Epsilon Articles

The pictured members of Sigma Tau were among the 77 undergraduate engineering students whose industry and originality won them cash awards from the James F. Lincoln Arc Welding Foundation of Cleveland, Ohio, during the school year 1942-43. This foundation, estab­lished in 1936, “has the educational objective of stimulating managers and engineers in both industry and college to acquaint themselves with the engineering, industrial and human progress possible through the use of welded designs." Last year its awards, ranging from $1,000.00 to $25.00, went to students representing 33 colleges and universities, We congratu­late our members whose achievements have brought them this distinction.

Lt. Ted C. Barnes, Epsilon ’38, entered the service on Sept. 1, 1942, and is now an instructor at the "Sub Chaser Training Center,” Miami, Fla. His address is 5729 N. W. 5th Ave., Miami 38, Florida.

Lt. Donald G. Moss, Epsilon ’43, has been in service with the Coast Artillery (anti-aircraft) since May 26, 1942. Stationed somewhere in Alaska, his address is Lt. Donald G. Moss O-463779, Btry. F, 203rd C. A. (AA), A. P. O. 986, c/o Postmaster, Seattle. Wash.

Major Max McCord, Epsilon ’38, entered the Army on December 10, 1940, and is engaged in staff work in the Replacement & School Command. His address is Hq. Replacement & School Command, Birmingham, Ala.

3. Marion A. Miller, Epsilon 1942, Topeka, Kansas, is a First Lieu­tenant in the U. S. Army Air Force engaged as Project Engineer in Txp. Eng. Div. on CG-4A Gliders and Ex­perimental powered glider models. His unit handles all experimental gliders and flight testing of tow-plane-glider combinations. He en­tered the service in August 1942. His last address was Eng. Div. Aircraft Lab., Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio.

17. Melvin E. Estey, Epsilon 1941, Langdon, Kansas, was a First Lieutenant in the Coast Artillery be­fore his discharge from the army. He is at present attending Kansas State University where he expects to receive his B. S. in Mechanical En­gineering in January. His last ad­dress was 1128 Laramie, Manhattan, Kansas.

35. Garland B. Childers, Epsi­lon 1941, Augusta, Kansas, is a Lieu­tenant (jg) in the USNR assigned to engineering duty aboard ship. He entered the service in January 1942. His last address was USS Colorado, c/o Fleet Post Office, San Francisco, California.

41. William B. Bixler, Epsilon 1943, Emporia, Kansas, is a First Lieutenant with the anti-aircraft ar­tillery in the U. S, Army engaged as Regimental Communications Officer. He has seen over a year's service in Alaska. He entered the service in May 1942. His last address was 0-463759, Regtl. Hq. 210 CA(AA), APO 980, Seattle, Washington.

51. Raymond M. Bukaty, Ep­silon 1941, Kansas City, Kansas, is a Major with the 437th Signal Heavy Construction Battalion. This bat­talion is engaged in building and maintaining all types of telephone circuits. He has seen service in England, French Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Sicily, Sardinia and Italy. His last address was (0-414022), Hqs. 437th Sig. Heavy Cons. Bn., APO 650, c/o Postmaster, New York.

57. Garrett E. Gardner, Epsilon 1939, Belvidere. New Jersey, is a Captain in. the Air Service Com­mand, Fifth Air Force, U. S. Army. He is engaged as an Engineer Of­ficer and Test Pilot. He entered the service in August 1939 and has seen service in the southwest Pacific. His last address was Second Service Sq. (Sep.), APO 503, c/o Postmaster, San Francisco, California.

63. John G. McEntyre, Jr. Epsilon 1942, Topeka, Kansas, is a Sec­ond Lieutenant in Anti-Aircraft, He entered the service in May 1942 and has been stationed somewhere in Alaska. His last address was APO 986, Seattle, Washington.

8. Marion A. Miller, Epsilon 1942, Topeka, Kansas, is a First Lieu­tenant in the U. S. Army Air Force engaged as Project Engineer in Txp. Eng. Div. on CG-4A Gliders and Ex­perimental powered glider models. His unit handles all experimental gliders and flight testing of tow-plane-glider combinations. He en­tered the service in August 1942. His last address was Eng. Div. Aircraft Lab., Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio.

19. Melvin E. Estey, Epsilon 1941, Langdon, Kansas, was a First Lieutenant in the Coast Artillery be­fore his discharge from the army. He is at present attending Kansas State University where he expects to receive his B. S. in Mechanical En­gineering in January. His last ad­dress was 1128 Laramie, Manhattan, Kansas.

33. Garland B. Childers, Epsi­lon 1941, Augusta, Kansas, is a Lieu­tenant (jg) in the USNR assigned to engineering duty aboard ship. He entered the service in January 1942. His last address was USS Colorado, c/o Fleet Post Office, San Francisco, California.

41. William B. Bixler, Epsilon 1943, Emporia, Kansas, is a First Lieutenant with the anti-aircraft ar­tillery in the U. S, Army engaged as Regimental Communications Officer. He has seen over a year's service in Alaska. He entered the service in May 1942. His last address was 0-463759, Regtl. Hq. 210 CA(AA), APO 980, Seattle, Washington.

53. Raymond M. Bukaty, Ep­silon 1941, Kansas City, Kansas, is a Major with the 437th Signal Heavy Construction Battalion. This bat­talion is engaged in building and maintaining all types of telephone circuits. He has seen service in England, French Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Sicily, Sardinia and Italy. His last address was (0-414022), Hqs. 437th Sig. Heavy Cons. Bn., APO 650, c/o Postmaster, New York.

59. Garrett E. Gardner, Epsilon 1939, Belvidere. New Jersey, is a Captain in. the Air Service Com­mand, Fifth Air Force, U. S. Army. He is engaged as an Engineer Of­ficer and Test Pilot. He entered the service in August 1939 and has seen service in the southwest Pacific. His last address was Second Service Sq. (Sep.), APO 503, c/o Postmaster, San Francisco, California.

Remember the first time you came through Manhattan? You were on your way to Topeka, or Kansas City, or perhaps K-State was your destination. Whatever your purpose was, long before you reached the city, you saw in the distance a mammoth "KS” on the west slope of Mt. Pros­pect. You soon discovered that those two letters identified this as the location of Kansas State College.

Since then, you’ve learned to be proud of the “KS” and the rising spirit of K-State that it stands for. You have a right to be proud of it.

To many of you, and to thousands of alumni, the two giant letters bring up associations of a thoroughly down to earth nature. Maybe you have a- pair of khakis that are well splattered with whitewash as a memento of the day you helped clean up the “K.” Since the idea was first conceived, the financing, construction or maintenance of these sym­bols has at one time or another, involved almost every engineer that has attended this school.

The story of the project goes back to several years before the con­struction of the “K” was actually begun. Students talked about it until finally one class built a "K” of loose rock on Bluemont hill. This didn't last long, so the next best idea was a reinforced concrete letter. In 1921, the Civil Engineering Society took the lead in promoting such a perma­nent letter. The General Engineering Seminar voted funds sufficient to build it, and classes were dismissed when everything was ready to go. The Engineers marched out to the hill, led by a brass band, and by the end of the first day’s work, it was nearly completed. The next day, the finishing touches were put on. This first letter is at a 40-degree slope and is anchored by cables and concrete lugs. Such a letter would cost over a thousand dollars to build at present prices.

Everyone was in favor of the immediate addition of an “S,” but nobody did anything about it until 1930. Sigma Tau members, organized a committee to promote the second letter, and the General Engineering Seminar soon decided that they would do the work, if the rest of the school would furnish the finances.

Five hundred dollars was pretty big money in the thirties, so that turned out to be quite a big problem. After sponsoring tag day, movies, boxing matches, and promoting donations from faculty, businessmen, and $125 from the Seminar treasury, they finally succeeded in raising enough cash.

This section of the hill required considerable preparatory work, and a day was spent clearing and leveling it off to the slant of the hill. On May 10, classes were dismissed and the Engineers started in on the “S.” Rain halted the work at noon, so the crew went to the Manhattan Community House for barbecued sandwiches. The rain soon stopped, and by six p.m., the job was completed. An army searchlight was spotted in on the hill, and the chairman of the committee presented the letter to the college and the City of Manhattan in an appropriate ceremony. Dr. J. T. Willard represented the college, and Mayor Hurst Majors, the city.

The latest chapter of this story was begun when it became common knowledge that the property on which the letters are located had changed owners several times. No clear-cut agreement assuring the Engineers the right to maintain the letters could be found, so a movement to acquire title to the land was begun.

Sigma Tau took this on as a. project in 1937 and several solutions were attempted. Insufficient funds were available to buy the entire. 28-acre tract, so proceedings were begun to have the section set aside as a park. This was not successful, and a practical solution was agreed upon only last spring.

In exchange for a 220-foot strip of land, including enough area for the "C" plus easement rights permitting entrance at any time, Sigma Tau members agreed to survey and subdivide 30 acres of property for the landowner. This was completed before the end of the ’47 school year, after many Fridays and Saturdays of hard work involving every member of the honorary fraternity.

In an all-school assembly on October 16, 1947, the deed was presented to the college by Prof. L. V. White, faculty sponsor of Sigma Tau and consistent promoter of this project for over 10 years. President Eisenhower accepted for the college.

Funds from the Engineering Council and Sigma Tau financed lighting of the freshly whitewashed “KS” the night before homecoming this year. An army searchlight was played on K-hill from the top of Sunset Hill.

According to tradition, Freshman Engineers have the important responsibility for cleaning and whitewashing the letters each fall semester. All of those who have had some part in maintaining or building the "KS" can be proud that they have helped build a very real part of Kansas State's tradition.

(Reprint Courtesy Kansas State Engineer)

R, A. Seaton. Epsilon '13, who served as Dean of The School of Engineering of Kansas State College for 29 years has retired to become building expediter for the college. His successor, M. A. Durland, Epsilon '17, has been assistant dean since 1926.

Dean Seaton, long recognized in Who’s Who in American, has had leaves of absence to work with General Electric and to serve in both World Wars. He was a captain designing artillery ammunition during World War I. Early in World War II, he was called by the U. S. Office of Education to organize and direct a nationwide program to train college-level engineers and administrators needed for the U. S. war effort. More than 200 colleges and universities with nearly two million course enrollees participated in that program.

He also has been called to Washington, D. C., on various other occasions as a consultant.

If you could sell, at today’s market value, all of the energy that falls on your back yard as free sunlight, you could retire for the rest of your life.

There are several ways in which man now uses the energy from the sun as is illustrated in figure 1. Life in any form would be impossible without this radiant energy which we call sunlight. 

The tree, shown on the left, converts this solar energy into wood through the magic of photosynthesis and man burns the wood to recover a small part of the trapped energy. In days long before man was on the earth, forests captured the sunlight, then died and were buried beneath the earth’s surface. Today man digs this “sun­light” out of the earth in the form of coal or pumps it out as petroleum.

Also, the solar energy which falls on the oceans causes the water to evaporate into clouds. The clouds drift over the land and the water falls as rain, and man captures a very small part of the solar energy with hydroelectric dams.

All of these methods in which we use solar energy are fine and they are the methods provided for us by nature, but they are all secondhand and we know that we are paying dearly for these secondhand dealings. The process of photosynthesis is only about 1/10 of one percent efficient and when we burn the wood, coal or oil we succeed in liberating only a small part of the energy in it. Also, we must go to all the work of cutting down the trees, mining the coal, or drilling oil wells and pumping the petroleum out of the ground.

In the past two- or three-years research has been undertaken to try to find ways to convert solar energy directly into useful energy. I have built a device to convert sunlight directly into electricity, which I call a parabolic mirror thermoelectric generator. It was built to illustrate the principle involved in this type of solar energy collector and also to get some idea of the efficiency which could be expected from a device of this type.

Several methods have been tried to harness the energy from the sun—probably the most popular of which is the solar battery which Bell Laboratories is experimenting with. Bell Laboratories hasn't, as far as I know, released any data or efficiencies on their solar battery so it isn't possible to discuss it in this paper. They may very well have the answer in their silicon crystals but we don't know yet.

Another possible way of converting solar energy directly into useful energy is by means of a device known as a flat-plate collector. It consists of a black absorber covered with a glass plate which transmits short light rays but reflects long waves. Sunlight penetrates the glass and strikes the black surface. Most of the heat is absorbed here and the little that it reflected bounces back as long waves. These can't penetrate back through the glass, so they bounce back to the bottom. The heat builds up quickly in the collector and can be used in one of two ways. One method, as shown in the figure, is to circulate a fluid between the black absorber and the glass plate to carry the heat away to a heat exchanger. Collectors of this type have been used to heat experimental homes.

Another way of using this type of collector is to place thermocouples in it instead of a fluid. Thus, the solar energy is converted directly into electrical energy. At first thought we would think that this method would be impossible because of the very low voltage generated by thermocouples but Dr. Maria Telkes of New York University has done a lot of research on thermocouple materials and has developed some such materials which may make this type of application possible. In fact, she has run some tests on just this type of collector, and she has obtained some very interesting results.

Another possible way of converting solar energy directly into useful energy is by means of a mirror-type collector. In this device, the sunlight strikes a parabolic reflector and is focused at the focal point of the reflector, giving a very high concentration of the solar energy.

Amazingly high temperatures have been produced by these reflectors. Convair has a 120-inch aluminum reflector which is used to study the effect of high temperature on metals and ceramic materials. In their reflector they develop temperatures up to 8500°F. By comparison the temperature produced in an oxyacetylene torch is around 5800°F.

One way of using this type of collector as a power source is shown, in figure 3. The high-boiling-point liquid circulates through the focal point of the reflector where it is heated by the high temperatures. The hot liquid is then circulated through a water boiler causing the water to boil and the resulting steam is used to drive a steam turbine. Dr. Charles G. Abbott of the Smithsonian Institute has done some experimental work on a unit of this type. Using the device in this manner still requires the use of the steam cycle.

A way in which the parabolic mirror could be used to convert solar energy directly into electricity without the use of intermediate steps would be to place the hot junctions of a thermopile at the focal point of the reflector. This is the type of device which I constructed. This would have the advantage of doing away with the maintenance problems of the steam system. Also, there would be almost no deprecia­tion since thermocouple materials do not wear out with use.

Shown in figure 4 is a characteristic curve of a thermocouple of which one conductor is made of iron and the other is of constantan. The slope of the curve is what is important because the slope is the generated emf per °F temperature difference between the hot and cold junctions.

Thermocouples, like batteries, may be connected with other thermocouples to increase either the generated voltage or the generated current. If they are connected in series the voltages add and if they are connected in parallel the currents add. A group of thermocouples is called a thermopile.

For many years thermocouples have been used as temperature measuring devices, but they haven’t been considered as possible power sources. A lot of research has been done on thermocouple materials to increase the produced emf per degree temperature difference between the hot and cold junctions and the results are very encouraging.

In 1933, Mr. G. R. Fitterer experimented with thermocouples and found that a graphite-silicon carbide thermocouple had its own characteristic curve. The comparison with the iron-constantan curve is very striking because the extreme difference in the slopes of the curves can readily be seen. This means that the new thermocouple; materials will produce a much higher emf for a given temperature difference. This was a very important step in the development of thermocouple materials, but it wasn’t the final step because in just the past two or three years, thermocouple materials have been developed which are even better.

Figure 6 is a picture of the device which I built, and the equipment used in making the tests on it. I used the iron-constantan thermocouples because these materials were available in the small size 30 wire which was necessary. Then, using what I found with the iron-constantan thermocouple I could calculate what I would have gotten thermopile been made of graphite-silicon carbide thermocouples. The reflector is the reflector from the headlight of a 1934 Ford. The thermopile consists of 20 thermocouples made of iron-constantan wire, all connected in series with the hot junctions at the focal point of the reflector.

This collector has some inherent characteristics which lower its efficiency. Because of its size, small wire was necessary and conse­quently the thermopile has a high internal resistance. This causes a large (I^2)*R loss and lowers the electrical output.

The reflector is very old and is of a mass production type which probably wasn’t very accurately made. Truer parabolic mirrors with a higher reflectivity could be made and, therefore, somewhat higher efficiencies could be obtained. The day that the tests were made was a very windy day and no protection was made for the thermopile to protect it from the wind. It was noticed that the output varied a great deal with differences in wind velocity. This was because the wind tended to reduce the temperature of the hot junction. If it were protected from the wind by a glass cover over the mirror, the efficiencies would be increased.

With larger reflectors, much higher temperatures could be obtained at the focal point of the reflector and correspondingly higher efficiencies would result.

In figure 7 and 8, I have compared the results of my tests with those found by Dr. Telkes with her flat-plate collector. She used 25 thermocouples in series made of chromel-constantan. She used these materials because they were available. From the results of her tests she could calculate what the results would be if the new alloys, which she has developed, were used.

Notice that with the parabolic reflector the emf is much higher than that obtained with the flat-plate, even though the area of the reflector was smaller. Notice, also, that the internal resistance of the flat-plate was much lower than that of the reflector.

The important thing is the overall efficiency. The efficiency is defined as the ratio of electrical energy output to the incident solar energy which fell on the collector. In the case of the iron-constantan parabolic reflector the output is low because of the high internal resistance in the thermopile.

Indications are that if the graphite-silicon carbide thermopile were used instead of the iron-constantan in the parabolic reflector under the same conditions of this test, an efficiency of 3.06 percent would be obtained. Dr. Telkes calculated that with her best thermocouple alloys she could obtain an efficiency of 1.05 per cent under the same conditions of her test which is shown here.

The efficiencies aren't significant in themselves because they are a measure of the output over input whereas the input is free. They are significant, however, when they are used as a comparison of different systems.

It is feasible that with a large, parabolic reflector type unit, efficiencies as high as 5 or 6 percent would be fairly easy to obtain. Using a 5 percent efficiency the size reflector that would be required for a 5000 KW generating capacity was calculated. The direct solar radiation on a clear day is around 300 BTU/(ft^2)Hr. Using this as a basis the required reflector would have a diameter of 1205 ft or 402 yards.

The efficiencies of flat-plate collectors could conceivably be raised to around 3 percent if they were made very large and if some of the newly developed thermocouple materials were used. On this basis, a 5000 KW generator would need to be 1375 ft. square or 445 yds square.

An interesting comparison of several solar energy conversion devices which have been experimented with in the struggle to get more of the energy from the sun than nature gives us is shown in Figure 9.

Dr. Telkes has developed some new thermocouple materials, and she calculates that with these new materials she can raise the efficiency, using the flat-plate collector, to 1.05 percent. The '‘best materials" which I have listed under parabolic reflectors are newly developed alloys which are the best thermocouple materials known today. I am not familiar with their composition.

Nature has tied the knot of solar energy utilization mighty tight, but I believe you will agree that these figures prove that it can be untied.

It is true that there are several problems which will have to be solved, before we can use the energy from the sun. The sun only shines during the day so some sort of storage will be necessary if we are to use this energy during the night. The sunshine isn't predictable and for this reason probably the first place to try a system of this type would be in India where the sun shines on an average of 300 days each year. Incidentally, there is probably more research going on in India to utilize solar energy than at any other place at the present time. In the case of the parabolic reflector type collector some device would be necessary to keep the reflector pointed directly at the sun at all times.

Yes, there are a lot of problems, and much research and development would be necessary before it would be possible, but I believe that, someday, we can take advantage of Old Sol’s generous gift of energy.

Engineering is as old as history. The pyramids of Egypt were a pretty fair construction job — also the roads, aqueducts, and stadia of ancient Rome. There is a considerable amount of very high-class engineering described in the Bible. The highway job across the Red Sea was really something. There was, however, very little engineering progress for many centuries. The explanation is very simple — there were no engineering colleges.

Engineering education may be said to have begun almost exactly 200 years ago with the creation in France of the still famous Ecole des Ponts et Chausees. There was little development elsewhere in the next fifty years. In 1800, there was no school of applied science in the English-speaking world. Germany possessed two small mining academies and a feeble school for surveyors. France had two successful schools for civilian engineers and two others for military engineers.

The next half century was however much different. France was still the lead, but Germany was in the early stages of her great industrial advance with eight rapidly developing polytechnic schools, three mining academies, and numerous technical schools of lower rank. Great Britain was still making little progress in technical education, and only a single technical school had been in operation in the United States for any length of time.

The Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute at Troy, New York, founded in 1824, is generally recognized as the first engineering school in the United States. This honor is sometimes claimed by Norwich University and also by the U.S. Military Academy at West Point. The long-established univer­sities, nor only in the United States, but all over the world, were making it very difficult for technical education to get a foothold. Practical education, that is, teaching students to do something really useful, was not academically respectable. This is not too far from some of our current philosophy.

About 1850, several schools, including Harvard and Yale, took steps to create schools of applied science, but very little was accomplished.

The Morrill Land Grant Act of 1862 really marks the beginning of engineering education in the United States. In the space of a single decade from 1862 to 1872, the number of engineering schools increased from six to seventy.

The provisions of the land-grant act passed by Congress on July 2, 1862, specified that colleges established in accordance with it should have as their object: 'Without excluding other scientific and classical studies and including military tactics, to teach such branches of learning as are related to agriculture and the mechanic arts, in such manner as the legislatures of the respective states may prescribe, in order to promote the liberal and education of the industrial classes in the several pursuits and professions of life.” So much for land-grant colleges. I will now devote my attention to this University.

The Kansas State Agricultural College was granted a charter in 1863 and, in accepting the conditions of the land-grant act, four departments, science and literature, mechanic arts, agriculture, and military science specified in the charter. As a matter of fact, only one, that of science and literature, was put into effect, and for the first 10 years of its existence, the college, was really only one of the old classical type. It is true that in 1866 a position, professor of mechanics and civil engineering, was created and a curriculum (called, at that time, a "course”) in mechanic arts and civil engineering was mentioned in the catalogue, but neither appears to have progressed beyond the paper stage. In 1869, Brevet Major-General J. W.

Davidson, professor of military science and tactics and teacher of French and Spanish, was given the added title professor of civil engineering; and the following year J. S. Hougham, professor of agricultural chemistry and commercial science, was made also professor of mechanic arts. Quite obviously such positions, which were only added duties for already overworked teachers, could be of little service and they were soon discontinued.

The first serious intention toward any real mechanic arts is indicated in the catalogue for 1871 in the statement, "A small blacksmith shop and car­penter shop afford a beginning to the department of mechanics" Ambrose Todd was made superintendent of the shops and instructor in mechanics. This must have been somewhat of a promotion for Mr. Todd, since the year before he had occupied the position of janitor.

The acceptance by John A. Anderson, in 1873, of the presidency of the institution marks probably the first positive attempt to comply with the terms of the land-grant act. President Anderson’s creed was expressed by himself as follow's, "Instead of the aim of the college being the making of thoroughly educated men, its greater aim should be to make men thorough­ly educated farmers, carpenters, masons, or blacksmiths.” Even he was more interested in training mechanics than engineers. Anderson, a Junction City preacher, was more of a politician than an educator and Kansas State was very fortunate when President Anderson was elected to Congress.

The mechanic arts course was, however, discontinued in 1875 on account of lack of demand after having been in theoretical operation for several years, but in the same year the middle section of the present shop building was built. In addition to the wood shops, it housed the following departments: printing, telegraphy, sewing, and instrumental music. The blacksmith shop, consisting of two forges, was in a small building nearby. The total equip­ment of the mechanical department was listed as 25 sets of carpenter tools and some blacksmith tools.

The appointment of O. P. Hood as superintendent of the workshops in 1886 was without question the most important event up to that time in the direction of engineering training at Kansas State Agricultural College. Pro­fessor Hood, a graduate of Rose Polytechnic Institute, was the first engineer to be given a place on the college faculty and he immediately initiated a program for making the mechanical department something more than a shop. He was made instructor in 1887 and, in 1889, professor of mechanics and engineering, in addition to being superintendent of the shops.

Although a curriculum in mechanic arts and civil engineering had been listed in the college catalogue of 1866-67, and another in mechanic arts several years later, neither had ever functioned, whether from lack of demand, lack of teaching personnel and equipment, or for other reasons is uncertain. Until the year 1896-97, only one course was in actual operation in the whole college which, with the limited substitutions allowed, was expected to fit its graduates for the profession of home economics, agriculture, engi­neering, or almost any other. However, in 1896, the fourth year of the course was divided into three options: farmers', women’s, and mechanics’. Electives were also allowed in the mechanics’ option so that architectural design could be taken by those wishing to become architects. Progress along engineering lines has been rapid since that time. In the faculty minutes of November 3, 1897, the following is recorded: "On the motion of Professor Willard, the name of the mechanics’ course is changed to engineering course." Apparently, Doctor Willard introduced, in name at least, engineering to Kansas State Agricultural College.

Although one of the requirements in the organization was that it should offer work in the mechanic arts, which had been described by the author of the act to include engineering, it had quite obviously neglected this branch. This is shown very strikingly in a statement of occupations of graduates up to the year 1897. Although the College had never even claimed to offer work in law, 30 of its graduates were lawyers or students of law, while only 6 were listed as engineers.

In 1898-99, a four-year course in mechanical engineering was described and one in electrical engineering mentioned. From then on other curricula have been added as the need appeared — architecture in 1904, civil engi­neering in 1907 (and also printing, which was discontinued in 1912), agri­cultural engineering in 1913, flour-mill engineering in 1916 (discontinued 1933), chemical engineering in 1924 (and landscape architecture which was discontinued in 1937), architectural engineering in 1924, industrial arts in 1937 (discontinued in 1958), industrial engineering in 1954, industrial technology in 1955 (discontinued in 1960), and nuclear engineering in 1953. In 1897, several programs were set up for training apprentices. These were discontinued in 1905. Beginning in 1914 and terminating in 1930, various short courses of sub-collegiate caliber were offered in such lines as blacksmithing, foundry work, machine shop practice, auto mechanics, and concrete construction.

As a gesture toward winning World War II, and under pressure from the Board of Regents, a 2-year program in Industrial Technology was set up in 1943. During the war various special programs were set up: ESWT (Engineering Science War Training) programs; ESMWT (Engineering, Science, Management War Training) programs; ASTP (Army Specialized Training Programs); and, later, ASTRP (Army Specialized Training Reserve Programs) in rapid succession, which were essentially "quickies”, for engi­neers and technicians. The common characteristic of each army program was that if it was successful, it was promptly revised.

Other short courses along technical lines were begun in the early part of the post-World War II period. The pressure of our regular collegiate engineering programs quickly made it necessary to drop all such short course programs.

The professional work of the whole college was extended very rapidly in the early part of the twentieth century so that it became necessary from the administrative point of view to group the various departments into larger groups called divisions. The division of mechanic arts was organized in 1909 and included these departments: applied mechanics and hydraulics, architecture and drawing, civil engineering, electrical engineering, mechani­cal drawing and machine design, power and experimental engineering, print­ing, shop methods and practice, and steam and gas engineering. Prior to that time the work of the division had been chiefly organized under E. B. McCormick, professor of mechanical engineering and superintendent of the shops; Dr. J. D. Walters, professor of architecture and drawing; and Prof. B. F. Eyer, professor of physics and electrical engineering. The remainder of the engineering faculty in 1908 were A. A. Potter, assistant professor of mechanical engineering (later dean); Ella Weeks, instructor in drawing; R. A. Seaton, assistant in mechanical engineering (later dean); M. S. Brandt, assistant in architecture and drawing; four shop foremen with one assistant; and eleven student assistants.

In 1917, the name of the division was changed from mechanic arts to engineering to be more in line with common practice, and a General Engi­neering Department was created for the newly required courses Engineering Lectures and Seminar. In 1938, the word architecture was added to make it Division of Engineering and Architecture, and in 1946 the word Division was changed to School, but few major changes have been made either in organization or administration of the division in the past 50 years. In 1913, the department of power and experimental engineering was discontinued and its work taken over by the newly created department of applied mechanics and machine design and the steam and gas engineering department, Civil was changed to Civil and Highway Engineering (back to Civil in 1916), and Shop Methods and Practice was changed to Shop Practice (Shop Practice to Industrial Engineering and Industrial Arts in 1954, and to simply Industrial Engineering in 1960). In 1914, the department of agricultural engineering was created under the name farm machinery (the name agricultural engineering was not applied to the department until 1922). For several years previously there had been an associate professor of farm mechanics in the agronomy department, and in 1915 the department of printing was removed to the general science division and combined with industrial journalism. In 1917, Architecture and Drawing was changed to Architecture. In 1940, the department of chemical engineering was organized in the School of Engineering and Architecture. Prior to that date, its work had been carried on in the Chemistry Department in the School of Arts and Sciences. The departments of Heat and Power, Custodian, and Building and Repair were transferred from the Engineering School to Administration and re­named the Physical Plant Department in January 1949. In 1950, the name of the Department of Architecture, in recognition of its increasing work in the field of art, was changed to Architecture and Allied Arts. This trend is well evidenced by the fact that during the present semester 31 percent of the student credit hours taught in the Department are for students not enrolled in the School of Engineering and Architecture. In 1956, with the retirement of Professor C. E. Pearce as Head of the Machine Design Department, that department was discontinued, and its staff transferred to the Me­chanical Engineering Department. The Nuclear Engineering department, whose beginning was in Chemical Engineering, was created in 1958 and is the newest in the engineering school family.

The present organization of the School of Engineering and Architecture consists of nine teaching departments — Agricultural Engineering, Prof. G. H. Larson the Head since 1956; Applied Mechanics, Professor M. E. Raville the Head since 1956; Architecture and Allied Arts, Professor Emil Fischer the Head since 1955; Chemical Engineering, Professor W. H. Honstead the Head since 1960; Civil Engineering, Professor R. E. Morse the head since 1947; Electrical Engineering, Professor R. M. Kerchner the head since 1955; Industrial Engineering, Professor I. L. Reis the Head since 1959; Mechanical Engineering, R. G. Nevins the Head since 1957; and Nuclear Engineering, Professor W. G. Kimel the Head since 1958.

As indicated earlier engineering education at Kansas State is only a little over sixty years old. By decades, in Engineering and Architecture, we have graduated from 1900 to 1910, 233; 1910 to 1920, 372; from 1920 to 1930, 868; 1930 to 1940, 1225, a total of only 2,698 in our first forty years, from 940 to 1950 we have graduated 1,754, and 1950 to 1960, inclusive 3,553. As of February 1961, engineering graduates number over 8,100. The increase in graduate work has been much more rapid. Although graduate programs have been offered in all departments for many years, only 187 masters degrees had been conferred up to 1950. From 1950 to date 286 masters degrees were conferred. The degree of Doctor of Philosophy has been offered in Applied Mechanics for several years but only 2 such degrees have been conferred. More recently the PhD program has been initiated in the departments of Electrical Engineering, Mechanical Engineering and Chemical Engineering. At present, there are 32 students enrolled in these various PhD programs.

From June 1916 to August 1939, 147 professional degrees were con­ferred. These degrees required at least three years of engineering or archi­tectural practice and a thesis. These degrees were discontinued in 1939 due to the feeling that professional engineering registration was accomplishing the same object. Some 10 to 12 honorary doctors degrees have also been awarded to engineering graduates.

The academic program for engineering at Kansas State has changed considerably in its fifty years of existence but parts of it are very much the same. In 1899, admission to all college curriculums (called "courses" at that time) required only a grade school education. The four-year engineering program included much more mathematics and English on that account. Agriculture was required as well as botany. Considerably more shop work and drawing were included. History, government, and economics were about equivalent to our present non-technical electives. The time devoted to me­chanics and thermodynamics was about the same as now. The major differ­ence between 1899 and 1961 is largely the inclusion of high school training. The immediate result of the increase in entrance requirements was the drop­ping of no longer needed courses in elementary mathematics and English. These hours, as well as some others such as botany and agriculture courses, were replaced by additional shop work, drawing, and advanced technical subjects. Recent reductions in drawing and shop work — and pushing formerly required freshman mathematics courses back to entrance requirements afford additional hours to be about equally divided between technical and non-technical subjects.

Until recently engineering educators have been more critical of their work than anyone else. About 40 years ago, the Society for the Promotion of Engineering Education, whose membership, at that time, was composed almost entirely of engineering teachers, asked the major national engineering societies to appoint advisory committees on engineering education. The result was the employment of Dr. Charles R. Mann, a physicist on the staff of the University of Chicago, to make an investigation of engineering education. This was rather meagerly financed by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching and resulted in the somewhat controversial Mann Report in 1918. Mann concluded that a good many things were wrong with engineering programs and the report stirred up considerable controversy. The major result was the undertaking, in 1923, of a much more comprehensive investigation of the same thing. This was adequately financed by the Carnegie Foundation, The General Electric Company, the Westinghouse Electric Corporation, and others. William E. Wickenden of the American Telephone and Telegraph Company was employed to direct it. Following numerous detailed and preliminary reports, the final report was made in 1929. This report concluded that engineering colleges were doing a very good piece of work, but were probably overworking (or trying to) the students, and were not allowing enough opportunities for electives. More recently there has been considerable pressure for the inclusion of even more work in the fields of social science and the humanities.

The four-year curriculum is, of course, too brief to include many things a student should learn; and, if we stay with this four-year program, we certainly must not eliminate the minimum amount of technical work required for beginning professional competence. Without opening a discussion of the relative merits of a four and a five-year program, it should be stated only that as yet the four-year program seems to be the more desirable.

It is frequently indicated that many people in Kansas (and even some in Manhattan) considerably underrate the School of Engineering at Kansas State University. Graduates, however, soon find out that they need not worry in competition with graduates from any engineering school. Typical alumni reactions are quite commonly that expressed in a letter of April 8, 1961. In writing to the Electrical Engineering Department to bring his address up to date, the alumnus closed his letter with this statement "Having worked with graduates of several leading engineering schools such as M. I. T., California Institute of Technology, Purdue, Illinois, and others, through comparison, I am convinced that the engineering education at Kansas State is of the highest caliber." This graduate was not one of our better students. Probably the faculty is the most important factor in any school. Ours at Kansas State University will look well in any comparison. Whether you judge a faculty by academic training, by textbooks written, by research carried on, by the graduates, by committee appointments and offices in national and local professional societies, or by special honors and achievements, the Kansas State University engineering faculty will look well. Time does not permit a listing of faculty accomplishments. 

Next to faculty, equipment is most important. There are admittedly many items of laboratory equipment which we do not have that we should, However, we will compare well with other good schools and are making steady improvement. Our television station was the first college station in the United States. Color television was first produced and first received in Kansas by equipment built and operated by faculty and students at Kansas State. The first telephone exhibited in Kansas was the property of Professor William K. Kedzie. It was constructed by the Mechanical Department after his directions. In the summer of 1877, the professor gave "illustrated" lectures on the telephone in a large number of Kansas towns. Supt. W. G. Stewart of the telegraph department, accompanied him as manipulator, and Prof. J. D. Walters, teacher of drawing, furnished cornet solos over the tele­graph wires from the telegraph classroom in the Mechanical building.

A top-flight educational program, particularly at the graduate level must be accompanied by a top-flight research program. Our research program came into being on March 24, 1910, by the following action of the Board of Regents. "The recommendation of Dean E. B. McCormick in relation to the organization of an engineering experiment station was presented and discussed at length. It was ordered on motion of Regent Capper (1) That the Board of Regents authorize the establishment of an engineering experiment station in accordance with the plans submitted by Dean E. B. McCormick. (2) That the staff be composed of the heads of the departments of the engineering department, including the heads of the new departments created by the order of the Board at this meeting. (3) It was ordered that the Dean of the Engineering Department be designated as Director of the Experiment Station.

Anyone who has tried to develop research programs recognizes readily that it is very likely to be a slow and discouraging endeavor. Only limited funds were available, and government sponsored research has only recently been invented. If I started in on our research program this would be much too long.

In conclusion, I will simply add that our research program has developed rapidly since World War II and has every indication of continuing progress.

Our off-campus service continues to increase as evidenced by the estab­lishment in 1959 of the Division of Engineering and Industrial Services, in the Engineering Experiment Station, and the creation, in January of 1961 of a Center for Community Planning Services in that Division.