified mixed powerplant version on the drawing boards in 1952, the Gu-1M. Its standard radial powerplant for cruise flight was enhanced with a new, non-afterburning Mikulin AM-5 axial flow jet engine with 2.270 kgf/5,000 lbf/23 kN additional thrust in the rear fuselage. With this temporary booster, a top speed of up to 850 km/h was expected. But to no avail - the pure jet fighter promised a far better performance and effectiveness, and the Gu-1 remained the only aircraft to exclusively carry the Gudkov name.
General characteristics:
Crew: 1
Length: 12 m (39 ft 4 in)
Wingspan: 14 m (45 ft 11 in)
Height: 4.65 m (15 ft 3 in)
Wing area: 28 m² (301.388 ft²)
Airfoil:
Empty weight: 4,637 kg (10,337 lb)
Loaded weight: 6.450 kg (14.220 lb)
Maximum take-off weight: 7,938 kg (17,500 lb)
Powerplant:
1× Shvetsov ASh-82TKF 18-cylinder air-cooled radial engine, rated at 2,720 hp (2,030 kW)
1x RD-20 axial-flow turbojet with 7.8 kN (1,754 lbf) thrust as temporary booster
Performance
Maximum speed: 676 km/h (420 mph) at 29,000 ft (8,839 m) with the radial only,
800 km/h (497 mph/432 kn,) with additional jet booster
Cruise speed: 440 km/h (237 kn, 273 mph)
Combat radius: 820 nmi (945 mi, 1,520 km)
Maximum range: 3.000 km (1.860 mi, 1.612 nmi) with drop tanks
Service ceiling: 14,680 m (48,170 ft)
Wing loading: 230.4 kg/m² (47.2 lb/ft²)
Power/mass: 0.28 kW/kg (0.17 hp/lb)
Climb to 5,000 m (16,400 ft): 5 min 9 sec;
Climb to 10,000 m (32,800 ft): 17 min 38 sec;
Climb to 13,000 m (42,640 ft): 21 min 03 sec
Armament
4× 23 mm Nudelman-Suranov NS-23 cannons with 100 RPG in the outer wings
Five hardpoints for an external ordnance of 1.500 kg (3.300 lb)
The kit and its assembly:
This whif is the incarnation of a very effective kitbashing combo that already spawned my fictional Japanese Ki-104 fighter, and it is another submission to the 2018 “Cold War” group build at whatifmodelers.com. This purely fictional Soviet escort fighter makes use of my experiences from the first build of this kind, yet with some differences.
The kit is a bashing of various parts and pieces:
· Fuselage, wing roots, landing gear and propeller from an Academy P-47D
· Wings from an Ark Model Supermarine Attacker (ex Novo)
· Tail fin comes from a Heller F-84G
· The stabilizers were taken from an Airfix Ki-46
· Cowling from a Matchbox F6F, mounted and blended onto the P-47 front
· Jet exhaust is the intake of a Matchbox Me 262 engine pod
My choice fell onto the Academy Thunderbolt because it has engraved panel lines, offers the bubble canopy as well as good fit, detail and solid material. The belly duct had simply been sliced off, and the opening later faired over with styrene sheet and putty, so that the P-47’s deep belly would not disappear.
The F6F cowling was chosen because it looks a lot like the ASh-73TK from the Tu-4. But this came at a price: the P-47 cowling is higher, tighter and has a totally different shape. It took serious body sculpting with putty to blend the parts into each other. Inside of the engine, a styrene tube was added for a metal axis that holds the uncuffed OOB P-47 four blade propeller. The P-47’s OOB cockpit tub was retained, too, just the seat received scratched armrests for a more luxurious look.
The Attacker wings were chosen because of their "modern" laminar profile. The Novo kit itself is horrible and primitive, but acceptable for donations. OOB, the Attacker wings had too little span for the big P-47, so I decided to mount the Thunderbolt's OOB wings and cut them at a suitable point: maybe 0.5", just outside of the large main wheel wells. The intersection with the Attacker wings is almost perfect in depth and width, relatively little putty work was necessary in order to blend the parts into each other. I just had to cut out new landing gear wells from the lower halves of the Attacker wings, and with new attachment points the P-47’s complete OOB landing gear could be used.
With the new wing shape, the tail surfaces had to be changed accordingly. The trapezoid stabilizers come from an Airfix Mitsubishi Ki-46, and their shape is a good match. The P-47 fin had to go, since I wanted something bigger and a different silhouette. The fuselage below was modified with a jet exhaust, too. I actually found a leftover F-84G (Heller) tail, complete with the jet pipe and the benefit that it has plausible attachment points for the stabilizers far above the jet engine in the Gu-1’s tail.
However, the F-84 jet pipe’s diameter turned out to be too large, so I went for a smaller but practical alternative, a Junkers Jumo 004 nacelle from a Me 262 (the ancestor of the Soviet RD-20!). Its intake section was cut off, flipped upside down, the fin was glued on top of it and then the new tail was glued to the P-47 fuselage. Some (more serious) body sculpting was necessary to create a more or less harmonious transition between the parts, but it worked.
The plausible placement of the air intakes and their shape was a bit of a challenge. I wanted them to be obvious, but still keep an aerodynamic look. An initial idea had been to keep the P-47’s deep belly and widen the central oil cooler intake under the nose, but I found the idea wacky and a bit pointless, since such a long air duct would not make much sense since it would waste internal space and the long duct’s additional weight would not offer any benefit?
Another idea were air intakes in the wing roots, but these were also turned down since the landing gear wells would be in the way, and placing the ducts above or below the wings would also make no sense. A single ventral scoop (looking like a P-51 radiator bath) or two smaller, dorsal intakes (XP-81 style) behind the cockpit were other serious candidates – but these were both rejected because I wanted to keep a clean side profile.
I eventually settled for very simple, fixed side intakes, level with the jet exhaust, somewhat inspired by the Lavochkin La-200B heavy fighter prototype. The air scoops are simply parts from an Italeri Saab 39 Gripen centerline drop tank (which has a flat, oval diameter), and their shape is IMHO a perfect match.
Painting and markings:
While the model itself is a wild mix of parts with lots of improvisation involved, I wanted to keep the livery rather simple. The most plausible choice would have been an NMF finish, but I rather wanted some paint – so I used Soviet La-9 and -11 as a benchmark and settled for a simple two-tone livery: uniform light grey upper and light blue lower surfaces.
I used RAF Medium Sea Grey (Humbrol 165) and Soviet Underside Blue (Humbrol 114) as basic tones, and, after a black ink wash, these were lightened up through dry-brushed post-shading. The yellow spinner and fin tip are based on typical (subtle) squadron markings of the late 40ies era.
The cockpit as well the engine and landing gear interior became blue-grey (Revell 57), similar to the typical La-9/11’s colors. The green wheel discs and the deep blue propeller blades are not 100% in the aircraft's time frame, but I added these details in order to enhance the Soviet touch and some color accents.
Tactical markings were kept simple, too. The "38" and the Red Stars come form a Mastercraft MiG-15, the Guards badge from a Begemoth MiG-25 sheet and most of the stencils were taken from a Yak-38 sheet, also from Begemoth.
Finally, the kit was sealed with matt acrylic varnish (Italeri) and it received some mild soot stains and chipped paint around the cockpit and on the leading edges. Some oil stains were added around the engine (with Tamiya Smoke), too.
A massive aircraft, and this new use of the P-47/Attacker combo results again in a plausible solution. The added jet engine might appear a bit exotic, but the mixed powerplant concept was en vogue after WWII, but only a few aircraft made it beyond the prototype stage.
While painting the model I also wondered if an all dark blue livery and some USN markings could also have made this creation the Grumman JetCat? With the tall fin, the Gu-1 could also be an F8F Bearcat on steroids? Hmmm...
The Engineering Design Showcase is the culminating experience for engineering seniors who have completed their engineering coursework and applied their skills to a real-world problem or client-based project. The 2018 event featured the work of more than 700 students and nearly 200 student design teams and brought together more than 150 industrial professionals from 100 companies representing eight areas of research and expertise. The success of the Showcase was made possible by the sponsorship of Chevron and the support from Boeing and the UC Davis Internship and Career Center.
(Lucy Knowles/ UC Davis)
The Seri Wawasan Bridge is one of the main bridges in Putrajaya. The concrete bridge is a combination of cable backstays and structural steel tie back. It is a dual three lane carriageways of 18.6m width each, comprising 3 x 3.5m width lanes, 0.5 m hard shoulder, 0.5m marginal strip. The median is 4 m wide and walkway cum cycle track width is 5.1m giving a total width of 37.2m at the centre of the bridge.
Title: Chemical Engineering Department, Paper Laboratory
Date: 1926-1929
Description: Students and faculty using machinery to experiment with paper, Iowa State College Department of Chemical Engineering, Paper Laboratory, 1926-1929.
ID: 11-04-F.ChemEng.836-01-02
Copyright 2012, Iowa State University Library, University Archives for Reproductions: www.lib.iastate.edu/spcl/services/photfees.html
Color postcard of the Engineering Building. Typed on the front is: "Mechanical Building, Michigan Agricultural College, Lansing, Mich." Written on the back is: "Mr. Dick Baas Holland Mich. R.D. #11." "Jan. 24, 1914. Friend Dick: I think it will make very little difference as to when I fulfill my promise by sending you this card. I suppose this fine winter weather is keeping you in the best of spirits -- (not the liquid of course). Say Hello to the fellows for me. Will be very glad to hear from you. Friend - G. Bloemendal. Williams Hall East Lansing, Mich." It is postmarked East Lansing, Michigan, January 25, 1915, 7 a.m.
This building was built is 1907 and was destroyed by fire in 1916. Ransom E. Olds preserved the university's engineering program when he donated $100,000 toward the reconstruction efforts after President Frank Kedzie made a personal appeal. The current R. E. Olds Hall, dedicated on June 1, 1917, was erected on the foundation of the former Engineering Building and was built to similar specifications.
Circa 1914
Repository Information:
Michigan State University Archives & Historical Collections, Conrad Hall, 888 Wilson Rd., Room 101, East Lansing, MI 48824, archives.msu.edu
Subjects:
Michigan State University -- Buildings -- Engineering Building
Resource Identifier:
A000942
by Caliper Studio
The abbreviation PLC stands for programmable logic controller. It is utilised to automate any electromechanical method. The PLC is designed as a compatible input and output device appropriate for extended temperature ranges. It is resistant to electrical noise, vibration and...
Read more about Plc Engineering
(Source from Chinese Rapid Prototyping Blog)
When MU engineering students learned that St. Patrick was the Patron Saint of Engineers, they adopted the shamrock as a symbol of the Engineering School. They celebrate engineering during St. Patrick's Day. Legend says that if you walk across this logo, you're destined to marry an engineer. Of course I walked on it.
Jamey Young, assistant professor of chemical and biomolecular engineering, likes to build bridges. But rather than physical structures, Young focuses on spanning the divide between biology and engineering, diabetes and cancer, and plants and animals.
Cell metabolism—especially its rate, known as flux—is the thread that connects his various research interests.
Read more: www.vanderbilt.edu/magazines/vanderbilt-engineering/2012/...
The UC Davis College of Engineering presented its annual Scholar Awards during a recognition ceremony at 3 p.m. on Tuesday, May 27, 2014 in the AGR Room of the campus’ Alumni and Visitor Center.
The ceremony featured 70 awards worth a combined total of $218,000. Specific awards have been sponsored by corporations that include Boeing, Bushnell Outdoor Products, Chevron, Micron, Phillips 66, Texas Instruments and Union Pacific.
College of Engineering students applied for the various awards via an online application that required short answers to questions designed to spur creativity and reveal details about applicant interests. Sample questions included “Cite your favorite UC Davis course, and why” and “Describe yourself in a tweet.” Applications then were reviewed, and winners selected, by faculty within each College of Engineering department.
The Scholar Awards are an excellent opportunity for students to demonstrate enthusiasm for their engineering fields of choice, while obtaining some extra money to help support their education. The corporate donors benefit as well, since it allows them to establish relationships with top College of Engineering undergraduates.
Student involvement and corporate sponsorship have grown significantly this year; by way of comparison, the 2013 Scholar Awards honored 40 individuals with cash awards that totaled $60,000.
Photo by T.J. Ushing/Academic Technology Services
Boeing has delivered a Next-Generation 737 with the new Boeing Sky Interior to Ethiopian Airlines, making it the second African carrier to own and operate Boeing’s innovative interior.
Boeing provides this photo for the public to share. Media interested in high-resolution images for publication should email boeingmedia@boeing.com or visit boeing.mediaroom.com. Users may not manipulate or use this photo in commercial materials, advertisements, emails, products, or promotions without licensed permission from Boeing. If you are interested in using Boeing imagery for commercial purposes, email imagelicensing@boeing.com or visit www.boeingimages.com.
Sacred Heart University Engineering hosted the Connecticut Engineering Tech Challenge with the Connecticut Technology Council on October 19, 2018, at the West Campus Makerspace. Photo by Mark F. Conrad
Engineering for Health E4H
Centre interdisciplinaire pour l'ingénierie et la santé
© Ecole polytechnique / Institut Polytechnique de Paris / J.Barande
TYNDALL AIR FORCE BASE, Fla., April 15, 2014 - Senior Airman Axel Fiksman, from the 116th Civil Engineering Squadron (CES), Georgia Air National Guard, takes a measurement during the construction of a wall during Silver Flag training
During the weeklong course, Guardsmen from the 116th CES and more than 30 other U.S. Air Force and Air National Guard units trained on building and maintaining bare-base operations at a forward-deployed location. In addition, they honed their combat and survival skills, repaired simulated bomb-damaged runways, set up base facilities and established various critical base operating support capabilities.
(Georgia Air National Guard photo by Master Sgt. Roger Parsons/Released)
During the Engineering Fair at the Azusa, Calif. campus on Feb. 19, Flight Operations team members Cecile Le-Mai, Esther Ho, and Mable Hwang presented to employees the dynamic world of Flight Operations, from launch readiness and early-on-orbit testing through on-orbit sustainment.
The UC Davis College of Engineering presented its annual Scholar Awards during a recognition ceremony at 3 p.m. on Tuesday, May 27, 2014 in the AGR Room of the campus’ Alumni and Visitor Center.
The ceremony featured 70 awards worth a combined total of $218,000. Specific awards have been sponsored by corporations that include Boeing, Bushnell Outdoor Products, Chevron, Micron, Phillips 66, Texas Instruments and Union Pacific.
College of Engineering students applied for the various awards via an online application that required short answers to questions designed to spur creativity and reveal details about applicant interests. Sample questions included “Cite your favorite UC Davis course, and why” and “Describe yourself in a tweet.” Applications then were reviewed, and winners selected, by faculty within each College of Engineering department.
The Scholar Awards are an excellent opportunity for students to demonstrate enthusiasm for their engineering fields of choice, while obtaining some extra money to help support their education. The corporate donors benefit as well, since it allows them to establish relationships with top College of Engineering undergraduates.
Student involvement and corporate sponsorship have grown significantly this year; by way of comparison, the 2013 Scholar Awards honored 40 individuals with cash awards that totaled $60,000.
Photo by T.J. Ushing/Academic Technology Services
Here we are offering top engineering college in India. This is Desh Bhagat University top rank university in Punjab, India. We are offering top placement offers. We have Automobile engineering, Civil engineering, Computer science engineering, Food tech. engineering and so many more. We have best and educated, experienced facility. The hostel is also available. For more information and your future visit our website deshbhagatuniversity.in/engineering/
The Engineering Design Showcase is the culminating experience for engineering seniors who have completed their engineering coursework and applied their skills to a real-world problem or client-based project. The 2018 event featured the work of more than 700 students and nearly 200 student design teams and brought together more than 150 industrial professionals from 100 companies representing eight areas of research and expertise. The success of the Showcase was made possible by the sponsorship of Chevron and the support from Boeing and the UC Davis Internship and Career Center.
(Xiaodong Qian/ UC Davis)
The UC Davis College of Engineering presented its annual Scholar Awards during a recognition ceremony at 3 p.m. on Tuesday, May 27, 2014 in the AGR Room of the campus’ Alumni and Visitor Center.
The ceremony featured 70 awards worth a combined total of $218,000. Specific awards have been sponsored by corporations that include Boeing, Bushnell Outdoor Products, Chevron, Micron, Phillips 66, Texas Instruments and Union Pacific.
College of Engineering students applied for the various awards via an online application that required short answers to questions designed to spur creativity and reveal details about applicant interests. Sample questions included “Cite your favorite UC Davis course, and why” and “Describe yourself in a tweet.” Applications then were reviewed, and winners selected, by faculty within each College of Engineering department.
The Scholar Awards are an excellent opportunity for students to demonstrate enthusiasm for their engineering fields of choice, while obtaining some extra money to help support their education. The corporate donors benefit as well, since it allows them to establish relationships with top College of Engineering undergraduates.
Student involvement and corporate sponsorship have grown significantly this year; by way of comparison, the 2013 Scholar Awards honored 40 individuals with cash awards that totaled $60,000.
Photo by T.J. Ushing/Academic Technology Services
The Engineering Design Showcase is the culminating experience for engineering seniors who have completed their engineering coursework and applied their skills to a real-world problem or client-based project. The 2018 event featured the work of more than 700 students and nearly 200 student design teams and brought together more than 150 industrial professionals from 100 companies representing eight areas of research and expertise. The success of the Showcase was made possible by the sponsorship of Chevron and the support from Boeing and the UC Davis Internship and Career Center.
(Lucy Knowles/ UC Davis)
To view this skull and others as a 360-degree rotational image, visit: www.dlt.ncssm.edu/tiger/360views/masterindex.htm
The North Carolina School of Science and Mathematics (NCSSM) has many more science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) learning objects like this one, for use by educators, in searchable format on their STEM web site at www.dlt.ncssm.edu/stem/
NCSSM, a publicly funded high school in North Carolina, provides exciting, high-level STEM learning opportunities. If you appreciate this resource, please consider making a tax-deductible donation to the NCSSM Foundation. Thank you! connections.ncssm.edu/giving
The Engineering Design Showcase is the culminating experience for engineering seniors who have completed their engineering coursework and applied their skills to a real-world problem or client-based project. The 2018 event featured the work of more than 700 students and nearly 200 student design teams and brought together more than 150 industrial professionals from 100 companies representing eight areas of research and expertise. The success of the Showcase was made possible by the sponsorship of Chevron and the support from Boeing and the UC Davis Internship and Career Center.
(Lucy Knowles/ UC Davis)