The odds are pretty good that you are within 5 feet of a piece of glass right now (unless you have someone read you my blog posts out loud, in which case it might be farther). In fact, glass, in the form of fiber optics, was almost certainly involved in you getting to this blog.
The term glass, as commonly used, actually refers to class of materials with similar properties (like metal), rather than a specific material (like copper). The defining feature of glass is the lack of crystal structure. Unlike typical metals or ceramics, glasses have no defined order once you move more then a few atoms away from your initial position. This results in some unique behaviors, such as a viscosity transition that depends on temperature (excitingly called the glass transition temperature). Certain glasses are almost infinitely recyclable.
Most glasses you encounter on a daily basis are silica-based (SiO2), from the Pyrex labware and cookware (borosilicate) to cheap glass bottles (soda lime silicate) to smartphone screens (alkali-stuffed aluminosilicate) to LCD screens (aluminosilicate). If you're old-fashioned (yet still on the internet), your CRT monitor contains multiple types of glass, including a very lead-rich glass for the funnel, which is now posing a problem for waste management as people toss their old CRT displays for shiny new flat-screens. Glasses, at least the kind for vision, are typically *not* made out of glass anymore.
In terms of materials science, there are two type of compounds found in glasses: network formers and network modifiers. Network formers are what gives glass its structure and rigidity. Common network formers include silica, borate and alumina. Network modifiers typically are ionizing oxides, and are very helpful in lowering the working temperature glass. Modifying compounds are things such a soda, lime (CaO), potassium oxide, and other alkali oxides. These don't include compounds like cobalt, or gold, which are used to color the glass, but in rather smaller quantities.
Glass can be processed in a fantastic number of ways as well. They can be die-formed, like for drinking glasses, blown, float cast, or drawn into fibers. Some experiments even study glasses formed while levitated. Torchwork typically involves welding manipulator rods on, heating the glass with a propane-oxygen torch (glass has a very high melting point), and pulling the glass with those rods, or various tools.
Glass has also been used by humans for thousands of years, and has been traced as far back as Mesopotamia. To put this in context, this is during the early Bronze age. It's been a part of human history for a very, very long time. And that's pretty darn spiffy.
Tuesday, August 30, 2011
Monday, August 29, 2011
Back from Guest Blogging
I'm back from my stint over at Scientopia, just in time to start cramming for my preliminary defense. I've got a committee, I've sent my document to my PI for approval, but next is the big hurdle: scheduling. It's hard enough to find my PI for 30 minutes, but I have to get 4 professors in one place for 2 hours.
Now, off to prepare the slides for the presentation...
Now, off to prepare the slides for the presentation...
Wednesday, August 24, 2011
Advisor Frustration
Not cross posting, because I'm just whinging. Feel free to ignore.
I'm in the process of writing up my thesis proposal, which has included a rather vast literature search, covering the experimental results for various common composite materials and the simulation results for such composites and their constituent materials. My advisor has finally agreed to my magical idea to integrate The Project That Won't Die (still) into my Alleged Thesis Topic. The PTWD is on material A, which happens to be a rather common composite material, so we're adding it in as a second reinforcement material to study, which means I can incorporate a lot of my existing results into earlier chapters. Huzzah. But.
In doing this whole literature search thing, it's becoming painfully apparent that the PTWD would be a much more logical thesis topic. Seriously, we've got data for four papers *so far*, and I've got ideas for several more. Neglecting his editing speed, it would not be unreasonable for me to be part way done writing my dissertation when my DoD fellowship runs out in 2013. However, it's painfully clear that he's relying on me to produce data to make the lab's productivity look better to grants that I'm not funded on. When I asked about just changing topics, the answer was no, because he says he can't find funding to support the PTWD (which I believe).
So back to working on the early stages of my Alleged Thesis Topic.
/whining
I'm in the process of writing up my thesis proposal, which has included a rather vast literature search, covering the experimental results for various common composite materials and the simulation results for such composites and their constituent materials. My advisor has finally agreed to my magical idea to integrate The Project That Won't Die (still) into my Alleged Thesis Topic. The PTWD is on material A, which happens to be a rather common composite material, so we're adding it in as a second reinforcement material to study, which means I can incorporate a lot of my existing results into earlier chapters. Huzzah. But.
In doing this whole literature search thing, it's becoming painfully apparent that the PTWD would be a much more logical thesis topic. Seriously, we've got data for four papers *so far*, and I've got ideas for several more. Neglecting his editing speed, it would not be unreasonable for me to be part way done writing my dissertation when my DoD fellowship runs out in 2013. However, it's painfully clear that he's relying on me to produce data to make the lab's productivity look better to grants that I'm not funded on. When I asked about just changing topics, the answer was no, because he says he can't find funding to support the PTWD (which I believe).
So back to working on the early stages of my Alleged Thesis Topic.
/whining
Tuesday, August 23, 2011
Editing Efficiently
Also available here
My regular readers are aware of some of my issues with my PI's time management skills. One particular issue is how long it takes him to give feedback on data and manuscripts. His approach is to immediately starting editing sentence by sentence, refining every detail, without reading through the overall paper.
Because he's a) busy and b) been busy so long he's got a backlog, this can mean that even if he's actually working on the paper (which is a whole separate can of worms), it can still be two months before you recieve *any* kind of feedback except by accident. Accidental feedback is things like while jetlagged, he mentioned that he was working on my paper, but the flow was rough. When I went and re-read it, my paragraphs were jumping all over the place like bunnies on speed, which is just how my brain seems to work. So I calmed the bunnies down, reorganized some thing and sent it back the next day. This apparently surprised him. I just thought it was the point of feedback...
This is also a problem because it means that he doesn't look at the data or conclusions until he's had the paper for quite awhile, and that's the feedback most of the students in my group are looking for. Does the model seem reasonable? Do the conclusions make sense? Are there more experiments/simulations I should be running?
When I'm editing for others, I usually try to read through once to get a feel for the overall flow, and then go back and start fixing the little things. I read absurdly quickly, so I find this technique rather helpful. It also gives me a chance to spot any big problems more quickly.
Editing my own stuff, I do it the other way around (since I already know where I'm trying to go). I have to take time away from the document before I can edit for flow, because otherwise my train of thought just follows the same tracks.
What's your editing strategy?
Monday, August 22, 2011
Engineers in Pop Culture
Cross posted at Scientopia
Being an engineer, I'm always excited by realistic engineers in pop culture. Unlike doctors, lawyers and paper salesmen, rather few sitcoms include engineers as a major character, let alone considering an engineering firm as a setting. The first thing that comes to most people's minds when you mention engineers is, somewhat unfortunately, Dilbert. While there are certain truths about the corporate world that come through, most engineers I know don't have Dilbert-type jobs. I'm not saying that Dilbert isn't funny, but I think it is a very narrow picture of what engineering really entails. Still, I've heard perfectly brilliant friends say "I don't want to go into engineering. I don't want to be Dilbert!".
Sci-fi is the major home of engineers, with Star Trek of course having an entire engineering department who get to do exciting things and save the day by crawling through the Jeffries tubes. However, sci-fi readers tend to be a bit more engineering-minded to start with, so it's not really reaching an audience that is as generally unaware of what engineers do.
So what about outside of sci-fi?
One of the better examples I've run into recently, oddly, is from a fantasy book about magical horses. Storm Warning, by Mercedes Lackey, has a group of engineers and mathematicians helping identify patterns in a series of magical disturbances to predict the next storm, and translating engineering concepts, like harbor breakwaters, to this new situation. Another favorite example is from the Kingkiller Chronicles, by Patrick Rothfuss. Yes, they're called artificers, but it's a similar concept. It's a high fantasy adventure, but it takes an honest look at some of the realities of being a design engineer. My favorite moment from the first two books is the sequence designing a magical arrow catcher, which while it operates partly by magic, still relies on physics to function.
There's also MacGyver, and if they would admit that what they do is really engineering, the Mythbusters. In fact, you were to ask people to give an example of a famous engineer (who is a real person), Grant Imahara would be pretty high on the list. I think Grant is a fantastic example of the non-Dilbertian side of engineering, plus he's considered one of the Bay area's most eligible bachelors.
Does anyone have good examples of real or realistic engineers in pop culture/fiction?
Being an engineer, I'm always excited by realistic engineers in pop culture. Unlike doctors, lawyers and paper salesmen, rather few sitcoms include engineers as a major character, let alone considering an engineering firm as a setting. The first thing that comes to most people's minds when you mention engineers is, somewhat unfortunately, Dilbert. While there are certain truths about the corporate world that come through, most engineers I know don't have Dilbert-type jobs. I'm not saying that Dilbert isn't funny, but I think it is a very narrow picture of what engineering really entails. Still, I've heard perfectly brilliant friends say "I don't want to go into engineering. I don't want to be Dilbert!".
Sci-fi is the major home of engineers, with Star Trek of course having an entire engineering department who get to do exciting things and save the day by crawling through the Jeffries tubes. However, sci-fi readers tend to be a bit more engineering-minded to start with, so it's not really reaching an audience that is as generally unaware of what engineers do.
So what about outside of sci-fi?
One of the better examples I've run into recently, oddly, is from a fantasy book about magical horses. Storm Warning, by Mercedes Lackey, has a group of engineers and mathematicians helping identify patterns in a series of magical disturbances to predict the next storm, and translating engineering concepts, like harbor breakwaters, to this new situation. Another favorite example is from the Kingkiller Chronicles, by Patrick Rothfuss. Yes, they're called artificers, but it's a similar concept. It's a high fantasy adventure, but it takes an honest look at some of the realities of being a design engineer. My favorite moment from the first two books is the sequence designing a magical arrow catcher, which while it operates partly by magic, still relies on physics to function.
There's also MacGyver, and if they would admit that what they do is really engineering, the Mythbusters. In fact, you were to ask people to give an example of a famous engineer (who is a real person), Grant Imahara would be pretty high on the list. I think Grant is a fantastic example of the non-Dilbertian side of engineering, plus he's considered one of the Bay area's most eligible bachelors.
Does anyone have good examples of real or realistic engineers in pop culture/fiction?
Thursday, August 18, 2011
Finding Your Committee
Cross posted over at Scientopia!
As of yesterday, I officially have a full committee of people who have agreed and are interested in my project. Huzzah!
My program is a bit odd in the requirements to advance to candidacy. At this point, I've passed my qualifying exams/coursework, and the next major hurdle is the preliminary proposal of thesis work. We have to put together at least part of our thesis committee at this point, though it's highly recommended you try and find a complete committee. Since this can be a daunting process, I felt I should share my steps to finding my committee members.
Step One: Look up your committee requirements
How many people do you need? Are you required to have certain balance of members inside and outside of your department?
Step Two: Identify the types of expertise you need
If you're doing computation on a particular system, such as in my case, is there someone doing experiments on a similar system? Are the other people doing similar experiments on different systems, if you're an experimentalist? If you're doing something that is new to your lab, is there someone else at your university using similar techniques? Faculty websites are a fantastic way to look up this sort of information. Most importantly, have a list of more people than you actually need for your committee. Professors are busy people. They may not have time to be on you committee, so be sure to have backups (but never tell them they are your backup!)
Step Three: Set up a meeting
This is, for me, the hardest part. What do you say? I've been approaching this with the idea of "Brief but thorough". My emails have looked something like this:
Prof. Blah
I am a student working with Pf. Blarg in the process of putting together a thesis commitee. My proposed topic is BasketWeaving, which relates to your work in FiberPreparation. Would it be possible to meet at sometime in the near future? I am unavailable ___, but otherwise flexible.
Regards,
Miss MSE
Step Four: The meeting itself
Sell your project. If you don't sound excited about what you're doing, they have no real motivation to agree to invest time and effort in being on your committee. It's also important to be clear on exactly why you think they would be a helpful addition to your committee (see Janus for the professorial side of this issue)
Once you have your committee comes the fun part: scheduling!
As of yesterday, I officially have a full committee of people who have agreed and are interested in my project. Huzzah!
My program is a bit odd in the requirements to advance to candidacy. At this point, I've passed my qualifying exams/coursework, and the next major hurdle is the preliminary proposal of thesis work. We have to put together at least part of our thesis committee at this point, though it's highly recommended you try and find a complete committee. Since this can be a daunting process, I felt I should share my steps to finding my committee members.
Step One: Look up your committee requirements
How many people do you need? Are you required to have certain balance of members inside and outside of your department?
Step Two: Identify the types of expertise you need
If you're doing computation on a particular system, such as in my case, is there someone doing experiments on a similar system? Are the other people doing similar experiments on different systems, if you're an experimentalist? If you're doing something that is new to your lab, is there someone else at your university using similar techniques? Faculty websites are a fantastic way to look up this sort of information. Most importantly, have a list of more people than you actually need for your committee. Professors are busy people. They may not have time to be on you committee, so be sure to have backups (but never tell them they are your backup!)
Step Three: Set up a meeting
This is, for me, the hardest part. What do you say? I've been approaching this with the idea of "Brief but thorough". My emails have looked something like this:
Prof. Blah
I am a student working with Pf. Blarg in the process of putting together a thesis commitee. My proposed topic is BasketWeaving, which relates to your work in FiberPreparation. Would it be possible to meet at sometime in the near future? I am unavailable ___, but otherwise flexible.
Regards,
Miss MSE
Step Four: The meeting itself
Sell your project. If you don't sound excited about what you're doing, they have no real motivation to agree to invest time and effort in being on your committee. It's also important to be clear on exactly why you think they would be a helpful addition to your committee (see Janus for the professorial side of this issue)
Once you have your committee comes the fun part: scheduling!
Wednesday, August 17, 2011
TV Workout
I had a brilliant inspiration for a new exercise plan, if I only a) had a treadmill in my apartment or b) BBC America/ a DVD player in the apartment complex gym: Watch and episode of Doctor Who, and every time the Doctor or his companions are running, you run. It sounds like a great interval training program to me!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)