10 Steps to avoid Engineering Scholarship Scams

10 Steps to avoid Engineering Scholarship Scams

Student or parents needs to be able to recognize the scholarship fraud profile. Following are top 10 Scholarship Scams.

1. The free seminar scam. Overwhelmed by all the information out there? Want to make the best financial aid decisions for you or your child? Often a free financial aid seminar is no more than a “come-on” for insurance sales pitches, matching services or investment products.

Signs that should make the warning bells go off: Are they using the hard sell? Sign-up today or the price shoots up tomorrow? Can only answer certain questions after you pay their fee? Wants your credit card information to “hold” a scholarship for you? Your ears should be ringing by now.

Remember, if you receive help from a consultant, he or she must sign the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA). If the seminar sales rep refuses to do so, it is another alarm bell. And never let a company consultant suggest that you adjust your income on the FAFSA in order to receive more aid. It’s unethical (a crime even). And it can backfire, big time.

2. Scholarships for profit. Scholarships are designed for many purposes—recruit talented athletes, assist low income applicants, encourage study in an academic discipline, promote campus diversity, attract the best students—but profit should never be one of them. Scammers that award modest scholarships of $1,000 (or no scholarship at all) can collect many times over that amount in fees by attracting thousands of applicants. You may only be out the 15 bucks or so, but multiple that by 1,000 scholarship hopefuls just like you and you just made for a nice payday for the scholarship scam artist. Being denied such a scholarship does not make you undeserving—but just one more scammed applicant.

3. The advance-fee loan. A low-interest loan with an upfront fee? Don’t think so, and neither should you. Legitimate lenders deduct fees from at the time disbursement checks are issue; they do not charge fees before paying out the loan to a borrower. Be wary of any lender that asks for money upfront—that is a loan that will likely never materialize.

4. Your Financial Aid Office. Huh? Your college Financial Aid Office is a credible and free resource for education funding. But beware; the Education Department recently banned the practice of lenders offering financial incentives to universities that recommend their service as a preferred lender (the university often receiving a “cut” for the loan). The move was prompted by investigations showing that some university officials accepted gifts, payments or stock on favorable terms in exchange for such practices. In other instances, marketing representatives for lenders staffed phones at student aid offices. In an $85 billion student loan industry, you have to ask yourself if your university steered you to the lender with the best rate available, or simply the one lining their pockets. Ouch.

5. The guaranteed matching service. If Match.com can’t guarantee you Prince Charming and firmer abs, scholarship matching services cannot guarantee you money in the bank. Matching services that promise guaranteed matching sources for a processing fee of $49.95 (and much higher) will at best provide you with information available for free on the web. Take note that these services often inflate their database when an individual sponsor offers hundreds of scholarships.

The Better Business Bureau (BBB) reports that many of the sources provided by scholarship matching services are inaccurate and “few, if any at all, receive the actual funds”. The BBB adds that information provided is often out of date, providing sources for deadlines that have long passed. And never mind that money-back guarantee—it comes with more hoops to jump through than any dog-and-pony show you could ever imagine.

6. Linked products. Don’t let any sales person ever convince you that a financial product, such as student life insurance, or an annuity, must be purchased to qualify for federal student financial aid. It just isn’t so. And it is a sure fire scam.

7. The telemarketer. Telemarketing was once the biggest bugaboos of scholarship fraud when the FTC first addressed scholarship scams in the 90s. Attention more recently has shifted to bogus financial aid and scholarship seminars, and deceptive practices among consultants. That does not mean that telemarketing scams still do not surface. The U.S. Department of Education warned consumers recently about telemarketing scammers posing as U.S. Department of Education (ED) officers offering grants to students for a $249 processing fee (by requesting a bank or credit card number). Contact the DOE’s Office of Inspector General at 1-800-MIS-USED (1-800-647-8733) or oig.hotline@ed.gov to learn more.

8. Guaranteed financial aid consultants. What can you expect for your fee from a financial aid consultant? Help completing the FAFSA, estimating your expected family contribution (EFC), and advising you or child on types of aid. Information and assistance that is readily available and free from a financial aid office at any university, your local library, on the web, or from a high school guidance counselor. So what is free, free, free information worth to you? Plenty, if you pay fees to a financial aid consultant to get it.

Some may want the handholding of a consultant regardless. Then be aware of deceptive claims that should send you looking for help from other sources. A financial aid consultant may guarantee a minimum $2,500 in aid or promise to refund your money. That’s nice, but misleading. Yes, you will no doubt receive that $2,500 student loan, but then so will every applicant who completes the FAFSA (free and on the web at www.fafsa.ed.gov). A federal entitlement available simply by completing the FAFSA should not be misrepresented or misconstrued as aid a consulting company can uniquely guarantee you as an enticement.

Likewise, if a consulting service guarantees you will receive every last penny to ship your child off to school (or your money back), you should not be fooled. You guessed it, another federal entitlement that is a byproduct of completing the FAFSA. That and a decent credit rating will earn you a PLUS loan for 100 percent of the total cost of attendance for you or your child. It is just good sense to steer clear of any company that entices clientele with benefits that are freely available to all students completing the FAFSA (whether they pay pricey consulting fees or not) as a federal entitlement.

Remember, if a consulting agency is completing a FAFSA (or any other form) on your behalf, review, sign it, and mail it yourself. You should maintain copies of the completed FAFSA and expect a refund if it is incorrect. And always agree to a flat fee for financial aid consulting services, never a percentage of aid received. Qualifications to consider when screening potential financial aid consultants include whether the consultant has experience at a financial aid office and is a Certified Public Accountant. Never be hesitant to ask for references.

9. The sweepstakes scholarship. Lucky you! You have just been selected as a finalist to win a scholarship in a sweepstakes that you never entered. (And you thought you never won anything.) The only obstacle standing between you and collecting your winnings is paying the redemption fee. Be wary of contests, websites and scholarships that collect personal data, payout a single dollar-amount (play the lottery today?) and repay the kindness with a barrage of advertisements. Which brings us to our next popular scam tactic.

10. The redemption fee. Common catchphrases by the scammer are disbursement fee, redemption fee, or processing fee. Notice the common denominator here? Legitimate scholarships do not ask a student to pay for an award. Be wary of any money awarded to you out of the blue that comes with strings, especially those with strings attached to your pocketbook.

Prof. Victor Li - the innovative creator of NanoMaterial in Civil Engineering

    The innovative creator of NanoMaterial in Civil Engineering: Review
      "One of the most challenging problems in infrastructure is to endure our built infrastrutures from the affect influences from the natural and man-made hazard. To mitigate the influence of hazard on the infrastructures, the smart engineer utilizes the smart material through materials technology". 
      One of the most smart and influencing engineer and researcher in the world in the area of smart material is "Professor Victor C. Li".
       Prof. Li use the technology core that is micromechanics-based designed engineered cemetitious composites (ECC) with ductility approaching two to three orders of magnitude that of ordinary concrete of FRC. Prof.Li's research extends its impact on the quality of life via interdisciplinary research collaborations with partners specilizing in polymer chemistry, rheology, fiber processing, including structural and construction engineering.

  This is for the "better built environment and infrastructures".  Read more Prof.Victor Li in Forbes.

  The short summary of Prof. Li Bio is below:
E. Benjamin Wylie Collegiate Chair
Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering
Professor of Materials Science and Engineering
University of Michigan

Education (Top)
Ph.D. Solid & Structural Mechanics Brown University 1981
M.S. Mechanical Engineering Brown University 1978
M.A. Mechanical Engineering Brown University 1977
B.S. Economics Brown University 1977
Experience (Top)
2005 - Present E. Benjamin Wylie Collegiate Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering, U. of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
2004 - Present Professor of Materials Science and Engineering,
U. of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
1993 - 2005 Professor of Civil and Envirn. Engineering, U. of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
1990 -1993 Associate Professor of Civil Engineering, U. of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
1985 -1990 Associate Professor of Civil Engineering, M.I.T., Cambridge, MA.
1983 -1985 Edgerton Assistant Professor of Civil Engineering, M.I.T., Cambridge, MA.
1981 -1983 Assistant Professor of Civil Engineering, M.I.T., Cambridge, MA.
Honors and Awards (Top)

* Fellow, IA-FraMCoS, 2010
* Member, General Council, Int’l Union of Laboratories and Experts in Construction Materials, Systems, and Structures (RILEM), 2005-present
* Member, Editorial Advisory Committee, RILEM J. of Materials and Structures, 2004-present
* Member, Advisory Board, J. of Adv. Concrete Technology, Japan Concrete Institute, 2001-present
* Guest Professorship, Southeast University, Nanjing, China, 2006-present
* Hua Ying Honorary Lectureship, Southeast University, Nanjing, China, 2006
* U-M Distinguished Faculty Achievement Award, 2005-2006
* Fellow, World Innovation Foundation, 2005-
* Finalist, Frank Annunzio Award for “cutting edge” innovations Christopher Columbus Fellowship Foundation, 2005
* UM College of Engineering Stephen S. Attwood Excellence in Engineering Award, 2004-2005
* Honorary Doctorate, Tech. Univ. of Denmark, Lyngby, Denmark, 2004
* President, Association of Fracture Mechanics of Concrete and Concrete Structures, 2001-2004
* Member, Editorial Board, J. of Cement and Concrete Composites, 2000-2002
* Højgaard Visiting Professor of Concrete Technology, Techn. Univ. of Denmark, 1999 - 2004
* Fellow, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1999 -
* Fellow, American Society of Civil Engineers, 1998
* Member, Executive Committee, ASCE Materials Technology Division, 1996 - 1998
* Invited Professor of Civil Engineering, University of Tokyo, 1996-1997
* Visiting Professor of Civil & Structural Engineering, Hong Kong Univ. of Science and Technology, 1997 summer
* Member, Executive Committee, Materials Engineering Division, ASCE, 1996 -
* Editor-in-Chief, ASCE J. Materials in Civil Engineering, 1996 - 1999
* U-M College of Engineering Research Excellence Award, 1995-1996
* Distinguished Lecturer Award, ICCE, 1994
* U-M CEE Department Research Excellence Award, 1993-1994
* Invited Guest Editor, J. of Cement and Concrete Composites, 1992
* Invited Professor of Structural Engineering, Techn. Univ. of Denmark, 1992 summer
* Rackham Research Partnership Award, 1991-1992
* Edgerton Career Development Chair, M.I.T., 1983-1985
* University Fellowship, Brown University, 1977-1978
* Tau Beta Pi, 1977- ; Sigma Xi, 1977-

Keynote/Plenary Speaker (selected list) (Top)

* "Non-Brittle Concrete For Durable Infrastructure In Coastal Regions," to appear in Proc., International Conf. on Future Concrete, Doha, Qatar, 2010.
* "Damage Characteristics And Micromechanics of Impact Resistant Engineered Cementitious Composites," European Fracture Conference (ECF18), Dresden, Germany, 2010.
* "Advances in Self-healing Engineered Cementitious Composites," Japan Concrete Institute, Tokyo, 2010.
* "Driving Infrastructure Sustainability Via Advanced Materials Technology," Int’l Conference on Advanced Concrete Materials, Stellenbosch, S. Africa, 11/2009.
* "Self-Healing Cementitious Material and Sustainable Infrastructure," 2nd Int’l Conf. on Self-Healing Materials, Chicago, 6/2009.
* "Sustainable Infrastructure With Durable Fiber Concrete Material," Concrete: Construction's Sustainable Option, Dundee Scotland, 7/2008.
* "Bendable Concrete for Sustainable Infrastructure," NRMCA Concrete Tech Forum, Denver, 5/2008.
* ACI Convention State-of-the-Art Cement and Concrete Applications, Puerto Rico, 2007
* 1st Int’l Conf. on Self Healing Materials, Noordwijk, the Netherlands, 2007
* 10th Int’l Inorganic-Bonded Fiber Composites Conf., Sao Paulo, Brazil, 2006
* Japan Society of Civil Engineers – TC334 Workshop, 2006
* Int’l Workshop on Fracture of Materials, Sydney, Australia, 2006
* ECI on Advances in Cement and Concrete – Sustainability, Switzerland, 2006
* Knud Højgaard Conf. on Advanced Cement-Based Materials, Denmark, 2005
* Int’l Seminar on Better Quality of Concrete and Competitiveness of the Construction Industry,” Seoul, Korea, 2005
* 6th RILEM Symp. on Fiber Reinforced Concrete (FRC), Varenna, Italy, 2004
* Conf. on Fibre Composites, HPC and Smart Materials, Chennai, India , 2004
* Int¹l Workshop on Sustainable Concrete Technology, Beijing, China, 2004
* JCI Japanese Symposium on DFRCC, Japan, 2003
* Fiber Society on Engineering with Fibers, Loughborough, UK, 2003
* Materials Research Society Meeting, Boston, US, 2002
* Japan Concrete Institute Workshop on DFRCC, Takayama, Japan, 2002
* 1st fib Congress ­ Concrete Structures in 21st Century, Osaka, Japan, 2002
* High Performance Concrete Workshop, Kungmin, China, 2001
* Int’l Conference on High Performance Concrete, China, 2000
* 6th Int'l Symposium on Brittle Matrix Composites, Warsaw, Poland, 2000
* FRAMCOS-3, Gifu, Japan, 1998
* 5th Int'l Symposium on Brittle Matrix Composites, Warsaw, Poland, 1997
* ICF-9, Sydney, Australia, 1997
* Meso-Fracture ‘96, Tomsk, Russia, 1996
* 4th Japan SAMPE Conference, Tokyo, Japan, 1995
* 4th Int'l Symposium on Brittle Matrix Composites, Warsaw, Poland, 1994
* 4th RILEM International Symposium on FRC, Sheffield, UK, 1992
* MIT Sea Grant Program, WS on Breaking Process of Ice Plates, US, 1984

Member/Chair, Scientific Board of Advisors/Organizing Committee (selected list) (Top)

* BEFIB 2012 on Fibre Reinforced Concrete, Guimaraes City, Portugal, 2012
* 7th Int’l Symp. on Cement & Concrete (ISCC), Ji’nan, China, 2010
* 2nd Int’l Conf. on Service Life Design for Infrastructure, Delft, The Netherlands, 2010
* 18th European Conference of Fracture (ECF 18), Dresden, Germany, 2010
* Fracture Mechanics of Concrete & Concrete Structures (FraMCoS 7), Korea, 2009
* 1st Int’l Conf. on Computational Technologies in Concrete Structures (CTCS'09), Korea, 2009
* 2nd Int’l Conf. on Self-Healing Materials (ICSHM), Chicago, US, 2009
* Int’l Conf. on Durability of Concrete Structures (ICDCS 2008), Hangzhou, China, 2008
* Int’l Symp. on Hydration, Microstructure and Durability, Nanjing, China, 2008
* Int’l Conf. on Challenges for Civil Construction, Porto, Portugal, 2008
* 8th Int’l Symp. on Utilization of High Strength & High Performance Concrete, Tokyo, Japan, 2008
* Int’l Workshop on HPFRCC, Mainz, Germany, 2007
* 1st Int’l Conf. on Self Healing Materials, Noordwijk, The Netherlands, 2007
* Int’l Workshop on Fracture of Materials, Sydney, Australia, 2006
* 11th Int¹l Conf. On Fracture (ICF11), Turin, Italy, 2005
* Int’l Conf. on Advances in Concrete & Construction (ICACC-2004), India 2004
* FraMCoS 5th Int'l Symp. on Concrete Fracture, Vail, Colorado, 2004
* 6th RILEM Symposium on Fibre-Reinforced Concrete, Varenna, Italy, 2004
* Int'l Conf. on Concrete under Severe Conditions CONSEC 04 Seoul, Korea, 2004
* HPFRCC-4 Int¹l Workshop, Ann Arbor, US, 2003
* Int¹l Fiber Society Symposium, Loughborough, UK, 2003
* Japan Concrete Institute Workshop on DFRCC, Takayama, Japan, 2002
* International Board of JCI Committee on High Performance Fiber Reinforced Cementitious Composites, 2001- 2004
* Int' Conf. on Advances in Building Technology, Hong Kong, 2002
* 2nd Int’l Workshop on Self-Compacting Concrete, Japan, 2001
* FraMCoS 4th Int'l Symp. on Concrete Fracture, France, 2001
* Int’l Conference on High Performance Concrete, Hong Kong and Shenzhen, China, 2000
* Int’l Workshop on High Performance FRC Composites, Mainz, Germany, 1999
* Civil & Envir. Engrg. Conf. – New Frontiers & Challenges, AIT 40th Anniv. Celebration, Thailand, 1999
* Meso-Fracture ’98, Haifa, Isreal, 1998
* Int’l Workshop on Self-Compacting Concrete, Japan, 1998
* FraMCoS 3rd Int'l Symp. on Concrete Fracture, Japan, 1998
* Sixth Int’l Symp. on Ferrocement, Ann Arbor, US, 1998
* Damage and Failure of Interfaces, Vienna, Austria, 1997
* ICF-9, Sydney, Australia, 1997
* Int'l Workshop on HPFRCC, US, 1995
* FraMCoS 2nd Int'l Symp. on Concrete Fracture, Switzerland, 1995
* RILEM 4th Int'l Symp. on FRC, UK, 1992
* RILEM Int'l Conf. Frac./Damage of Conc. & Rock, Austria, 1992
* FraMCoS 1st Int'l Conf. Frac. Mech. of Conc. Struct., US, 1992
* SEM Int'l Conf. Micromech. Failure of Quasi-Brittle Mat'ls, US, 1990
* Int'l Assoc. BEM - Int'l Sym. on BEM, 89, US, 1989
* ITA Int'l Conf. on Jointed and Faulted Rock, Austria, 1989
* RILEM Int'l Conf. Frac. Toughness and Frac. Energy, UK, 1989
* RILEM Int'l Conf. in Fracture of Concrete and Rock, UK, 1987

What is ECC?

   The new trend of Civil Engineering is to utilize the most effective and sustainable solution to the built environment. Since most of the Civil Engineering application are unavoidable to deal with the infrastructures encountering with the impact of the surrounding environment, the engineers thus seek to use the most durable and cost-effective materials in their built infrastructure.

    ECC is one of the most outstanding material developed by using Nanotechnology. Several researchers are currently working to drive the high performance ingredients of ECC to use in various Civil application; for example, Prof. Victor Li. His research is very famous and highly impacted like On Engineered Cementitious Composites (ECC) A Review of the Material and Its Applications (Invited paper)
Victor C. Li, published in Journal of Advanced Concrete Technology, 1(3) 215-230, 2003

     This article surveys the research and development of Engineered Cementitious Composites (ECC) over the last decade since its invention in the early 1990's. The importance of micromechanics in the materials design strategy is emphasized. Observations of unique characteristics of ECC based on a broad range of theoretical and experimental research are reviewed. The advantageous use of ECC in certain categories of structural, repair and retrofit applications is reviewed. While reflecting on past advances, future challenges for continued development and deployment of ECC are noted. This article is based on a keynote address given at the International Workshop on Ductile Fiber Reinforced Cementitious Composites (DFRCC)- Applications and Evaluations, sponsored by the Japan Concrete Institute, and held in October 2002 at Takayama, Japan.

    ECC, unlike common fiber reinforced concrete, is a micromechanically designed material[2]. This means that the mechanical interactions between ECC's fiber and matrix are described by a micromechanical model, which takes into account material properties and helps predict properties and guide ECC development.

    ECC looks similar to ordinary portland cement-based concrete, except that it does not include coarse aggregate and can deform (or bend) under strain[1] . A number of research groups are developing ECC science, including those at the University of Michigan, Delft University of Technology, the University of Tokyo, the Czech Technical University, and Stanford University. Traditional concrete’s lack of durability and failure under strain, both stemming from brittle behavior, have been a pushing factor in the development of ECC.

   ECC has a variety of unique properties, including tensile properties superior to other fiber-reinforced composites, ease of processing on par with conventional cement, the use of only a small volume fraction of fibers (~ 2 %), tight crack width, and a lack of anisotropically weak planes [3]. These properties are due largely to the interaction between the fibers and cementing matrix, which can be custom-tailored through micromechanics design. Essentially, the fibers create many microcracks with a very specific width, rather than a few very large cracks (as in conventional concrete.) This allows ECC to deform without catastrophic failure.

   This microcracking behavior leads to superior corrosion resistance (the cracks are so small and numerous that it is difficult for aggressive media to penetrate and attack the reinforcing steel) as well as to self-healing[4]. In the presence of water (during a rainstorm, for instance) unreacted cement particles recently exposed due to cracking hydrate and form a number of products (Calcium Silicate Hydrate, calcite, etc.) that expand and fill in the crack. These products appear as a white ‘scar’ material filling in the crack. This self-healing behavior not only seals the crack to prevent transport of fluids, but mechanical properties are regained. This self-healing has been observed in a variety of conventional cement and concretes; however, above a certain crack width self healing becomes less effective. It is the tightly controlled crack widths seen in ECC that ensure all cracks thoroughly heal when exposed to the natural environment.

    When combined with a more conductive material (metal wires, carbon nanotubes, etc.) all cement materials can increase and be used for damage-sensing. This is essentially based on the fact that conductivity will change as damage occurs; the addition of conductive material is meant to raise the conductivity to a level where such changes will be easily identified. Though not a material property of ECC itself, conductive ECC for damage-sensing applications are being developed by a number of research groups.

Field Applications

    ECC have found use in a number of large-scale applications in Japan, Korea, Switzerland, Australia and the U.S.[3]. These include:

    * The Mitaka Dam near Hiroshima was repaired using ECC in 2003[5]. The surface of the then 60-year old dam was severely damaged, showing evidence of cracks, spalling, and some water leakage. A 20 mm-thick layer of ECC was applied by spraying over the 600 m2 surface.

    * Also in 2003, an earth retaining wall in Gifu, Japan, was repaired using ECC[6]. Ordinary portland cement could not be used due to the severity of the cracking in the original structure, which would have caused reflective cracking. ECC was intended to minimize this danger; after one year only microcracks of tolerable width were observed.

    * The 95 m (312 ft.) Glorio Roppongi high-rise apartment building in Tokyo contains a total of 54 ECC coupling beams (2 per story) intended to mitigate earthquake damage [7]. The properties of ECC (high damage tolerance, high energy absorption, and ability to deform under shear) give it superior properties in seismic resistance applications when compared to ordinary portland cement. Similar structures include the 41-story Nabeaure Yokohama Tower (4 coupling beams per floor.)

    * The 1-km (0.6 mile) long Mihara Bridge in Hokkaido, Japan was opened to traffic in 2005 [8]. The steel-reinforced road bed contains nearly 800 m3 of ECC material. The tensile ductility and tight crack control behavior of ECC led to a 40 % reduction in material used during construction.

   * Similarly, a 225-mm thick ECC bridge deck on interstate 94 in Michigan was completed in 2005[9] . 30 m3 of material was used, delivered on-site in standard mixing trucks. Due to the unique mechanical properties of ECC, this deck also used less material than a proposed deck made of ordinary portland cement. Both the University of Michigan and the Michigan Department of Transportation are monitoring the bridge in an attempt to verify the theoretical superior durability of ECC; after 4 years of monitoring, performance remained undiminished.

    In conclusion,  ECC is one of the most outstanding material developed by using Nanotechnology.  The material is to meet the requirement for the new trend of Civil Engineering that utilizes the most effective and sustainable solution to the built environment.

Follow Us on Twitter

You can now follow us on Twitter  

                                                      

Amr S. Elnashai-One of the Best Expert in Earthquake Engineering.

    In this post, I introduced you to one of the best expert in Earthquake Engineering. If you are in this field, you might be able to guess. Yes. He is Amr S. Elnashai.He is the first author of Fundamentals of Earthquake Engineering

     
    Professor Amr Elnashai, Fellow of the UK Royal Academy of Engineering is the William and Elaine Hall Endowed Professor in the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering at the University of Illinois.  He is also Director and Chair of the College of Engineering Council on Global Engineering Initiatives.

A graduate of Cairo University, Dr. Elnashai obtained his M.Sc. and Ph.D. from Imperial College, University of London, UK. Before joining the University of Illinois in June 2001, he was Professor of Earthquake Engineering and Head of Section at Imperial College. He has been Visiting Professor at the University of Surrey since 1997. Other visiting appointments include the University of Tokyo, the University of Southern California (1990-1995) and the European School for Advanced Studies in Reduction of Seismic Risk, Italy, where he has served on the Board of Directors since its founding in 2000.
Dr. Elnashai is founder and co-editor of the Journal of Earthquake Engineering, editorial board member of several other journals, a member of the drafting panel of the European and Egyptian design codes, past chairman of the UK earthquake engineering association, UK delegate to and past senior Vice-President of the European Association of Earthquake Engineering. He is the winner of the Imperial College Unwin Prize for the best PhD thesis in Civil and Mechanical Engineering (1984), the Oscar Faber Medal for best paper in the Institution of Structural Engineering, and two best paper medals from the International Association of Tall Buildings, Los Angeles. He served as coordinator for major European research networks including 14 institutions from 9 countries.            
     Dr. Elnashai is Fellow of the American Society of Civil Engineers and the Institution of Structural Engineers in the UK. He is President of the Asian-Pacific Network (ANCER), a member of the FIB Seismic Design Commission Working Groups and two Applied Technology Council (ATC, USA) technical committees as well as the Illinois State Seismic Safety Task Force. He founded the Japan-UK Seismic Risk Forum in 1995 and served as its director until 2004. He was adviser to the UK Department of the Environment, chairman of a ministerial committee for the assessment of scientific research in Egypt, adviser to the Civil Defense Agency of Italy and review panel member for the Italian Ministry of Research and the New Zealand and Canadian Science Research Councils.
       He has successfully supervised 35 Ph.D. and more than 100 Master of Science theses. Many of his students hold significant positions in industry, academia and government in over 12 countries. He has contributed to projects for a number of international companies and other agencies such as the World Bank, GSK, Shell, AstraZeneca, Minorco, British Nuclear Fuels, Nuclear Installations Inspectorate, Mott MacDonald, British Airport Authority, Alstom Power, the Greek, Turkish and Indonesian Governments, Federal Highway Administration, National Geographic Society, US AID, among others. He is currently leading a large project for the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), and State Emergency Management Agencies.

Research Overview: 

      Dr. Elnashai's technical interests are multi-resolution distributed analytical simulations, network analysis, large-scale hybrid testing and field investigations of the response of complex networks and structures, on which he has more than 250 research publications, including  approximately 120 refereed journal papers, many conference, keynote and prestige lectures (including the Nathan Newmark Distinguished Lecture), research reports, books and book chapters, magazine articles and earthquake field mission reports.

   

what are B and D regions?

      B-Regions are parts of a structure in which Bernoulli's hypothesis of straight-line strain profiles applies. D-Regions, on the other hand, are parts of a structure with a complex variation in strain. D-Regions include portions near abrupt changes in geometry (geometrical discontinuities) or concentrated forces (statical discontinuities). Based on St. Venant's principle, the extent of a D-Region spans about one section depth of the region on either side of the discontinuity.

Figure 1 and Figure 2 show examples of the division between B-Regions and D-Regions in building and bridge structures, respectively. In the figures, the unshaded area with a notation B indicates B-Region, and the shaded area with a notation D is used to indicate D-Region. The notations h₁, h₂, h₃, ... are used to denote the depth of structural members. The notations b₁ and b₂ denote the flange width of structural members.

Figure 1   Example of D-Regions in a Common Building Structure
(Click here to view a larger image)

Figure 2   Example of D-Regions in a Common Bridge Structure
(Click here to view a larger image)

    Most design practices for B-Regions are based on a model for behavior. As examples, design for flexure is based on conventional beam theory while the design for shear is based on the well-known parallel chord truss analogy. By contrast, the most familiar types of D-Regions, such as deep beams, corbels, beam-column joints, and pile caps, are currently still designed by empirical approaches or by using common detailing practices. For most other types of D-Regions, code provisions provide little guidance to designers. The Strut-and-Tie Method (STM)  is emerging as a code-worthy methodology for the design of all types of D-Regions in structural concrete.

     It is worth noting that although the STM is equally applicable to both B- and D-Region problems, it is not practical to apply the method to B-Region problems. The conventional beam theory for flexure and parallel chord truss analogy for shear are recommended for those designs.

More on Newmark!

Nathan M. Newmark

Structural Dynamics Innovator Extraordinaire

Nathan M. Newmark. Courtesy of Civil Engineering Department, University of Illinois.

As one of the most recognized and respected pioneers in the field of structural dynamics and seismic design for more than a half of a century, Nathan "Nate" Mortimore Newmark elevated the stature of the U.S. civil engineering profession in those disciplines to the top tier internationally. He developed countless innovative theories, analysis procedures and design criteria for seismic soil-structure interaction for building earthquake-resistive structures that remain in wide use today.

The Latino Americana Tower, Mexico City’s tallest highrise. It has withstood several large magnitude earthquakes with little or no structural damage. Courtesy of Civil Engineering Department, University of Illinois.

His cutting-edge methods continue to be applied to the analysis and design of a wide range of complex structures including high-rises, large dams, bridges and nuclear reactor facilities, both in the U.S. and abroad. Along with his theories for such construction are included the universal design criteria he developed for U.S. military protective projects and nuclear reactor facilities. Among his noted consulting projects were the Bay Area Rapid Transit System (BART) and the Trans-Alaska Oil Pipeline.

According to William Hall, a longtime colleague of Newmark at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (UIUC), "Professor Newmark developed simple yet powerful and widely used methods for analyzing complex structural components and assemblies under a variety of conditions of loading, and for calculating the stresses and deformations in soil beneath foundations. He contributed significantly to a better understanding of the behavior of structural materials under various environments including fatigue and brittle fracture. He added materially to knowledge of the behavior and design of highway bridge decks and floor slabs in buildings, and structures subjected to impact, periodic excitation, wave action, wind, blast and earthquakes."

For Newmark’s "special contributions to the advancement of engineering knowledge of structures subjected to earthquake or blast, and for inspiration to others in improving man’s environment," Newmark was honored with two prestigious national recognitions: first, the 1968 National Medal of Science presented by President Lyndon B. Johnson; then, the 1969 Washington Medal from the Western Society of Engineers and several other major U.S. engineering societies.

Trans-Alaska Pipeline in the fall. Courtesy of Alyeska Pipeline Service Company.

The importance and practicality of his work in structural dynamics and seismic analysis was showcased when one of his projects -the Latino Americana Tower, Mexico’s City’s tallest building at 600-plus feet, counting its 138-foot television antenna - withstood two large earthquakes unscathed, one in 1957, the other in 1985. It proved to be a case study in how properly designed high-rise buildings can successfully survive major seismic activity.

A year before the 1957 earthquake, Newmark (along with Mexico City consulting engineer Leonardo Zeevaert, one of his former students) had presented a seminal paper on the innovative design of the Tower at the World Conference on Earthquake Engineering at the University of California. In their presentation, they delineated the crux of their design, emphasizing the project’s unusual characteristics. They said, "The building is nearly twice as tall as any other building in the city, and because of poor foundation soils, a light but rigid structure was designed to rest on a foundation comprised of a floating concrete box set upon piles."

So successful was Newmark’s seismic analysis for the structure that Engineering News-Record (ENR), in reporting on the 1957 disaster, wrote, "The most encouraging news from earthquake-struck Mexico City is that the city’s one true skyscraper, the 43-story Latino-Americana Tower, rode the shock waves undamaged, even to its window glass and partitions."

Construction of the Trans-Alaska Pipeline in the 1970s. Courtesy of Alyeska Pipeline Service Company.

Nate was born on September 22, 1910, in Plainfield, New Jersey, to Abraham S. and Mollie (Nathanson) Newmark. After receiving his early education in North Carolina and New Jersey, Newmark graduated from Rutgers University with high special honors in civil engineering in 1930. He immediately enrolled in graduate school at UIUC. When he arrived there, its civil engineering department was blessed with a stellar staff that included three world-renowned icons in the structural engineering field - Wilbur Wilson, Harold Westergaard and Hardy Cross,

In Newmark’s first encounter with Cross, the engineer-philosopher asked where each student had studied. When Newmark answered Rutgers, Cross looked down his nose at him and commented, "You’ve got a lot of things to unlearn." In time, the two developed a mutual admiration for each other - and a broad spectrum of interests. Their relationship was based on the interplay and exchange of ideas, not only in engineering but also in a wide range of subjects. They discussed politics, philosophy, art, and the classics with equal relish. Newmark once remarked that his part of the discussions "must have been audible for blocks because Cross was so deaf I had to yell just to be heard."

Newmark received his master’s degree in engineering from UIUC in 1932, the same year he married Anne May Cohen. Over the years, they raised one son and two daughters, Richard, Linda and Susan.

Two years later, in 1934, Newmark received his PhD. He continued on at Illinois as a research assistant - the first of several positions he would hold at UIUC. He was appointed research professor of civil engineering in 1943 and became head of the Department of Civil Engineering in 1956.

From 1947 to 1957, he chaired the Digital Computer Laboratory at the University where he participated in developing one of the country’s first large-scale digital computers (ILLIAC II). This triumph marked the beginning of applying computer science to engineering and establishing an entire new department at the University - its Digital Computer Department - which spawned numerous spin-offs and expansion into supercomputing nationwide.

His lifelong tenure at the institution resulted in many rewarding recognitions for himself and his alma mater. Hall stated, "Newmark carried his university [UIUC] with him wherever he went, even into professional practice. Engineers, young and old, who came into contact with this man, sensed an intense intellectual and educational challenge. His penetrating insight, his keen engineering judgment, and his genuine interest in people have been a constant source of inspiration to all who have had the privilege of working with him."

When geotechnical engineer Ralph Peck - Karl Terzaghi’s protégé - began teaching at Illinois in 1942, the 30-year-old struck up a close relationship with Newmark. Both were emerging pioneers in analyzing the effects of seismic forces and motions on soils - and on the structures bearing on the soils. Recalled Peck, "Since my wife and I were only slightly younger than Nate and Ann Newmark, we became included in their circle of friends, and much of our social life was with them."

Newmark (right) with his protégé and frequent collaborator William Hall examining a reinforced concrete beam-column specimen being tested for flexure and shear. Courtesy of Civil Engineering Department, University of Illinois.

One particular social event in 1957, which turned into a night of intense seriousness, has stuck in Peck’s mind over the years. At the time, Peck had persuaded his friend and colleague, the newly knighted English engineer Sir Alec Skempton, to spend time in the U.S. to give a series of lectures at UIUC. One evening, the Newmarks, who had just completed a new house with a large, long combined living and dining room that was suited for entertaining large groups, invited the Pecks and their famous guest over to christen the place.

After dinner, the three men moved to the living room end and the two wives settled at the far end, lost in the dining area. Since Skempton was currently heavily involved in the early design and analysis of the Mangla Dam in Pakistan - and because of Newmark’s intense interest in the dynamics of all structures, including large earth dams - the men’s conversation quickly turned to slope stability. Their conversation became heated and loud, and several back-of-the-envelope sketches were produced - and new theories instigated.

The results of that night, which led to the development of the "Newmark Analysis" for structures and slope stability, are still being felt. According to Peck, "The ‘Newmark Analysis’ today carries a specific meaning in the field of seismic stability of dams. As I reflect on the conversation that evening in 1957, I realize I was present at its conception, the product of the interactions of two great minds, probing and reinforcing each other."

During World War II, Newmark served as a consultant to the National Defense Research Committee and Office of Scientific Research and Development, spending part of his service in the Pacific war zone. From the mid-1950s onward, he was involved in developing key design criteria - including the hardness standards - for the Minuteman program and missile launch facilities.

In 1964, Newmark became deeply engaged in seismic resistance codes for nuclear power reactors throughout the country. He and Hall published U.S. Nuclear Regulation Committee Report NUREG/CR-0098 Development of Criteria for Seismic Review of Selected Nuclear Power Plants, which is still in use today.

Trans-Alaska Pipeline in the winter. Courtesy of Alyeska Pipeline Service Company.

In 1969, the pair also published a paper - delivered at the Fourth World Earthquake Engineering Conference in Santiago, Chile - on a straightforward method for computing and sketching seismic design spectra, now a classic document. Shortly after, Newmark was chosen to be the intermediary between the U.S. Department of Interior and the oil companies in shaping the seismic design of the Trans-Alaska Petroleum Pipeline. (Hall, a member of Newmark’s original team, still serves as a consultant for the project.)

A founding member of the Engineering Mechanics Division of the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), Newman received many of the division’s awards for individual achievements. His ASCE honors include the James Croes Medal, Mosseiff Award, Norman Medal, Ernest Howard Award, and Theodore von Karman Medal.

Earthquake Spectra and Design (Engineering monographs on earthquake criteria, structural design, and strong motion records)

Cover of one of Newmark’s most popular books Fundamentals of Earthquake Engineering. Courtesy of Richard Weingardt Consultants, Inc.

In his later years, he received the John Fritz Medal, an all-engineering society award, and the Gold Medal from the Institution of Structural Engineers of Great Britain - only the second American to receive this prestigious award. The other was one of his mentors, Hardy Cross. In 2006, Newmark was named as one of the top ten U.S. seismic engineers of the 20th century by ENR and the Applied Technology Council (ATC).

Newmark was a fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, and an honorary member of ASCE, American Concrete Institute, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, International Association for Earthquake Engineering, and Seismological Society of America. He was a founding member of the National Academy of Engineering and a member of the National Academy of Sciences.

He was the recipient of honorary degrees from Rutgers University, University of Liege (Belgium), University of Notre Dame, National Civil Engineering Laboratory of Lisbon (Portugal), and UIUC. His honorary doctor of science degree from UIUC came with this citation: "Graduate study in structural engineering today bears his indelible imprint as a result of the large group that he attracted to Illinois to work with him. His style, combining rigorous analysis with a sophisticated appeal to experience and intuitive leaps, while inimitable, has provided generations of graduate students with a model of engineering creativity at its best."

Cover of one of Newmark’s most popular books Earthquake Spectra and Design. Courtesy of Richard Weingardt Consultants, Inc.

Newmark published more than 200 papers, and numerous books and book chapters. His seminal books included Design of Multi-Story Reinforced Concrete Buildings for Earthquake Motion (with John Blume and Leo Corning), Fundamentals of Earthquake Engineering (with Emilio Rosenblueth), and Earthquake Spectra and Design (with William Hall).

Elevation of Trans-Alaska Pipeline. Courtesy of Alyeska Pipeline Service Company.

In 1973, Newmark became UIUC Professor of Civil Engineering and Professor in the Center for Advanced Study, taking emeritus status from 1976 until his death on January 25, 1981, in Urbana, Illinois. To honor his legacy, UIUC officially renamed the Civil Engineering Building the Nathan M. Newmark Civil Engineering Laboratory later that same year.▪