How to Promote Dual-Use Technology Development (PAE 1987)
Descrição do Produto
Seki, Shigetaka
1987
Policy Analysis Exercise
How to Promote Dual-Use Technology Development In Advanced Polymers
PAE Seminar: S488y by Dr. D. Zinberg First Reader: Dr. P. Doty Second Reader: Dr. L. Branscomb
April 13, 1987 Shigetaka Seki
Table of Contents
Executive Summary
-----
1
1. Introduction
-----
4
2. Polymer Science and Technology
-----
8
3. R&D Situation in the u.S.
----- 15
4. Options
----- 21
5. Conclusions and Recommendations
----- 32
Appendices A. Structure of the Plastics Industry
----- 39
B. The Domestic Production, Sales and Trade of Polymers, and the Trade of All Chemicals
----- 40
C. Expenditures for Research and Development by Chemical and Allied Industries
----- 42
D. Comparison of Present Status and Future between the u.S. and Japan for Five Speciality Polymers ---- 43 E. The U.S. Government Expenditure for Materials R&D
----- 44
F. The Japanese Government Expenditure for Materials R&D
-----
45
G. Abstract of the MIT Polymer Processing Center
-----
46
---------
48
H. Abstract of the Center for University of Massachusetts-Industry Research in Polymers References and Notes
51
Executive Summary 1. Introduction This report tries to identify the problems of R&D for advanced polymer materials which are applicable for both military and civilian use (dual-use) and to present recommendations to satisfy the objectives of sustaining international competitiveness and national security. 2. Polymer Science and Technology The properties of advanced polymers are designed at various levels of molecular structures.
New waves of development are
incessantly generated in polymers despite their 50 year history. The major fields of applications of advanced polymer materials are high performance structural materials, fibers and functional materials.
Multidisciplinary communication and collaboration is
essential for effective R&D since the development of advanced polymers requires a variety of expertise.
Potential spin-offs
between military and civilian R&D are expected to be significant since the military specification has not differentiated in most of the polymer materials areas to the extent that it becomes irrelevant for civilian use. 3. R&D Situations in the
u.s.
In the past, polymers were not regarded as prestigious areas in academic research.
The industries also contracted their R&D
activities in polymers during the '70s.
Currently, they are
attracting both the academic and industrial interests and R&D in these fields are growing.
Many industrial sectors are engaged in
the development and application of innovative polymer materials. 1
·However, the
u.s.
has had fewer synthetic chemists and engineers
than researchers in analytical work despite that fact that polymer syntheses are essential in any stages of R&D.
~he
u.s.
industries have kept strong competitiveness in polymer products for decades.
The U.S. still appears to hold the leading
technologies in advanced polymer materials in the world, but foreign competitors are steadily catching up.
Although, the
government supplies large amount of support for materials R&D as a whole, the share of polymer materials R&D seems fairly small. Host of the government supports in advanced polymer composite materials come from DOD. 4.
Options
a) Military Initiatives Advantages o Give a strong incentive for development and encourage the transfer of technology from the research to the development stages o Favor expensive and/or long R&D projects and reduce risks of introducing new products for actual use o Hay support growth of domestic industries by large R&D contracts and procurement Disadvantages o Reduce contractors' incentives to search for economic alternatives o Hay not replenish basic findings o May create wasteful duplication if communication and the transfer of technology are strictly controlled b) Civilian Initiatives Advantages o Encourage multidisciplinary collaboration through university2
industry cooperation o Stimulate generation of technologies from basic findings o Sustain economic incentives in R&D and do not require large government investment o Stimulate education and training if good personnel relations are established between the universities and the industries Disadvantages o Do not necessary stimulate purely basic research o Create conflict between academic freedom and companies' proprietary assets o Hay not afford costly and uncertain R&D projects
s.
Conclusions and Recommendations Either one of civilian and military R&D is insufficient for
effective development of advanced polymer materials.
On the
other hand, both the civilian and the military sectors can enforce their R&D activities each other if communication and the transfer of technology are smooth.
Excessive control over R&D
in military projects for security reasons might compromise the international competitiveness and ruin the current technological superiority of the U.S. in advanced polymers.
The followings are
recommended to maximize the benefit of R&D for both the military and the civilian sectors. o More investments for basic research and training of synthetic chemists and engineers o More focus on research in military R&D o Dismantling confidentiality of military R&D as much as possible o Promotion of collaboration between university and industry o Coordination between military and civilian R&D
3
1. Introduction 1-1. Client This study assumes a hypothetical client either OSTP or congressional committee with jurisdiction over R&D activities serving both military and economic needs.
The objective of this
paper is to find an appropriate policy to promote "dual-use
,
technologies" (as defined later) in advanced polymers.
1-2. Background Military research and development (R&D) has been playing a very important roie in developing innovative technologies and offering opportunities for applying such technologies.
The civi-
lian sector has often benefited spin-offs from the military technology development in the past, for example civilian aircraft and computers as spin-offs of military aircraft and computer R&D respectively.(l)
At the same time, the military sector also has
benefited from civilian R&D, which not only develops innovative technologies but also improves efficiency of manufacturing goods. Therefore, the interaction between military and civilian R&D is a key factor for economic growth and national security.
However,
military R&D and civilian R&D do not always reinforce each other for several reasons.
First of all, while communication among
researchers and the transfer of technology are vehicles of civilian R&D, they frequently have to be controlled in military R&D for national security reasons. Second, targets in military R&D are sometimes set for use in an extreme environment and are not
4
necessarily relevant for civilian use.
1'hird, financial and
human resources in a nation are not infinite and military R&D and civilian R&D have to share them.
Therefore, it is essential to
balance military and civilian R&D to maximize the benefit as healthy economic growth and solid national security. The balance between military and civilian R&D is becoming particularly an important issue in these days for the following reasons.
First, the share of military R&D in the total federal
R&D layout has been increasing substantially.
During the late
70s, the military share was almost a half, while it rose to three quarters in 1986.
Federal defense R&D grew ata rate of 11.7
percent in constant dollar terms between 1980 and 1985 while nondefense R&D shrank 5\ a year in the same period (2).
Second, the
restoration of economic competitiveness has become a highly prioritized agenda these days and an effective national R&D strategy is being sought to solve the problem.
Besides the
relation to the first concern of shrinking federal expenditure for civilian R&D, this poses the question of how to promote the transfer of technology efficiently from fundamental research to commercialization.
Third, the emergence of dual-use technologies
spot-lights the very issue of balancing national security and economic growth.
Traditional border between military and civi-
,
lian technology by performance as specified in the COCOH list is becoming obscure.
Many technologies are used as important ele-
ments in both civilian and military use.
In addition, scientific
community is getting more and more internationalized.
Therefore,
traditional way of controlling communication and technology flows may threaten the development of innovative technologies which 5
benefit both civilian and military activities. 1-3. study Framework Advanced polymers were studied for the following reasons. First, it is a high technology area and is expected to
~lay
a key
role in both the military and the civilian sectors for diverse purposas.
Second, there are several fields in which we can
expect close interaction between military and civilian applications.
Third, in contrast to micro-electronics, this area is
fairly separated from political bargaining among the sectors concerns.
Finally, polymers are familiar to me since I studied
organic chemistry and I can take advantage of my experience and knowledge in chemistry. Since there are few studies carried out for dual-use technology issue, this paper aims at finding out important factors first and evaluates them where possible. the information came from interviews.
An important part of
My interviews include the
following interviewees: three polymer scientists, one from industry, one from a university in basic research, one from a university who is involved in university-industry relations and two people (one from this country and one from Japan) who are studying in science and technology issues. Dr. Lloyd Taylor: polymer scientist and executive in charge of R&D of a company (Polaroid) Dr. Richard S. Stein: professor and director of the Polymer Research Institute, University of Massachusetts (He is deeply involved in university-industry relations.)
6
Dr. Toyoichi Tanaka: professor at the Center of Haterials Science, HIT (a researcher 1n the basic research of macromolecules) Dr. Eugene B.Skolnikoff: professor at HIT, spec~alizing the science and technology policy Hr. Kiichiro Yamaglshl: a staff in JETRO (Japan External Trade Organization) New York in charge of science and technology affairs
1-4. Definitions 1-4-1. Dual-use Technologies
Many technologies are applicable for both civilian and military use.
For example, the super computer, laser and advan-
ced materials are -going to playa key innovative role in both the civilian and military sectors and are aggressively being studied in both sectors.
In this report, dual-use technologies mean such
technologies that are (or will be) important for the innovation of key functions, utility and performance in both the civilian and the military use. 1-4-2. Advanced .Polymers
In this report, "advanced (or high) polymers" are polymers which show significantly advanced properties such as high strength or unique functions compared to conventional polymers. ,
Details are explained in the following section.
7
2. Polymer Science and Technology
2-1. Polymers 2-1-1. Conventional Polymers A variety of polymers are produced for traditional use such as synthetic fibers (e.g. nylon, polyester) for clothes, polyolefin (e.g. polyethylene, polyvinyl chloride) for packing use, epoxy resins for adhesives, electrical and electrical use and so on. (Appendix A)
These are usually categorized as low performance
plastics and much of commercial interest still lies in them.
The
total sales of polymers and resins amounted to 20 billion dollars in 1985. (Appendix B)
The major technological concerns focus on
manufacturing engineering rather than the properties of polymers.
2-1-2. Advanced Polymers Advanced polymers are those polymers which have quite different performance than conventional polymers.
The properties of
advanced polymers can be designed by a variety of ways. Polymer molecules are made from small molecular units know as monomers, repeated hundreds or thousands of times in a chainlike structures.
Polymers show infinite versatility since not
only the bulk materials but also their basic constituents, polymer molecules, may be tailor-made. (3)
Polymers can be hierar-
chically organized at four successive stages: molecular level, nano-molecule level, micro molecule level and macro molecule level.(4)
At the molecular level, there are varieties of mono-
8
mers such as aromatic olefins, alkyne halides and nitriles, polyamino amines, polycarboxylacids, amino acids, polyhydric alcohols, sugars, and nucleotides.
Selection of a monomer de-
cides the basic properties of polymers.
For example monomers
such as aromatic olefins and alkyne halides make high-temperature resistant polymers. Even for the same monomer, there are varieties of structure at nano molecule level because of the differences in configuration and conformation.
Combinations of different monomers fur-
ther expand the variety at nano molecule level.
At the micro
molecule level, polymers can be easily differentiated by changing the regularity of the polymer chain.
For example, partial crys-
tallization at this level makes rigid and high strength polymers. At the macromolecular level, variation may come from differences in length or direction of polymer chains (it can either be homogeneous or heterogeneous), blending of different polymer resins, surface treatments and so on.
Interactions at and between these
various levels of structure influence the characteristics of polymers.
Such characteristics range in many directions beyond
the traditional categories of rubbers, plastics and fibers.
Be-
sides these variations in polymers, diversified structuring of polymer products opens another dimension of variation.
For exam-
ple, products of radical properties can be created by intimately mixing one polymer with another or with quite different materials such as metals and ceramics.
2-2. Application of Advanced Polymers 2-2-1. High Performance structural Materials Newly developed polymers are used either as fibers (such as carbon fibers, and polyamide fibers), as matrix resins to make composite materials, or in partially crystallized forms.
High
strength, rigidity, resistance to heat, radiation, vibration, ch~mical
erosion and friction are the goals frequently.
Civilian use
Military use
aircraft boat, container automobile body construction materials sporting goods
aircraft, space ships military ships military vehicles construction materials
This is probably the most promising and well developed area in all the high polymer materials.
The world consumption of
advanced polymer composites (defined as those reinforced with high strength glass or superior fibers) is forecasted to be 110 million pounds in 1995 (or $6.5 billion in 1985 dollars) and 200 million pounds in 2000 (or $12 billion), but only 22 million pounds were produced in 1984 mostly in the U.S.(5)
2-2-2. Fibers Fibers with special functions such as high strength, tensile, clarity, high refraction, bio-affinity, etc. are being developed.
There are several successful examples for dual-use.
For instance, Kevler aramid fibers developed by DuPont are used in composite materials for aircraft and tires to reinforce their 10
strength while reducing their weight.
The fibers are also used
in helmets and bullet-proof jackets. Civilian use
Military use
materials for composite materials optical fibers medical use
materials for composite materials optical fibers ropes bullet-proof textiles
2-2-3. Functional Materials Unique characteristics of polymers give them essential roles in diverse purposes in which the potential overlap between military and civilian use is quite wide.
Examples are show below.
Some of them are actually used, for instance, in chips and electronic circuits as capusulation materials and insulating boards. Some of them such as electronic-magnetic wave absorbing polymers came to the stage of actual application recently.
However,
extensive research work is necessary for many of them before actual application. Function
Material
Application
Photo-sensitivity
Photo resist resin
Logic and memory Printing
Photo-electron transformability
Photo-electron transformation
Photo communication
Conductivity
Semiconductor anti-static materials
Chips, circuits, wires
Insulation
insulation material
Electric and electronic circuit board, insulator 11
Hagneticsensitivity
Magneticsensitive materials
Memory, switch sensor
Electronicmagnetic wave absorption
Electronicmagnetic wave absorption resin
Ghost free, radar undetectable paint
Reversible thermosensitivity
Thermo-sensitive materials
Sensor, switch
Pressuresensitivity
P~essure-sensitive
materials .
Switch, memory
Sonic-sensitivity
Sonic materials
Sonic goods
separation
Membrane Holofibers
Liquid, Gas separation and purification Oxygen enrichment dialysis
Bio-affinity
Medical materials
Artificial organs, skin, contact lens, blood, artificial seeds, etc.
Water-absorption
Water absorbing resin
Sanitary Goods, artificial masculine
Chemical stability
Teflon resin etc.
Parts and containers which contact chemicals
Lubricity
Lubric materials
Mechanical parts
Source: Japan External Trade Organization, "Nippon to Oubei Shuyo-Kakkoku ni okeru KoKino Kobunshi Zairyo Sekkei-Hyoka System Gijutsukaihatsu no Genjo to Kyoryoku no Kanousei (The R&D Situation and the Possibility of International R&D Cooperations in Advanced Polymers between Japan and Western Industrialized Countries)", pp.l3, March, 1986, and my interviews.
2-3. Technology Elements Although some differentiation appears particularly at the stage of development, most of polymer R&D consists of following elements.
The borders between basic and applied research or
applied research and development cannot be strictly defined by 12
actual practices in laboratory, but rather by the objectives. o Basic research ---fundamental characteristics of monomers and polymers ---structural analysis ---chemical and physical properties analysis ---synthesis of new polymers ---relation between structure and properties ---molecular surface properties ---blending of monomers, polymers ---molecular design o Applied research ---performance of properties and functions improvement ---processing science ---hybridization, composite, ramification ---surface treatment, coating ---interface ---synthesis of special purpose polymer optimized for specific applications o Development ---large scale production ---processing technology ---testing method and instrumentation ---data base construction In polymer science these three phases of R&D are closely related to each other despite the fact that very different types of scientific knowledge and technologies may be required in the different stages.
In other words, the performance of final
polymer materials is fundamentally dependent on the constituent polymer molecules while it is considerably influenced by processing technologies which produce the end products.
Since there
are infinite possibilities for designing polymers, communication among researchers at different levels is critically important to find the most promising direction. 1n addition, cooperation of a variety of expertise is
13
necessary at every stage of R&D, if not in every single study. As
one can expects from the list of technology elements above,
polymer materials R&D requires various types of expertise such as chemists (both analytical and synthetic), physicists (both theoretical and experimental), chemical engineers and mechanical engineers of diverse fields.
2-4. Spin-offs between Military and Civilian R&D The potential spin-offs between military and civilian R&D in advanced polymers is expected be quite substantial for three reasons.
First, findings in basic research--which consist an essen-
tial part in designing innovative polymers--are usually not yet incorporated with specific products of any kind and both the military and civilian sectors may expect benefits from them whether the sponsoring agency is military or civilian.(6)
Se-
cond, many of the advanced polymers are still at their early stage of research and development (7) and the specification for military use has not differentiated from that for civilian use. There are relatively few cases in which military specificatlon (for example, stability under extreme conditions such as radiation, big temperature fluctuation, vibration) may be irrelevant for civilian use.
Finally, there are a lot of common tools such
as data bases and testing equipment for which are very important for polymer materials R&D and both the military and the civilian sectors can benefit by them once they are constructed either by the military or the civilian incentives.
14
3. R&D Situation in the u.S. 3-1. Polymer R&D Environments The trend of publications suggests that the research activities in advanced polymer materials have been steadily growing while traditional areas slightly declining. fact that the share of reports of total
Despite the
macro~~lecular
chemistry
in Chemical Abstracts declined from 5.7\ in 1977 to 4.9\ in 19S5, that of synthetic high polymers in macromolecular chemistry increased from 26.5\ to 34.1\, while that of plastic manufacture and uses increased moderately (24.4\ to 28.1\) and those of textiles (11\ to S.2\) and synthetic elastomers and natural rubber (8.5\ to 6.S\) decreased.(S) Polymer materials research is conducted in a variety of industries.
Besides the chemical industry, which plays a funda-
mental role in developing and producing new polymers, various other industries are directly or indirectly engaged in polymer materials development.
For example, R&D of high performance
polymers for circuits board and chips (capsulation and insulation) are being carried out by the electronics industry, composite materials by the aircraft industry and bio-affinity polymers by the medical equipment industry. Dr. Taylor of Polaroid pointed out five problems in the u.S. comparing the situation with Japan.
First, by the early '70s,
scientists in the u.s. began to consider that polymer science was mature and nothing very important would be discovered in the future. (10)
In the same period, Japan was keen to develop new
15
types of polymers and was gaining ground in developing many high performance polymers.
Second, polymer did not have prestigious
status in science in the u.s. and could not attract top class human resources.
This point was also mentioned by Dr. Stein of
University of Massachusetts.
By contrast, polymer bas been one
of the most prestigious fields in chemistry, physics and engineering in Japan.
Third, major chemical companies in the u.s.
actually contracted their R&D activities in polymers in the '70s. The industrial R&D expenditures in rubber and plastics declined from $371 million (constant dollar of 1972) in 1975 to $306 million in 1981.(10)
The R&D expenditure as a share of sales
dropped from nearly 4% at the beginning of the '60s to slightly more than 2% by the late '70s in the chemical and allied industries. (Appendix C)
According to Dr. Taylor, since chemical com-
panies in the U.s. were highly competitive in conventional polymers, they did not have strong incentive to develop new products which might disturb their conventional polymers.
Fourth, all of
the polymer researchers interviewed and Dr. Branscomb at the Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University mentioned that the U.s. university scientists were more interested in analytical research than synthetic polymer chemistry although the latter was no less important than the former to stay in the leading age of new polymers.
Finally, as many interviewees agree, Dr. Taylor
mentioned that polymer research is not effectively done in a multidiciplinary manner.
Despite the necessity of an integrated
research effort, he said that polymer study had been traditionally done guite independently in chemical, physical and engineering departments in universities. 16
It is not easy to quantify these factors, but there are some indications that some of situations above may be improving. First, polymer chemistry is not regarded to be a low priority as long as wages are concerned.
A survey by the American Chemical
Society showed that the average wages of industrial
~hemists
who
had B.S., H.S., and PhD in polymer chemistry ($36.6K, $42.6K, $5l.8K respectively) were not very different from inorganic chemistry (36.8, 38.8, 49.6) and in physical chemistry (38.0, 35.6, 55.0) and higher than the average of all chemists (33.0, 37.9, 47.8) as of March 1, 1986.(11)
Given the present high
expectation toward polymer materials, polymer science may not have difficulties in attracting promising young researchers. Second, industries seem to be fully aware of the importance of polymers and committed to thrust R&D in the area.(12)
Hany
companies are supporting research activities in the universities. For example, IBH announced a $25 million program for the support of research in materials and processing science In 1984.
The
objective of the program was to provide incentive for selected U.S. academic institutions to start new fundamental research program, attract outstanding faculty into these multidisciplinary scientific activities, and develop curricula that will train highly qualified graduate students in these fields (13).
Third,
research activities with multidisciplinary interaction are growing in numbers recently.
Many companies have collaboration with
universities in advanced polymers these days.
In addition, three
university-industry cooperation research centers (NSF programs) seem to be operating effectively. (Appendix G and
17
H)
3-2. Competitiveness The Appendix B shows that conventional polymers in the U.S. has been quite competitive for decades.
The exports of polymers
has been around one-fifth of total sales and the value of exports had been more than four times of that of imports until 1982.
The
contribution of polymers in the net exports of all chemicals has been almost 30\ in the '80s.
However, the nominal value of im-
ports increased more than 10\ a year from 1982 to 1985 (from $766 million to $1631 million) while that of exports did not change very much during the same period (from $3650 million to $3777 million).
These facts may suggest that polymers in the U.S. have
been losing competitiveness in conventional polymers.
However,
the technology base of polymer science and technology does not seem to be in jeopardy.
The domestic patent share of the U.S.
among the seven summit countries in rubber and miscellaneous plastic products increased from 68.9\ in 1975 to 76.7\ in 1981. (14) There are no suitable aggregate data to evaluate the competitiveness of the U.S. in advanced polymers. depends of specific products in these fields.
The competitiveness For example, the
U.S. is importing carbon fibers while exporting aramid fibers. As for the technological capability of the U.S., a survey by
JTECH(Japanese Technology Evaluation Program) stated that the
u.S.
is superior to or even with Japan in five major polymer
fields (high strength/modulus polymers, engineering plastics & matrices, polymers for electronic- applications, membrane separation technology, and biopolymers) although Japan is catching up 18
or gaining ground most of the areas. (15) (Appendix D) the story is different for licensing patterns.
However,
Many American
firms are dependent on Japanese firms In high performance polymers despite the fact that Japanese companies either licensed technology from or had joint ventures in Japan with foreign firms in 50's and 60's.(16)
For example, UCC and Borg Warner, pioneers
in the development of carbon fibers and acrylonitrle-butadienestylene terp01ymer (ABS) respectively, appear now to have become dependent on Toray, a Japanese firm, for advanced technology for these products (16).
The JTECH report pointed out the difference
in corporate attitudes between two countries that "it is noteworthy that work still continues today on these new materials in Japanese chemical companies, while the U.S. companies have long since terminated their efforts once a market could not be defined." (9)
3-4. Financial Supports for R&D It is difficult to estimate R&D expenditure for polymer materials for several reasons.
First, most of the statistics do
not separate expenditure on polymer materials from other materials or other chemistry areas.
Second, polymer research is
usually only a part of the activities in a university department, in a company, or other research institutes and cannot be isolated from other activities in them.
Third, polymer material research
is frequently a constituent of an integrated R&D project and is not always clearly separated from the rest of the project.
Howe-
ver, one can find some fragmental information about R&D fundings. 7he Federal Government has been playing a sUbstantial role
19
in supporting R&D of materials.
Several agencies such as DOD,
DOE, NSF and NASA are major sources of funding. (Appendix E) Compared to the government support in Japan (Appendix F), the U.S. government support is quite substantial in this broad area. Total federal support for materials R&D (metals, ceramics and other materials are included) is estimated to be $1098 million while Japanese government spent $65 million in 1986. However, the share of the spending for polymer materials is not known except for the expenditures by NSF (only $7.1 million out of $148 million were allocated to the polymer research program in 1986).
According to the JTECH survey, government
support in the U.S. for research on advanced materials is far more committed to metals and ceramics than to polymers, whereas five out of the seven new materials research projects (The Research Projects of Technologies for the Future Industry) of MIT! are polymer related.(17)
This statement suggests that federal
support for polymer materials R&D may not be very SUbstantial despite the large amount of total R&D support for materials as a whole.
As
a matter of fact, all the polymer related research
activities in the projects in Japan covered only about 40% (about $6 million) of the total expenditures for the seven projects in FY 1985. (Appendix F)
Moreover, the Polymer and Textile Research
Institute, one of the three materials related national research institutes in Japan, received only $5 million, whereas the Metal Materials Research Institute and the Inorganic Materials Institute received $40 million and $6.9 million, respectively in 1985. Therefore, the allocation pattern of the government R&D budget among various materials may not be drastically different between 20
the
u.s. and Japan. Among the areas of advanced polymers, the Department of
Defense as well as NASA seems to have strong interest in the polymer composite materials.
According to the OTA Report (18),
roughly 65-70 percent of all the federal R&D spending for polymer matrix composites in the past two years was spent by DOD.
The
same report stated that defense applications continue to drive the development of advanced composites, which are used in an estimated $80 billion of weapons systems.
On the other hand, the
interests of DOE and NSF appear to spread many areas of advanced polymers. (Appendices E, G and H).
4. options to Promote Dual Use R&D
There are basically two different ways to promote dual-use R&D either directly or indirectly.
One is R&D with military
initiative and another is R&D with civilian initiative. 4-1. R&D by Military Initiative This option has the following characteristics. a) b) c) d)
Bias toward performance rather than cost efficiency Potential big government procurement Bias toward development rather than research Control of communication, and the transfer of technology
4-1-1. Bias toward performance rather than cost efficiency Few civilian objectives are strong enough to attract as much government support as national security reasons do. 21
Potentially,
a dual-use technology can fully enjoy the advantage of national security priority and substantial support from the government. In addition, as Dr. Rosenberg mentions in his paper (19), if there are significant economies of scale at specific stages of the R&D process, military programs may generate cost reductions at such stages for civilian research.
Indeed there are several
Qreas in polymer research, for instance, development of testing devices.
Since the development of some instruments (such as
neutron beam surface treatment equipment) is very costly yet essential for polymer materials development, military R&D and procurement could promote development significantly faster than civilian R&D alone would do by rapid capital investment.
In
addition, bias toward performance reduces the financial risk of contractors.
However, the production costs rather than the deve-
lopment costs may be the biggest factor in determining whether or not a material of military specification can be used for civilian activities.
That is, civilian use may be satisfied by a curren-
tly available and inexpensive product thereby making purchase of a higher cost product with only marginal advantage unjustified. On the other hand, there are several disadvantages as well. First, such bias may eliminate contractors' incentive to find alternatives which may slightly compromise performance but can substantially reduce cost. Disincentive for cost reduction is fatal for sustaining competitiveness in the civilian market. Professor Reich at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University mentions that this is one reason that companies which have defense contracts separate their defense related sections
22
from others so as to avoid infection of the latter by the former. (However, the main reason is probably accounting and 90vernment controls on profits.)
Second, many people point out the possibi-
lity that the expansion of military R&D will increase the cost of R&D for civilian sectors by pulling in more human resource and
increasing its price as a consequence, although it is very difficult to measure such effect. offset by
s~' illovers
However, this advantage may be
from military R&D to civilian activities if
their goals are not differentiated significantly.
In addition,
funding of polymer materials R&D ,through DOD does not appear to have influenced the human resource allocation very much since it is merely one of the government agencies so far which have mer related projects.
poly~
Because the share of DOD out of total
federal supports for materials research is estimated to be only 25\ in 1987. (Appendix F)
Moreover, the share of government
funding in total polymer related R&D may not be very big since only one percent of total federal funds for industrial R&D goes to the chemical industry which plays a key role in polymer R&D.(20)
However, in some specific areas such as polymer composite materials, the R&D expenditures of DOD might be substantial enough to influence allocation of researchers between the civilian sectors and the
milita~y
sectors.
4-1-2. Potential Large Government Procurement Government procurement can be a profound impact on R&D and corporate strategies.
With the bias toward performance, gover-
23
nment procurement assure profits for contractors by covering all the costs for targeted performance.
Government procurement re-
duces the risk of developing innovative technologies which may require huge investments or a long period of time.
In particu-
lar, areas which lead to high production rates benefit from economies of scale, because guaranteed government procurement increases demand and reduces marginal production cost.
This merit
is expected to be re.'narkable in the aircraft industry since the size of the market is fairly limited despite the huge cost of R&D.
In other words, without the military initiative, polymer
composite materials development for aircraft might not be possible. On the other hand, many people mention the possibility that, government procurement (which is biased toward performance) as well as the likelihood of single source supplier fails to provide incentives for R&D in manufacturing process technology.
In
addition, it may discourage companies from entering the civilian market where they are exposed to harsh competition for cost reduction.
There are many companies which depend more on
military procurement than civilian market.
Indeed, General Elec-
tric, a major polymer developer, increased the share of military procurement in its total sales of all the products from 10% to 25% recently. 4-1-3. Bias Toward Development rather than Research Defense R&D is considerably biased toward development.
In
the FY 1987 budget, development constitutes 90.4% of the total defense R&D ($ 45.4 billion), whlle the applied and basic research share were only 7.4% and 2.2% respectively. (21) Defense 24
accounts for 93.4% of total federal support for development and while it accounts for 11.5% of the federal expenditure for basic research (21)
However, basic research support by DOD is not
insignificant.
Indeed, 16.7% of federal support for basic
research in chemistry (total $432.6 million) came from defense, which followed 29.3\ from NSF and 21.2% from DOE in 1986.(22) Professor George H. Whiteslles of Harvard University notes that, in his experience, "DOD has been extremely open to virtually any area of basic science" (23).
This implies that R&D which is not
related in some way to defense has little chance of receiving government support for development while R&D which can be related to defense use has a good chance. Many polymer materials can be a part of integrated architecture for defense use and therefore can enjoy the benefit of government support at the stage of development.
Since the deve-
lopment stage of many polymer materials, particularly polymer composites for structural materials, often requires large investments for instrumentation and a long time for testing, it is risky for the civilian sector to do alone.
In addition, a mis-
sion oriented development helps the integration of various expertise which is essential for polymer material R&D.
As described
in previous sections, communication and cooperation among people from basic research to development, among chemists, physicists, and engineers are indispensable for effective polymer materials development.
Defense R&D with a focus on development is expected
to create strong incentive for such integration. On the other hand, bias toward development has disadvantages
25
as well.
It tends to use existing high performance materials to
construct new devices rather than to develop innovative materials from the scratch.
In other words, military R&D projects do not
necessarily start from generating innovative materials, since materials are usually only a part of the project and If there is uncertainty about materials it makes it difficult to draw a plan and implement projects with clearly specified targets.
This
tendency became tangible in the 60's when both DOD and DOE began to emphasize the need for prototype development to exploit the earlier investment in research on polymers. (9)
Therefore, deve-
lopment oriented R&D is suitable for an incremental improvement of existing materials but not so much for developing innovative materials.
As long as there is a big reserve of basic research
findings and seed technologies, bias toward development is expected to boost the rate of technology transfer and promote the application of new technology, but it does not replenish the reserve which is depleted in the long run and future development is not assured.
4-1-4. Control of Communication and the Transfer of Technology Control of communication and the transfer of technology derives from two different concerns: national security and competitiveness.
For the national security reasons, the transfer of
many technologies and goods of strategic importance has been controlled by COCOH, though the boundary between military and civilian use is becoming obscure.
On the other hand, because of
the restoration of competitiveness such control is a growing
26
concern these days.
As the defense R&D expands, the inclination
to extend control to larger regions of basic research Is becoming more evident.
For example, a AAAS survey disclosed that some
academic conferences were under the supervision of DOD who also attempted to control communication and publicatlon.(25)
Indeed,
some conferences related to polymer composite materials had sessions closed to the u.s. citizens only.(25)
However, according -,
to my interviews, these restrictions in basic Lesearch does not appear to have had significant impact on free academic activities so far. Another important benefit (or rationale for control) is possible positive -impacts on competitiveness.
First such control
encourages technology development by domestic efforts.
It gives
incentives to companies to use domestic resources, since dependence on foreign resources (and technology) may conflict with security requirements.
Second, it could hinder other countries
from catching up to the u.S. because of the restricted access to the u.s. technologies. Therefore, the u.S. might expect some chance to sustain competitiveness by instituting control. However, such control create various problems which may well offset the expected benefits.
First, in a global perspective, it
does not use resources efficiently.
Second, there is no guaran-
tee that the u.s. alone can lead the world.
In other words,
international competItors may do better than the u.s. without depending upon the u.s. technology.
Third, it discourages free
and autonomous academic activities.
Fourth, it may become diffi-
cult to attract human resources, and shift the interests of university research remote from militarily sensitive areas. 27
In-
deed, a survey at HIT disclosed that 47\ of the faculty would discontinue their research if their area became militarily sensitive or classified while 21\ answered they would not.(25)
Fifth,
given the present situation in which there are many international cooperation and foreign students or researchers in universities and in industry, it is not easy to effectively isolate foreign influences and formulate a national team for the security reasons.
Finally, such control may significantly inhibit the gene-
ration of new ideas and spillovers between defense and civilian R&D as outcomes of interdisciplinary communication. (26) All of these points are relevant to polymer materials R&D. The
u.s.
technical advantages of polymers are not absolute at
all. There are many international faculty members and students in universities which are leading polymer research in this country. There are a lot of international communication and collaboration between the
u.s.
companies and foreign companies such as techno-
logy licensing or joint ventures.
So far, basic research of
polymer science in universities has not been exposed to strong military influence.
Few incidents are mentioned in the inter-
views in which the defense department intervened to the extent the universities compromised their free academic activities. However, it may because universities are reluctant to accept research projects which require control of communication or publication. (27)
4-2. R&D by Civilian Initiatives There are several means by which civilian incentive can 28
promote R&D: a) b) c) d)
accelerating industrial R&D by tax credits or subsidies;" cooperation among industries; bilateral cooperation between a firm and a university; and multilateral cooperation between industry and universities. a tool of government support for any of the forms above,
As
direct support such as subsidies and indirect support such as tax credits are available.
However, this
re~ort
does not intend to
analyze the effectiveness of these specific tools but rather to identify what types of institutional setting are suitable for the promotion of dual-use technologies in polymer areas. Here, options c) and d) are discussed for the following reasons.
First, since multidiciplinary and integrated interac-
tion among various levels and kinds of expertise is essential for effective polymer materials research, simple support of individual companies may not as effective as creating a multidisciplinary institutional setting unless such companies have sufficiently diverse resources.
For example, companies such as DuPont and
General Electrics may satisfy this condition.
Indeed, Kevler was
a successful example of development by DuPont's independent effort.
Yet, it is unlikely that such big companies can obtain
predominance in most of the innovative polymer materials since they are not the exclusive inventors of innovative polymers and the application such materials are too diverse to cover by a single company.
Second, cooperation among companies can be arra-
nged without particular government support if the companies see that such cooperation will benefit them.
On the other hand,
companies cannot usually expect a tangible return
~rom
coopera-
tion with universities because of the high degree of uncertainty 29
normally attached to basic research.
Yet, interaction between
universities and industry Is very important in polymer materials R&D since feedback among sectors in different levels of research is essential as described above. University and industry cooperation has many advantages. First, it stimulates multidisciplinary interaction and accelerate technology transfer.
Both universities and industry
from expanded access to technological information.
~y
benefit
Second, the
incentive for cost reduction is not destroyed as it is in the performance oriented defense R&D and procurement.
It is helpful
to search for alternatives which may eventually develop a new frontier.
In addition, R&D coordination by the university/indus-
try collaboration may be more efficient that by the government since it is based on the market mechanism. Third, it may provide an opportunity for retraining researchers in companies to catch up with the most recent discoveries in bas!c research.
Fourth,
it may positively influence the environment for recruitment. students at universities need information about companies and such arrangements would make it easier for them to find out where they want to work in the future.
In turn, companies may have
good opportunities to identify promising students as future human resource for them.
Finally, such arrangements do not require
large government investments. On the other hand, such arrangements may raise several problems.
First, such cooperation may distort healthy academic
activities by orienting their commercial interests.
res~arch
toward areas of specific
It could threaten autonomous academic
30
activities.
Second, selection of appropriate partners is not
always easy.
It depends on the specific mechanisms adopted by
individual case.
This problem is serious if the cooperation
requires give and take between participants.
Third, protection
of proprietary information requires some control of communication and publication.
It may discourage participation of late comers.
Fourth, while cooperation promotes certain areas of basic and applied research, it may not stimulate works in areas which are purely basic and have no clear prospects of future application, or areas which may need long time of research or huge amount of resource (for example instrumentation).
Finally, there is no
control in terms of national security. In the polymer materials area, there are several centers founded by NSF program, for example, the Polymer Processing Center at HIT (Appendix G) and the Center for Research on Polymers at University of Massachusetts ,(Appendix H).
Here the
government incentive is that NSF supplies about a half of the budget at start and fades out in five years.
The center at HIT
has already become self-sufficient and the U. Hass center is steadily becoming self-sufficient. Some fundamental and some applied research are covered by these centers.
Although university faculty members do not deny
the possibility that the center may have significant influence in orienting research areas, they stress that they are not forced to accept anything that may compromise university's autonomy and freedom of research.
Therefore, distortion of academic research
through interaction with companies does not seem to exist at present.
There is a possibility that publication and communica31
tion may be controlled to protect proprietary information, however, the studies at the centers are ultimately publishable.
When
a participating company considers that multilateral cooperation is unsuitable because it risks disclosing proprietary information but it wants to continue cooperation with university, it can seek direct bilateral cooperation.
In such cases, universities can
still keep their autonomy and if they accept bilateral cooperation only when it is consistent with their objectives. Therefore, control of communication and publication for the proprietary reasons does not seem to pose significant problems so far for the universities.
However, the size of the budget of
these centers, usually around one million dollars a year, is enough for some basic studies but not sufficient for areas which may require expensive instrumentation.
5. Conclusions and Recommendations 5-1. Conclusions New waves are incessantly generated in polymers despite its 50 year history and the future market of advanced polymer materials is expected to be very large. polymers are dual-usable.
A variety of advanced
Although there are much of work to be
done in research and development before many of promising advanced polymers for dual-use become actually applicable, some of them have been already or are beginning used. fibers are popular example.
The Kevler aramid
In the advanced polymer materials 32
areas, polymer composite materials seem one of the most promising area with a large market in near future.
However, even in these
fairly well developed fields, there are infinite possibility of the emergence of product with radical properties In the future. All the stages of basic and applied research and development play important roles in generating innovative polymer products.
In
particular, multidisciplinary collaboration among various expertise is essential for the effective R&D in high polymers.
As for
the human resources, more polymer s'ynthetlc chemists and engineers are wanted in the
u.s.
At present, the interest ofuniver-
sities and industries seem to out while the present R&D support by DOD appears to have bias toward polymer composite materials, specifically those for aircraft.
The R&D expenditures of DOD for
advanced polymer materials are very likely to be biased toward development rather than research.
Although substantial support
is provided by many of the federal agencies for R&D in materials as a whole, the allocation to polymers appears fairly small. There are basically two ways of promoting the development of advanced polymers for dual-use: research and development with the military initiatives and with the civilian initiatives.
As a
form of civilian initiatives, collaboration between universities and industry is considered to be particularly important.
There
are several criteria to evaluate these options: a) b) c) d) e) f) g)
generation of new findings for the future innovation; generation of new technologies; efficacy of the transfer of technology; acceleration of applying new polymer products; economic efficiency in R&D; government investment requirements; and national security and international competitiveness.
33
Both the military and the civilian incentives do not necessary stimulate purely basic research for qeneration of new findings.
It is because the military R&D has a bias toward deve-
lopment rather than research.
However, the private sectors are
keen to generate innovative technologies from basic -f indings, while the military often inclines to use existing materials of highest performance to construct new devices.
Both options have
positive impacts on the transfer of technologies.
Clearly de-
fined goals and missions of military R&D give strong incentive for integrating a variety of expertise toward development, while the market mechanism is the vehicle of generating new technologies and transferring them from university research to industrial application.
Research and development by the military incentives
has an advantage to that by the civilian incentives in stimulating application of new polymer materials which may require large investments and a 10n9 time.
It is because the former is usually
substantially committed to the original 90als and the schedule of R&D with large investments.
In addition, the military sectors
are often willing to pay for marginal improvement of performance. On the other hand, the civilian sectors may not justify such investments if it is too costly.
Besides, they often have diffi-
culties to engage in R&D projects which may bring out big but uncertain returns.
As
for the economic efficiency, the civilian
incentives have advantages to the military incentives.
The pri-
vate sectors try to find alternatives or to improve production process for cost reduction even when such efforts may slightly compromise the performance of products, while the military sec-
34
tors are frequently much more committed to performance.
In
addition, confidentiality of military contracts aay separate military R&D from civilian R&D and lead to wasteful duplication. The government investments for R&D are generally substantially larger in military R&D than in civilian R&D.
As for national
security, the communication and the transfer of technology between countries are basically free in civilian R&D while they can be controlled in military R&D. only when the world.
u.s.
However, such control makes sense
can sustain technological leadership in the
A large amount of subsidies to the domestic industries
through military contracts may encourage their R&D activities, but nationalistic arrangements for the security reasons might create obstacle to international cooperation. tners exceed the
u.s.
If foreign par-
in R&D, such arrangements do not contribute
neither for national security or international competitiveness. In conclusion, research and development for dual-use advanced polymers is not effectively achieved only either one of the military or the civilian incentives.
There is significant poten-
tial that the military and the civilian R&D activities enforce each other. On the other hand, strong control over R&D activities for the national security reasons may undermine the multidisciplinary communication and the transfer of technology and lead to wasteful duplication.
In addition, it is important to recognize
that there are fields which may not be covered by either defense or civilian R&D.
For example, some fundamental tools, such as
data bases and testing devices, may not be effect'ively developed by civilian initiative if such devices are too costly and a company or a group of companies cannot enjoy sufficient benefit 35
to offset the cost despite such devices once developed would benefit ·a number of people and bring about big net social benefit. 5-2. Recommendations For the effective development of dual-usable advanced polymers, I
reco~uend
the following action programs.
a) More investments for basic research and training of synthetic chemists and engineers b) More focus on research in military R&D c) Dismantling confidentiality of military R&D as much as possible d) Promotion of collaboration between university and industry e) Coordination between military and civilian R&D 5-2-1. More Investments for Basic Research and Training of Synthetic Chemists and Engineers Both the military and the civilian incentives combined are not sufficient for the promotion of basic research.
The
depletion of basic findings may risk the U.S. competitiveness and military superiority, since such findings are essential for the development of innovative products.
At present, the polymer R&D
receives relatively small amount of the government supports for materials R&D as a whole.
Therefore, the U.S. government should
increase supports basic research for polymer materials.
As for
human resources, the number of synthetic chemists ann engineers seems to be still insufficient.
The 90vernment should offer
supports for training these expertise. 5-2-2. More Focus on Research in Military R&D Substantial parts of the improvement of performance or crea36
ting new properties originate from the findings In the research level in advanced polymers. Therefore, the military R&D projects should be designed to lay more focus on research than in the past. It is because the polymer materials, although used as a part of devices, play a key role in designing the function of the devices.
In addition, the military R&D should pay more
attention on the fields o :' hflr than polymer composi te mater ials. 5-2-3. Dismantling Confidentiality of Military R&D as much as Possible Whether military R&D enforces civilian R&D or leads wasteful duplication significantly depends on the the degree of confidentiality requirements.
Although lifting confidentiality
requirement might compromise national security, more mutual communication between the military and civilian research is expected to stimulate the development of innovative polymer products and raise the technological capability of the U.S. as a whole.
Since foreign competItors such as Japan are steadily
catching up and gaining ground in advanced polymers, the U.S. should be very careful whether it can keep technological superiority by imposing strict security and confidentiality requirements on defense R&D contracts.
Therefore, the U.S.
should dismantle such requirements as much as possible. 5-2-4. Promotion of Collaboration between University and Industry Collaboration between university and industry seems quite effective in generating technologies from fundamental findings. There are three university-industry centers established under the 37
guidance and supports of NSF in the field of polymers.
~hey
are
functioning well in a self-sufficient manner substantially. Since the number of such centers are limited despite the infinite variety of polymer .aterials, more efforts should be done to increase such arrangements where possible .
In addition, the
government should consider additional supports for such centers in areas where expensive
instrumen~s
are required.
5-2-5. Coordination between the Military and Civilian R&D Some inter-agency mechanism to coordinate between the military and the civilian sectors would enhance the efficiency of the R&D activities. in advanced polymer materials.
The mission of
such coordination is not to draw plans for specific R&D projects and to control or monitor budget allocation since more suitable government agencies exist for that.
But rather, it should iden-
tify what areas are effectively developed by either the military or civilian incentives and what areas are not sufficiently covered by either of them, and give guidance for budget allocation and institutional arrangements for R&D.
It should also supply
information about the R&D programs carried out by the government or the government initiatives, the universities and the industries if possible to stimulate multidisciplinary communication. In addition, it should identify areas in which positive government supports are necessary, for example, construction of data bases, development of expensive instrumentation and settIng standards for testing methods and devices, and recommend necessary actions to the appropriate agencies. 38
Appendix A Structure of The Plastics Industry
Raw material suppliers
Monomers
Materiaf.s producers
Polymers
Chemical intermediates
Additives ..
Compounds
Compounders
~ Processors
~
Molders
Reinforced plastics
~
~
1
FClbricatorsl finishers
Extruders
~
~
Laminators
Film and sheet processors
:U.6
Film and sheet
~
Packaging
~
)
Rigid
~ Industrial end users
~
~
~
~
1
~
~
Construction
Electrical and electronic
Paints and adhesives
Transportation equipment
Furniture
tj.O ~
;>. ) /~
7.
2/.:1 Yo
%
If"
£,i . ~
~ Appliances
2 ./
/7.8~ "
Consumer end products
Household diSPOS~es
Ll.0
d'
Construction
Housewares
Toys
:jA.A
Source: Charles. H. Kline & Co. Inc, Kline Guide to the Chemical Industry 4th Edition, 1980, pp. 158- 160 Note: Figures are estimates of 1979.
39
7p
Appendix B Ib~ QQm~a1i~ PrQg~~ti2UL §~!~aL ~Qg ih~ I~~g~ sag ib~ I~~g~ 21 ~!! ~h~mi~~!a
21
e21~m~~a
Volume: Millions of Pounds, Value: Millions of Dollars Year
1973
Polymers Production a)volume Cm pounds) 30251 Sales b)volume Cm pounds) 27018 c)value (m dollars) 5347 Trade d)exports value 1028 elimports value 207 f)net exports value 821 All Chemicals g)exports value 5748 h)imports value 2437 i)net exports value 3311 Polymers Ca-b)/a (i.) 10.7 exports/sales Ci.) 19.2 net exports/sales C%) 15.4 exports/imports (d/e) 5.0 f /i Ci.) 24.8
1974
1975
1976
1977
30348
24868
2'3680
34623
26128 7887
20955 7003
24837 8619
29799 10882
1618 327 1291
1173 227 946
1672 309 1363
1732 389 1343
8822 4018 4804
8705 3696 5009
9958 4772 5186
10827 5432 5395
13.9 20.5 16.4 4.9 26.9
15.7 16.7 13.5
16.3 19.4 15.8 5.4 26.3
13.9 15. '3 12.3 4.5 24.'3
18.9
----------------------------------------------------------------1978 1983 197'3 1980 1981 1984 1982 1985 ----------------------------------------------------------------38878
41871
38186
40601
38313
44281
48254
49998
33527 12349
36834 15380
33550 16011
36107 17092
32002 15313
38075 18371
40751 20923
42171 20168
2088 518 1570
3241 626 2615
3884 647 3237
3809 780 3029
3650 766 2884
3732 1098 2634
4050 1484 2566
3777 1631 2146
12618 6427 6191
17306 7485 9821
20740 85'34 12146
21187 9446 11741
19891 9494 10397
19751 10779 8972
22336 13697 8639
21759 14533 7226
13.8 16.9 12.7 4.0 25.4
12.0 21.1 17.0 5.2 26.6
12.1 24.3 20.2 6.0 26.7
11.1 22.3 17.7 4. '3 25.8
16.5 23.8 18.8 4.8 27.7
14.0 20.3 14.3 3.4 29.4
15.5 19.4 12.3 2.7 29.7
15.7 18.7 10.6 2.3
29.7
---------------------------------------------------------------O'UUu
40
Polymer Exports/Sales ~,-----------------------------------------------~ 24 23
22 21
,.
20
I
18
17 18 16 14 13
12 11
'O~---r--~----r---'---~---T---'----r---~--~-------J ,.73
,.74
,.76
,.78
,.771978
'.79
~
+
,..,,.,
,~
1183
'184
1186
Ml~'"
Sources: Production and Sales data; "Synthetic Organic Chemicals", 1973-85, United States International Trade Commission Trade data; Department of Commerce, Note: Classification of products is not necessary the same between two data sources. There was a change in classification of products in trade data between 1978 and 1979. Differences betweet'l the prc,duction volume and the sales volume are attributable to the consumption in the plants or ~stablishment of the same firm.
41
Appendix C
Expenditures, $ billion
3.0
Expenditures as % of sales
4.0 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - .
~------------------.
2.5
2.0
3.0
1.5 2.0
~
1960
___
~
1965
_ _ _......._ _ _......_ _ ___'
1970
1975
1980
1.10 . 8~
1960
___
~
1965
___
~
1970
___
~
1975
__
Sources: National Science Foundation; Annual Survey of Menufactures; and estimates by C. H. Kline & Co.
~
1980
42
Appendix 0
CompaY' i sl:)n of PY'esent Status and FutuY'e between "the U. S. and Japan foY' Five Speciality PolymeY's
CATEGORY
BASIC RESEARCH
ADVANCED DEVELOPMENT
PRODUCT IMPLEMENTATION
-1
-1
-1
-1
01
+~
HIGH STRENGTHI MODULUS POLYMERS ENGINEERING PLASTIC" MATRICES
.
POLYMERS FOR ELECTRONIC APPLICATIONS
o~
of
of
MEMBRANE SEPARATION TECHNOLOGY
01
of
01
BIOPOL YMERS
-1'
-1
-f
COD,ING SYSTEM -JAPAN COMPARED TO USA: PRESENT STATVS
o
RATE OF CHANGE
BEHIND
f ,GAINING GROUND
EVEN
... HOLDING CONSTANT
t
+ AHEAD
PULLING AWAY
SoLtY'ce: JTECH Panel RE-poY't on Advanced MatE-Y'ials in Japan, Executive SummaY'Y, May 1986.
43
Appendix E
Millions of Dollars,
('l.)
Agencies
FY1985
FY1986
FY1987
Department of EneY'gy
645(59)
609(55)
479(42)
DepaY'tment of Defense
155( 14)
164(5)
291(25)
National AeY'onautics and Space Admin.
107(10)
121
(11)
170( 15)
Nat i onal Sc i ence Foundat i Ctn
135( 12)
137( 12)
148(13)
National BUY'eau of StandaY'd
23( 2)
25( 2)
36( 3)
OtheY's
36( 3)
42( 4)
26( 2)
1101'(100) 1098(100) 1150(100)
Total
SouY'ce: AAAS Report XI: Research
& Development, FY 1987
Note: The R&D pY'ojects in DOE aY'e incorpoY'ated in seveY'al large pY'ogY'ams such as the MateY'ial Sciences SubpY'ogY'am, the SolaY' EneY'gy PY'ogram, the Fossil Fuel PY'ogY'am, the ConseY'vation pY'ogY'am, the NucleaY' Energy ReseaY'ch and Development pY'ogY'ams, and the Magnetic Fusion EneY'gy progY'am's Development and Technology SubpY'ogram. The expendituY'es by DOD should be actually laY'geY' than the figuY'es listed above since it is impossible to pinpoint all the funding foY' mateY'ials R&D in the SOl pY'ogram. The substantial increase of DOD funding between 1986 and 1987 aY'e attY'ibutable to the expansion of allocation for the Air Force, the Navy and the DARPA. The NSF fundings for polymer Y'eseaY'ch projects are estimated to be 7.5 million dol laY'S in 1987. The figures of fundings for polymers sepaY'ated fY'om otheY' mateY'ials are not available for other agencies.
44
Appendix F'
Millions of Yen or Dollars ($=250) Institutes or Projects
Expenditures
The allocation for the national research institutes
Yen
The Metal Materials Research Institute The Inorganic Materials Institute The Polymer and Textile Research Institute
10010 1733 908
Dollars 40.0 6.9 3.6
-----
-----
12651
50.6
1500 2100
6.0 8.4
3600
14.4 ,
The allocation for the national projects* polymer related projects other materials projects
about about
Source: The Agency of Industrial Science and Technology, MITI and the Science and Technology Agency. Note: The current exchange rate (April 1987) is $=145 yen, which was resulted after about 40% appreciation of yen against dollars from the 1985 level. * The Materials research projects in the MITI's Research Projects on Basic Technologies for F'uture Industries. The projects focus on generic and applied research but do not include devel c.pment. ** Membranes, electron conductive polymers, high strength/modulus polymers, photo-active polymers and polymer composite materials are included. *** Ceramics, metals and metal composite materials are included. In addition to the projects listed above, the Science and Technology Agency have several basic research programs (some 5-10 million dollars) about materials as a whole. A small amount of budgets, probably negligible amount compared to government projects for material research listed above, is allocated to universities by the Ministry of Education and Culture for polymer research. .
45
Appe-ndix 6
1. Foundation--1973
2. Status The first project of the Industry/University Cooperative Research Ce-nter by NSF 3. Organization a) Members Institute--Several laboratories in different department such as Departments of Chemistry, Chemical Engineering, Mechanical Engineering, Electric Engineering. Industry --Boeing, CR industries, Dart and Kraft, Dexter Div. of Hisol, Eastman Kodak, E.I.Dupont, Instrumentation Labs, Intelitec, ITT, MartinMarietta, Xerox b) Advisory Council One- from each participant company, three from MIT and one fra:.m NSF 4. Budget about one million dollar per year in 1986. NSF funding faded out. A company with total sale of more than 900 million dollar pays 140,000 dollar per year, while a company with total sale of less than 900 million dollar pays 39,500 dollars per year. 5. Me-chanism
A company has to get approval of the Advisory Committee when it wants to enter or quit the center. In principal, the number of companies admitted from an industry is limited to one. Research result is published, but usually one company is responsible for one research theme. Patents are held by the MIT, but participating companies may receive time-limited exclusive licenses.
46
6. Research Themes
o o o c. o o o o o c. o o o o o o o o o o o o
Sequential Forming of Plastic Parts Mechanical Performance Prediction of Injection Molded Parts Molding of Highly Filled Materials On-line Measurement of Dispersion in Polymer Melts SMC/Lightweight Composites Conductive Paths on Polymers Interpenetrating Polymer Network Film Thickness Measurement Low Energy Solvent Separation Rheol':)gy and Cure of Epoxy/Graphite Composites Orientation of MagnetiC Fibers Injection Molding of Microcellular Foams Dielectric Curing of SMC Polymer/Polymer Composites Automatic Mold Polishing Sensors for Biomedical Applications Friction and Wear of Elastomers and Composites Forming of Thermoplastic Composites Tack Measurement and Prediction New Reinforcements Rheology and Processing of Foams Molding of Highly Filled Systems
47
Appendix H
1. Foundation
September, 1980
2.Status One of the Industry/University Cooperative Research Center projects of NSF 3. Organization a) Members University--Polymer Science and Engineering Department, University of Massachusetts Companies---Alcoa, Allied, B.F. Goodrich, Dow Chemical, Exxon Chemical, GE, Gulf Oil, Hooker Chemical, Mobil Oil, IBM, Milliken Research, Monsanto, Petroleum Research Fund, PPG Industries, Minnesota Mining and Mfg, W.R. Grace b) Steering Committee Four members from the university c) Advisory Committee One each from participating companies, two from the university and one from NSF 4. Budget
1'380-1981
NSF $253 thousand Industry $250
1983-1984
NSF $177 thousand Industry $510 ($30k/company x 17)
(NSF will fund $1,043,000 over five years. Participation fee for a company is $35,000 presently.) 5. Mechat1ism a) Steering Committee--Administration b) Advisory Committee--Advice on policy and research themes Research proposals are reviewed by the committee and grants are awarded. 48
c) Proprietary Results Initial research reports are restricted to the CUMIRP companies who may clear them for publication or request up to a year's delay to permit patent application. Patents are held by the university, but participating companies may receive non-exclusive royalty-free licenses. Royalties that may ensue from selling licenses to others are shared ano,.:.ng participating companies, the university, and. the inventor according to a prescribed formula. (There has been negligible patent activity as a consequence of the fundamental and gen.ral nature of the research program pursued. Companies have made the reasonable decision to pursue patent-oriented research via "one-to-one" research grants.) d) Technology transfer Each payticipating companies pyc.vides "monitoys" which review reseaych progress. Technology transfey to industrial participants is through them who interact with faculty and researcheys. 6. Performance ~oyty-fouy technical papers based on CUMIRP research have been approved for publication or presentation at meeting over the last four years. Over a total of 21 reseaych pYojects, involving 16 faculty, 29 researchers and two technicians were completed during 1984.
7. Research Themes a) Model Network Polymers o Scattering Studies from Amorphous Polymer Networks o Studies of Crosslinking Rates in Thermosets o Molecular Interpretation of Deformation Mechanisms in Heterophase and Network Polymers o Relaxization and Orientation During the Crosslinking of a Polymer Network o Thermodynamics of Network-Diluent Systems o Synthesis and Characterization of Model Elastomer Networks b) Surface and Interfaces o Oxidation at Polymer Surface: On Use of Water Contact Angle as a Measure of the Surface Photooxidation of a Polystyrene ~ilm
o Metal Ion Binding to Polymey Surfaces o Evaluation of Composite Interface Behavior o Polymer Surface Modification by Concentration of Polymey Chemical ~unctionality at the Surface 49
c)
R~activ~
Polym~r
Syst~ms
o Sulfat~-Group Ionic Polym~rs for N~twork Studi~s o R~activ~ Polym~r Systems o Phase S~paration in Lin~ar and Crosslink~d Syst~ms d) Diffusion and Foams o Multicompon~nt Permeation Through Barrier Polym~rs o Diffusion in Polymer Blends: Modelling of TransportMorphology Interactions o A Study of Factors Influ~ncing the Cell Opening Process in Polymeric Foams ~)
Other Research Programs o Stabilization Mechanisms in Polyolefins by
Hind~red
Amines
f) Exploratory Programs o A study of the Time Dependence of the Crystalline Dipole Orientation Behavior in Poly (Vinyliden Fluoride) o Direct Preparation of High Tenacity High Modulus Fibers by Int~rfacial Spinning o Dielectric Relaxation of Liquid Crystal Polymers o Polymerization of Terephthalaldehyd~ by Phase Transfer Catalyzed benzoin Condensation
50
Refe~ences
1.
and Motes
Nelson R. R. "High-Technology Policies: A Five-.Hation Compa19 , chapte~ 5 about the u.s. expe~ience in elect~o nics, aviation and nuclea~ power describes significant spinoffs of defense R&D to civilian use in the past.
~ison"
2.
NSB (National Science pp.39.
Boa~d),
Science
Indicato~s,
~he
1985
Repo~t,
3.
Bae~ E, "Advanced Po1yme~s": Scientific Ame~ican, October 1986, pp.179 illustrates new know1edge about the ~e1ation between molecu1a~ and micro st~ucture of a po1yme~ and its p~ope~ty.
4.
Baer E, Hi1tne~ A., Keith H. D., "Hiera~chica1 Structu~e in Polymeric Materials, Science Vol 235, February 27, 1987, pp.1015.
5.
OTA, "New structural Materials Technologies: Opportunities for the Use of Advanced Ceramics and Composites", pp.6, September 1986. This report illustrates the present situation of industry and R&D of advanced polyme~ composites and lists four areas, namely aerospace, automobile, reciprocating equipment and shipping and storage where future application Is expected to be substantial.
6.
Rosenberg N., "Civilian 'Spillovers' f~om Military R&D Spending: The American Experience since World War II", Presentation Pape~ at a Confe~ence on Technical Cooperation and International Competitiveness, pp.7, April 1986, Bacca, Itary.
7.
Howard Simmons, the vice p~esident of DuPont's Central and Development Department, desc~ibed the p~esent situation by saying that " ••• only the surface of polyme~ science has been scratched." in an article of C&EN (a weekly journal of the American Chemical Society, April 28, 1986 pp.8) • Resea~ch
Figu~es
8.
American Chemical Society, "Facts & R&D", C&EN, July 28, 1986, pp.38.
9.
JTECH (Japanese Technology Evaluation Program) Panel Report on Advanced Mate~ialsln Japan, Chapter 1.0, NTIS PB87138780, May 1986, JTECH Is ope~ated for the Federal Government by Service Applications International Corpo~ation (SAIC) to p~ovide definitive technical assessments of eme~ ging Japanese thrusts in selected high-technology areas. JTECH program was initiated in 1983 by the DOC; currently, the NSF is the lead support agency. The chapter 1.0 described the situation as follows, " .•• In the universities and in the national laboratories 51
for Chemical
most of the effort over the past 30 years has been directed more at understanding rather than developing new materials." 10.
NSB, Science Indicators, The 1985 Report, pp.203.
11.
American Chemical Society, C&EN 1986 June 30, pp.23 and 26.
12.
Virginia W. Donohue of General Electric in charge of plastic stated in C&EN (August 18, 1986, pp.22) that "We've seen more product proliferation in the past five years than ever before." and Howard Simmons, the vice president of DuPont's central research and development department stated in the same column that "Polymer research is the largest area today and probably remains so because of many exciting discoveries still being made . . • . "
13.
Branscomb L. M., IEEE Transactions on Education, Vol.E-29, No.2, May 1986, pp.69-77. Materials and Processing Science Research Grants are explained in pp.74-75.
14.
NSB, Science Indicators, The 1985 Report, pp.204.
15.
JTECH, "JTECH Panel Report on Advanced Materials in Japan", Executive Summary, May 1986.
16.
Ibid., Chapter 2.2.1
17.
Ibid., Chapter 2.2.2
18.
Rosenberg N. "Civilian 'Spillovers' from Military R&D Spending: The American Experience since World War II", pp.7, April 1986.
19.
OTA,"New Structural Materials Technologies", pp.62, September 1986.
20.
American Chemical Society, C&EN July 28, 1986, pp.48.
21.
AAAS Report XI: Research & Development, FY 1987, pp.28.
22.
Ibid., pp.41.
23.
American Chemical Society, C&EN, November 4, 1985, pp.24. In the same article, G. Ghirardelli, acting director of the Army Research Office's chemical and biological sciences division says that the best type of proposal is not tailored to the military's specific needs or interests, but addresses a problem in the forefront of research that is of intense personal interest to the proposer.
52
24.
AAAS, "Scientific Freedom and Natlnoal Security", March 1985. According to this report,-High-tech Review-1984" by Society for the Advancement of Material and Process Engineering and "Advancing ~echnologyin Materials and Process" hosted by the same institute had closed sessions to the u.S. citizens only. There was inspection of publicatIons and limited access to them.
25.
Report of the Ad Hoc committee on the Military Presence at HIT, 1986.
26.
Dr. Taylor of Polaroid stated in my interview that company's R&D potential did not always increase by defense contr.,)ct, in his experience, since there was little communication between people in charge of the defense contracts and people in the company's other activities.
27.
Professor Stein at the University of Massachusetts said in my interview that "Universities will not accept research projects which may not ultimately allow publication."
Lihat lebih banyak...
Comentários
