National Engineering Societies Research Articles

Comments: New Year Marks JPT’s 75th Anniversary

We’re excited to begin the year with the commemoration of JPT’s 75th anniversary. This issue launches our special features dedicated to JPT’s reporting of technology and practices over the past 7½ decades. Emerging Technology Senior Editor Stephen Rassenfoss and Senior Technology Editor Trent Jacobs penned this month’s articles highlighting innovations in drilling, completions, and reservoir engineering. Each month, our editors will dive into the archives to round up milestones of industry advancements and achievements as reported in JPT. Since its inaugural issue in January 1949, JPT has remained true to its mission of reporting the technological and scientific learnings and advancements in the global oil and gas industry. Built upon a strong technical foundation, it continues to draw upon the expertise and knowledge of industry experts to disseminate up-to-date, relevant information to SPE members from all disciplines. JPT’s evolution began with The American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical, and Petroleum Engineers (AIME), founded in 1871 in Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania. It was one of the first national engineering societies established in the US. In subsequent years, AIME was joined by four other engineering founder societies—The American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME), the American Institute of Electrical Engineers (now the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers [IEEE]), the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), and the American Institute of Chemical Engineers (AIChE)—and formed the United Engineering Foundation. (US President Herbert Hoover, a mining engineer, served as AIME’s president in 1920.) As AIME itself continued to grow, it decentralized and formed four independently operated member societies: SME (Society for Mining, Metallurgy, and Exploration); TMS (The Minerals, Metals, and Materials Society); AIST (Association for Iron & Steel Technology); and SPE (Society of Petroleum Engineers). AIME had as part of its membership a small, but growing, number of petroleum engineers. These members had specific technological issues far removed from their peers in the older, more-established engineering disciplines. The AIME Petroleum Branch Executive Committee (whose members represented companies such as The Pure Oil Co., Dowell Inc., Humble Oil and Refining Co., and the Texas Co.) determined that the best way to meet this group’s needs was to develop a “publication so dominantly petroleum as to secure wide reader interest,” one that would “rapidly gain the respect of the industry.” Over the years, that goal was achieved. JPT came to be recognized worldwide as the source for authoritative technical information in the petroleum industry. JPT’s first issue included four technical papers, one of which was “A Hydraulic Process for Increasing the Productivity of Wells.” The paper’s author, J.B. Clark, noted, “To date the process has been used in 32 jobs on 23 wells in 7 fields, resulting in a sustained increase in production in 11 wells.” The hydraulic fracturing techniques for well stimulation that he discussed have been responsible for the subsequent recovery of billions of barrels of oil. Also, bear in mind that the world’s total crude oil production in 1949 was about 3.8 billion bbl, less than the projected total US annual production in 2023—4.7 billion bbl. Other articles related to the oil and gas business were “Private Financing of Oil-Producing Properties” and “Middle Eastern Oil and Its Importance to the World.” Interestingly, although the content is outdated, both topics remain relevant today, 75 years later. Join us each month to explore our rich history and follow us on LinkedIn. All issues of JPT from 1949 to date are available in OnePetro. Even a cursory glance at the titles of the papers will show the remarkable evolution of technology over the years. We wish you the best in 2024, both in your professional and personal lives.

Member Societies: Honoring SPE’s Heritage and Fellow SPE Members through AIME, UEF, and AAES Awards

You may have heard or recall that SPE was originally part of what is now the American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical and Petroleum Engineers (AIME). In 1985, SPE and the other three AIME member societies, the Society for Mining, Metallurgy, and Exploration (SME); The Minerals, Metals, and Materials Society (TMS); and the Association for Iron and Steel Technology (AIST), became separately incorporated from AIME. AIME, founded in 1871, was one of the first national engineering societies established in the United States. In 1904, AIME and two other engineering societies—the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) and the American Institute of Electrical Engineers—formed what is now called the United Engineering Foundation (UEF) to advance the engineering arts and sciences for the welfare of humanity. UEF received a gift of $1 million from Andrew Carnegie to build a common headquarters building in New York City and house their joint and sever-al libraries. By 1958, two other engineering societies had joined UEF: the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) and the American Institute of Chemical Engineers (AIChE). SPE is the largest engineering society among the AIME member societies, but by no means as large as some of the UEF founder societies. For example, the successor organization to the American Institute of Electrical Engineers, IEEE (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers), is the world’s largest technical professional association with roughly 450,000 members. Both AIME and UEF founder societies have awards for which SPE members are eligible. Some of these are exclusive to SPE and administered by SPE award committees. They are familiar names: the DeGolyer and Lucas awards, and Honorary Membership. Others are available to SPE members as well as those belonging to one of the four AIME member societies. These include the Charles F. Rand Memorial Gold Medal, honoring distinguished achievement in mining administration, including metallurgy and petroleum Robert Earll McConnell Award, which recognizes beneficial service to mankind by engineers through significant contributions that advance a nation’s standard of living or replenishes its natural resources Rossiter W. Raymond Memorial Award, given for the best paper written by a member under age 35

AIME Legacy Continues To Benefit SPE and Other Member Societies

Member Societies For those not familiar with AIME, it stands for the “American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical, and Petroleum Engineers.” AIME, founded in 1871 in Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania, was one of the first national engineering societies established in the United States. In subsequent years, AIME was joined by four other engineering founder societies—the American Society of Mechanical Engineers, the American Institute of Electrical Engineers, the American Society of Civil Engineers, and the American Institute of Chemical Engineers—and formed the United Engineering Foundation. An interesting side note is that US President Herbert Hoover, a mining engineer, served as the AIME president in 1920. More detailed information on the history of AIME can be found in the JPT articles referenced below. As AIME itself continued to grow, it decentralized and formed four independently operated member societies: SME (Society for Mining, Metallurgy, and Exploration) TMS (The Minerals, Metals, and Materials Society) AIST (Association for Iron & Steel Technology) SPE (Society of Petroleum Engineers) The overarching mission of AIME remains to support its member societies, with an accompanying vision to honor its legacy as a valued partner with the member societies. The purpose of this article is to report to our members how AIME is fulfilling its mission of preserving our legacy. AIME’s History and Heritage Committee is charged with providing over-sight to activities related to preserving and enhancing this legacy. Some of the key focus areas include archiving historical materials, documenting key initiatives and activities of the institute prior to the formation of the independent member societies, capturing oral histories from members on their experiences in the “early days” of their respective industries, maintaining the AIME awards and recognition program, and highlighting specific activities such as commemoration of AIME’s 145th anniversary in 2016 and planning for the 150th milestone in 2021.

AIME: Continuing a legacy of service to the science and engineering community

To read more about him turn to page 10 To join TMS, visit www.tms.org/Society/Membership.aspx. The American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical & Petroleum Engineers (AIME) was founded in 1871 by 22 mining engineers in Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania. As one of the fi rst national engineering societies established in the United States, and along with the societies for civil, mechanical, electrical, and chemical engineers, it is known as an Engineering Founder Society. After 85 years, TMS was incorporated as a separate organization in 1957. Thus, AIME is the parent organization of TMS, along with the Society of Petroleum Engineers, the Association for Iron & Steel Technology and the Society for Mining, Metallurgy & Exploration. AIME celebrated its 125th anniversary at a joint meeting with TMS in Anaheim, California in 1996 and presented a commemorative plaque to the Mayor of Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania—its birthplace. TMS, in turn, celebrated its own 50th Anniversary at Walt Disney World in Florida in 2007. At that celebration, AIME leadership participated in the festivities and honored TMS. Organizationally, AIME is now run by a Board of Trustees comprised of two representatives from each of its member societies. TMS is currently represented by the author, 2011–2012 AIME President Brajendra Mishra (2006 TMS president) and Trustee Ray Peterson (2010 TMS president). In addition, TMS Executive Director Warren Hunt attends the board meetings. AIME has a very simple mission: to support its four member societies primarily by distributing funds and facilitating interaction with the larger sciAIME: Continuing a Legacy of Service to the Science and Engineering Community

Congressional Fellow report

Through the American Association of the Advancement of Science Congressional Science and Engineering Fellowship Program, scientists and engineers from around the country have enjoyed a 20‐year relationship with Congress—a mutually beneficial union that has significantly enhanced the legislative process involving science and technology policy.More than 500 postdoctorate to mid‐career level scientists and engineers have worked as professional legislative staff members on Capitol Hill since 1973. Heralded for its unique public policy learning experience, the Congressional Fellowship program has enabled a number of scientists and engineers to flourish in the public policy arena after their experience in Washington. Several of these individuals have attained high‐level policy positions within the government, a path they may not have followed without their involvement in the program. AGU is one of the twenty‐two national science and engineering societies that support the program.

Across the Atlantic: Networks of friendship: Region 8 has been immensely successful in building networks of friendship that transcend national, cultural, religious, and educational boundaries

Unlike the homogeneous personality that is prevalent among IEEE Regions in the United States, Region 8, which encompasses Europe, the Middle East, and Africa, is marked by differences in language, culture, religion, and education. Thus, initiating and then maintaining a high level of interest in IEEE student activities has always been a challenge requiring considerable time and energy. Our task has been further burdened by the challenge from national engineering societies that already represent the electrical engineering profession, and student organizations that already exist within the various engineering schools. Nevertheless, our efforts have paid off, and Region 8 has grown from one Branch in 1961 to 42 in 1984 and from a student membership of 200 in 1965 to more than 2000 presently.

The Functions of the Professional Association

organization of practitioners who judge one_another as profpssionally competent and who have banded together to perform social functions which they catnot perform in their separate capacity as individuals. It is typically a voluntary association. The degree to which it is voluntary may, however, differ greatly from case to case. It may range from the extreme in which the option to join is small since the penalties of not belonging are great, as in the case of county medical societies, to the other extreme, in which the option is large since thepenalties for not belonging are negligible, as in tie case of the more than seventy-five national engineering societies. Professional associations differ also in their structure. They may be closely controlled from a central office or may allow considerable autonomy to local branches of the association. I do not, however, intend to explore these variations of structure, important as they are, for it is not its structure which most significantly characterizes the professional society, but its functions. The professional association is as the professional association does: its manifest and latent social functions, not the structure designed to put these functions into effect, are its social excuse for being. That is why we can largely neglect, in this short examination, the organizational

Wanted: More Engineers in Public Affairs: The EJC Symposium on National Engineering Problems

At a precedent-making symposium, high United States government officials implored the engineering profession to be more active in national affairs relating to science and technology. They called for the engineers to articulate their technical insights and visions on proposed national goals and policies and to enter into government positions at all levels including the political. This is necessary, the government officials said, if wise and fruitful outlays for research and development are to be assured. Both the engineering and scientific communities were cited for being remiss in their attention to public policy; the engineers, however, were considered to be more aloof than the scientists from the processes that determine the nation's scientific and technological directions. The occasion for these observations was the Engineers Joint Council Symposium on National Engineering Problems, held January 12-14, 1964, in Washington, D.C. EJC, a federation of twenty-four national engineering societies, sponsored this symposium under the aegis of its Government Liaison Committee to explore national problems in engineering and the significance of science and technology in public affairs. The conference, held in conjunction with EJC's annual meeting, was attended by more than one hundred society presidents, board members, and staff directors. For more than two days, the government officials impressed on them that science and technology represent dynamic forces that are dramatically affecting the country and influencing the government's own goals and responsibilities. They described Washington's attempts to manage and guide these forces and identified historical trends and problem areas that have arisen from the mammoth increases in national Research and Development (R&D) expenditures. This account reports on some of their numerous observations.

THE FUNCTIONS OF THE PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION

organization of practitioners who judge one_another as profpssionally competent and who have banded together to perform social functions which they catnot perform in their separate capacity as individuals. It is typically a voluntary association. The degree to which it is voluntary may, however, differ greatly from case to case. It may range from the extreme in which the option to join is small since the penalties of not belonging are great, as in the case of county medical societies, to the other extreme, in which the option is large since thepenalties for not belonging are negligible, as in tie case of the more than seventy-five national engineering societies. Professional associations differ also in their structure. They may be closely controlled from a central office or may allow considerable autonomy to local branches of the association. I do not, however, intend to explore these variations of structure, important as they are, for it is not its structure which most significantly characterizes the professional society, but its functions. The professional association is as the professional association does: its manifest and latent social functions, not the structure designed to put these functions into effect, are its social excuse for being. That is why we can largely neglect, in this short examination, the organizational

International co-operation between national engineering societies

International co-operation between national engineering societies

Vannevar Bush — John Fritz medalist for 1951: Vannevar Bush: Electrical engineer, executive

Vannevar Bush, President of the Carnegie Institution of Washington, was awarded the John Fritz Medal for 1951 “for outstanding contributions to his country and to his fellow men.” The medal is awarded annually by the four national engineering societies: AIEE, The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, the American Institute of Mining and Metallurgical Engineers, and the American Society of Civil Engineers, for notable scientific or industrial achievements, regardless of nationality or sex.

Graduate Training in Chemical Engineering

ALTHOUGH chemical engineering as now defined is only about 40 years old it ranks fourth among major branches of engineering. Ten per cent of all engineers are chemical engineers, and the enrollment of students in chemical engineering in the United States is now about the same as the enrollment in all branches of engineering in 1910. Development of strong graduate programs in chemical engineering started in the twenties, and the number of graduate students is now some three times the number of all students enrolled in chemical engineering in 1910. Chemical engineering has been a leader in the development of graduate study in engineering; through t h e thirties well over half the doctorates in engineering were in chemical engineering, and today there are more students enrolled for the doctorate in chemical engineering than in any of the other engineering fields. Some 357c of the chemical engineers who are members of national engineering societies have ...

The engineering profession in transition

This report by Colonel Carey, chairman of the Engineers' Joint Council Committee on the 1946 Survey of the Engineering Profession, reviews the highlights of the EJC's 1946 survey which is entitled “The engineering profession in transition.” The survey is soon to be published and will be available for general sale at $1 per copy. It is a continuation of previous work which covered the years 1929 to 1934, the present survey covering the years 1939 through 1946. Three articles reporting various phases of the former survey were published in ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING as follows: “Professional Aspects of Engineering Education,” (EE, Aug '36, pp 863–7); “Unemployment in the Engineering Profession,” (EE, Feb '37, pp 216–23); and “Employment in the Engineering Profession,” (EE, May '37, 524–31). Of particular interest in this latest study, restricted for the first time to persons identified through their membership in the six national professional engineering societies as being qualified members of the profession, are the comparisons afforded for 1939, 1943, and 1946, indicating the economic status of the engineer before, during, and after the war years. The participating societies in this survey are: AIEE, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, American Society of Civil Engineers, American Institute of Mining and Metallurgical Engineers, and the American Institute of Chemical Engineers, which make up the Engineers' Joint Council, and the National Society of Professional Engineers, joining in this project by invitation of EJC.

Realism in engineering education

Citing the cultural education of an engineer as a continuing process, Dean Langsdorf tosses the responsibility to the national engineering societies. He opposes further dilution of engineering curricula which already require streamlining and intensification if, in the face of expanding technology, they are to meet effectively their obligation of assuring their graduates the requisite fundamentals.

Electrical engineering: Retain Germany's peacetime industry! Urge presidents of five national engineering societies

Electrical engineering: Retain Germany's peacetime industry! Urge presidents of five national engineering societies

The 8 joint functional organizations of the National engineering societies

The 8 joint functional organizations of the National engineering societies

Work of the American Engineering Standards Committee

THERE are literally hundreds of organized groups engaged in industrial standardization work in this country. By and large, this group standardization movement has developed during the present century. It has been a natural outgrowth of company standardization, which has been one of the most marked characteristics of our industrial growth. Just as company standardization led to standardization by groups, so the latter inevitably necessitates intergroup or national standardization. The World War created a situation in all industrial countries which made clearly apparent the necessity of a national standardization clearing house. The first step toward a national organization was taken in 1918 by five national engineering societies, which together with the U. S. Government Departments of War, Navy and Commerce, formed the nucleus of such an organization. Later, this nucleus was broadened into a federation of trade associations, technical societies, and Government departments. The American Engineering Standards Committee is primarily concerned with national and international standardization. It is the agency through which industrial standardization in

A national museum of engineering and industry

Monday, August 17, may prove a memorable day in the history of the four National Engineering Societies. On that day the presidents and the secretaries of these societies met Mr. Samuel Insull at a luncheon given in his honor by our ex-president, Dr. John Lieb. It was a conference luncheon, and the subject of the conference was the endeavor of founding a National Museum of Engineering and Industries. This movement started sometime ago, and recently Mr. Insull accepted the invitation to steer its course. No ship ever stranded which had him for its helmsman. The secret of his success is principally due to his good judgment in the selection of his crew. The first question which Mr. Insull addressed, very informally, to the representatives of the four engineering societies was this: Is the proposed voyage worth while, and if it is, will your societies supply me with suitable candidates for a crew? The unanimous opinion was that the voyage is worth while, and that the National Engineering Societies will gladly supply him with men worthy of the honor to serve on his crew. Your president proposed two names from the rostrum of honor of the A. I. E. E. They are ex-presidents John Lieb and Frank B. Jewett. The presidents of the other three National Engineering Societies will make their recommendations in the near future, so that the good ship will start on its voyage of exploration as soon as Mr. Insull returns from his European trip, which will be about October first. The object of this exploration will be a search for a National Museum of Engineering and Industry.

Standardization in electric transportation equipment

IT is more than proper that representatives of the railroads, electrical manufacturers, power companies, and our national engineering societies jointly undertake at once certain standardizations in electrical railway equipment. Such standardizations will not only facilitate electrification and provide better transportation at less cost, but will definitely forestall losses that will otherwise mount to enormous proportions in the future. The accomplishment of these standardizations is a public obligation of the highest importance.

Industrial Management and the American Engineering Council

T HE American Engineering Council was organized by the engineering profession in an effort to provide the profession with an agency through which it might express the crystallized thought of engineers upon national questions in the consideration of which their training, experience and thought would be useful. The engineers have only one motive in supporting and operating such an organization-to meet public responsibilities and to render public service. Twenty-eight national, state and local engineering societies, having a combined individual membership of approximately 42,000 engineers, constitute the American Engineering Council. The Council was organized in November, 1920, and began its work early in 1921, under the leadership of its first president, the Honorable Herbert Hoover. He was succeeded by Dean Mortimer E. Cooley, of the University of Michigan, who served as president for two years and a half. The third president is the Honorable James Hartness, ex-governor of Vermont, who is now directing the organization.