JTEC/WTEC ANNUAL REPORT

AND PROGRAMSU_

1993/94

Geoffrey M. Holdridge, Editor

March 1994

This material is based in part upon work supported by the National Science

Foundation (NSF) of the United States Government, under NSF Grants ECS-8902528,

ECS-8922947, ENG-9111333, and Cooperative Agreement ENG-9217849, awarded to

the International Technology Research Institute at Loyola College in Maryland. The

Government has certain rights in this material. Any opinions, findings, and

conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors

and do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States Government, the

authors' parent institutions, or Loyola College.
rI_C/WI'EC

Michael J. DeHaemer, Principal Investigator, Director

Geoffrey M. Hold_ridge, Staff Director and JTEC/WTEC Series Editor

Bobby A. Williams, Assistant Director

Catrina M. Foley, Secretary

Aminah Batta, Editorial Assistant

Cecil Uyehara, Senior Consultant for Japan Operations

Advance Work in Japan also performed by:

Alan Engel, ISTA, Inc.

M. Gene Lim, SEAM International

Advance Work in Europe performed by American Trade Initiatives, Inc.

Advance Work in Russia and Ukraine performed by

American Trade Initiatives, Inc. in cooperation with:

Oleg Lozinsky of the International Integration Association,

Oleg Shevjakov of InterHealth, Inc.,

the USSR Nuclear Society,

and Vladimir Andreev of the Ukraine Academy of Sciences

George Gamota

Mitre Institute, the Mitre Corporation

Senior Technical Advisor to JTEC/WTEC

International Technology Research Institute at Loyola College

R. D. Shelton, Director

Special thanks are due to Amett J. Holloway, Patricia N. Rogers,

and Robert Hatcher, who edited previous editions of the Program Summary.

Copyright 1994 by Loyola College in Maryland. The U.S. Government retains a nonexclusive and

nontransJerable license to exercise all exclusive rights provided by copyright. The ISBN number f_r this

report is 1-883712-31-9. It is distributed by the National Technical Information Service (NTIS) of the U.S.

Department of Commerce as NTIS Report # PB94-155702. Information on JTEC/WTEC reports and on

ordering them from NTIS is on the inside back cover. Note: This document contains JTEC and WTEC

report summaries that have been edited by the JTEC/WTEC and NSF staffs based on the original reports

prepared by the ]TEC and WTEC panels.
JTEC/WTEC Annual Report and Program Sunmmry

CONTENTS

Director's Letter

Foreword

A. ANNUAL REPORT 1993/94

Io JTEC/WTEC Program at Loyola College

Loyola College

President's Remarks

The International Technology Research Institute

Mission

Methodology

II. Review of JTEC/WTEC Activities for 1993 and Early 1994

Trips

Dissemination Highlights

Workshops

Other Presentations by Panelists

Reports

Press Coverage

mo Plans for the Coming Year

Studies Underway

Prospective Future Studies

How to Initiate a JTEC/WTEC Study

B. SUMMARIES OF COMPLETED PROJECTS*

iii

3

3

3

3

4

4

6

6

8

8

10

11

15

18

18

19

19

21

* Boldface indicates new summaries from 1993/94 reports.

Information and Communication Technology 45

s,. m Comm"um o., Sys , and Technology in Europe,

and Japan (1993) 45

Knowledge-Baud Systems in Japan (1993) 54

Display Technologies in Japan (1992) 61

Database Use and Technology in Japan (1992) 66

Machine Translation in Japan (1992) 71

X-ray Lithography in Japan (1991) 76

High Definition Systems in Japan (1991) 79

Advanced Computing in Japan (1990) 84

Io

Key 44

Introduction: Historical Overview and Comparisons (George Gamota) 23
Contents

II=

91

m,

Materials

Advanc_ Msnufscmring Technology for Polymer Composite

Structures in Japan (1994) t 91

Advanced Composites in Japan (1991) 99

High-Temperature Superconductivi_ in Japan (1989) 102

l"Vi

Manufacturing and Construction

Se_ Teehnolo_, in Japan (1993)

Material Handling Technologies in Japan (1992)

Construction Technologies in Japan (1991)

Vo

105

105

113

118

Via

Aeronautics, Space and Ocean Technology 123

Rmmarch SubamsiblM and Undemea Technologies in Russia,

I.PcraJne,and Western Europe C1994) t 123

Space Robotics in Japan (1991) 133

Space and Transatmospheric Propulsion Technology (1990) 138

143 Energy

Compm_tlw Ammmuns_ c_Nuclear In_

and Controls in the United St_ss, Canada, Japan,

Westm'n Europe and the Former Soviet Union C1994) t 143

Irm_ C,mttml and Safety _tmzm d

Nuclear Facilitim (1993) 154

European Nuclear Instrumentation and Controls (1991) 159

Nuclear Power in Japan (1990) 163

Biotechnology

Bioprocess Engineering (1992)

Professional Background Information

JTEC/WTEC Staff Biographies

Other Contributors/Contractors

List of Sponsors

Other Participants

List of JTECF_rTEC Panelists, 1992-94

A.

B. Bibliography

169

169

175

175

177

178

179

180

184

* Boldface indicates new summaries from 1993/94 reports.

t Published in final form for the first time in this volume
DIRECTOR'S LETTER

Loyola College in Maryland

March 1, 1994

It is a distinct pleasure to deliver to our readers this summary of studies and a report

of recent activities at the Japanese Technology Evaluation Center (JTEC) and the

World Technology Evaluation Center (V_I'EC). Briefly stated, the mission for

JTEC/WTEC has been to inform R&D policymakers in government, industry and

academe concerning the current status and trends in high technology abroad. To

that end we are happy to report the completion of five studies in 1993 and progress

on five more, which will be published soon.

By all measures, the JTEC/WTEC program has achieved significant improvement in

dissemination in the past year, generating more public interest in the results of its

studies. The increasing attention being paid to JTEC and WTEC studies in the

industrial research and manufacturing communities is evidenced by their growing

representation among our workshop attendees (now about fifty percent) and by their

requests for copies of the reports. Over a thousand persons attended JTEC/WTEC

workshops in the time period covered by this summary, and over a thousand more

have heard secondary presentations of study results in other forums. In addition,

5,000 full reports and 4,000 executive summary reports have been distributed. In

calendar year 1993, 33 expert panelists visited eleven different nations to research

the state of the world's high technologies.

It was exciting in three of these studies to observe the excellence of science and

engineering in Russia, Belarus and Ukraine and to have active participation in our

workshops by 11 outstanding scientific representatives of those countries. Many

opportunities for international cooperation were brought to light in these and other

studies.

The JTEC/WTEC program owes appreciation to numerous people for their support

of the past year's activities -- Paul Herer and many others at the National Science

Foundation, sponsors from numerous agencies, superb panelists who contributed

the quality information, and an excellent staff, led by Geoff Holdridge, that published

and distributed about 1.5 million pages. Special thanks are due to Duane Shelton,

currently director of the International Technology Research Institute, who brought
ii Director's Letter

the JTEC/WTEC organization up to operational speed and passed it over to me in

early 1993.

I hope that you will find value in this information and will offer us your suggestions

for the future course of JTEC and WTEC.

Michael J. DeHaemer

Director, Principal Investigator
JTEC/WTEC Annual Report and Program Summary iil

FOREWORD

The National Science Foundation has been involved in funding technology

assessments comparing the United States and foreign countries since 1983. A

sizable proportion of this activity has been in the Japanese Technology Evaluation

Center (JTEC) and World Technology Evaluation Center (WTEC) programs. We

have supported more than 30 JTEC and WTEC studies over a wide range of

technical topics.

As U.S. technological leadership is challenged in areas of previous dominance, such

as aeronautics, space, and nuclear power, many governmental and private

organizations seek to set policies that will help maintain U.S. strengths. To do this

effectively requires an understanding of the relative position of the United States and

its competitors. The purpose of the JTEC/WTEC program is to assess research and

development efforts ongoing in other countries in specific areas of technology, to

compare these efforts and their results to U.S. research in the same areas, and to

identify opportunities for international collaboration in pre-competitive research.

Many U.S. organizations support substantial data gathering and analysis efforts

directed at nations such as Japan. But often the results of these studies are not

widely available. At the same time, government and privately sponsored studies that

are in the public domain tend to be "input" studies. That is, they provide

enumeration of inputs to the research and development process, such as monetary

expenditures, personnel data, and facilities, but do not provide an assessment of the

quality or quantity of the outputs obtained.

Studies of the outputs of the research and development process are more difficult

to perform because they require a subjective analysis performed by individuals who

are experts in the relevant technical fields. The National Science Foundation staff

includes professionals with expertise in a wide range of disciplines. These

individuals provide the technical expertise needed to assemble panels of experts that

can perform competent, unbiased, technical reviews of research and development

activities.

Specific technologies, such as telecommunications, biotechnology, and nuclear

power, are selected for study by government agencies that have an interest in

obtaining the results of an assessment and are able to contribute to its funding. A

typical assessment is sponsored by two to four agencies. In the first few years of

the program, most of the studies focused on Japan, reflecting concern over Japan's

growing economic prowess. Studies were largely defined by a few federal mission

agencies that contributed most of the funding, such as the Department of Commerce,

the Department of Defense, and the Department of Energy.
iv Foreword

The early JTEC methodology involved assembling a team of U.S. experts (usually six

people, from universities, industry, and government), reviewing the extant literature,

and writing a final report. Within a few years, the program began to evolve. First,

we added site visits. Panels traveled to Japan for a week visiting 20-30 industrial and

research sites. Then, as interest in Japan increased, a larger number of agencies

became involved as co-sponsors of studies. Over the 10 year history of the program,

15 separate branches in six agencies of the Federal Government (including NSF)

have supported JTEC and W'rEC studies.

Beginning in 1990, we began to broaden the geographic focus of the studies. As

interest in the European Community (now the European Union) grew, we added

Europe as an area of study. With the breakup of the former Soviet Union, we began

organizing visits to previously restricted research sites opening up there. These

most recent WTEC studies have focussed on identifying opportunities for

cooperation with researchers and institutes in Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus, rather

than on assessing them from a competitive viewpoint.

In the past four years, we have also begun to considerably expand dissemination

efforts. Attendance at JTEC/WTEC workshops (in which panels present preliminary

findings) increased, especially industry participation. Representatives of U.S.

industry now routinely number 50% or more of total attendance, with a broad cross

section of government and academic representatives making up the remainder.

JTEC and WTEC studies have also started to generate increased interest beyond the

science and technology community, with more workshop participation by

policymakers and better exposure in the general press (e.g., Wall Street Journal,

New York Times). Publications by JTEC and WTEC panel members based on our

studies have increased, as has the number of presentations by panelists at

professional society meetings.

The JTEC/WTEC program will continue to evolve in response to changing conditions

in the years to come. We are now considering new initiatives aimed at the following

objectives:

O Expanded opportunities for the larger science and technology community to

help define and organize studies. This may be accomplished through a

proposal competition in which NSF would invite universities and industry

(preferably working together) to submit proposals for JTEC and WTEC studies.

These would then be peer reviewed much as NSF reviews research proposals.

O Increased industry sponsorship of JTEC and WTEC studies. For example, NSF

recently funded a team organized by the Polymer Science & Engineering

Department at the University of Massachusetts (Amherst) to visit Japan for two

weeks studying biodegradable plastics and polymers R&D there. Twelve

industrial firms put up over half of the funds.
JTEC/WTEC Annual Report and Program Summary v

o Including a broader policy and economic context to our studies. This is

directed at the need to answer the question, "So what?" that is often raised in

connection with the purely technical conclusions of many JTEC and WTEC

panels. What are the implications of the technical results for U.S. industry and

the economy in general? We will be adding an economist to an upcoming

JTEC study on optoelectronics in Japan as a new effort to address these

broader questions.

In the end, all government funded programs must answer the following question:

How has the program benefitted the nation? I would like to point out a few of the

benefits of the JTEC/WTEC program:

O JTEC studies have contributed significantly to U.S. benchmarking of the

growing prowess of Japan's technological enterprise. Some have estimated

that JTEC has been responsible for over half of the major Japanese technology

benchmarking studies conducted in the United States in the past decade. Our

reports have also been widely cited in various competitiveness studies.

O These studies have provided important input to policymakers in federal mission

agencies. JTEC and WTEC panel chairs have given special briefings to senior

officials of the Department of Energy, the NASA Administrator, and even the

President's Science Advisor.

O JTEC/WTEC studies have been of keen interest to U.S. industry, providing

managers with a sense of the competitive environment internationally.

Members of the recently completed study on satellite communications have

been involved in preliminary discussions concerning the establishment of two

separate industry/university consortia aimed at correcting the technological

imbalances identified by the panel in its report.

O JTEC and WTEC studies also have been valuable sources of information for

both U.S. and foreign researchers, suggesting potential new research topics

and approaches, as well as opportunities for international cooperation. One

JTEC panelist was recently told by his Japanese hosts that, as a result of his

observations and suggestions, they have made significant new advances in

their research.

O Not the least important is the educational benefit of the studies. Since 1983

over 170 scientists and engineers from all walks of life have participated as

panelists in the studies. As result of their experiences, many have changed

their viewpoints on the significance and originality of foreign research. Some

have also developed lasting relationships and ongoing exchanges of

information with their foreign hosts as a result of their participation in these

studies.
vi Foreword

As we seek to refine the JTEC/WTEC program in the coming years, improving the

methodology and enhancing the impact, we will still be operating from the same

basic premise that has been behind the program from its inception: the United

States can benefit from a better understanding of cutting-edge research that is being

conducted outside its borders. Improved awareness of international developments

can significantly enhance the scope and effectiveness of international collaboration

and thus benefit all of our international partners in collaborative research and

development efforts.

Paul J. Herer

National Science Foundation

Arlington, VA
JTEC/WTEC Annual Report and Program Summary 1

A. ANNUAL REPORT 1993/94
2 JTEC/WTEC Program at Loyola College
AnnualReport1993/94 3

I. ]TEC/WTEC Program at Loyola College

LOYOLA COLLEGE

Loyola College in Maryland, founded in 1852, is part of the proud 450-year old

tradition of Jesuit education worldwide. Among the 28 Jesuit colleges and

universities in the United States, Loyola was the first to bear the name of St. Ignatius

Loyola, the founder of the Society of Jesus. Originally founded to provide a liberal

education to Baltimore's Catholic community, Loyola was always open to students

of other religious persuasions. Modem-day Loyola continues in this tradition of

serving the community by providing a broad liberal education to students from a

wide variety of backgrounds. While maintaining an emphasis on undergraduate

education, Loyola also offers a wide variety of graduate programs in the College of

Arts and Sciences as well as in the Joseph A. Sellinger, S.J. School of Business and

Management.

Among these graduate programs are

courses in computer science, electrical

engineering and engineering science, in

keeping with the Jesuit tradition of

excellence in science and mathematics.

Also in keeping with Jesuit tradition,

Loyola College values the benefits of

cultural diversity and a global

perspective on business. The college

maintains international study programs

in Belgium and Thailand, actively

recruits foreign students for the

Baltimore campus, and includes

international studies as part of its

graduate programs in international

business and executive management.

_nt's broad=

part of its m=sion, Loyola College seeks to

pmndde _rvice to its traditiozml corammaity and

at the same _rte to be outward looJd.ng. In this

context we are proud to support and have in

reeidence the]apanese Technology Evaluation

Genter GTEG) and the _Vorld Technology

EvaluationCenter (FFI'EC). These center# are

in keeping with a College commi_ent to

excellence in science, and enable us to

contribute both toour country and toour home

state the best knowledge that exists about

world trends in high technologic.

Thomas Scheye

Acting President

Loyola College

INTERNATIONAL TECHNOLOGY RESEARCH INS'frru'l_

Loyola's International Technology Research Institute (ITRI) combines the college's

strengths in science and technology with its international interests. ITRI is currently

housed in the Donnelly Science Building with Loyola's Electrical Engineering and

Engineering Science Department. ITRrs co-founders, Drs. Shelton and DeHaemer,

also teach and serve as department heads of Loyola's Engineering and Information

Systems and Decision Sciences departments, respectively. ITRI's staff boasts

professional background in history, science policy, economics, information
4 JTEC/WTEC Program at Loyola College

technology, and political science -- attesting to the interdisciplinary nature of ITRI's

endeavors. ITRI is a synergistic umbrella organization that houses three centers for

assessment of foreign technology. The Transportation Technology Evaluation

Center (TTEC) has the mission of assessing foreign technology in vehicles,

transportation, and construction methodology and highway systems. It is supported

by the Federal Highway Administration, and is directed by Prof. Shelton. The

Japanese Technology Evaluation Center (JTEC) and the World Technology

Evaluation Center (WTEC) are directed by Prof. DeHaemer, and are supported by

the National Science Foundation under a cooperative agreement.

MISSION

The JTEC program was initiated in 1983 by the U.S. Department of Commerce and

the National Science Foundation (NSF) for the purpose of informing policy makers,

strategic planners and managers from government and private industry about the

status of selected high technologies in Japan in comparison to that in the United

States. Subsequently, the WTEC program was established to provide similar studies

of countries other than Japan.

NSF assumed leadership of the program in 1984. Consistent with NSF's commitment

to open international exchange of scientific and technical information, the JTEC

program was one of the first foreign technology monitoring efforts funded by the U.S.

Government to operate totally in the public domain. JTEC/WTEC thereby

contributes to NSF's goal of promoting international collaboration in science and

technology by identifying other countries' strengths in specific research and

development areas; these are the areas that can provide opportunities for fruitful

international collaboration.

The JTEC/WTEC program has the twin missions of helping the United States better

understand the international competition it faces in science and technology as well

as helping to identify opportunities for international collaboration in pre-competitive

research. It does this by establishing a world-class benchmark for each technology

studied and comparing the different approaches being taken in research programs

around the world. This international perspective can offer new insights on the

direction of U.S. research programs.

METHOIX)LOG'i"

The objective of an ITRI study is to produce an up-to-date report on the outcomes

of current R&D efforts in a specific field for a specific geographic area. The report

is a rendering of the judgements of the leading U.S. experts as to the value --
Annual Report 1993/94 5

scientific, technical, and industrial -- of the technologies they have observed abroad.

A study answers the following questions:

What is the worldclass benchmark?

What is the competitive environment?

What are the opportunities for cooperative ventures?

Are there different approaches being taken abroad?

Is our research emphasis correct?

A panel for a study nominally has six members, but often seven or more, who travel

to a host country for site visits and discussions with researchers to reach

conclusions about the state of the observed technology. Panelists are chosen for

their own special expertise in and knowledge of the technology under study, both

domestically and abroad. Thus they are able to compare this R&D to that in the

United States.

Much of the strength of the JTEC/WTEC effort comes from the quality of its panelists.

They have included the Under Secretary of Commerce for Technology; a former

Associate Administrator of NASA; vice presidents or provosts of UC Berkeley, RPI,

and Rice University; and many distinguished engineers and scientists from the

academic, government, and industrial communities of the United States.

The results are initially presented in workshops attended by representatives from the

public and private sectors who critique the preliminary findings. The panels' written

reports are distributed by the National Technical Information Service (NTIS), where

they have become best-sellers with leading U.S. and Japanese firms, universities, and

the science counselors of the embassies in Washington. Thousands have received

gratis copies because of workshop attendance, hosting of panels, etc. The results

are also presented in books and articles by the panelists. Studies are usually the

subject of national press accounts; a sample of these publications is listed in the

Bibliography (Appendix ]]).

Although ITRI is planning to try out a number of revisions to this methodology in the

coming year, this approach has yielded successful results in over thirty studies

conducted to-date involving a dozen countries and over 200 panelists and other

participants.
6 Review of JTEC/WTEC Activities Jor 1993 and Early 1994

II. Review of JTEC/WTEC Activi' s for 1993 and Early 1994

In calendar year 1993, JTEC/WTEC sent five delegations (totalling 33 panelists and

11 observers) on tours of overseas laboratories, completed five final reports, issued

five full draft reports, conducted five workshops and seven smaller meetings, and

initiated four new studies. JTEC/WTEC also prepared three summaries of the stateof-the-art of U.S. technology in the course of its ongoing studies, three books of draft

site reports distributed for review to hosts and panelists, and three stand-alone

executive summaries based on JTEC/WTEC final reports. Including draft reports,

workshop viewgraph books, etc., the JTEC/WTEC staff prepared over 4,500 pages

of manuscript in 1993 and the first six weeks of 1994, 1,100 of which were in final

reports. The staff mailed out or otherwise disseminated a total of over 1.5 million

pages in copies of these draft and final reports.

In addition, the JTEC/WTEC program has put renewed emphasis on widening the

dissemination of study results, employing large commercial mailing lists, regular

press releases, and paid advertising for the first time. JTEC/WTEC mailed over

28,000 workshop invitations in 1993. Participation by U.S. manufacturing companies

in JTEC and WTEC workshops in 1993 reached an all time high. JTEC/WTEC

enjoyed greater coverage in the technical and general press in 1993 than in the

previous nine years combined. All of these developments are discussed in further

detail below.

JTEC/WTEC sent two delegations to Japan in 1993 plus three to Europe and the

former Soviet Union.

The WTEC Panel on _ $__ _ _rnd_'mm Te_lmo/o_se visited

Finland, France, Russia, Ukraine, and the United Ifingdom in May of 1993, stopping

to see 39 facilities in those countries. This panel was sponsored by NSF and ARPA,

with additional participation from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration. The panel saw many research submersibles that were previously

unknown in the West. In Ukraine, the panel saw Mach 1 ocean speed research

underway at the Kiev Institute for Hydrodynamics.

The Civil Engineering Research Foundation (CERF) organized a Task Force on

_rm_u_ _/r_'_uctm_ Symtmrrm _ in early 1993. WTEC commissioned

a panel of U.S. civil engineering technology experts to join CERF's Task Force

during its June 1993 trip in order to assess the status of European constructed civil

infrastructure technologies. Among the Task Force's more interesting observations

was a new form of concrete under development in France that can grow its own

fiber reinforcement as a result of a delayed chemical reaction.
Annual Report 1993/94 7

In September of 1993, JTEC's Panel on _aro-_ecm_-_ca/$_rw t_S)

visited Japan to look at progress there in the development of millimeter- to micronscale, batch-fabricated electro-mechanical devices and their applications. This study

is sponsored by NSF, ARPA" the Air Force Office of Scientific Research, and the

Department of Commerce. The MEMS panel found that the highly publicized MITI

national research program in micromachines is focussed primarily on nonlithographic approaches to micro-machine fabrication. However, the MITI program

is dwarfed by other Japanese MEMS research, primarily in industry, that closely

parallels U.S. efforts in lithography-based approaches. The U.S. probably retains a

lead in lithographic approaches, but the panel saw a number of innovative Japanese

programs in the non-lithographic area.

The MEMS panel was followed closely by the JTEC Panel on .__c Paal_ing',

sponsored by NSF, ARPA, NASA, and the Dept. of Commerce, which visited 12 major

Japanese electronics manufacturers in early October in a search for improved

understanding of Japan's overwhelming success in the global marketplace for ultracompact and low-cost consumer electronics. That panel found that, though the U.S.

is close to or equal to Japan in packaging technology, Japan is far ahead in

manufacturing process development and refinement, and in market-pull product and

manufacturing technology innovation.

Finally, the WTEC Panel on ,Pm'_lm_/_p/a¥ Te_hno/ogfes visited Russia, Belarus,

and Ukraine in late October to assess opportunities for collaboration between the

United States and the countries of the former Soviet Union in advanced display

technologies. This effort was sponsored by NSF and ARPA. The panel found many

intriguing display technologies under development in these three countries, among

which is an electron beam pumped laser projection display (the "quantoscope") that

is claimed to have over 3,000 lumen white light brightness at resolutions that easily

exceed 2500 lines.

Table 1 shows the JTEC/WTEC foreign trips for 1993. Altogether, 43 JTEC/WTEC

panelists and observers visited 188 sites in 11 countries.
8 Review of JTEC/WTEC Activities tor 1993 and Early 1994

Fomi Tris in

SYUDY

Research

Submersibles

CERF Task Force

MEMS

Electronic

Packaging

Advanced Display

Technologies

May 16 - 30, 1993

June 5 - 14, 1993

Sept 25 - Oct. 2, 1993

Oct. _. - 9, 1993

oct. 23 - 30, 1993

Finland, France, Russia,

Ukraine, United Kingdom

France, Germany, Italy, the

Netherlands, Sweden, United

Kingdom

Japan

Japan

Belarus, Russia, Ukraine

s i,

i #_81 _i

39

78

22

12

37

DISSEMINATION HIGHLIGHTS

1993 was a banner year for JTEC/WTEC with respect to workshop attendance. Our

first workshop of the year, the NASA/NSF Conference on Satellite Communications

in Europe, Russia, and Japan, set a JTEC/WTEC record for attendance (over 200).

This was due in part to advertisements placed by JTEC/WTEC in five relevant

technical journals. Perhaps more significantly, this was also the first major effort by

JTEC/WTEC to use large commercially available mailing lists for workshop

invitations.

Table 2 shows the number of invitations mailed and attendance at each of the

JTEC/WTEC workshops held in 1993 and early 1994.

Thus, JTEC/WTEC has mailed 2,500 or more invitations for each of its workshops

since the Satellite Communications Conference, held in February 1993. This adds

up to over 28,000 invitations mailed for all workshops in this period, not including

invitations distributed via electronic mail and fax. This is in contrast to earlier years,

when invitation lists for workshops typically ran in the hundreds. Attendance at

JTEC/WTEC workshops in 1993 averaged just over 140, and consistently exceeded

100, compared to an average of 50 to 75 in earlier years.
Annual Report 1993/94

TABLE 2

Invitations and _tsndauce at rI'EC/WTEC Workshops

in 1993/94

9

WOI_SHOP

, ,, ,, ,,

Satellite

Communications

Polymer Composites

Feb. 5, '93 2500

ATTENDED

240

Feb. 18, '93 4500 160

Research Submersibles July 29, '93 3500 200

CERF Sept. 1, '93 2500 120

MEMS Nov. 17, '93 6500 100

Electronic Packaging Jan. 12, '94 4500 140

Advanced Displays/FSU Feb. 3, '94 3800 120

Press coverage also increased significantly for the 1993 JTEC/WTEC workshops

compared to previous years. Every 1993 workshop received mention in the general

or technical press. Participation in our workshops by representatives of U.S. industry

was consistently high in 1993, averaging over 50% of total attendance in the most

recent two workshops. In two comparable 1991 JTEC workshops, an average of

only about 20% of participants hailed from U.S. manufacturing companies.

We have also made efforts to improve workshop presentations and to make the

workshop itself more pleasant for the audience. Beginning with the CERF workshop

in September of 1993, all JTEC/WTEC workshops have included color presentation

graphics. JTEC/WTEC workshops have also had several changes of venue in the

past year, as we tried several different facilities in Washington, DC, then moved our

workshops to the vicinity of NSF's new offices in Arlington, VA.

Two of the 1993 workshops covered, technologies in the newly independent

countries of the former Soviet Union (FSU) -- concentrating mostly on the Russian

Federation, Ukraine, and Belarus. These took a different approach from previous

JTEC and W'rEC workshops. Rather than comparing the quality of FSU R&D with

that in the West, both the research submersibles and the advanced display

technology workshops instead focussed on identifying interesting new technologies

and centers of excellence in the FSU. To regular JTEC/WTEC workshop attendees,

the most noticeable difference was probably the absence of the traditional "rating

chart" summation of the panel's findings. The other notable difference was the active

participation of a total of 11 eminent scientists from Russia, Ukraine and Belarus at
] 0 Review of JTEC/WTEC Activities for 1993 and Early 1994

these workshops (see Table 3). Especially in the case of the advance displays

study, the workshop took on a new dimension as a way of fostering cooperation

between U.S. companies and researchers and those of the former Soviet Union -- our

guests from the FSU participated in more than 40 meetings with representatives of

U.S. companies and universities during their week in the U.S.

TABLE3

FSU Guests Psrficipa_,_g in 1993 WTEG Workshops

NAME AFFILIATION ! COUNTRY Sqq.JlYl"

Nikolae Dubrovsky Andreev Institute Russia Research Subs.

Vladimir C,evorkian Ukraine Academy Ukraine Research Subs.

of Sciences

Victor Grinchenko Institute of Ukraine Research Subs.

Hydromechanics

Anatoly Kuteinikov Malachite Russia Research Subs.

Mark Slavinsky Russian Academy Russia Research Subs.

of Sciences

V.G. Chigrinov NIOPIK Russia Advanced Displays

Boris Gorfinkel VOLGA Russia Advanced Displays

Andrej Kosarev IOFFE Russia Advanced Displays

Alexander Smimov Rad/oEngineering Belarus Advanced Displays

Institute

V.M. Sorokin Ukraine Advanced Displays

Vladimir Ulasjuk

Institute of

Semiconductors

PLATAN Russia Advanced Displays

Other Pruentafiorm by Panelists

JTEC/WTEC also encourages panelists to make presentations at professional society

meetings as a way of further disseminating study results to the research community.

An average of two to three such presentations result from each JTEC or WTEC

study. Additionally, panelists are often asked to make presentations about their

JTEC/WTEC activities inside their own organizations. The JTEC/WTEC staff is aware

of a total of 15 presentations made by panel members in calendar year 1993.

In just the first two months of 1994, JTEC and WTEC panelists made a total of 15

individual oral presentations at two major professional society conferences: the
Annual Report 1993/94 11

annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS)

and the Fifteenth International Communications Satellite Systems Conference

sponsored by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA).

The AIAA conference's plenary session was based on the findings of our Panel on

Satellite Communications Systems and Technologies, and included presentations by

three panelists and two of the panel's principal Japanese and European hosts. An

additional session at the same conference, chaired by the panel's NASA sponsor,

Ramon DePaula, included detailed reviews of Japanese, European, and Russian

satellite communications technologies presented by eight other panelists.

The AAAS meeting's session on international technology benchmarking included

presentations by George Gamota (Mitre Corporation and Senior Advisor to

JTEC/WTEC) and by Mary Good, former member of the National Science Board and

now Under Secretary of Commerce for Technology.

JTEC/WTEC also encourages panelists to publish articles in professional journals

drawing on study results. The knowledge-based systems study completed by JTEC

in 1993 was the subject of an article authored by that panel in the January 1994 issue

of Communica_ons of the ACM. A more in-depth treatment of the same report has

been accepted for publication in the spring 1994 issue of A/Magazine. Profi

Karbhari, a member of the JTEC Panel on Advanced Manufacturing Technology for

Polymer Composite Structures in Japan, authored an article based on that study for

the August 1993 issue of Advanced Materials and Processes. Similarly, the co-chairs

of the NASA/NSF Panel on Satellite Communications Systems and Technology,

Burton Edelson and Joseph Pelton, published a two-article series in the March and

April 1993 issues of Satellite Gommunications based on their experiences as

JTEC/WTEC panelists. Several members of the JTEC Panel on Bioprocess

Engineering in Japan were co-authors of a National Academy of Sciences report

issued in 1993 citing the 1992 JTEC study for its conclusions regarding Japan, and

calling for a JTEC-s_le study of bioprocess engineering R&D in Europe. Similar

publications arise out of virtually every JTEC and WTEC panel.

Report=

Written final reports are a primary medium for disseminating the results of JTEC and

WTEC studies. Table 4 shows final reports published in 1993.

Thus, the JTEC/WTEC program generated over 1,100 pages of final report

manuscript in 1993, distributing a total of 5,000 copies of these reports (or a total of

almost 1.1 million pages distributed of all reports combined). The comparable

figures for 1992 were 745 total pages of final report manuscript and 2,800 total copies
12 Review of JTEC/WTEC Activities Jor 1993 and Early 1994

TABLE 4

rrEC/WTEC Final Reports Published in 1993

Material Handling in

Japan

Separation Technology in

Japan

Knowledge-Based

Systems in Japan

Canadian Nuclear

Instrumentation &

Controls

Satellite Communications,

Vol. I

Satellite Communications,

Vol. II

DATI¢  ̧

Feb. '93

Mar. '93

May '93

July '93

july '93

P_=_"_ .-...=.,,v,K. .......

I i  ̧ i /i i: iii

!i  ̧ I

248

143

200

35

322

_ TOI'Ah PAGWI'i

p_D_I'TXD'i,  ̧ !!! il / //'

800

800

1,000

400

July '93 186

1,500

500

198,400

114,400

200,000

1,400

483,000

93,000

_)YAh t 1,134 8,000 1,000,800

* With the exception of one or two of the most recent reports, the number disseminated by ]TEC/WTEC

very nearly equals the number printed (current stocks are negligible). The dissemination figures shown

here do not include additional copies that are produced and sold as xerox or microfiche by the National

Technical Information Service (NTIS).

T Numbers in this row are the sum of the columns above. Thus, "total pages" in this row is the sum of

all "total pages" rows above it, whereas in all other rows, total pages is pages/copy multiplied by copies

printed.

distributed (or 530,000 total pages). Even more importantly, the JTEC/WTEC

program has shown steady progress since 1990 in increasing the number of final

reports and executive summaries disseminated to the public (Figure 1). In addition

to reports disseminated directly by JTEC/WTEC, tallied in Figure 1, the National

Technical Information Service (NTIS) distributes several hundred more per year.

The increased level of activity at JTEC/WTEC in 1993 is also evident with respect to

draft reports, workshop viewgraphs, and other JTEC/WTEC publications not included

in the final report category (see Table 5). These draft reports and other interim

products play an important role in the program: sponsors get timely access to

preliminary findings; hosts are offered the opportunity to correct any errors or

misunderstandings before they are published; panelists and staff have a chance to
Annual Report 1993/94 13

10

Thousands

_/7;c,7717/77/7/A

D",,' ///I'/' ",I

• / , _/ ', ,'/,','/ V//////////////,4",,,';;

1990 1991 1992 1993

Figure 1. Total Final Reports Printed, Disseminated: 1990-93

(excluding program summaries, including

stand-alone executive summaries)

improve the quality and

accuracy of the final

reports; and the program in

general benefits from

increased dissemination of

study results.

The stand-alone executive

summaries listed in Table 5

represent an important

thrust in our efforts to widen

the awareness of JTEC and

WTEC studies in both the

R&D and lay communities.

JTEC/WTEC printed large

numbers of stand-alone

executive summaries for

three of its 1993 final

reports, mailing most of

these to professional society mailing lists as a way of promoting interest in and sales

of the full reports.

Total manuscript pages in these categories rose from 2,309 in 1992 to 3,480 in 1993

and the first two months of 1994. Total copies distributed of these non-final report

manuscripts rose from just over 5,000 copies in 1992 to an estimated 6,855 copies

in 1993. Some of these reports have limited distribution (e.g., draft site report books,

which are distributed to members of the travelling party and staff while the site

reports are under review by hosts). Preparing and distributing these specialized and

draft reports accounts for a significant proportion of the total level of effort in the

program. In 1993, over three pages of draft manuscripts were generated for each

page of final report copy.

Targeted mailing lists have proven to be valuable for workshop invitation and

executive summary mailings. Other avenues for expanding dissemination of JTEC

and WTEC final reports are also under active consideration. These include

commercial publication of final reports and electronic dissemination. For example,

in February 1994, JTEC/WTEC signed a Letter of Agreement with MCC providing for

all recent JTEC and WTEC reports to be made available to MCC members

electronically. As of March 1994, information on the JTEC/WTEC program will be

available to all users of Internet's World Wide Web system from a server at Stanford

University. Other avenues for electronic distribution of JTEC/WTEC reports through

the Internet are also under investigation.
14 _view of JTEC/WTEC Activities k)r 1993 and Early 1994

TITLE

TABLE 8 - Other rrEC/UTEC l:_lhli_ in 1993 '94

DA_ r,c_ coea_s ,ro,r_ P_,_'zs [ ..... ; , .... ; ,,,;,,i ,i,iii,

Material Handling - Stand-Alone Jan. '93 2,000

Executive Summary

Satellite Communications - Jan. '93 468 N 30

Preliminary Draft Report

Satellite Communications - Feb. '93 240 350

Workshop Viewgraphs

Polymer Composites - Workshop Feb. '93 251 250

Viewgraphs

Satellite Communications - Mar. '93 545 120

Review Draft Report

Knowledge-Based Systems - May '93 10 500

Stand-Alone Executive Summary

Submersibles - Summary of U.S. May '93 30 N 85

Activities

Submersibles - Workshop Jut. '93 208 250

Viewgraphs

Satellite Communications - Stand- Jut. '93 l0 2,000

Alone Executive Summary

CERF - Workshop Viewgraphs Sept. '93 132 200

Polymer Composites - Preliminary Sept. '93 246 20

Draft Report

MEMS - Summary of U.S. Sept. '93

Activities

Oct. '93

Nov. '93

40 ~ 100

36 ~ 80

127

FSU Display Technologies -

Summary of U.S. Activities

MEMS - Draft Site Report Book 6O

200

80

70

60

200

20O

S,SS8

MEMS - Workshop Viewgraphs Nov. '93 229

Polymer Composites - Review Nov. '93 274

Draft Report

FSU Display Technologies - Draft Dec. '93 148

Site Report Book

Electronic Packaging - Draft Site Jan. '94 88

Report Book

Electronic Packaging - Workshop Jan. '94 235

Viewgraphs

FSU Display Technologies - Feb. '94 156

Workshop Viewgraphs

TOTALS (sum of columns only) 3,480

14,000

14,040

84,000

62,780

65,400

5,000

2,550

52,000

20,000

26,400

4,920

4,000

2,880

7,620

46,800

21,920

10,360

6,280

47,000

31,200

B27,120
AnnualReport1993/94 15

Pnm 

Table 6 lists reports and articles published in 1993 that cite JTEC and WTEC studies.

Thanks in part to the timeliness of the satellite communications study, as well as the

reputations of the panelists, in 1993 the JTEC/WTEC program enjoyed more press

coverage (27 articles) than in the previous nine years combined. This m depicted

graphically in Figure 2.

30

25

20

15

10

............................................................... //////

t/1111

............................................................ //////

'84 '85 '86 '87 '88 '89 '90 '91 '92

////I/

//////,

/,/LLLL,_

//////,

'93

Figure 2. JTEC/WTEC Coverage in the General and Technical Press

(excluding articles from Dept. of Commerce and Japan InJormation Access Project publications)

Of the 27 articles or reports published in 1993 citing JTEC and WTEC studies, 17

were about the satellite communications study. Though this study was of natural

interest to the press, we made an effort to attract the press, holding press

conferences for several workshops in which there was interest. In 1993, Rosalia

Scalia of Loyola's Public Relations Department issued press releases promoting

JTEC/WTEC conferences and reports. JTEC/WTEC events have also been listed by

the National Science Foundation's Office of Legislative and Public Affairs in its

regular press briefings.

The 27 articles listed in Table 6 do not include 18 other references to JTEC and

WTEC studies published in special reports (e.g., GAO and OSTP reports) and in the

specialized U.S.-Japan technology press (e.g., Japan Access Alert Bulletin, Japanese

Techru'cal Literature Bulletin, Japan Techrdcal Affairs, etc.) during 1993. In fact,

Japan Techru'cal AEa/rs has published an edited rendition of every JTEC executive

summary completed since 1992, and has thus become a highly valued archival
16 Review of JTEC/WTEC Activities for 1993 and Early 1994

publisher of all recent JTEC findings. The Department of Commerce's Japanese

Techru'calLiterature Bulletin has also faithfully covered JTEC workshops and reports,

as has the newsletter of the Japan Information Access Project, Japan Access A/err.

A full listing of all these citations is included in the Bibliography. Therefore the total

number of citations in 1993, including all of the above, was 45.

TABLE6

PUBLICATION ARTICLE TITLE

NAME

2/8/93 New Tecl_olo07

Week

2/11/93 Wa_ington

Technology

2/16/93 Satellite News

2/22/93 New Technology

Week

3/93 Satellite

Commurdcations

3/93 Modem Zt_atex_als

Handling

4/93 Satellite

Commurdcations

5/10/93 New Technology

Week

W'm/Sp _ Atumn/

'93 League News

6/93 F/a Satellite

6/28/93 Ban'on's

7/23/93 Warfleld's

7/28/93 New York T/zrms

7/29/93 Space Fax Daily

3/10/93 San Francisco "Elvis: Sun Micro Expected to Team Satellite Communications

Chrordcle with Russian Firm"

4/25/93 Space News "Study: Japan May Catch U.S. Satellite Satellite Communications

Firms"

"Japan: Rising Sun or Shooting Star?'.' Satellite Communications

"Japan Drawing Bead on U.S. in Separation Technology

Membranes?"

"satellite Scorecard Mixed as $30 Satellite Communications

Billion Prize Goes Begging"

"Editor's Note" Satellite Communications

"Dangerous Display Flat-Panel Display Technology in

Floundering Holds Risks for U.S. Japan

Industry"

"Tracking Japan's Growing Strength in JTEC studies in general

Development of High Technology _

"U.S. is Said to Lag in Space Research" Satellite Communications

"American Sat Makers May Begin Satellite Communications

Hearing Footsteps of Foreign Rivals"

"satellites: Another U.S. Industry Faces Satellite Communications

Decline"

"Foreign Sats Lead U.S." Satellite Communications

"Competitors Seek to Narrow U.S. Lead Satellite Communications

in Mobile Satellites"

"Japan Reaches Parity in the Polymer Composites

Manufacture of Advanced Polymers"

"The Race Is On" Satellite Communications

"Let's Get Going" (Editorial) Material Handling
AnnualReport1993/94 17

8/93 Advanced Materials

and P_

8/2/93 New Technology

Week

8/6/93 Nature

8/16/93 Electronic

Eng_eermg 7"Jme8

8/27/93 The Daily Record

10/93 Via Satelb'te

11/93 Air Force Magazine

ARTICI_ TITLE

"Polymer Composites Technology in

Japan"

RELEVANTSTUDY

Polymer Composites

"Submersibles in F.,x-USSR Eye Openers Research Submersibles

for Westerners'

',Satellite Research 'Needs More Satellite Communications

Money"

"U.S. Slipping in Satellites' Satellite Communications

"U.S. Lags in Construction R&EF CERF

"Editor's Note" Satellite Communications

"The Chart Page -- The Global Race in Satellite Communications

Satellite Technology"

11/93 IEEE Spectrum "The Flat Panel's Future" Display Technology in

Japan

11/24/93 Space Fax Dally Satellite Communications

Electronic

Engineering 7"lines

"U.S. May Lag in Mobile Satellite

Market, Study Warns"

"U.S., Japan Gear Up for

Micromachines"

"U.S. Risks Forfeiting Satellite

Communications Science"

11/29/93

12/93 Signal

MEMS

Satellite Communications
18 Plans for the Coming Year

m. Plans for the Coming Year

STUDIES UNDEI_WAY

As of February 1994, there are two WTEC and three JTEC studies in progress. In

addition, the CERF study referred to above, in which JTEC/WTEC has collaborated,

is nearing publication of its final report.

o The JTEC Panel on Advanced Manufacturing for Polymer Composite Structures

in Japan released its full draft report in November 1993. This has now

completed review by the panel's Japanese hosts and the JTEC/WTEC editor.

Hosts' comments and editor's changes and markup are now under final

consideration by the panel members. The JTEC/WTEC staff will be working

with the panel in March and April 1994 to prepare the final report. We have

completed review of the panel's executive summary, which therefore is

included in this volume.

It is interesting to note that this panel's conclusions regarding Japanese

manufacturing in polymer composite materials closely parallel those of the

electronic packaging panel with respect to electronics manufacturing. Both

panels concluded that there is usually no "silver bullet" of superior technology

that is the secret to Japan's m_mufacturing successes. Instead, these panels

attribute this success to consistent, patient, even painstaking work to make

evolutionary refinements in process technology and quality control, sensitivity

to customer requirements, and the ability and willingness to make large, longterm, and often risky capital investments to develop and maintain high

technology manufacturing infrastructure.

o The WTEC Panel on Research Submersibles and Undersea Technologies

released its full draft report in October 1993. Because communications with

the panel's hosts in Russia and Ukraine are slow, the hosts' review comments

were still arriving at the JTEC/WTEC office as of this writing. The JTEC/WTEC

staff and editor will be working with the panel to finalize its report in the spring

of 1994. Review of the executive summary from that report has also been

completed, and is included in this volume.

o The JTEC Panel on Micro-electro-mechanical Systems (MEMS) in Japan

travelled to Japan in late September 1993, and held its workshop in Arlington,

VA on November 17, 1993. The panel's draft site reports were reviewed by the

Japanese hosts in December of 1993. The full draft report will be available in

early April of 1994.

O The JTEC Panel on Electronic Packaging in Japan visited 12 major Japanese

electronics manufacturers in October 1993. This panel held its workshop in
Annual Report 1993/94 19

O

O

Arlington, VA on January 12, 1994. The panel's draft site reports were

reviewed by the Japanese hosts in January of 1994, and a full draft report is

expected by April.

The WTEC Panel on Advanced Display Technologies in Russia, Ukraine, and

Belarus visited 38 sites in those countries in late October 1993. Draft site

reports are now out for review by the hosts. A workshop was held on

February 3, 1994 in Arlington, VA. As mentioned above, one of the notable

contributions of this workshop was the contacts that it fostered between U.S.

companies and researchers and representatives from the former Soviet Union.

A new JTEC panel on optoelectronics is currently being organized. In addition

to visiting Japanese organizations, plans are also being made to visit a number

of U.S. companies -- including suppliers, technology companies, and system

integrators. This extra effort will provide a better benchmark of U.S. activities

against which to compare those in Japan. Plans are also being made to

include an economist on this panel. This study has support from NSF, ARPA,

Air Force, the Office of Naval Research, and the Departments of Commerce,

State, and Energy.

PROSPECTIVE FUTURE STUDIES

As of this writing, probable future JTEC and WTEC studies are, in order of likelihood,

software practices in Japan, man-machine interface (including virtual reality and

speech recognition) in Japan, environmentally responsible manufacturing (Japan),

metal casting technology (Europe and Japan), research submersibles technologies

in Japan and Eastern Russia, avionics (Japan), and medical instrumentation.

The studies on software practices, man-machine interface, environmentally

responsible manufacturing, and metal casting technology are probable, but scope

and funding details have yet to be finalized. The other topics listed above are

somewhat preliminary, since funding is still being organized.

HOW TO INITIATE A JTEC OR WTEC STUDY

Up to now, funding for JTEC and WTEC studies has been drawn exclusively from

agencies of the Executive Branch of the U.S. Government. Most recent studies have

involved funding from three or more agencies working in collaboration with NSF, the

lead agency. NSF works with the interested agencies to find common ground for

a detailed statement of the study's scope. This work statement becomes the basis

for inter-agency agreements, in which contributing agencies transfer funds to NSF

in return for NSF undertaking responsibility for the performance of the study. NSF
20 Plans Jlorthe Coming Year

in turn puts these funds into its Cooperative Agreement with Loyola College, under

which Loyola carries out the study.

Because of the diversity of interests among contributing agencies (see list of

sponsors in Appendix r), a certain amount of negotiation is usually required at the

outset of a study in order to arrive at a study scope that satisfies the requirements

of all contributors. This is usually accomplished through one or more planning

meetings at NSF, in which potential sponsors present their requirements and develop

a consensus scope, identify a suitable chair for the panel, and discuss other potential

candidates for panelists.

The contact person at NSF for JTEC and WTEC studies is:

Paul Herer

Senior Advisor for Planning & Technology Evaluation

Engineering Directorate

National Science Foundation

Room 605.13, Stafford Place

4201 W'dson Blvd.

Arlington, VA 22230

(703) 306-1303 (W)

(703) 306-0289 (FAX')

electronic mail: pherer@nsfgov
LOYOLA

COILEGE

IN MARYLAND

Japanese Technology Evaluation Center

World Technology Evaluation Center

Loyola College in Maryland

4501 North Charles Street

Baltimore, Maryland 21210-2699

JTEC/WTEC Annual Report and Program Summary 21

B. PROGRAM SUMMARY
22 Introduction: Historical Overview and Comparisons

The following is the complete collection of executive summaries from the JTEC and

WTEC reports completed to-date under the management of the program by Loyola

College. They are preceded by an introduction by George Gamota, originator of the

JTEC program concept and the only person who has worked with this program

consistently from its inception to the present day. Dr. Gamota, Director of the Mitre

Institute, the Mitre Corporation, currently serves as Senior Advisor to JTEC/WTEC.

His introduction offers many useful insights into the historical background and

rationale for the JTEC/WTEC program, its relevance to the current U.S. science and

technology policy context, and the broader lessons that can be drawn from the

results of its completed studies. Others may view these results differently from the

way Dr. Gamota does. However, his analysis demonstrates that the findings of the

JTEC and WTEC technology assessments, with the unique perspectives they offer

on the R&D efforts of our friends and allies abroad, can be extremely relevant to the

ongoing debate over science and technology policy, and indeed industrial policy,

in the United States today.
ProgramSummary 23

INTRODUCTION: HISTORICAL OVERVIEW AND COMPARISONS

by George Gamota

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF THE ]TEC/WTEC PROGRAM

In 1994, the JTEC program is celebrating its tenth year of operation and the

completion of its thirtieth study. In addition, the companion World Technology

Evaluation Center program has completed three studies, including a landmark global

assessment of satellite communications technology, and will be nearing completion

of its fourth and fifth by the end of the year. This tenth anniversary affords us an

opportunity to take a look back over the history of the program with a view towards

gleaning some overall lessons from the program and towards understanding and

refining its mission.

Inception of the JTEC Program

Just a decade ago, we had difficulty in even admitting that there was R&D of interest

being done outside the United States, in spite of many major surprises coming from

abroad. As each new foreign discovery was made public, we went into a series of

denials and chest poundings, but very little changed. Basically, we were more

interested in our own work than somebody else's. And we always went for the big

payoff -- the homerun, the Nobel prize, the revolutionary breakthrough -- and

discounted incremental improvements, ideas developed in other countries, and

generally efforts requiring teamwork or long-term investments, be they in science,

technology, or business.

When the Japanese Technology Evaluation Center (JTEC) program was initiated in

1983, the U.S. high technology trade balance coincidentally was about even (see

Figure 3). But, as indicated in the figure, the equality lasted for only a short time.

Our trade imbalances grew, and we moved from our status as the biggest creditor

nation to being the largest debtor nation.

During the Cold War era, much attention was paid to the smallest bit of information

coming from the Soviet Union -- some real threats, some imaginary (e.g., the Alpha

class submarines and poly-water, respectively). The Soviets were first in space, and

then potentially threatened the West with massive technological prowess to which

we had little access. It was easy to convince Washington to fund Soviet technology

studies, but there was little interest in learning about other foreign technologies.

Meanwhile, the trade imbalances with our allies (particularly Japan) began to grow,

even in high technology areas the United States had traditionally dominated.
_.4 Introduction: Historical Overview and Comparisons

Billions of 1980 Dollars

150

100

5O

0

-50

-100

\

80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92

--U.S. Balance

+Japan Balance

Figure 3. High Technology Trade Balances, 1981-93 (U.S. Oovemment 1993)

The reason for this blind-sided view of other countries was that the United States

was the leader in many if not most technologies during the early post-World War II

era. Therefore we became complacent about our leadership position. We took it

for granted that everything important would be developed here. It was in this

environment that the JTEC program started back in 1983. Even with the growing

U.S. trade deficit with Japan in high technology manufactured products, the JTEC

idea proved to be very difficult to sell, until some very senior U.S. government

officials finally not only blessed it, but more importantly, marshalled the resources

to fund the studies.

JTEC's stated goal was to systematically look at various technologies of strategic

value to the U.S. government and industry. Technologies were chosen for study

largely by decision-makers in Federal R&D agencies who were willing to supply

dollars and were eager for the information. Initially, JTEC was coordinated by the

Department of Commerce (DOC), with the National Science Foundation (NSF), the

Department of Defense (DOD), and the Department of Energy (DOE) as funding

partners. However, due to personnel changes at DOC, in 1984 leadership of the

program shifted to the NSF, where it currently resides. Nevertheless, partnerships

with key technology agencies have remained a hallmark of the program. Today the

JTEC/WTEC program is one of few real cooperative government programs that have

survived so many years. Appreciation is due to NSF for its consistent and far-sighted

management of the program over the years (see acknowledgments at the end of this

introduction). According to one report (Uyehara 1991), the JTEC program has

produced over half of all in-depth studies on Japanese technology that are publicly

available in the United States.
_o_ramsamma_ 25

When JTEC was started, one of the fears was that it would be extremely difficult to

get useful information from the Japanese, because they were perceived to be

secretive, and the language barrier would give them an easy way not to tell U.S.

visitors about the important things that were going on. JTEC panels found the

opposite to be true. Like most researchers, the Japanese are eager to share their

work. In most cases, they have provided far more information than we would have

expected to glean from comparable visits to U.S. companies. To be sure, good

advance work has been necessary to ensure that we visited the right places and

asked the right questions; but very seldom has a JTEC team been denied access

even to assembly plants that it asked to visit. The hardest visits to arrange were

those to U.S. subsidiaries in Japan, which operated more like U.S. companies. But in

general we have been welcomed, even when, in the case of the 1992 display

technology study, we arrived in Japan in the middle of a heated trade dispute.

Although language has not really presented a problem, whenever a JTEC team

included at least one Japanese-speaking member, more information was exchanged.

The Japanese view JTEC very positively. They believe in the importance of

gathering information, and they are very good at it. Their balance of trade with the

U.S. in information gathering is roughly 3:1. That is, Japan buys three times more

information from the U.S. than the U.S. buys from Japan. In terms of people

exchanged, the numbers are even more skewed. For every ten Japanese scientists

or engineers who visit the U.S. for an extended time, only one American goes to

Japan. The imbalance is so great that the Japanese government even funds

Americans to travel to Japan and spend time in Japanese laboratories.

Some technologies -- for example, those in the area of computer science -- have

been the subject of several JTEC studies over the history of the program because

of the great interest in the subject and rapid changes in the technology. This

continuity, combined with the institutional memory of several people who have been

involved with the JTEC program since its inception, makes it possible to assemble

a picture of the evolution of Japanese technology in comparison with that in the

United States. Because of the time that has elapsed since the earlier reports, it is

also possible to see which of the predictions came true, which did not, what was

missed, and, finally, why some predicted events did not come to pass.

The ICOT Fifth Generation computer project is an example. Many people consider

that project a disappointment. My own opinion is that, although it did not achieve

all of its goals, it taught the Japanese many things that are critical to the next phase

of advanced computing. The 1987 study, A_-anced Computing in Japan, dealt

almost exclusively with the Fifth Generation program, and the 1990 study reflected

on the degree to which that project succeeded. The 1993 JTEC report on

knowledge-based systems in Japan includes a section on ICOT. One finding from

that report is that ICOT has made some impressive achievements, particularly in the

development of the "KL 1" family of parallel symbolic programming languages. The

ICOT program was actually extended for three years beyond its originally scheduled
26 Introduction: Historical Overview and Comparisons

termination date. In the meantime, the Japanese government has undertaken another

major project in computer science R&D, the Real World Computing (RWC) Initiative,

which is sure to further promote the emergence of Japan as a major world player in

the computer and information science fields.

The Global Challenge

In recent years there has been an increasing awareness among the sponsors of the

JTEC program that the technological challenge facing the United States comes not

only from Japan, but also from Europe and potentially from many other parts of the

world. This inspired the formation of the World Technology Evaluation Center.

WTEC completed its initial assessment, on European nuclear instrumentation and

controls (I&C) technology, in late 1991. This focused on one aspect of nuclear

technology that already had been the subject of one chapter of the broader 1990

JTEC study on Japanese nuclear technology. The detailed review of the world's

major nuclear I&C technology suppliers was completed in 1993 with the publication

of the WTEC Monograph on Instrumentation, Control, and Safety Systems of

Ganadian Nuclear Facilities. Based on these three reports, Jim White of Oak Ridge

National Laboratory has now prepared the world-wide summary assessment of

nuclear I&C technologies that is published for the first time in this volume. It will

also be available separately. Dr. White's assessment, that the United States trails

every country but Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union in nuclear I&C

technology and applications, should be of concern even to those who question the

wisdom of further investments in nuclear power; instrumentation and controls

technology is critical to the safety of our existing plants.

WTEC's second international assessment, completed in 1993, examined satellite

telecommunications technology in Europe, Japan, and Russia. This study also

resulted in some sobering conclusions: Japan, and to a lesser extent Europe, stand

a good chance of wresting a substantial proportion of the satellite communications

business away from the United States early in the next century. This is the result of

a long period of slackened satellite communications R&D funding at NASA, during

which time strong European and Japanese research and applications programs have

proven new technologies and given their companies valuable experience and

know-how.

With the breakup of the Soviet Union at the end of 1991, the Departments of Energy

and Defense requested that I assess the technological potential of Ukraine, the

second largest of the newly independent republics of the former Soviet Union (FSU).

A five volume report entitled Science, Technology and Conversion in Ukraine was

published in 1993, and is the most comprehensive look at that country's R&D

potential. It reviews the major R&D institutions and activities there, listing key

individuals, their addresses, telephone numbers, and, whenever available, their

electronic mall addresses.
Program Summary 27

As of this writing, WTEC is planning to perform its next global assessment in the

area of research submersibles and related undersea technologies. A WTEC panel

is now completing its report on submersible technologies in Russia, Ukraine, Finland,

France, Germany, and the United Kingdom. Within the next few months, we hope

to send the same panel to Japan, following which they will visit some sites in eastern

Russia (Vladivostok area) that they were not able to visit in their May 1993 trip to

European Russia and Ukraine.

WTEC is now filling in another piece of the global picture in advanced display

technologies with a panel that visited Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus in October of

1993. As described above in the Annual Report section, WTEC is also collaborating

with the Civil Engineering Research Foundation in an assessment of civil engineering

technologies in Western Europe. This complements the earlier JTEC study of

construction technology in Japan, affording a broader global perspective on the

status of the U.S. with respect to another important application of advanced

technology. Topics under consideration for future WTEC studies include

environmentally benign manufacturing technologies and metals casting technology.

Our experience with Europe and the former Soviet Union is not as long as it is in

Japan. Unlike JTEC, which is well recognized in Japan, the WTEC mission is not yet

fully understood. This has required more work, particularly in planning and

preparation for the site visits. Furthermore, Japan is a single country, with many R&D

activities centrally located in Tokyo. Conversely, Europe is a continent with many

countries; just the transportation aspect alone makes it harder to coordinate a set of

visits in a short time. And most visits have to be completed in a short time; industrial

panelists find it particularly difficult to get away from their jobs for more than about

a week -- two weeks at the most. By including Russia, Ukraine and possibly other

new countries in Eastern Europe, the WTEC trips have stretched these limits.

In spite of these problems, we have been delighted to find out that the JTEC process

works well in Europe (East and West). Now after nearly completing four studies in

Europe, we find that it is easier to obtain access. Logistics problems have been

solved by breaking the team into subgroups and utilizing travel time for other

activities -- such as sleeping, eating or site report preparation. A noteworthy

addition to our process, when we have visited FSU countries, has been to invite

selected hosts from our site visits to our workshop in Washington. This provides

them with an opportunity to meet interested U.S. parties and initiate joint ventures or

cooperative research. Many of these organizations have been previously closed to

the West, and are eager to become known and engage in discussions for

cooperation. This is particularly true for Russian organizations situated outside of

Moscow and St. Petersburg, and most organizations in Ukraine, Belarus and the

other new countries in Eastern Europe.
28 Introduction: Historical Overview and Comparisons

APPIACABIIATY OF ]TEC/WTEC TO THE BROADER U.S. TECIINOLOGY POLICY

DEBATE

Each JTEC or WTEC study provides a current view of the status of research,

development and/or applications of a particular technology in one or more foreign

countries. It also provides a snapshot of a particular technology and its relationship

to a possible range of products. Finally, most JTEC and WTEC studies include a

review of mechanisms for R&D support in the subject country(ies). As such, the

large body of JTEC and W'rEC studies completed to-date provides a useful

benchmark for the ongoing debate in Washington as to the direction that U.S.

technology policy should take in the latter part of the 1990s.

First, a number of ideas that are being proposed in Washington today to stimulate

the development of civilian and dual-use technologies have been tried in Japan and

Europe already, to varying degrees of success. JTEC/WTEC studies can provide

valuable information on why these ideas have succeeded or failed abroad, and how

they may or may not work in the United States.

Second, foreign governments have identified certain technologies and/or applications

as critical to their future, therefore deserving of direct or indirect government

support. The debate in the United States over industrial policy must therefore be

influenced greatly by the extent to which other governments around the world have

already distorted the "free market" forces that would otherwise shape the

development and deployment of new technologies and products. The illusion of a

free market is further undermined by the behavior of large oligopolistic or

monopolistic private corporations and/or consortia overseas. For example, there is

no doubt that, due to differing cultural and institution frameworks, Japanese

corporations behave very differently from U.S. corporations, especially with respect

to long-term investments in R&D. In other words, if governments and large

corporations and consortia overseas are practicing technological mercantilism by

subsidizing or otherwise fostering the development of civilian high technology

industry, the U.S. Government cannot possibly gain from conducting a laissez £aire

free trade policy in isolation. JTEC and WTEC studies can provide key information

concerning the mechanisms for corporate and government R&D support abroad to

facilitate informed debate on this issue in the United States.

Finally, to the extent that free trade in high technology products and information

does prevail in this world, U.S. government and industry must have access to reliable

information concerning where the best research and technology can be found

around the world. The JTEC/WTEC program can contribute in this respect as well.

In order to facilitate such contributions to the broader U.S. technology policy arena,

the National Science Foundation has asked us to combine the executive summaries

of all the recent JTEC/WTEC reports in a single document and to identify some

issues that cut across several of the studies. This program summary presents
Program Summary 29

twenty-two executive summaries from reports completed since the fail of 1989.

Summaries of the first ten studies, those completed between 1984 and early 1989, are

not included here. Readers are directed to Gaining Ground -- Japan's Stn'des in

Science and Technology (Gamota and Frieman 1988), the JTEG Program Summary

(JTEC 1991) and the JTEGZWTEC Program Summary (JTEC/WTEC 1992) for more

information on those early studies.

The reports have been arranged according to application areas, so readers can

make correlations between similar areas and compare changes reported by similar

studies conducted at different times. Whereas in the 1980s it became customary in

the Federal Government to organize technology policy discussions along lines of

disciplines or categories of "critical" technologies, the current administration appears

to be inclined instead to look at the end-result, or applications, of these

technologies. This is almost the opposite of the current trend in Japan, where

government agencies for the past few years have been putting greater emphasis on

improving Japan's basic research capability. However, these recent policy shifts in

Japan and the U.S. both represent positive responses to an imbalance that was

evident in the 1980s, i.e., that the Japanese did better applied research and product

development, while the U.S. excelled at basic research and, at least in the

government sector, paid little attention to collaborating with industry in applied R&D

and manufacturing technology. Governments in both countries are moving to

redress this imbalance: Japan by putting new emphasis on basic research, and the

United States by pursuing new initiatives in government-supported applied R&D

projects in close cooperation with industry.

Unfortunately, a troubling trend appears to be developing in the United States. To

redress the lack of support of applied research and development for commercial

applications, basic research funding is now being threatened. There is a need to fill

the "gap" in applied R&D funding, in order to ensure that we are prepared to

capitalize on basic research discoveries. But this should not be in lieu of support

for that basic research. Basic research has proven to be our insurance for the

future. If we wish to remain competitive, we need to do so across the full spectrum

from basic research to applied R&D.

Table 7 compares the JTEC and WTEC studies with a variety of application areas.

The "critical technology" approach is still with us, however. In the U.S., there remain

statutory requirements for the maintenance of several lists of critical or sensitive

technologies at both the Defense and Commerce departments (U.S. Govt. 1990,

1991a, 1991b). There are several analogous Japanese lists, most notably a 1988

Ministry of International Trade and Industry (MITI) document that ranks the United

States and Japan in a wide range of industrial technologies (Govt. of Japan 1988).

Similar strategic thinking is evident in the 1990 list of research projects supported by

the Commission of the European Communities (EC 1990). These lists have many

common themes and, not too surprisingly, include most of the topics that have been

studied by the JTEC teams.
30 Introduction: Historical Overview and Comparisons

TASI,E 7

 c/ 'sc St dm by Area

XPPUC 's

Manufacturing

Communications & Information

Electronic Packaging" (JTEC)

Polymer Composites" (JTEC)

Displays (JTEC and WTEC)

Construction (JTEC)

CERF Task Force" (WTEC)

MEMS' (]TEC)

Computer Science (JTEC - '84

'87 '90)

Satellite Communications

(worldwide)

Knowledge-Based Systems

(]I'EC)

Electronic Packaging" (]TEC)

MEMS" (]TEC)

Optoelectronics'" (JTEC)

Natural Resources & Environment Polymer Composites" (JTEC)

Separation (JTEC)

Education & Training All Studies Listed Above Under

Communications & Information Technologies

Transportation Polymer Composites" (JTEC)

Advanced Composites (]TEC)

Space Propulsion (]TEC)

National Security All of the Above

Energy Supply & Demand Nuclear I&C (2 WTEC Studies +

Global Summary)

Polymer Composites" (JTEC)

Nuclear Power (JTEC)

Food & Fiber Bioprocess Engineering (JTEC)

Separation (JTEC)

Health Bioprocess Engineering (JTEC)

Separation (JTEC)

i

Note: * in progress; ** planned.

As a glance at the titles of all the JTEC studies makes clear, JTEC's sponsoring

agencies have emphasized information technologies, although much work has also

been done in the areas of materials, manufacturing, and space technology. No

studies have directly addressed pharmaceutical, medical, and environmental
Program Summary 31

technologies, though the bioprocess engineering study (completed in 1992) and the

separation technologies study (completed in 1993) do cover some relevant material.

Perspective is one of several benefits that accrue from compiling the JTEC/WTEC

studies. The studies suggest that if current trends continue, Japan and other

advanced industrialized countries will present an increasing challenge to the United

States in high-technology markets. This is not to say that they will dominate all high

technology. But if there is a large market, many if not all of these countries will be

participating in it, and will be trying to perform state-of-the-art R&D work to ensure

that their products will be competitive. The emerging Eastern European economies

also have the potential to present major competitive challenges, as well as

cooperative opportunities, for U.S. high-technology industry.

The U.S. can react to these challenges, and in fact has turned a comer in at least

one area that was given up by many as a lost cause -- semiconductor manufacturing.

Recent advances by U.S. industry giants such as Intel and SEMATECH (a

cooperative industry research institute) have made the U.S. competitive again. The

Clinton Administration is proposing similar and/or complementary initiatives in

automotive technology, information infrastructure, advanced manufacturing

technologies, and dual-use technologies in general (Clinton & Gore 1993). The new

administration is also advocating a permanent extension of the research and

experimentation tax credit as a way of stimulating private R&D investments across

the board.

However, one of the most fundamental lessons that we have learned in the

JTEC/WTEC program is that one should be very careful in interpreting successes

and failures abroad, and trying to compare them to our own experience here in the

United States. Too often successes are copied by starting similar efforts only to fred

out that it takes more than just proclamations and/or money. Unique local conditions

(culture, education, etc.) must be taken into account before a successful effort in

Japan or Europe can be carried out in the United States. Certainly we can and

should learn from the efforts of others, but we must understand them in their full

context. Two such cases in point are Japanese consortia and the role of, or

apparent lack of, basic (undirected) research in Japan.

In the mid- to late-1980s, it became fashionable in the United States to create

industrial consortia. A few succeeded and are still around today, but many did not

live up to their expectations. There are many reasons, but one key factor is that the

close government-industry relationships typical of Japanese consortia would be

viewed as legally or ethically questionable in the United States. The two best known

U.S. consortia -- MCC and SEMATECH -- are currently doing well, but they have

abandoned many of their original goals, and have succeeded mainly by
32 Introduction: Historical Overview and Comparisons

understanding how Japanese consortia really work, modifying that model to fit the

U.S. situation.

Gerald Hane in a recent article in Issues in Science and Technology (Hane 1993)

has analyzed the workings of Japanese consortia. In simplistic terms, he states that

the key to their success is coordination of research, not forced marriages between

competitors. Many U.S. consortia tried to force cooperation between natural

competitors, and it just did not work. Coordination of research, on the other hand,

means that participants can keep their secrets, but know the general direction of

their competitors. Taichi Sakaiya, formerly with MITI, expresses this more strikingly.

Rather than viewing Japan as a monolithic "Japan, Inc.," a nation with a single

purpose precisely executing a complex and cooperative effort, he argues that Japan

is more like "a land of a thousand clocks" (Sakaiya 1993). The government makes

sure everyone keeps the same time, but there is much less sharing than many in the

West believe. He states that in Japan "everyone is first and foremost loyal to his

organization." This has been evident in some of the JTEC studies, when we

encountered openness to our visiting team, but concern about sharing findings with

our hosts' Japanese competitors.

Another key ingredient in Japanese consortia is the role played by the national

laboratories. This is a role that U.S. national laboratories -- mostly Department of

Energy laboratories -- are now aspiring to play. Unfortunately, the U.S. laboratories

have evolved mostly from weapons work or basic research, and do not have any

significant experience or background in understanding the commercial world. Thus

they are having difficulty in acting as honest brokers between companies, a role

Japanese laboratories have played well.

Close relationships between government and industry can benefit R&D, but can also

cause other problems. The Japanese construction industry offers a good example.

JTEC sent a team to Japan in 1991 to study construction technology. The panel

learned that the Japanese construction industry invests a half percent of its revenues

in R&D -- nearly five times the percentage in the U.S. This investment has allowed

Japan to excel in such areas as tunneling, design and construction of intelligent

buildings, robotics, and other related areas. Private R&D funding has also been

assisted by the Ministry of Construction, a government agency for which there is no

U.S. counterpart. Recently, however, this government-industry relationship in

construction has been the subject of public scrutiny, and a number of government

and industrial executives have been jailed for illegal activities that stemmed from

their cozy relationships. This was, in fact, one of the causes for the recent toppling

of the Liberal Democratic Party after 38 years in power.

Another area where Japanese industrialpolicy is encountering difficulties is in the

development of the nuclear breeder reactor, Monju. The U.S. abandoned this

technology 15 years ago because of potential economic, health, safety, and political

problems. In spite of this, Japan continued to pump most of its advanced reactor
_ogramS_ma_,y 33

R&D investments into this one area. Today, even as IFIonju is being prepared for

startup this spring, Japan is reviewing its plans for the plutonium fuel cycle, at least

in part in response to worldwide protests on Japan's plutonium fuel shipments from

France, as well as the exorbitant cost of the Monju project (Washington Post 1994).

The debate over industrial policy will be fueled even more by the recent controversy

over the Japanese HDTV standard (MUSE). After it became known early this year

that the Japanese government was considering abandoning the MUSE system in

favor of the new digital standard just adopted by the United States, the Ministry of

Posts and Telecommunications was obliged to make a public announcement

pledging continued support for MUSE. This apparent turnabout in Japanese

government policy was reportedly sparked by a storm of protest from major

Japanese electronics companies that have collectively invested billions of their own

funds in the MUSE system, and are not inclined to write that investment off as yet.

But the future of the MUSE system will be pretty much determined by its lack of

acceptance by the U.S. and Europe -- investment or no investment.

However that question is resolved, there is no denying that the MUSE system is an

excellent example of a pioneering technology that was developed by Japan

completely on its own. The Japanese also have reason to feel pride in the fact that

they have the world's only operational HDTV system. Japanese manufacturers are

in a good position to dominate the world market for digital HDTV equipment

because they currently dominate the technology and markets for more conventional

equipment.

The Japanese thrust to develop HDTV, beginning in the 1970s, has also had an

important side-benefit: HDTV requires advanced displays. Thus the Japanese

program has included a big effort to develop wall-sized flat panel displays. Though

large-scale commercial production of such displays is still in the future, it is no

coincidence that Japan now dominates the technology and markets for smaller flat

panel displays used in portable computers.

In sum, this is not to say that industrial policy is bad or good, but only that it must

be balanced against many considerations; decisions should be reviewed periodically

to assure that the original underpinnings and assumptions are still valid. One could

also conclude, ironically, that a successful industrial policy requires the taking of

risks. Hence, in order to succeed, you must be willing to fail occasionally. If this

were not the case, there would be no need for government intervention to mitigate

the risks private firms must take in order to invest in new technologies. "Sure fire"

new technologies will get all the private investment they need -- only risky (and/or

expensive) ones require the sort of nurturing that a government industrial policy can

provide. Of course, this argument, when taken to the extreme, could result in

government policies that distort the market by promoting only losing technologies.
34 Introduction: Historical Overview and Comparisons

Japanese Strengths 8rid Weaknesses

It is very difficult to make categorical statements about a nation's strengths and

weaknesses in a technology without using many caveats. Unfortunately, too many

caveats make the argument less persuasive. However, without the caveats,

statements can be taken out of context and wrong perceptions created.

Nevertheless, it is necessary to synthesize and present data so that policy makers

and the nontechnical community can easily understand the importance and the

implications of the findings. Table 8 relies on an overview of the JTEC studies to

summarize the Japanese position. This table makes it obvious that the single most

important Japanese strength is in product development and manufacturing, not only

in the area of electronic components, but also in many other areas. Another

interesting observation from the table is that in many cases Japanese R&D is

competitive with that in the United States. Japanese technology is weak in many

basic research areas; but by launching programs such as ERATO (described below),

the Japanese show that they are trying to offset this deficiency.

TABLE 8

Japanese Strengths 8nd Weaknesses

Strong Competitive Weak

MATBRIAL8

carbon-fiber products & R&D - pan basic research

R&D - pitch

thermoplastic resin R&D

processes co-curing & tooling hand layup, thermoforming,

pultrusion & rtm filament winding, &

tow placement

carbon-carbon R&D, manufacturing

composites

high-strength R&D, products basic research

polymers

polymer composite civil engineering automotive and

structures applications industrial

applications

electronic (si & products R&D II-VI materials

gaas)

biopolymers all processes (but

gaining)
Program Su_ua,y 35

gas separations

]APm

Strong Competitive Weak

R&D and

implementation

hydrometallurgical

separations

development &

implementation

research

ion exchange R&D implementation

membrane

processes

extraction solvent, ion research

exchange, &

supercritical fluid

superconductors processing R&D theory & space

applications

EWECTI_NICS AND INFORMATION _LOGWS

microelectronics memory chips logic chips microprocessors

lithography optical & x-my

displays products

machine translation products R&D European languages

databases image & multimedia products

memory storage optical magnetic

computers laptop components supercomputers, workstations, PCs

hardware

software factories software engineering R&D, products

expert systems

national initiatives in

knowledge-based

systems

consumer products,

integration, support

structure, & national

initiatives

parallel symbolic

computation, very

large knowledge

bases, & fuzzy logic

systems

tools & applied

research

quality of very large

knowledge bases

sensors charge-coupled products research

devices

basic research in

industry &

universities
36 Introduction: Historical Overview and Comparisons

satellite

communications

Strong

advanced batteries,

solid state amplifiers,

& pointing and

positioning systems

Competitive

electric propulsion &

intersatellite links

Weak

high data rate

com.m., srtlaJ]

satellites, & onboard processing

telecommunications component & fiber mobile networks

optics

BN1_GI' AND PROPUI_(N_

nuclear power instrumentation & construction R&D computer code

controls

nuclear control room basic research advanced design &

design product

implementation

instrumentation & architecture I_D support systems standards & tools,

control for nuclear architecture product

power reactors implementation

rocket propulsion liquid rockets scramjet technology,

turbopumps

MANUFACTURING

flexible products

manufacturing

systems

software human-machine

interface (but

gaining)

manipulators products R&D

precision products R&D

engineering

robotics products systems

computer-integrated R&D, products

manufacturing

computer-assisted applications new concepts &

design tools

Japan has had a definite lead in manufacturing for some time. Some interesting

findings have been reported by our current JTEC panel on electronic packaging,

chaired by Professor Michael Kelly from Georgia Tech. Although the report is not
Pro_z_ Summary 37

yet available, the panel released some preliminary findings at a workshop held on

January 12th of this year. Gene Meieran of Intel, one of the JTEC panelists, lists U.S.

strengths as university research, information technology research, generic company

research, and entrepreneurial activity and risk taking. According to Dr. Meieran, the

Japanese are best at active involvement in research, manufacturing research, and

coherent company and government policies.

Information research is an area in which the U.S. seems to continue to lead. Japan

is behind in networks, database systems, electronic mail, and system integration.

The U.S. also maintains its lead in software engineering, even though this has been

targeted by the Japanese for a number of years. Their effort to "leapfrog" the United

States by creating software factories has just not worked. The biggest threat to U.S.

software engineers and programmers is an increasing volume of software now being

written in India -- often by Ph.D.-educated scientists who cannot find work in their

field. They can produce software for a fraction of what it costs in the United States.

Similar growth in the software business has been reported in Russia, although the

language barrier could prove to be a hurdle there in the immediate future.

The United States still leads in basic (or "undirected") research. This lead is often

quite wide, particularly in areas that are not clearly identified as relevant to key

industries. This is in part because much "basic" research in Japan is focused,

ultimately tied to possible applications. One example of this is superconductivity,

a basic research topic the Japanese have singled out for emphasis, and in which

they have been competing successfully worldwide. Their focus is on

high-temperature superconducting materials, an area with obvious applications.

The Japanese government has started a number of programs to enhance basic

research. One of its successes in this respect has been the ERATO program,

initiated in 1981 under the sponsorship of the Science & Technology Agency (STA)

through its Japan Research and Development Corporation (JRDC). ERATO is unique

in its operation. All ERATO projects have a senior director (recruited from industry,

national laboratories or universities) and a handful of younger researchers who work

together on some specific long-range problem for five years. Considerable freedom

is allowed in how funding is allocated within the individual projects. Most projects

fall into two major categories -- physics/engineering and biotechnology. The nature

of the work has been in almost all cases basic research not explicitly tied to any

specific application. The results, however, often are applied to specific problems,

instruments, and products that the ERATO office publicizes in its reports. ERATO

was designed to bring industry and university scientists together. These factors have

helped ERATO attract increasing funding contributions from industry. Funding is

modest at about two to three million dollars per year per project. The total ERATO

budget is currently about $85 million per year, allocated to 37 projects.

In a departure from previous practices, ERATO recently announced a new project

that will be based outside Japan. It will be headed by Yoshihisa Yamamoto from
38 _troduction: Historical Overview and Comparisons

Stanford University. He will receive $17 million over five years. A spin-off ERATO

program has also been announced that will fund a large scale cooperative program

between researchers at Tokyo University and the University of California at Santa

Barbara.

JTEC studied ERATO in 1988, and a follow-up study has been proposed for this year.

The focus of such a study would be not only to examine the quality of ERATO

research, but also to look at its impact on career paths followed by young people

engaged in the various projects.

As a part of the Japanese move to improve basic research, they have also

strengthened their university research and made efforts to more closely couple that

research with industry. University research has traditionally played a secondary role

in Japan's research enterprise. Early JTEC teams were so disappointed with what

they observed that for a long while few teams even wanted to visit universities

except to pay social calls. Today that is changing. Recent JTEC teams have noted

that university research is improving steadily. Even more significantly, Japanese

industry is starting to pay more attention to what is going on at universities. There

is a significant new initiative within the Japanese government aimed at improving

university infrastructure, including a 29% increase in fiscal year 1993 (ending 4/94)

funding for the Ministry of Education. Much of this additional funding is reportedly

targetted at buildings and equipment.

Nevertheless, U.S. university research remains unquestionably superior. Despite

Japan's efforts to improve university-industry coupling, it is difficult to point to any

one area today where Japanese university research plays a significant role in

providing results of interest to industry. There is probably more coupling between

Japanese industry and American university research than there is with their own

universities. Part of the problem lies in lack of real incentives for Japanese academic

researchers to collaborate with industry.

In some critical areas -- for example, artificial intelligence and software -- the

Japanese have decided to fund basic research in the United States. Some of the

work is being done at prestigious U.S. universities, and some at Japanese-owned

R&D centers at U.S. locations such as Princeton, Palo Alto, and Michigan. The work

there is first class, and most of the results are published in U.S. journals. To be sure,

the Japanese scrutinize the results for possible applications to their product lines.

With this new emphasis on basic research, particularly in the Japanese government,

Japan now faces somewhat of a dilemma. It was much easier in the past for the

Japanese to import and absorb foreign technology than it is now for them to forge

ahead in areas in which they lead. The reasons may include the following:

First, lack of a critical mass of basic researchers makes it difficult to identify new

directions. One contributing factor to this is that Japan has had less success than
Program Summary 39

the United States in attracting foreign scientific and technological talent. There are

many foreign students in Japan, but comparatively few of them stay for any extended

period beyond their education. Such imported talent has been a key contributor to

U.S. successes in basic research, especially since many foreign students have

chosen to settle here after their education is complete.

Second, Japanese culture has for the last 120 years (not just recently as some

believe) excelled at absorbing and using information from abroad. Even prior to the

Meiji Restoration of the 1860s, Japan imported the best of foreign (primarily Chinese)

culture and technology, adapting it as appropriate. Japan's Charter Oath, which

bears a resemblance to our Declaration of Independence, says in part, "knowledge

shall be sought throughout the world, and the foundations of the empire shall be

strengthened." During the late 19th and early 20th centuries, foreign experts were

recruited, including specialists on railways, mining engineering, communications, and

medicine. In 1873 the Imperial College of Engineering in Tokyo (later Tokyo

University) became the first university in the world to offer a program in electrical

engineering. James Clerk Maxwell said of the work done there by the founding

professors, William Ayrton and John Perry, that they had "... moved the center of

gravity of electrical engineering greatly eastward." One of Ayrton's Japanese

students helped to found one of the companies to form Toshiba, and another

became one of the founders of NEC. Countless students were sent abroad at great

expense to learn and come back and build upon what they had studied.

Third, basic research requires staying power and very long term investment. Given

the current economic situation in Japan and the recent closer view of the bottom line

in industry, it is questionable whether the commitment can be sustained. Some

reductions in R&D spending have been reported recently at Fujitsu, Hitachi, JVC,

NEC, and Toshiba. Industrial funding of research at Japanese universities has also

seen reductions.

While the need to send students abroad has greatly diminished due to the excellent

schools at home, the Japanese continue to be passionate about learning about the

world's good ideas. They have no qualms about honoring foreigners who have

achieved greatness. For example, last year Dr. George Heilmeir was honored for

his work on liquid crystals while he was a researcher at RCA laboratories. It is a

sobering fact that here was a man being honored in Japan for work that could have

meant tremendous profits to RCA or other U.S. companies had they exploited this

discovery themselves. Unfortunately, we just let it go.

In the West, and particularly in the U.S., being associated with a technological failure

is usually detrimental to one's career. In Japan, decisions are made by consensus,

and risks are shared by all concerned. If a program fails to meet its technological

objective, the people associated with the undertaking share the disappointment; but

seldom does such a failure threaten an individual's career, because the group made

the decisions. Moreover, the Japanese try to learn from failures, documenting findings
40 Introduction: Historical Overview and Comparisons

just as if the results had been positive. As a result, there appears to be much less

"going over the same ground" in Japan than in the United States. The ICOT program,

mentioned earlier, is a good case in point. Its almost impossibly ambitious goals were

not achieved, but much was learned from the attempt, and the program did raise

Japan's level of competence in computer science. Parenthetically, realizing that they

have gone as far as anyone in this area, the Japanese invited international participation

in their next computer science effort -- the RWC Initiative (also known as the Sixth

Generation Project). For policy reasons, the U.S. has declined to participate in the

whole program, but has agreed to cooperate in aspects related to optoelectronics.

W'FBC Ol::un,_i,o_

The WTEC studies covering Western Europe are still too few to make many general

statements, so I will mention only a few findings, mostly dealing with the FSU.

The first and probably most important conclusion is that we in the United States have

taken an overly narrow view of opportunities in the FSU. "Soviet" has meant "Russia"

to most of us in the West, and Russia has meant Moscow. The Soviets wanted the

window to the Soviet Union to be through Moscow, and we continue to suffer from that

tunnel vision. However, it is outside of Moscow in Russia, and in Ukraine, Belarus, and

the Baltic countries, that many exciting possibilities exist. To be sure, it will take more

time to find them, but the rewards are worth it. The once closed cities are now open;

much of the technology (applied research and advanced development) is found

outside Moscow, which has been the center of basic research. For example, Kharkiv

boasts the world's largest aviation complex; Dnipropetrovsk is the site of the most

modem former Soviet rocket facility; and Mykolaev has the only nuclear aircraft carrier

shipyard.

Another observation is that, while the people in the FSU are very hospitable, they are

becoming weary of the large number of delegations that are visiting with no follow up.

To a far greater extent than in Japan, there is an expectation in the FSU of a quid pro

quo. That is one of the reasons we have included invitations to some of our hosts to

visit the U.S. and attend our workshops, affording them an opportunity to meet

potential research or business partners. Their infrastructure is crumbling, and the

window for collaborative work will not remain open much longer. Facilities will

deteriorate, or the people will leave. Worse yet, political changes could close these

sites to the West, and a new arms race could well begin. This should not come as a

surprise; it has happened already twice in this century.

Lastly, focusing now on Western Europe, the WTEC panels are finding a substantial

body of excellent basic research in Germany, France, Switzerland and other Western

European countries. There is a fair amount of willingness there to invest in research,

and even to support intra-European efforts (e.g., CERN). Additionally, one finds a

surprising number of U.S.-educated and experienced Europeans who have returned
Program Summary 41

to their native countries after spending 20 years or more in U.S. facilities such as AT&T

Bell Laboratories or IBM Watson laboratory.

With the demise of the Superconducting Supercollider Project (SSC), I suspect a fair

number of our best high energy physicists will be going to Europe soon. The two

most recent major discoveries in high temperature superconductivity were made in

Europe -- the first in Switzerland, and the most recent in France. I do not want to

argue whether or not the SSC was a good investment at its inception, but I do feel that

once the U.S. decided to fund such an important and long term project, terminating

it in the middle of construction was unfortunate. Many first rate scientists committed

their careers to it, and the U.S. government and the State of Texas had already

committed and expended billions.

CONCLUSION

JTEC/WTEC has initiated 36 studies of foreign technology over the past 10 years (six

are still in progress, and final reports are expected in 1994). This series of studies

gives a fairly comprehensive picture of the status and trends, and the strengths and

the weaknesses, of Japanese R&D over a wide spectrum of strategic technology areas.

It is inevitable that the 22 executive summaries included in this volume will be

vulnerable to misinterpretation when taken out of the context of the full reports.

Nevertheless, even a brief perusal of these summaries conveys an overall impression

of Japanese R&D that is scarcely subject to misinterpretation: Japan is engaged in a

systematic effort to achieve parity with, or superiority over, the United States in

virtually every technology that is of current or potential economic significance. The

Europeans are evidently following a similar path of strategic investment in high

technology. The mechanisms by which Japan and Europe have pursued this strategy,

and the extent to which they are succeeding, cannot help but be of great interest to

policymakers in the United States and in the rest of the world.

The Japanese make no secret of their objectives or methods in pursuing their strategy;

quite the contrary, they offer the rest of the world a possible blueprint for the pursuit

of economic prosperity through thoughtful long-range investment in science and

technology. The authors of the JTEC and WTEC reports and the other contributors

to this summary report hope that readers will find this information to be a useful

contribution to the debate over how valid and applicable this Japanese model of

technological and economic development is to the rest of the world.

Since 1992 the world has been experiencing a recession, and Japan and Europe are

not immune to its effects. Industrial funding for R&D in the U.S. is down, and there is

talk that Europe is following suit. Even in Japan there are signs of strain. The JTEC

electronic packaging panel heard comments from some of their Japanese hosts last

fall that traditional supplier relationships are being disrupted by the recession.

However, there is no indication yet that there has been any wholesale cutback in
42 Introduction: Historical Overview and Comparisons

Japanese R&D funding, either in the private sector or in the government. If the

Japanese follow their previous strategy, they will use this time to increase R&D rather

than cut it back. Time will tell, and we hope our current and future JTEC reports will

provide us with more detailed information. But the recession is certainly not sufficient

grounds for the United States to become complacent about the long-term economic

and technological challenge posed by Japan and Europe.

Too many people have contributed to the overall JTEC/WTEC effort to list here,

though we are grateful for all of their work -- and particularly for the work of the

panelists and chairpersons of all the study teams, without whom there would have

been no JTEC program. I would also like to thank the numerous hosts in Japan,

Europe, Canada, and the former Soviet Union, who have been very gracious in

accepting our teams, sharing information, and making our visits very memorable. I will

conclude by thanking those whose efforts have most directly led to the success of

JTEC/WTEC and to the publication of this document: Paul Herer of the National

Science Foundation, who manages the JTEC/WTEC program for NSF; Frank Huband,

formerly in charge of JTEC at NSF and now executive director of the American Society

for Engineering Education; Duane Shelton, director of the International Technology

Research Institute at Loyola College; Michael DeHaemer, principal investigator for the

JTEC/WTEC grants at Loyola College. Additionally, I want to give special thanks and

credit to Geoff Holdridge of the JTEC/WTEC staff, who edited and produced this

summary report.

t_u_-'_._CES

Clinton, President William J. and Vice President Albert Gore, Jr. 1993. Technology for

America's Economic Growth, A New Direction to Build Economic Strength.

Office of Science and Technology Policy, Executive Office of the President.

Washington, DC (USGPO 1993-347-397/80412).

Commission of the European Communities. 1990. EC Research Funding: A Guide for

Applicants. Brussels, Belgium.

Gamota, George and Wendy Frieman. 1988. Gaining Ground: Japan's Stn'des in

Science and Technology. Ballinger,Cambridge, MA

Government of Japan. 1988. Trends and Future Tasks in Industrial Technology.

Ministry of International Trade and Industry.

Hane, Gerald J. 1993. Issues in Science and Technology, Winter 1993-94, page 56.

International Technology Research Institute. 1992. JTEC/WTEC Program Summary.

Baltimore, MD. NTIS PB94-107083.
Program Summary 43

Japanese Technology Evaluation Center. 1991. JTEG Program Summary. Baltimore,

MD, NTIS PB92-119429/XAB.

Sakaiya, Taichi. 1993. Across the Board. page 48.

Scientific American. January 1994, p. 144.

The Washington Post. 1993. Feb. 23, 1994, p. A24, col. 1.

United States Government. 1990. Emerging Technologies: A Survey of Techru'cal and

Economic Opporturu'ties. Department of Commerce, Technology Administration.

United States Government. 1991a. Gritical Technologies Plan. Department of Defense.

Washington, D.C.

United States Government. 1991b. National Critical Technologies List. Office of

Science and Technology Policy, Executive Office of the President.

Washington, D.C.

United States Government. 1993. Science and Engineering Indicators - 1993. National

Science Foundation, Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office (NSB

93-1).

Uyehara, Cecil. 1991. "JTEC Studies -A Common Thread," Third Japanese Science and

Technology Information Conference, Nancy, France, May 15-18, 1991.
44 Key

Some of the JTEC and WTEC panels chose to present their basic conclusions in

tabular form. Table 9 explains the notations used in the tables throughout this

document, except as otherwise noted. Figures use a variety of notations, which are

explained under each figure.

TABLE 9

d the Notation:

Position of Subject Country(lee) Relative to that of the United Stat_

Al_olute Poaition

("status"]

of Chsr 

("trend")

+-4-

+

0

Far ahead -> >

Ahead ->

Even =

Behind < -

Far behind < <-

Pulling away sharply

Pulling away

Holding position

Falling behind

Slipping quickly
Im

Program Summary 45

INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY

SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS AND TECHNOLOGY"

July 1993

Burton I. Edelson, George Washington University (Panel CoChair)

Joseph N. Pelton, University of Colorado, Boulder (Panel CoChair)

Charles W. Bostian, Virginia Tech

William T. Brandon, Mitre Corporation

Vincent W.S. Chan, IV[IT Lincoln Laboratory

E. Paul Hager, George Mason University

Neil R. Helm, George Washington University

Raymond D. Jennings, U.S. Department of Commerce/NTIA

Robert K. Kwan, Jet Propulsion Laboratory

Christoph E. Mahle, COMSAT Laboratories

Edward F. Miller, NASA Lewis Research Center

Lance Riley, Jet Propulsion Laboratory

SUMMARY'

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and the National Science

Foundation (NSF) commissioned a panel of U.S. experts to study the international

status of satellite communications systems and technology. The study covers

emerging systems concepts, applications, services and the attendant technologies.

The panel members travelled to Europe, Japan and Russia to gather information firsthand. They visited 17 sites in Europe, 20 sites in Japan, and four in Russia. These

included major manufacturers, government organizations, service providers, and

associated R&D facilities. The panel's report was reviewed by the sites visited, by

the panel, and by representatives of U.S. industry. The report details the information

collected and compares it to U.S. activities.
46 Information and Communication Technology

The panel's principal conclusions are:

. The D'nits_f Sta_ h_ loet i_ l_ing ix_idon in rmmy aritfcwl satslli_

commu_d_v'_ h_,/m_og/m. Table 10 shows that the United States is

currently behind or even with its international competitors in most of the key

technologies. Furthermore, due to research and development projects now

underway abroad, the United States is likely to fall behind Japan, and to a

lesser extent Europe, in most of these technologies in the next five to fifteen

years.

. The rmm_t _ d the US. _te///m _mmurdc_dorw _ry m at

Currently, the U.S. industry retains a leading position in the marketplace -- a

position largely founded on technologies and capabilities developed in the

1960s and 1970s. However, the United States is losing ground with respect

to a wide range of technologies and systems that will be key to future

communications markets.

These developments have come about largely because Europe and Japan view

satellite communications as critical to their future economic growth, and have acted

accordingly. European and Japanese government policies are designed to nurture

their satellite communications industries both directly and indirectly. The absence

of comparable policies in the United States in recent years is one factor contl"ibuting

to our declining competitive position. Table 11 compares government policies with

respect to satellite communications in Europe, Japan, and the United States.

SCOPE

Te_mo/ogy Focus. This is not a market or industrial process study but rather a

survey of advanced technology now under development for commercial use in the

satellite communications field. All aspects of satellite communications were

considered, including fixed, broadcast, mobile, personal communications, navigation,

low earth orbit, small satellites, etc.

Adl_m_ w. Cummt SaJs///m C,ommun/c._tfo,'w Te_hno/o_. The focus of the study

is on experimental and advanced technology being developed in R&D and

demonstration programs rather than on today's production capabilities. Although

launch vehicles and spacecraft technologies are considered, the primary focus is on

technologies and applications unique to the field of satellite communications. Most

of the technology reviewed in this study is five or more years away from

implementation in operational systems.
Program Summary

TABLE 10

U.S. Scorecard in Advanced Satellite Communications Technologies

US. TECHNOLOGY LEAD

High Data Rate Satellite Communications

USATs and Personal Communications Transceivers

Small Satellites

Space Applications for High Temperature Superconductivity

On-Board Processing

U.S. _OLOO_ TIE

Traveling Wave Tubes

Electric Propulsion

Spacecraft Antennas

Interaatellite Links

Autonomous Control Systems

US. TECHNOLOG'Y LAG

HEMT Technology

Free Space Optical Communications

Advanced Batteries

Solar Array Systems

Solid State Power Amplifiers (FETs)

Pointing and Positioning Systems

Large Scale Deployable Antenna Systems

Advanced System Design and Long Range Planning Concepts

New Application Development

WITH

Europe

Japan & Russia

Japan & Europe

Japan

Japan & Europe

LEADER

Japan

Japan & Europe

Japan

Japan

Japan

Japan

Japan and Russia

Japan

Japan

47

TABLE 11

Comparison of Government Roles

EUROPE JAPAN U.S.

Policy Strong Strong Moderate

Plmmlng Moderate Strong Weak

Advanced _t Strong Strong Moderate

Support of Industry Strong Strong Weak

Support of 1ntecrmt_nal Strong Strong Weak

Systmrs
48 Information and Communication Technology

_eu Focus. The panel has surveyed European, Japanese, and, to a lesser

extent, Russian systems and technologies. The panelists' extensive knowledge of

U.S. and Canadian industry has been used as a benchmark for that evaluation. But

the panel did not formally review U.S. technology, and made no U.S. site visits.

/.A,n/_stform. This report is focused on commercial satellite technology, and

does not attempt to review military, defense-related, or other confidential satellite

communications capabilities in either the United States or other countries. The

report covers both government and industrial research and development programs.

The panel has attempted to account for structural differences between the countries

studied with respect to the mix of public and commercial efforts.

_UND

Satellite communications technology is a tremendous force for change and

innovation. From the first satellite telephone call, to the moon landing in 1969, to

today's global coverage of the Olympics with more than 3 billion viewers, satellites

have helped create a world community. From $300 trillion annually in worldwide

electronic funds transfers to hundreds of millions of airline reservations, satellites

play critical roles in finance, business and international trade. Despite growth in

fiber optic cables, some 60% of all overseas communications is satellite based.

Today, more than 200 countries and territories rely on about 200 satellites for

domestic, regional and/or global linkages, defense communications, direct broadcast

services, navigation, data collection, and mobile communications. Satellite

communications is the largest and most successful of all commercial space

enterprises -- it is currently a $15 billion per year business which could grow to $30

billion per year within the decade.

In the mid 1960s, when satellite communications first became a commercial reality,

the United States was not just the leader, but was predominant in every aspect from

launch vehicles to satellite technology. The agreements under which the

International Telecommunications Satellite Organization (INTELSAT) was established

were originally negotiated on an interim basis only, giving the United States a

dominant leadership role. Japan and Europe felt they would need a number of years

to enter seriously into the field. Today, more than a quarter of a century later,

conditions have changed dramatically.

FINDINGS

The global satellite communications industry is now entering a new phase of

expansion. While growth in fixed satellite services has slowed, broadcast and

mobile communications will experience explosive growth over the next ten years.

Services and revenues could triple or even quadruple by early in the next century.
ProoramSummary 40

It is thus a matter of great concern that, on the eve of this renaissance in satellite

communications, the U.S. technology base in this field is now at risk. Without

changes in U.S. R&D policy, the United States will soon fall behind Japan and be

locked in a contest with Europe for second place.

Several countries have introduced or are introducing advanced operational satellite

communications systems ahead of the United States, particularly broadcast and

mobile systems, and have taken the lead in critical areas of technology. The effects

are not readily apparent in today's orders for communications satellites, in which the

United States still leads. However, the United States lags in many areas of advanced

research and technology development from which commercial applications will

derive in the next five to fifteen years.

In the course of its work, the panel encountered a rapidly shifting environment with

respect to satellite communications around the world: the market is expanding and

diversifying; many new applications are under development; and many different

types of technologies and system architectures are emerging, including small

satellites in low earth orbit, multi-purpose orbiting megastructures, and highly

specialized satellite designs. Concepts in satellite manufacturing based on mass

production, akin to making VCRs, exist alongside traditional methods for building

one-of-a-kind products. European and Japanese satellite communications

technologies are emerging rapidly.

The detailed results of this study are presented in-depth in the full report, but some

general observations are presented below:

Major Disparitiu in the Attocation of Resources

The European Space Agency (ESA) and the Japanese National Space Development

Agency (NASDA) both devote about 10% of their total budgets to space

communications and related activities. NASA, on the other hand, allocates less than

1% to R&D in this area. Figure 4 shows the dramatic differences in resource

allocation, particularly over the last five years. Only the funding for the Advanced

Communications Technology Satellite (ACTS) program, which manifests itself as a

"bump" in the graph of U.S. expenditures, temporarily diminishes this strong disparity

in relative funding levels. This disparity is even more significant considering that the

total budgets for the Japanese and European space programs are significantly less

than that of the United States.
50 Information and Communication Technology

3O0

250

(D

200

r_

_ 150

lOO

Q

50

NASA

NASDA

-- -- ----- ESA

........ NASA NON-ACTS I

I

I

- ./! ,, ,--" ,

! t /_._.',___,"

', !

.-'/ \

I ,'f-' I

\\ -..

\

l

i

I

1960 1970 1980 1995

YEAR

Figure 4. Annual Funding for Satellite Communications Programs

Major _ncee in ReNarch and Developmental Progranw

The difference in major flight-based experimental commurdcations satellite programs

is striking. Figure 5 depicts such programs in the United States, Europe and Japan

for the past decade as well as a decade into the future. It shows that the United

States has had only one truly major research program, namely ACTS. In contrast,

Europe and Japan each have had several flight-based research programs in the past

ten years, and will continue in this direction in the next decade.

Service Trends

Of the three general satellite communications service categories --fixed, mobile and

broadcast -- only the fixed satellite service (FSS) may be said to be a mature service,

providing global coverage since the late 1960s. FSS traffic growth has now slowed

to a rate of about 10% per year. Within the FSS, VSAT systems (very small aperture

terminals) are expanding rapidly, but their demand on satellite capacity is light. The
Program Summary 51

6

C0

FO

Inn

O

n"

n

In

O

rr

UJ

m

D

Z

5

4

3

2

1

0

ACTS

PSDE

ARCHIMEDES

ARTEMIS/

SILEX

ITALSAT

OLYMPUS

OICETS

COMETS

ETS VI

ETS V

U.S. EUROPE JAPAN

Figure 5. A Comparative View: Experimental Communications Satellite Projects

in the United States, Japan, and Europe

greatest potential area for expansion of fixed services is in high data rate (HDR)

communications (i.e., 155 Mbits/sec or higher) for data transfer, networking, and

HDTV, to complement the growing global network of fiber optic cables. Little

interest has been expressed by terrestrial carriers in HDR satellite service, except

for cable restoral service. European and Japanese satellite operators are looking to

the United States for leadership in HDR communications via ACTS, and would like

to cooperate with the United States in developing trans-oceanic HDR links.

Mobile and broadcast satellite services (MSS and BSS) most clearly exploit the

advantages of satellite communications over terrestrial means, consume large

amounts of satellite capacity, and are growing very rapidly (over 20% per year).

Significant R&D and commercial activity in this area is underway in Europe and

Japan, far more than in the United States. Satellite broadcast services are extending

rapidly to third world countries. The International Maritime Satellite Organization

(INMARSAT), which has been providing maritime service for over a decade, has

recently extended its service to aircraft and land-mobile vehicles. Perhaps the most

exciting, and certainly the fastest moving, field is personal communications services

(PCS) via satellite using handheld transceivers similar to those used in cellular radio.

U.S. industry is pioneering this area. LEO, MEO and GEO (low earth, medium earth
5_. Information and Communicalion Technology

and geostationary earth orbit) systems are all under study and/or development for

personal communications.

New Applications and Marksts

Markets, applications and technologies are diversifying into GEO, MEO and LEO

systems, and both very large scale and small, lower cost satellite designs are

emerging. Under these changing conditions, the need for clear targeting of research

for the future has become increasingly important. Clear understanding of new

applications and markets is strategically even more important. Promotion of new

applications and stimulation of markets seem to be more aggressively pursued

overseas, especially in Japan, than in the United States. For example, Japan's

initiative in direct broadcast satellite (DBS) service began after the United States, but

today there are some six million Japanese subscribers in an operational system and

ten thousand receivers to test HDTV broadcasting via DBS satellites.

Planning, Systems, and Advanced Technology Studies

A noticeable difference and a serious problem is the lack of planning in the United

States. There is no commitment and no mechanism to pursue long-range systems

and technology studies in satellite communications, as is being done systematically

in Japan and fairly well in Europe. Equally important is the subsequent need to

develop and follow detailed technology road maps designed to accomplish or

execute the identified system goals. The Japanese COMETS program and possible

follow-on programs now under consideration reflect a clear commitment to long term

systems goals in the areas of space broadcasting and mobile satellite services.

Likewise, the European OLYMPUS, ARTEMIS, and ARCHIMEDES programs reflect

strategic commitments to these same areas.

C,ovemment / Industry Roles

The panel found considerably more interest and support for satellite communications

and a stronger relationship between the governments and industries in Europe,

Japan, and Russia than in the United States. As indicated in Table 11, and detailed

in the full report, the European Space Agency, individual European countries, and

Japan all have industrial policies that support satellite communications. Japan has

a comprehensive planning program in which both government agencies and private

industry are engaged. The European planning effort, although not as well organized,

is still quite ambitious. The United States has no recognized plan for the

development of satellite communications, nor even for fitting satellite communications

into the national information infrastructure.

Europe and Japan have advanced technology development programs which provide

direct support to industry, in most cases aimed at developing specific national

capabilities. Perhaps most significant of all is the extent to which European and
Program Summary 53

Japanese governments and industry work hand-in-hand to promote regional and

national interests in international systems -- a good example of which is the heavy

support given by ESA and Japanese government agencies to the development of

advanced technology for the INMARSAT mobile and personal communications

program.

TbreaW

This panel's year-long review of overseas capabilities in satellite communications has

revealed many potential threats to U.S. industry. These threats include a slipping

base in advanced satellite communications technologies across a wide range of

disciplines, rapidly changing markets and applications, and a lack of effective long

term systems planning and related technology road maps to the future. Most of all,

there is a dearth of mechanisms for effective long term R&D directed at advanced

technologies in which industry, government and universities can play an effective

ongoing role.

Opportunities

The United States still holds an industrial lead in today's satellite communications

market measured in spacecraft construction and flight hardware sales. This is a

result of large investments in many areas of space technology over the last three

decades. However, the U.S. space technology base is being depleted rapidly. Also,

the position of its launcher industry has eroded considerably in the last five years.

The United States certainly has competitive industrial practices and a reasonably

good but aging infrastructure for test and integration. Given these and other factors

noted herein, there is good reason to believe that today's threats could be

counteracted. If the available opportunities are realized, the United States could

maintain its industrial leadership and recover from the effects of its slipping

advanced technology base.

In summary, the members of this panel have identified a number of serious and

growing risks to the U.S. satellite communications industry, but opportunities exist

for future initiatives that could allow the United States to maintain its leadership role.
54 Information and Communication Technology

EN__ SYSTEMS IN JAPAN

May 1993

Edward Feigenbaum, Stanford University (Panel Chair)

Robert S. Engelmore, Stanford University (Report Editor)

Peter E. Friedland, NASA Ames Research Center

Brace B. Johnson, Andersen Consulting

H. Penny Nii, Stanford University

Herbert Schorr, University of Southern California

Howard Shrobe, MIT

S_

This report summarizes a study of the state-of-the-art in knowledge-based systems

technology in Japan, organized by the Japanese Technology Evaluation Center

(JTEC) under the sponsorship of the National Science Foundation and the Advanced

Research Projects Agency. The panel visited 19 Japanese sites in March 1992.

Based on these site visits plus other interactions with Japanese organizations, both

before and after the site visits, the panel prepared a draft final report. JTEC sent the

draft to the host organizations for their review. The final report was published in

May 1993, and is available from the National Technical Information Service as NTIS

Report PB93-170124 (see inside back cover for ordering information). A more

extensive summary of the panel's findings is being prepared for publication in A/"

Magazine.

RATIONAbE, OBJECTIVES AND DESIGN OF THE STUDY

Expert Systems (ES), also called Knowledge-Based Systems (KBS) or simply

Knowledge Systems, are computer programs that use expertise to assist people in

performing a wide variety of functions, including diagnosis, planning, scheduling and

design. These systems have become the most successful commercial applications

of Artificial Intelligence (AI) research, first in the United States, and then in Europe

and Asia. Thousands of systems are now in routine use world-wide, and span the

full spectrum of activities in business, industry and government. Economic gain has

been realized along many dimensions: speed-up of professional (and
Program Summary 55

semi-professional) work; cost savings on operations; return on investment; improved

quality and consistency of decision making; new products and services; captured

organizational know-how; improvements in the way a company does its business;

crisis management; and stimulation of innovation.

Because of the potentially large impact that knowledge systems technology can have

on the economy, and because Japan has had active and well-funded research and

commercialization activities in KBS since 1982, the National Science Foundation and

the Advanced Research Projects Agency requested that a study be conducted of the

state-of-the-art of knowledge-based systems in Japan.

The primary objectives of this JTEC panel were to investigate Japanese expert

systems development from both technological and business perspectives and to

compare progress and trends with similar developments in the United States More

specifically, there were five dimensions to the study:

.

2.

3.

4.

5.

Business sector applications of expert systems

Infrastructure and tools for expert system development

Advanced knowledge-based systems in industry

Advanced knowledge-based systems research in universities

National projects, including:

ICOT - the laboratory of the Japanese Fifth Generation Computer Project;

EDR - the electronic dictionary research knowledge-base building effort;

LIFE - the Laboratory for International Fuzzy Engineering.

The panel conferred with Japanese computer scientists and business executives both

before and after the official visits of March 1992. The 19 sites visited included four

major computer manufacturers, eight companies that are applying expert systems

to their operations, three universities, three national projects, and the editors of

/V'/kkei A/, a publication that conducts an annual survey of expert systems

applications in Japan.

CONCLUSIONS

The panel reached the following conclusions about the state-of-the-art in

knowledge-based systems in Japan.

Bueine_ Sector Applications, Infr_tructum and Tools

On the basis of our site visits, plus additional data gathered by/V'/kkei .4I, we can

draw a number of conclusions about the state of the art of expert system

applications within the business sector in Japan.
56

1.

.

.

.

.

Information and Communication Technology

The technology of expert systems has now been mastered by the Japanese.

Since the early 1980s, when they first entered this field, they have completely

caught up with the United States. Their best applications are equal to the best

elsewhere in the world. Their use of the technology is widely spread across

many business categories.

Computer manufacturers play a dominant role in the technology and business

of expert systems. The Japanese have mastered and absorbed expert system

technology as a core competence. They tend to use systems engineers rather

than knowledge engineers to build systems. Consequently, integration with

conventional information technology poses no special problem for them, and

is handled routinely and smoothly, without friction. These large computer

companies also build many application systems for their customers; small firms

play only a minor role in applications building, in contrast with the situation in

the United States.

Within the computer manufacturing companies, there is a close coupling

between activities in the research laboratories, the system development

groups, and the sales departments. The development and sales groups work

closely together to develop custom systems for clients, the results of which are

fed back to the research lab to provide the requirements on the next

generation of ES tools.

Viewed as a technology (rather than as a business), the field of expert systems

is doing well in Japan, as it is in the United States. As in the United States, the

experimentation phase is over, and the phase of mature applications is in

progress. Following a normal learning curve, the number of successful

deployments of expert systems has risen sharply, from about 5% in the early

years to about Y5% in recent years. Japanese appliers of the technology make

eclectic use of AI techniques (their attitude seems to be, "Try it, it might

work."). Most of these techniques originated in the United States or Europe.

As in the United States, expert systems technology is often a component of a

bigger system. The Japanese do not attempt to analyze payoff at the

component level, but at the system level. Thus they do not measure the return

on investment of these embedded expert systems. However, there are many

applications in which the expert system is the main technology.

Viewed as a business, the expert systems field did not "take off" in any

exceptional way versus the United States or Europe. Although the overall level

of activity is significant and important, there is no evidence of exponential

growth. The components of the business consist of expert system tools,

consulting, and packaged knowledge systems. Hitachi's expert system

business seems the most viable. Other major players, such as Fujitsu and

CSK, have not had business success.
Program Summary 57

. With respect to tools for building knowledge-based systems, the Japanese

tools are similar in sophistication to those sold and used in the United States.

The techniques and methodology developed in the United States have been

and continue to be made into products quickly.

. Japan has more experience than the United States in applications of KBS

technology to heavy industry, particularly the steel and construction industries.

. Aside from a few exceptions, the Japanese and U.S. ES tool markets follow

similar trends: vertical, problem-specific tools; a move towards open systems

and workstations; and an emphasis on integration of expert systems with other

computational techniques.

. The number of fielded applications in Japan is somewhere between 1000 and

2000, including PC-based applications. The number of U.S. applications is

probably several times that of Japan.

10. Fuzzy control systems (not counted in the above tally) have had a big impact

in consumer products (e.g., camcorders, automobile transmissions and cruise

controls, television, air conditioners, and dozens of others).

11. We saw continued strong efforts by Japanese computer companies and

industry-specific companies (e.g., Nippon Steel) to advance their KBS

technology and business. This situation contrasts with that in the United

States, where we see a declining investment in knowledge-based systems

technology: lack of venture capital, downsizing of computer company efforts,

few new product announcements. It is a familiar story, and one for concern,

as this trend may lead to Japanese superiority in this area relatively soon.

Knowledge-Based Systems Research in Japan

I. A survey of three years of working papers of the Special Interest Group on

Knowledge-Based Systems of the Japan Society for AI shows a wide range of

research topics, touching most of the subjects of current interest in the United

States.

. The quality of research at a few top-level universities in Japan is in the same

range as at top-level U.S. universities and research institutes.

. In the remainder of the Japanese university system the quality of research is

not at the same level as at first or second tier U.S. research centers.

. The quantity of research (in terms of number of projects and/or number of

publications) is considerably smaller (by nearly an order of magnitude)

compared to the United States.
58 InJormation and Communication Technology

. LIFE is the world leader in applying fuzzy logic concepts to classic AI core

problems.

° The industrial laboratories appear to be doing advanced development that is

tightly coupled to application or product development. The computer

companies and some high-tech companies are carrying out some

knowledge-based systems research, but most non-computer companies do

none. We saw, essentially, a thin layer of excellent work at Hitachi, Toshiba,

NEC, Fujitsu and NTT, and (on previous visits) also at IBM Japan and Sony.

The most basic and deep work is at Hitachi's Advanced Research Laboratory,

which is conducting advanced research in model-based reasoning and

machine learning.

IGOT

° Using massive parallelism, ICOT appears about to achieve its stated goal of

100 million logical instructions per second (LIPS) theoretical peak

performance.

. The Fifth Generation Project achieved its goal of training a new generation of

computer technologists.

. ICOT is one of only a few sites i_ the world that is studying massively parallel

symbolic computing.

. ICOT created the funding and motivation to spur significant interest worldwide

in AI, KBS and advanced computing paradigms.

. ICOT's logic programming research is world class, and probably the best in

the world.

. On the negative side, ICOT made little progress in the applications dimension,

and has had little impact on knowledge-based systems technology.

. The choice of Prolog and logic programming, coupled with high-cost research

machines, isolated ICOT from industry.

EDR

. EDR will likely produce a practical scale, machine usable dictionary for

Japanese and English.

° With several hundred thousand entries in their concept dictionary, the scale

of EDR accomplishments is very impressive and should be taken as a model

for similar research programs elsewhere.
Program Summary 59

o A follow-up project, the Knowledge Archives project, may be funded, and

should be closely tracked.

. EDR has not significantly improved the underlying technology for maintaining

large knowledge bases, nor significantly added to our theoretical

understanding of knowledge base organization.

Compm'isons with the United States

A comparison of expert systems activities in Japan and the United States, drawn from

the above conclusions, is presented in the following two tables.

TABLE 12

Comparison of _ of l_pert Systems

in the Unimd States end Japan

(See Key, p. 44)

Trend

Quality of the best

Quantity relative to GDP

Support Structure

Tools

Consumer Products

Integration

0

0

+

0

+

+

->

->

_r

* Japan trend is constant or gaining
60 Information and Communication Technology

TABLE 13

Comparison of Knowledge-Based Research

in the United Sta_s and Japan

(See Key, p. 44)

OUAN rY OuALr 

Current Trend Currant 'rmnd

Stmo Stmo

Adv. KBS Research in Industry

Basic Research

Applied R&D

Adv. KBS Research in Universities

National Initiatives

Parallel Symbolic Computation

Very Large Knowledge Bases

Fuzzy Logic Systems

0 -> + =

-> -:>

+ <- + =

+ <- 0 =

+ -> + =
Program Summary

DISPLR_ TECHNOLOGIES IN _w_PAN

June 1992

61

Lawrence E. Tannas, Jr., Tannas Electronics (Panel Cochair)

William E. Glenn, Florida Atlantic University (Panel Cochair)

Thomas Credelle, Apple Computer

J. William Doane, Kent State University

Arthur H. Firester, David Sarnoff Research Center

Malcom Thompson, Xerox Corporation

_OUND

The Japanese have recognized that as we enter the Information Age, both the

computer industry and the television industry will need new display technology. The

introduction of the laptop computer has created a need for a thin panel display with

good readability and low power consumption. Television is entering a new era of

high definition television (HDTV'). The Japanese have recognized that new display

technologies are critical to making their electronic products highly competitive in the

world market.

SUMMAR'I"

Japanese-U.S. Comparison

The panel feels that U.S. display technology is competitive in some areas and

superior in others. However, without the long-term investment in manufacturing

facilities and the resolve to lower manufacturing costs by addressing both the

computer and consumer markets, the U.S. will not be able to profit from its

investment in display research. Japan is currently expanding its lead in product

development, is dominating in investment and manufacturing implementation, and is

competitive in basic research (and gaining). The relative status of the U.S. and

Japan in flat panel displays is shown in Table 14.
_, Information and Communication Technology

i

-- -_

_ A "A "A

I I I

A A A o I A A

I I i_ I _- V I I

O O

÷÷o_÷o _ 1 ++

AI AI AI

l +++

i_ AAI I AI

j +o+

A A II A A I A A

I I I I V I I

-F" _- I O0 I -t--0

A II _. _. II II A A

I I I

-_o I I I _-_o

o_ ,_

0 _ _

Ul

o

o

|

o
Program Summary 63

L_tdd Crynd Dbp_ys

By the mid-1980s, it was becoming obvious to displays industry experts that the

Japanese displays industry was beginning to make significant breakthroughs in

technical developments and in the manufacturing of liquid crystal displays (LCDs).

In Japan, the stage is nearly complete for the production of flat panel displays

(FPDs) through the end of the 1990s. The LC FPD industry is now orders of

magnitude ahead of the other FPD technologies. The research, development, and

production activities in Japan are so focused on LCD technology that funding for

advancing electroluminescent (EL), plasma, and other FPD technologies is

diminishing. In Japan, LCDs are perceived as clearly being the leading edge

technology, but the cost and complexity of the new amorphous silicon (a-Si) LCD

factory are so extensive that the larger machines of the next generation will not be

attempted until the present generation of machines have completely proven

themselves and been paid for.

Crys_d Ma_dab

Low-molecular weight nematic liquid crystalline materials for twisted nematic (TN),

super-twisted nematic (STN), and ECB displays are well developed, and European

nematics materials producers have established joint ventures in Japan to tailor-make

mixtures for display manufacturers.

Most improvements in TN and STN displays are expected to come from materials

such as retardation films and improved alignment layers. Japanese companies are

the only suppliers of retardation films. Other improvements are expected to come

from the synthesis and design of new low-molecular weight LC materials for

ferroelectric chiral smectic (FLC) displays. Also, several Japanese companies are

studying new molecular forms. Gray scale was perceived to be a major problem by

most of the Japanese companies.

Most Japanese companies had research programs on polymer-dispersed liquid

crystals (PDLC) materials, and there appeared to be interest in these materials for

projection applications. Advances are also being made in the development of blue

and white EL phosphors. In the plasma display panels (PDPs), new designs and

success in discharge cell structure are expected to give new focus to materials

research.

University researchers in Japan are more aware of display materials problems and

industrial needs than are their counterparts in the United States and Europe.

University research is more basic in general, and basic research on liquid crystals

is more driven by display technology than in the U.S. and Europe.
64 Information and Communication Technology

Active Matrix Liquid Crystal Technology

Over the past few years, progress in active matrix LC (AMLC) technology has been

spectacular. Remaining questions are how low the cost can be, how fast they will

penetrate the market, and how good their ultimate performance will be.

Manufacturing issues have become the prime focus of research and development.

Research is continuing on low-temperature polysilicon. The market niche that drives

polysilicon currently is for view finders and projection light valves.

The main thrust in AMLC technology is directed towards developing cost-effective

manufacturing of amorphous-silicon active matrix liquid crystal displays (AMLCDs).

In these applications, the ability to integrate the drive electronics onto the AM

substrate provides a significant, and at times enabling advantage. Seiko-Epson and

Toshiba continue to develop metal-insulator-metal (MIM) technologies, but MIMs are

expected to only serve limited applications in which cost is more severely

constrained than performance.

There is intense competition for market share, because many major Japanese

corporations view this area as a strategic long-term investment.

Passive Matrix _ Crystal D/splays

Passive matrix LCDs dominate the flat-panel display business today, and will

continue to dominate it, at least in unit sales, for the next five years. The passive

matrix LCDs covered in this panel's report are twisted nematic, supertwisted

nematic, vertically-aligned nematic (VAN), and ferroelectric.

Film-compensated STN (FSTN) LCDs have enabled a new industry (portable and

notebook computers), and are also used widely in Japan in word processors. Color

FSTN LCDs will continue to improve and will be introduced to the market in

significant numbers in 1992-93. FSTN LCDs have not reached their full potential, and

improvements are expected in several areas in the next few years.

VAN LCDs have made impressive gains but probably will be limited to niche markets

because of their slow response time and low optical efficiency. Ferroelectric LCDs

are under active development at a few laboratories, but only Canon has announced

production plans. If Canon has solved the manufacturing problems, then these

displays will give competition to active matrix LCDs, especially in the larger sizes.

_rojeotJon Dbi]_lays

In Japan, much of the new display development has been motivated by the highdefinition television market. At this time the only feasible options seem to be either

direct-view large panels o- such as PDPs or AMLCD panels -- or projectors. In the
Program Summary 65

short term, only projectors seem to have the cost and performance characteristics

for consumer HDTV displays. For large screen displays, cathode-ray tube (CRT)

projectors with good performance have been produced.

Currently, university laboratories in both the U.S. and Japan are doing competitive

basic work. In both countries, a large part of the basic research is funded by

governmental agencies. Although research in CRT projectors continues, the major

effort seems to have shifted to AMLCD light-valve projectors. These projectors

provide images with excellent quality and have a number of cost and performance

advantages.

Efforts at this time seem to be concentrated on reducing cost and increasing the

yield of projectors of the current design in an effort to have consumer-quality

projectors available by 1995. The major thrust of the effort seemed to be to

concentrate on products using current system designs.

Future Tremts

Future display needs will probably be met with a combination of types. For small

displays -- from 14- to 16-inch diagonals and eventually up to 20 inches -- it is

expected that LCD panels will dominate for the foreseeable future. At present this

market consists primarily of passive matrix LCDs, but higher performance AMLCD

panels are rapidly expanding their share of the market. It is expected that CRTs will

still dominate the market for 20- to 30-inches sizes. For displays larger than this,

light-valve projectors using AMLCD panels are thought to be the near-term solution.

In the longer term, NHK and several others expect plasma panels to be used for the

long-sought-after "hang-on-the-wall" display.
66 Information and Communication Technology

DATABASE USE AND TECHNOLOOT IN _AN

April 1992

Gio Wiederhold, Stanford University (Panel Chair)

David Beech, Oracle Corporation

Charles Bourne, DIALOG Information Services

Nick Farmer, Chemical Abstracts Service

Sushil Jajodia, George Mason University

David Kahaner, Office of Naval Research

Toshi Minoura, Oregon State University

Diane Smith, Xerox Advance Information Technology

John Miles Smith, Digital Equipment Corporation

_UND AND t_;RJ:.;_%L CONCLUSIONS

This report presents the findings of a group of database experts, sponsored by JTEC,

based on an intensive study trip to Japan during March 1991. Academic, industrial,

and governmental sites were visited. The primary findings are that Japan is

inadequately supporting its academic research establishment, that industry is making

progress in key areas, and that both academic and industrial researchers are well

aware of current domestic and foreign technology. Information sharing between

industry and academia is effectively supported by governmental sponsorship of joint

planning and review activities, and enhances technology transfer. In two key areas,

multimedia and object-oriented databases, export of Japanese database products,

typically integrated into larger systems, is on the horizon.

Database research in industry relies heavily on publications from the U.S. and

Europe for conceptual input. The researchers are well-read and often well

connected with foreign academic sources; thus they provide an important path for

technology transfer.
ProuramSummary 67

Role of the Japanese Government

The Japanese government, overall, seems to have less influence on research

directions than is perceived by outsiders, although it does appear that the Japanese

government has done more than most governments to further database use and

technology. Academic researchers have considerable flexibility in choosing the

directions for government-sponsored research. The level of government funding for

industrial laboratories is relatively low, and does not influence market-driven

priorities. However, these projects do require regular meetings of academic,

government, and industrial researchers, increasing mutual awareness, understanding,

and enhancing technology transfer.

Driving Force: The Japanese Electronics Industry

An important driving mechanism in database development is the Japanese capability

in the area of developing electronic products. High-quality image acquisition,

transmission, storage, display, and digitized voice data are emphasized. The panel

concluded that purchasers of systems with multimedia requirements will, with

Japanese image-processing hardware, acquire Japanese database software. This

field is likely to grow rapidly. Computer-assisted design (CAD), computer-assisted

engineering (CAE), and other application areas that are critically dependent on

graphics will be the initial applications of this technology.

Hardware

Japanese hardware for computer systems is roughly equivalent to U.S. systems,

except again in the areas of multimedia support and optical mass storage, where the

Japanese have a substantial advantage. Parallel architecture and database

accelerator schemes are of active interest in Japan.

Hardware support for database systems is provided equally well by Japanese and

foreign companies. Sony is an important supplier of workstations, but U.S.

companies such as SUN Microsystems are also well represented. Japanese

mainfi'ame-based database systems are similar to their U.S. counterparts, but this

market shows less growth and is less fluid.

Relevant research on topics such as database accelerators is being pursued. This

work can be seen as a specialization of research into parallel computation, which

is pursued by computer researchers everywhere with equal intensity. The payoff is

likely to come as demands on database computation increase.

The Databa_ Industry in Japan

The JTEC study also surveyed the industry that maintains databases and sells

information retrieved from these databases. In this area, Japanese databases provide
68 Information and Communication Technology

useful service internally, but are not in a position to export their services. There is

substantial use in Japan of Western databases, both via U.S. and European vendors

and via Japanese resellers. Some internal developments are oriented towards

providing image data as well. Providing such services on an international scale

awaits high capacity communication lines and acceptance standards. In this area

the relative situation seems stable.

While Japan is not viewed today as a world-level player in the database area, the

infrastructure is in place for Japan to make important contributions in areas where

there is high growth potential and linkage with consumer hardware.

Qualitative Comparisons Between the U.S. and Japan

The panel has prepared a qualitative comparison of the present status and trends

in database systems research in the U.S. and Japan. The subject matter covered by

the panel was divided into seven subtopics: mainframes, hardware-PC, workstationservers, storage, database content, database management systems, and new

database technologies. (See Figs. 6-12).

I I I I

Now Mid-Late 90s Now Mid-Late 90s

_= Japan i_ =U.S. P_= Japan i_Iil= U.S

Figure 6. Mainframes Figure 7. Hardware - PC
Program Summary 69

I

Now

ESI: Japan

I

Mid-Late 90s

I_1_11-- US

Optical

Now Mid-Late _°sOs

Magnetic

I_: Japan I_I1: U,S.

Figure 8. Workstations - Servers Figure 9. Storage

I I

NOW Mid-Late gOs

_= Japan 1_I_--U.S

neral

Iti_dia

ltimedia

_neral

I I

Now Mid-Late90s

I_: Japan t1_l_1: U.S

Figure 10. Database Content Figure 11. DBMSs
70 Information and Communication Technology

_Deductive

I I

NOW Mid-Late 90s

I_'/_= Japan IE =U.S.

Figure 12. New DB Technologies
Program Summary

MACHINE _TION IN JAPAN

January 1992

71

Jaime G. Carbonell, Carnegie Mellon University (Panel Chair)

Elaine Rich, MCC (Panel Cochair)

David Johnson, IBM

Masaru Tomita, Carnegie Mellon University

Muriel Vasconcellos, Pan American Health Organization

Yorick W'flks, New Mexico State University

_UND

The goal of the JTEC report on machine translation is to provide an overview of the

state of the art of machine translation (MT) in Japan, and to compare Japanese and

U.S. technology in this area. The term "machine translation" as used here includes

both the science and technology required for automating the translation of text from

one human language to another.

SUMMAI_

In Japan, machine translation is viewed as an important strategic technology that is

expected to play a key role in Japan's increasing participation in the world economy.

As a result, several of Japan's largest industrial companies are developing MT

systems, and many are already marketing their systems commercially. There is also

an active MT and natural language processing (NLP) research community at some

of the major universities and government/industrial consortia.

The principal use for MT today is in translating technical documentation for products

to be sold abroad. The volume is still relatively small but appears to be growing

steadily. There is also an increasing use of MT embedded in other applications,

such as database retrieval systems, electronic mail, and (in the prototype stage)

speech-to-speech translation systems.

Users have reported varying degrees of success with MT. While a few users have

actually experienced lower productivity using MT compared to conventional

approaches, productivity gains of 30 percent appear average. Higher numbers are
72 Information and Communication Technology

typical for restricted domains and lower numbers for broader domains. Most uses

of MT require some human pre- or post-editing to produce acceptable quality

translations.

SPECIFIC R&D COMPARISONS

In both the U.S. and Japan, total funding for MT appears to be on a gradual but

steady rise. Japanese commitment to MT is greater than that of the U.S., though the

U.S. commitment is by no means insignificant.

In both Japanese and U.S. markets, MT is gaining gradual acceptance (Fig. 13), with

Japan having and maintaining a lead. The same situation and trends are present for

the integration of MT systems into other text processing software (Fig. 14).

I I I I

Now Mid-Late 90s Now Mid-Late 90s

Figure 13. Acceptance of MT Figure 14. Integration of MT

Improved accuracy appears to be the single most important factor in determining

how widely MT will be accepted. Japanese and U.S. efforts are expected to show

steady improvement in accuracy between now and the mid- to late-1990s (Fig. 15).

MT requires multiple knowledge sources, which are large and expensive to build

and maintain. Consequently, they are valued resources in MT research and are

even more important in successful MT system deployment. Japan is currently

leading the U.S. in private knowledge sources, and this lead may be widening

(Fig. 16).
ProgramSummary 73

SPECIAL

PURPOSE M'r

GENERAL

PURPOSE MT

I I I I

Now Mid-Late 90s Now Mid-Late 90s

JAPAN AND U.S. _--_ =JAPAN _ = U.S.

Figure 15. Accuracy of MT Figure 16. Private Knowledge Sources

Although Japan also leads in shared knowledge bases (Fig. 17), the gap may narrow

assuming continued funding from the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency

(DARPA) and other U.S. government agencies that are targeting some funds

specifically at building shareable knowledge sources.

The basic science and technology underlying MT is natural language processing (or

computational linguistics), which is the study of computer processing of language.

Traditionally the U.S. has been a bastion of scientific research in this area, but

research funds in the U.S. have been decreasing. Funding in Japan and Europe has

been increasing and will surpass the U.S. level, if it has not already done so. Thus,

the U.S. risks being surpassed (Fig. 18) in the one area where it has traditionally led:

computational linguistics, both the basic theory and computational methods.

The U.S. is ahead of Japan in some areas. For example, the U.S. currently leads

Japan in technological diversity, that is, the variety of approaches to MT (Fig. 19)

and linguistic diversity, that is, the number of languages being developed (Fig. 20).

Present trends indicate that although the U.S. will maintain its lead in technical

diversity, the gap will narrow in linguistic diversity.

The U.S. also maintains a lead in other related research areas. For example, the U.S.

leads in speech recognition technology (Fig. 21), but both the U.S. and Japan are

working on the early integration of speech technology into speech-to-speech MT.

The U.S. also has a narrow lead in natural language processing technologies

(Fig. 22) such as automatic extraction of knowledge from text, NLP-based humancomputer interfaces, routing and classification of texts for assimilation, etc.
74 Information and Communication Technology

{ I

Now Mid-Late 90s

I I

Now Mid-Late 90s

= JAPAN _ = U.S.

Figure 17. Shared Knowledge Sources Figure 18. Funding Jot Basic Research in

Natural Language Processinq

I I I I

Now Mid-Late 90s Now Mid-Late 90s

Figure 19. Technological Diversity Figure 20. Linguistic Diversity

THE FUTU1_

A substantial amount of research is being conducted in Japan. Figure 23 shows that

funding for MT R&D in Japan is substantially higher than in the U.S., although U.S.

funding is expected to increase. New Japanese corporate funding is more focused
Program summary 75

on productivity and commercialization. Figure 24 indicates the expected increase

in commercial MT in Japan in response to this trend.

_,,\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\_>

I I I I

Now Mid-Late 90s Now Mid-Late 90s

Figure 31. R&D in Speech Recognition and

Speech-to-Speech MT

Figure 22. R&D in Other Natural Language

Processing Technologies

I I I I

Now Mid-Late 90s Now Mid-Late 90s

Funding Jot R&D in

MT Technology

Figure 23.

(U.S. will go up

after 1990s)

Figure 24. Commercial Use of MT

While there are unlikely to be any major technology breakthroughs in MT during the

next five years, steady progress is expected, especially in the quality of machine

translations. As knowledge bases grow in quantity, quality, and comprehensiveness,

the sharing of these intellectual properties will become more common. User

interfaces are also improving, partially as a result of the positive feedback from the

growing community of MT system users. As a result, the Japanese fully expect to

see a return on the substantial investment that they have made and are continuing

to make in MT.
76 Information and Communication Technology

X-RAY IJTH_HY IN JAPAN

October 1991

James T. Clemens, AT&T (Panel Chair)

Robert W. Hill, Hill Associates (Panel Cochair)

Franco Cerrina, University of Wisconsin

Gene E. Fuller, Texas Instruments

R. Fabian Pease, Stanford University

Hem'y I. Smith, MIT

_OUND

The goal of the JTEC report on X-ray lithography, fully funded by the Office of Naval

Research, is to provide a detailed appraisal of the technology, personnel

commitments, and strategies for implementation in manufacturing of X-ray lithography

in Japan.

Integrated circuits (semiconductors) are the key components of modern computers,

communication systems, consumer electronics, and the new generations of smart

machines and instruments. Microlithography is one of the most critical elements of

the semiconductor manufacturing process because it determines the minimum

feature size and the functional capabilities of the semiconductor. The quality of the

microlithography process is critical in determining the yield and cost of

semiconductors and hence the competitiveness of the electronics industry.

At present, all volume semiconductor manufacturing is done with optical UV

(ultraviolet) projection lithography. X-ray lithography, however, holds the promise

of providing higher yields in manufacturing semiconductors by virtue of enhanced

process latitude, process robustness, and resolution.

SUMMAI_

The major Japanese microelectronics firms have a broad, well-developed strategy

for research and development of microlithography technology that includes UV,

deep UV, X-ray proximity and projection, and electron-beam lithographies. They are

investing in all of these alternatives. All of the manufacturers visited either had inhouse X-ray programs, were members of the SORTEC X-ray consortium, or both.
Program Summary 77

Their commitment to X-ray lithography was firm and appeared to be well balanced.

In the U.S. there is limited interest from semiconductor manufacturers in X-ray

technology, with the exception of AT&T, IBM, and Motorola.

Rue_mh Fund/rig

Most funding for X-ray lithography efforts in Japan comes from individual industrial

organizations. The Japanese government directly and indirectly has provided seed

money to major research and development efforts. The government has funded

roughly $70 million of the SORTEC development through MITI, and industry has

funded $30 million. Japanese companies are making the major part of the X-ray

investment in their own companies.

In the U.S., there has been a significant X-ray lithography program for over ten years

at IBM. Motorola has recently joined the effort. Congress has provided money to

DARPA for applied research and development on X-ray lithography in all sectors of

the technical and industrial community. However, the U.S. industrial community has

not been independently preparing itself for insertion of X-ray lithography into

manufacturing.

opti nitho hy

The consensus among Japanese semiconductor manufacturers was that optical

lithography would continue to evolve for advanced semiconductor manufacturing

until the late 1990s, and that the potential switch to X-ray lithography would probably

occur when the minimum critical dimension reached 0.25 micron or less. While their

first choice for 256 megabit dynamic random access memory (DRAM) was optical,

they were prepared to use X-ray technology for manufacturing. Although they

recognized potential of higher yield and lower manufacturing costs with X-ray,

manufacturers will not change technology until absolutely necessary. This same

viewpoint prevails in the United States and in Europe.

S ciz otro 

There were many large efforts in Japan to develop synchrotron-based lithography

systems because they are bright, collimated sources. Smaller laser and gas plasma

sources, while more desirable from a granularity standpoint, were not visible or

discussed in detail. X-ray projection projects exist; they were mentioned at several

companies but not extensively discussed.

The size, cost, and configurational aspects of synchrotron-based X-ray lithography

did not appear to be serious issues in Japan with the DRAM manufacturers. Their

view was that if X-ray lithography were used, it would be for large-volume

manufacturing, which would require multiple synchrotron facilities. Cost has been

a major issue with the U.S. and European manufacturers since their volume
78 Information and Communication Technology

semiconductor production has not been DRAM-based, their companies are smaller,

and many are not using the leading edge of microlithography technology. The initial

investment is beyond the means of most of these manufacturers; only IBM, AT&T,

and Motorola have major active internal X-ray programs. Also, in the U.S. several

synchrotrons originally developed for other purposes are being used in part for X-ray

lithography R&D.

DARPA is administering a program sponsored and financed by Congress that

attempts to overcome some of these difficulties by helping to build the infrastructure

necessary for X-ray lithography. DARPA is expanding that program to support other

lithographic alternatives.

Other Research

Development of X-ray mask technology, exposure systems, and resists has been

pursued vigorously in Japan, as has integration of the total system.

There appeared to be a consensus that materials for X-ray masks were adequate.

The Japanese were using silicon nitride membranes with tantalum absorber mask

technology licensed from NTT. They were researching silicon carbide membrane

and tungsten absorber materials, and planned to research diamond membranes.

The major mask concern was 1X electron-beam mask patterning, specifically errors

in feature placement and dimension control. There was no work on mask inspection

and repair underway; the Japanese believe these tools will be available from

domestic or overseas sources when required.

Several independent efforts were being pursued on exposure system aligners, with

critical elements under development. Heterodyne interferometric alignment

techniques were favored for alignment; these were more advanced in concept than

current U.S. or European projects.

With respect to fundamental understanding of the science of X-ray lithography, the

Japanese and the U.S. technical communities were on a par. The trend, however,

was for the Japanese to pull ahead of the U.S. due to a higher level of funding and

star, g, particularly at the company level.

If X-ray lithography becomes necessary for producing the next generation of

semiconductors, Japanese industry will be in an excellent position to maintain or

increase its market share in semiconductors and the advanced systems dependent

on them.
Program Summary

HIGH DEFINITION SYSTEMS IN JAPAN

February 1991

79

Richard J. Elkus, Jr., Prometrix Corporation (Panel Chair)

Robert B. Cohen, Consultant

Bimey D. Dayton, NVISION

David G. Messerschmitt, University of California

Vv-llliam F. Schreiber, Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Lawrence E. Tannas, Jr., Consultant

"High definfion" describes new products or systems whose value resides in their

ability to process greatly increased amounts of audio and video information.

Processing of information is fundamental to the infrastructure of electronics,

telecommunication, and media markets. The panel's goal was to study technological

developments in Japan pertaining to high definition systems. A brochure from

Japan's Ministry of Posts and Telecommunications described high definition

television as "the cornerstone of the information age," which indicated a dedication

to the concept of HDTV in Japan. The purpose of this dedication seemed to be to

focus the Japanese electronics industry on a problem that, when solved, might have

advanced the state of the electronics manufacturing art in Japan a generation beyond

that of the rest of the world.

The Japanese manufacturers the panel visited indicated that near-term applications

of HDTV technology that would justify their investment were in information systems

and industrial applications. Public relations literature made clear the long-term focus

of Japanese electronic companies on the increasing use of speech, image, and video

in all phases of information systems and illustrated a combined vision of and

commitment to a new age of information technology.

The panel report does not address the new digital approaches to HDTV, which were

publicized after the panel had completed its work.
80 Information and Communication Technology

HDTVand Sign Processing

High definition systems require a lot of bandwidth to store and transmit video. The

two major technological components of high definition systems (HDS) are digital

signal processing (DSP) for compression and quality enhancement, and highresolution displays. An example is the Japanese MUSE system, which is analog

transmitted by satellite but uses large doses of DSP in the transmitter and receiver

to compress the bandwidth. In 1989, six Japanese manufacturers were cooperating

with the public broadcasting organization NHK on a reduced-cost MUSE receiver

that required development of thirty separate application-specific integrated circuits.

The panel saw several projects engaged in compression of digitally-encoded HDTV.

The importance of these DSP developments transcend their near-term application

to HDTV. For example, the U.S. was strong in DSP, which was a technology driver

because it required high arithmetic processing rates that often exceeded even those

of supercomputers. DSP was also a key component of many military and

commercial systems. HDS requires some of the highest processing rates of any DSP

applications and, hence, drove Japanese manufacturers toward very advanced

electronics technologies and advanced architectures such as multiprocessor DSP.

The Japanese expect HDS to be an element of many future commercial applications,

such as multimedia applications in computing and new products in medicine,

manufacturing, publishing, f'flmmaking, education, and telecommunications. Japanese

manufacturers would be well positioned in these markets, given their DSP and

display capabilities.

A twenty-year research effort coordinated and facilitated by NHK led Japanese

manufacturers to world leadership in HDTV technology. Participating Japanese

manufacturers could justify their investment knowing that, with NHK coordinating,

their components would fit into the larger system. NHK's coordination was much

more important than any public-sector monetary support it offered. This illustrated

one way to pursue a research effort for a system so complex that it transcends the

capabilities of any single manufacturer.

Evolution of Displays in Japan

High-quality, high-resolution displays are critical to the success of HDTV. At the

time of the panel report, one technical limitation of HDTV lay in the display. The five

problems were to: (a) generate the resolution in one continuous image plane; (b)

make the image plane large to create realism; (c) change images to show real-time

dynamics; (d) create the image in color; and (e) combine all these features at a

consumer market cost with acceptable weight, power, and volume characteristics.

Many display panels could meet some of these requirements. For example, ac

plasma panels could be made with high resolution, but not simultaneously in color

or at acceptable cost. Japanese industry was attempting to develop a large ac

plasma panel and active matrix liquid crystal flat-panel, direct-view HDTV display
ProgramSummary 81

prototype by 1995. U.S. industry was reportedly no longer attempting to develop an

NTSC TV flat-panel display to hang on the wall. HDTV displays available in Japan

had come about from improvements in cathode ray tube (CRT) and projection

technologies. The second contender for consumer HDTV displays that the panel

identified was the LCD light valve using three active-matrix liquid crystal cells. It

was not yet clear whether this technology could compete with CRT projectors.

High Definition Standards and Equipment Development in japan

JTEC panelists were often told that the Japanese could build to any standard within

one or two years of learning about it. The process of developing standards in Japan

was similar in some respects to that in the U.S., but the panel also found differences.

Japanese companies had been participating in the U.S. process. This participation

had been made possible because many Japanese could speak English, the diverse

nature of U.S. culture made it very easy to find proxies, and Japanese companies had

a strong export orientation. By contrast, U.S. companies were usually distant from

the standards process in Japan.

Numerous standards for different HDTV (1125/60) equipment had been developed

or were under development in Japan. Work had been done on a variety of television

standards of intermediate resolution (greater than NTSC but less than true HDTV)

under the rubric "EDTV," or enhanced definition TV. Significant progress had also

been made in standards setting for components, such as HDTV semiconductors and

displays, and for end-use products, such as studio HDTV equipment, industrial

products, and consumer products.

A rapid cycle of standardization, manufacture, improvement, adaptation, and

restandardization characterized Japan's standards process. Japanese companies

were willing to adopt standards from elsewhere, adapting them to suit their changing

needs. By contrast, the standards generation process in the U.S. was seen as slow.

Japanese l-Iigh De_uition Television S_stems

That HDTV existed as a standards issue in the U.S. was largely due to the

development of a system and equipment in Japan, and to Japanese efforts to have

their system adopted worldwide. NHK began HDTV development in 1970. The plan

was to implement HDTV in Japan as an entirely new service, delivered to viewers by

direct-broadcast satellites (DBS) to supplement the over-the-air (terrestrial) system

that would continue to use NTSC, the color standard used in both the U.S. and

Japan. Scanning standards were chosen with the intention of making the picture

quality comparable to that of 35-mm motion pictures. Since standard satellite

transponder channels were inadequate for this studio system, the MUSE transmission

system was developed to allow a compressed version of the signal to be transmitted

in a normal satellite channel. System and equipment developments were paralleled

by efforts to have the studio system adopted as an international standard for program
82 Infonnafion and Communication Technology

production and intemational exchange. However, the system was not optimum for

cable or terrestrial broadcasting. U.S. industry may learn from the Japanese

experience in HDTV development and devise a system suitable to U.S. needs.

Japan's Public Policy Ira""_fives in Support of High Definition Systems

Japan's leading electronics corporations and the Japanese government have invested

substantially in R&D to commercialize HDS and HDTV. Many Japanese leaders

seemed to view HDTV as the center of a move to a vastly different Japanese

economy that would offer huge benefits in growth and consumption. They also

appeared to believe that government financing for the early stages of HDS

development was important to reduce corporate risk and ensure that private funds

would be forthcoming for the first stages of commercialization. Government funds

also supported the development of key HDTV component technologies.

Sales to industrial customers were expected to support the growth of the new HDS

market initially. Corporations would develop controls for design, engineering, and

production or service-delivery processes, advances that would create new market

opportunities for these firms. Development of HDTV was likely to enhance the

interdependency of some of the most dynamic parts of Japanese industry and

promote further vertical integration of the largest Japanese electronics firms.

The strong base that Japan's major corporations had in the consumer electronics

industry facilitated their move into HDS. By playing a major role in the consumer

electronics and semiconductor industries, these firms had a greater ability to benefit

from economies of scale in developing new display, semiconductor, and processor

products. The Japanese recognized the need for government-promoted R&D in

high-risk areas such as large flat-panel displays. Therefore, they created new

business-government entities, including the Key Technology Center and an HDTV

leasing corporation. The Japanese also expected a significant boost in demand for

semiconductors from HDS development.

l-F.tgh Definition Products and Systsms: The Stra_gy of

To Japanese businessmen, strategy is everything. Every person, business, and

industry must have a goal and a strategy by which to achieve it. Because resources

are usually scarce, the successful Japanese plan includes the concept of leverage.

Some markets are considered more strategic than others. By targeting strategic

markets, an infrastructure can be built that ensures a solid basis for economic

expansion. However, the leverage is not based simply on the importance of one

market over another, but rather on the assumption that, as they develop, strategic

markets will become interrelated and interdependent, with the whole becoming

substantially larger than the sum of its parts. Therefore, coordination of strategy and

direction is essential -- a point that is fundamental to the strategy of product and

market development in Japan. It is based on the concept that if the development of
Program Summary 83

a product or market is pushed to its logical extreme, it becomes related to other

products and markets. Thus, Japanese business strategy does not reject a product

or market on the basis of profit potential, but rather assumes that every product

becomes the basis for another, and every technology becomes the stepping-stone

for the next. The resulting efficiencies of scale are enormous.

The market for high definition products and systems can help push the markets for

electronics products, telecommunication services, and software (including mass

media) to their logical extreme. The Japanese expressed the view that, perhaps by

the year 2000, the requirements and possibilities created by improving the

technology to rapidly process large amounts of audiovisual information would force

a confluence of these three end-use markets into a single information systems

market. They expected that the information systems market would grow to represent

33 percent of all capital investment, 44 percent of all new jobs, and 22 percent of all

economic growth.

The Japanese felt that in the future information age, any nation without a proprietary

position in or reliable strategic access to each of the market segments within

electronics, the media (including software and mass media), and telecommunication

services would be at a significant competitive disadvantage. This concept was in

part the basis for the accelerated development in Japan of high definition products

and systems, and underscored the significance of high definition technology and its

effect on all parts of the industrial structure of Japan.
84 Information and Communication Technology

ADVANCED COMPUTING IN JAPAN

October 1990

Michael A. Harrison, University of California, Berkeley (Panel Chair)

Edward F. Hayes, Rice University

James D. Meindl, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute

James H. Morris, Carnegie Mellon University

Daniel P. Siewiorek, Carnegie Mellon University

Robert M. White, Department of Commerce

SUMMARY

To assess Japanese technology in advanced computing, the panel divided the

subject into electronic components, data storage, computer architecture, software,

computer/human interface and multimedia, and supercomputers. The panel obtained

a baseline of U.S. accomplishments in these areas by reviewing literature, attending

conferences, visiting laboratories, and discussing the subject with specialists. The

panel then spent a week in Japan visiting five university sites, sixteen industrial sites,

one consulting company, and nine government laboratories.

The Technio_ Bottom

Table 15 summarizes the positions of the U.S. and Japan in advanced computing.

Japan has made a significant long-term commitment to information technology, from

research through commercialization. Policymakers, aware that Japan would have

difficulty being self-sufficient in food and in energy, decided as early as 1955 to meet

international competition and make international contributions by cultivating

information as a resource. Japan would draw on a highly educated and motivated

labor force to promote information-related, knowledge-intensive industries. Japan

has implemented this goal through national programs. Industrial strategies have

been coordinated, and MITI introduced a series of multi-year plans devoted to

achieving excellence in information technology.

Japan's success in information technology is due in large part to its support of

industries in the allied technologies -- advanced semiconductors, chip-making

technology, data storage devices, and so forth.
Program Summary

TABLE 15

Japan's Position vs. U.S.: Advanced Computing

(See Key, p. 44)

85

Area P_i_on Rm

Electronic components

Data storage

Computer architecture

Software

Scientific calculations

and supercomputers

Computer/human interface

Multimedia

0 ->>

0 -->

+ ->

Japan's success in the computer industries has led to significant market share; the

profits have been reinvested in R&D, and Japanese capital expenditures have

remained high. Thus the panel expected that the Japanese competitive position

would remain strong for at least the next five years. Whether the U.S. could maintain

its competitive position would depend on whether the U.S. was willing to match

Japan's rate of investment.

The panel found Japan relatively weak in software but effective in software

engineering. There was a serious shortage of talented software people who could

be hired to work in the large, high-technology Japanese companies, partly because

many young people chose to work for higher salaries in the financial community.

Japan had nothing yet to compare with the strong community of creative and

talented software people in the United States.

Japanese universities remained substantially weaker than their U.S. counterparts

because they have had no large projects of the type supported by DARPA in the U.S.

Japanese students graduated from universities with a good conceptual education.

The companies then provided continuing education to train them in design,

production, and so forth. Employer-sponsored continuing education in the U.S. was

much less intensive and effective because of employee mobility.

A key theme in Japan was internationalization. Japanese companies were using the

profits from their success in consumer electronics and other information industries

to establish themselves in the U.S. and elsewhere. Individual companies were

establishing R&D laboratories, product development laboratories, manufacturing

facilities, and sales and distribution centers in the U.S.
86 InJonuation and Communication Technology

Table 16 shows Japan's position in electronics components by indicating the number

of years Japan is ahead of (behind) the U.S. in various areas.

TABLE 16

Japan's Position vs. U.S.: Eloctrmdc Componsnw

Cap

SRAMS

DRAMS

NVRAMS

Gate arrays

Microprocessors

= +2 years (high density)

= +3 years

= 0

= +1, 2 years density)

= -2 years or more

Gallium arsenide = +2 years

Packaging No U,S. presence

Infrastructure Eroding

The panel qualified the findings in Table 16 by noting that the interval between an

R&D announcement and commercial production was typically smaller for U.S.

companies than for their Japanese counterparts. This tended to exaggerate the gap

between the countries' positions.

Data

Table 17 compares the two countries in data storage. Most Japanese industrial

research focused on near- to medium-term issues. The panel found an enormous

amount of exploratory work being done on alloys for thin film media, tribology,

magnetoresistive sensors, and so forth. By comparison, efforts in the U.S. appeared

more fragmented but more adventurous -- for example, the holographic storage at

MCC and attempts to exploit high-resolution scanning microscopy.

Computer ArchimcCLu'e

The Japanese were experimenting with a vast number of computer architectures.

Although their projects were based on American architectures, the gap between the

American roots and the first Japanese project had narrowed from over a decade (i.e.,
Program Summary

TABLE 17

Japan's Position _s. U.S.: Dam Storage

(See Key, p. 44)

87

Anm Position

Magnetic recording

Heads

Media

Head.to-disk interface

System

Optical Recording

Optical media

Lasers

- ->

0 =

+ -->

+ -->

from the American Illiac IV in the mid-1960s to the Japanese PAX in 1977) to less

than a year (i.e., hardware simulation engines). Furthermore, although the number

of advanced architectural projects was roughly equivalent in the U.S. and Japan, the

sheer volume of Japanese projects initiated since 1980 was very impressive.

The U.S. was ahead of the Japanese in computer architecture. However, the

Japanese were strong and growing stronger in hardware, prototyping, vector

processing and pipeline design, dedicated hardware simulation architectures,

multimedia workstations, and technology transfer between research and products.

Scz'tware

Except in software engineering, Japan has traditionally been weak in software, as is

shown in Table 18. Although Japan has improved significantly in graphics, logic

programming, and artificial intelligence applications, so has the rest of the

international community. Ironically, the panel found that Japan had the lead in

software engineering. U.S. researchers were conducting better software engineering

research, but the Japanese were applying U.S. methods in a more disciplined fashion

and achieving impressive results.

Multimedia and Computsr/I-Iuman Intsdaces

The panel found the U.S. to be significantly ahead in computer/human interfaces,

although the Japanese were beginning to concentrate in that area. In multimedia

systems, the Japanese were ahead in hardware technology because of their

significant consumer electronics industry; the U.S. was far ahead in software

applications. Table 19 shows the panel's rankings in multimedia systems.
88 Information and Communication Technology

TABLE 18

Jspsn's Position vs. U.S.: SoRwam

(See Key, p. 44)

TABLE 18

Jslxm's Position vs. U.S.: Mul_dia smi CompuCer/Hunum Inmrfsces

(See Key, p. 44)

P_

Computer-supported

collaborative work

Hypertext

Electronic books

Multimedia

Components

Workstations

MM Mail

User interfaces

D

m

m

<<--

<<--

<--

+ -->

0 ->

Suipercompumrs

Table 20 records the panel's impressions of Japanese research in supercomputers.

In most areas of computational science and engineering, the number of researchers

in Japan was smaller than that in the U.S. by a considerable margin. However, the

numbers were growing in each of the fields surveyed.

The panel predicted that for the next five years the U.S. would continue to have

more researchers working in supercomputers and scientific calculations. If U.S.

researchers continued to have access to enough state-of-the-art supercomputers,
Program Smumal_ 89

the U.S. would continue to provide leadership in developing new approaches,

algorithms, and software.

TABLE 20

Japan's Position vs. U.S.: Supercomputsrs

(See Key, p. 44)

Hardware 0 ->

Architecture - ->

Systems software - ->

Monitoring tools + =

Vectorization 0 ?

Technical Su,mnary

In the field of advanced computing in general, the panel found Japan to be ahead

of the U.S. in basic building blocks such as chips and components. The U.S.

predominated in software. However, revenues for software development could not

be compared to those for the manufacture of electronics, and so forth. Therefore,

the panel predicted that Japan would continue to have both market share and profits,

which would fund R&D.

The panel judged the United States' investment in advanced computing R&D

unimpressive. Because future government funding was uncertain, industry has been

left with an increasing responsibility for funding computer-related R&D. IBM has

taken a leadership position in forming cooperative ventures, although some

collaborative ventures had not lived up to expectations. Therefore Japan's position

in advanced computing hardware could become dominant unless new initiatives are

undertaken.
90 Information and Communication Technology
Program Summary 91

II. 1VIAls

ADVANCED MANUFACTURING TEMOLOGY' FOR

POLYMER COMPOSITE STRUCTURES IN JAPAN

March 1994

Dick J. Wilkins, University of Delaware (Panel Chair)

Moto Ashizawa, Ashizawa Associates Composites Engineering

Jon B. DeVault, Advanced Research Projects Agency

Dee R. Gill, McDonnell Douglas

Vistasp M. Karbhari, University of Delaware

Joseph S. McDermott, Consultant

INTRODUCTION

The United States has invested a great deal of effort in developing polymer

composite structures. Now, the government seeks expanded applications. Experts

perceive that the barrier to expanded applications is the high cost of manufacturing.

This is not only an American issue, but an international one. Consequently, the

government asked this panel to evaluate the status and outlook for manufacturing,

or fabrication, technology in the U.S. and Japan, with an eye toward finding or

developing mechanisms of cooperation.

The title for this study is "Advanced Manufacturing Technology for Polymer

Composite Structures." The title reflects the panel's emphasis on polymer

composites, and the focus on manufacturing technology as the key to wider use of

composites by lowering the cost of using them.

For the purpose of this study, we define a composite as a combination of two or

more materials that enhances their properties. Composites are being used because

of their superior capabilities in the following categories:

Stiffness/weight

Ability to tailor structural performance

Ability to tailor thermal expansion

Strength/weight
92 Materials

Corrosion resistance

Fatigue resistance

Familiar applications include boats,surf boards, fishing rods, racquets, skis, and tool

handles. Many advanced applications of composites have been made in the aircraft

industry:

Commercial aircraft flaps, slats, elevators, tails

Helicopter blades and bodies

F- 16 tail surfaces

F- 18 wings and tails

AV-8B Harrier fuselage, wings, tails

F-117

B-2

The manufacturing methods of major interest for this study are shown in Table 21.

TABLE 21

Manufacturing Methods of Major Interest

Iaunh_tion Hand or machine layup of dry of preimpregnated layers; Vacuum bag, press, or

autoclave molding

Pultrusion Continuous pulling of fiber preform through

resin bath and heated die

_t Winding Dry or wet winding around mandrels

Moklh_ Press molding of structural molding

compound (SMC)

Stamping of pre-impregnated fibers and resin

__ CR_ _ etc.) Injection of resin into mold containing fiber

preform

_ACTI

The panel's approach was to develop a draft report summarizing the status and

outlook for advanced manufacturing technology of polymer composite structures in

the U.S. This report was given to the hosts in the approximately 20 Japanese

organizations that the ten-person JTEC team visited over a ten-day period in

December 1992.
ProgramSummary 93

Sponsors for this study were:

NSF: Paul Herer

Army Research Office: Dr. Andrew Crowson

Air Force Office of Scientific Research: Dr. Charles Lee

Department of Energy: Dr. Paul Maupin, Dr. George Jordy

The study was carried out under the auspices of the Japanese Technology

Evaluation Center (JTEC) at Loyola College, funded by the above agencies through

NSF's grant to JTEC. JTEC studies are carried out by the International Technology

Research Institute (ITRI) at Loyola College; ITRI is directed by Dr. R.D. Shelton.

Within ITRI, the JTEC Principal Investigator and Director is Dr. Michael J. DeHamer

and the JTEC/WTEC Staff Director and Series Editor is Geoff Holdridge.

As detailed in Appendix B of the full report, the panel had unique qualifications for

this study:

Dick Wilkins (Chair), University of Delaware

17 years at General Dynamics, Fort Worth in composites development

(Coordinator of F-16 Tail Certification)

5 years as Director of UD Center for Composite Materials (2 years as

President of American Society for Composites)

2 years as Director of Institute for Applied Composites Technology

Moto Ashizawa, Ashizawa and Associates Composites Engineering

15 years in composites design, analysis & development at Douglas

10 years in composites program management, certification, & manufacturing

at Douglas

1 year in composites consulting in both the U.S. and Japan

Jon DeVault, Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA)

25 years experience in advanced materials industry with Hercules

Former President of Hercules Advanced Materials & Structures Company

Now starting a new position organizing composites initiatives at ARPA

Dee R. Gill, McDonnell Douglas

25 years in manufacturing methods development at Hercules

4 years as Director of Production Operations and Director of Manufacturing

in the New Aircraft Division of McDonnell Douglas

Vistasp Karbhari, Center for Composite Materials

Associate Scientist, Center for Composite Materials, U. of Delaware

Research Assistant Professor in Civil Engineering, U. of Delaware
94 Materials

Joe McDermott, Composites Services Corp

11 years as Director, Composites Institute of SPI

12 years in composites consulting in both the U.S. and Japan

During the visit to Japan, the panel was assisted by a number of highly qualified

sponsor representatives:

Dr. Iqbal Ahmad, ARO

Excellent background in materials science

Army Representative in Japan

Dr." Alan Engel, ISTA

Several years in polymer & composites research at DuPont

JTEC Advance Arrangements Contractor

Dana Granville, ARL

Army Materials Directorate Coordinator for Composites

Dr. Bruce Kramer, NSF

Program Director for Manufacturing & Materials Processing

Xavier Spiegel, JTEC

Teaches materials at Loyola College

The mission of the study was to summarize the current status and future outlook of

polymer composite structures in Japan and in the United States. It was motivated by

the desire of the U.S. to move from invention to commercialization, which dictates

advancements for low cost, repeatable manufacturing. The hope was expressed to

the Japanese hosts that the U.S. and Japan could cooperate so as to expand the

market for composites.

Available literature was used to summarize the U.S. status in a document for the

Japanese hosts to see the scope being sought. Available literature and key Japan

site visits were also used to summarize the Japanese status. Summary findings were

presented at a Workshop in Washington, D.C. on February 18, 1993. This report was

then developed.

_INC_

It is overwhelmingly clear that individual organizations in both Japan and the United

States practice the same basic manufacturing technologies. But Japanese companies

practice them with a much greater respect for detail. This respect for detail leads

directly to the high quality evident in their operations and parts.
Program Summary 95

The Japanese hosts expressed great confidence in the training and skills of their

work force. At the same time, factory workers help develop the fabrication methods

to achieve the best chance of success.

Many of the processes observed were relentlessly developed to remove chances for

errors and reduce cost. This persistence was strildng.

The panel observed impressive efforts to reduce composite detail part count. One

derivative is the high level of excellence achieved in co-curing. Another is the

observed emphasis on dry-fiber preforming.

There were a number of interesting areas showing strong potential for success.

These included:

Co-cured Omega stringer panels

3-D and 2.5-D weaving

Curved pultrusion

Super composite bolt

Continuous forming of thin-walled pipes

DETAILED FINDINGS

The JTEC panel's qualitative comparisons between the United States and Japan in

advanced manufacturing technology for polymer composite structures are shown in

Table 22. The full report addresses each of the topics listed in the table in some

detail. Conclusions in each of these topics are also summarized below.

Aerospace

The aerospace sector is focused on commercial applications of aerospace

technology. Japanese technology was introduced through alliances with U.S. and

European companies, from whom the Japanese companies have transferred both

good and bad habits.

Automo_w end Industriel

While the U.S. seems to still have opportunities in automotive applications, Japan

appears to be stymied by recycling concerns.

Japan is quite aggressive in this industrial field. Many cost-driven applications are

being tried.
96 1Vlater_l_

TABI, E 22

]span Compszed to U.S. in &dvan_d Manufacturing Technology

for Polymer Composite S_ucmres

(See Key, p. 44)

R• D DU nON

Status Trend Status Trend

AEROSPACE

Advanced Materials

Carbon Fiber (Pan)

Carbon Fiber (Pitch)

Thermoset Resin

Thermoplastic Resin

Processes

Hand Layup

Auto. Tape Layup

Ply Cutting & Stacking

Filament Winding

Tow Placement

Pultrusion

RTM

Thermoforming

Co-Curing

Tooling

SPORTING GOODS

AUTOMOTIVE

INDUSTRIAL

CIVIL ENGINEERING

0 = 0 =

+ --> "1- -->

0 = 0 ->

0

0

= 0 ->

= 0 ->

--> -- -->,

<-- -- <--

-> 0 ->

0 -> 0 =

+ -> + ->

+ -> + ->

0 = 0 _-

_m m _m

+ -> + ->

civa

In contrast to the U.S., where the construction industry is fragmented, the Japanese

opportunities in civil engineering applications are many and varied.
_ogramSummary 97

_riak

There is still a large effort to introduce pitch carbon fiber into applications. The

economics are still mysterious, however.

Emphasis on thermoplastics was evident, in spite of the reduction in emphasis in the

U.S. Similarly, high temperature resins are getting much attention.

In contrast to the U.S. approach of developing computational models to understand

processes better, Japanese manufacturing science appears to reside in experienced

workers who develop understanding of the processes over long periods of time.

Product and Process Development

Japanese product and process development use concurrent engineering by

definition. Japanese teams have developed the human factors issues far beyond

those in the West.

POLIGY C,ONSH_]_IAq_ONS

Advantagesm Japan

o The Japanese appear to be able to accomplish more with less.

o They drive to low cost from a life cycle viewpoint.

o Manufacturing people have high status.

O While the U.S. is better at university-industry links and university education,

Japan is better at keiretsu, consortia, and industry-government links. A good

example is the 3-D Composites Research Corporation that was formed by a

number of Japanese organizations for a fixed number of years to advance the

technology of preforming.

O The Japanese will derive a cost advantage from government projects in

standards and data bases.

O The Japanese appear to be better at a number of aspects of composites

manufacturing. They focus more on long-range strategy, and invest more up

front to ensure success. These up front investments are frequently justified

by careful cost trade-offs. The other critical investment is in the training of

the entire work force to achieve a unified approach throughout the company.
98 Materials

The high-quality people assigned to production management maintain a high

priority on manufacturing. They enforce high standards and goals in

development and execution of fabrication processes. The above-mentioned

attention to detail is a direct result.

_ONS

Japan and the U.S. have much to gain from each other. Each country has different

strengths to bring to composites manufacturing. Many of our hosts expressed the

belief that they must develop ways to cooperate with the U.S. In perspective,

producers in both countries can reduce costs by obtaining a deeper understanding

of basic processes. Companies in both countries must also develop a unified basis

for understanding what it takes to make repeatable composite structures so that new

markets may be opened with more confidence and reliability. It is also clear that the

process advancements made by the Japanese can be transferred to the U.S. only by

also transferring the spirit of cooperation that exists within Japanese companies.
Program Summary

ADVANCED COMPOSITES IN _PAN

March 1991

99

R. Judd Diefendorf, Clemson University (Panel Chair)

William Hillig, General Electric Research and Development

Salvatore J. Grisaffe, NASA Lewis Research Center

R. Byron Pipes, University of Delaware

John H. Perepezko, University of Wisconsin

James E. Sheehan, MSNW Inc.

SUMMARY

The JTEC Panel on Advanced Composites surveyed the status and future directions

of Japanese high-performance ceramic and carbon fibers and their composites in

metal, intermetallic, ceramic, and carbon matrices.

Japan's ambitious space program includes development of a hypersonic civilian

aircraft, to be completed by 2005. A major factor in the program is new materials,

one of three areas selected by MITI for national development investment. The

Japanese believe that technological superiority in space structures and launch

systems could help them become dominant in the aerospace market.

Japanese industry and government are willing to forgo short-term gains to build for

the future. The new MITI materials thrust initiated in 1989 (High Performance

Materials [or Severe Environments) was scheduled to continue for almost ten years,

longer than would be possible in the U.S. The Japanese support parallel approaches

to materials research and technology that often involve overlapping activities among

several groups, sharing information at the precompetitive stage. By contrast, the U.S.

seems to select one best approach initially, frequently finding later that other options

are needed.

By attempting to find an immediate application for less-than-optimum materials, the

Japanese gain the manufacturing experience to produce a lower-cost, more reliable

product. For this reason, they tend to place less emphasis on basic science and

more on manufacturing and large-scale pilot plants. Compared with the U.S., there

seems to be more learning by doing and fewer analytical studies.
1O0 XWte_Is

Some previous MITI materials programs have led to new consumer markets and

substantial returns on government investment. The Japanese formed technical teams

within and across industries that remained intact for the long periods required to

develop and exploit markets. The 1989 MITI initiative was different: although

materials would be an enabling technology for a hypersonic transport vehicle, they

might only be produced in small quantit/es. MITI also set very ambitious

performance for its new program in 1989. The panel felt that these goals would be

revised downward to achievable levels.

Because of a strong carbon and fiber industry, Japan is the leader in carbon fiber

technology. Japan has initiated an oxidation-resistant carbon/carbon composite

program. With its outstanding technical base in carbon technology, Japan should be

able to match present technology in the U.S. and introduce lower-cost manufacturing

methods. However, the panel did not see any innovative approaches to oxidation

protection.

Ceramic and especially intermetallic matrix composites were not yet receiving much

attention at the time of the panel's visit. There was a high level of monolithic

ceramic R&D activity. High-temperature monolithic intermetallic research was just

starting, but notable products in titanium aluminides had already appeared.

Matrixless ceramic composites was one novel approach noted. Technologies for

high-temperature composites fabrication existed, but large numbers of panels or

parts had not been produced.

The Japanese have selected aerospace as an important future industry. Because

materials are an enabling technology for a strong aerospace industry, Japan initiated

an ambitious long-term program to develop high-temperature composites. Although

the program was just starting, its progress should be closely monitored in the U.S.

Reinfor_emenm

High-temperature/high-performance composites for aerospace applications depend

on the availability of strong, lightweight fibers. Japan's commitment to several

advanced aerospace efforts -- for example, Mach 4-6 hypersonic technology -- make

its fiber accomplishments of particular interest. Japan has done well in developing

a number of useful fibers, primarily through the polymer precursor approach. The

Japanese are learning how to produce quality fibers in reasonable quantities and

fabricate lower temperature composites with the fibers. They are developing

insights into advanced composite fabrication and higher temperature composite

durability, which would help them exploit improved fibers as they become available.

Ceramic Mstrix Composites

Japanese researchers have focused on enhancing the toughness of the best alreadyavailable monolithic structural ceramics. Japan has been a prime supplier of
Program Summary 101

continuous high-performance, high-temperature fibers that have been used in the

development of ceramic composites in the U.S.. The Japanese themselves have

focused on the use of SiC and SisN, whiskers and particulates.

The Japanese are also devoting significant effort to processing hybrid ceramic/metal

composite systems. They are developing sophisticated techniques for making

functionally gradient materials (FGMs) whose properties change gradually from

ceramic to metal. FGMs are designed to overcome the severe problems of thermal

expansion mismatch in joining metal to ceramic parts in high-temperature engines.

A separate processing effort is directed at making the high-temperature, highperformance composite materials into shapes needed for such engines. This effort

involves combining self-propagating high-temperature synthesis with hot isostatic

pressing to produce high-quality material in the desired complex shapes.

Metal and Intenuetallic Matrix Composites

Japan entered the field of metal matrix composites about a decade later than the U.S.

did. However, the Japanese have more than made up for lost time. At the time of

the panel's visit, the Japanese had not developed widespread commercial

applications for metal matrix composites; rather, the focus of activity was

development of lower-cost production methods. The Japanese R&D programs also

emphasize self-sufficiency in components. Some early successes have been

achieved with intermetallic alloys that perform well in high-temperature turbines.

Csrbon_ Composites

The technology for fabrication of fiber-carbon matrix (C-C) composites has been

funded by the U.S. government for almost twenty years. A mature domestic industry

is manufacturing large, complex C-C shapes. In contrast, Japan has only recently

begun to emphasize C-C components manufacturing. Although several Japanese

companies possess the facilities and basic understanding to produce C-C

components, the lack of applications and design experience has put Japan at a

disadvantage.

C-C manufacturing innovation in Japan is driven in part by a concern with production

costs and associated efforts to identify commercial nonaerospace applications for

C-C composites. Japanese efforts to develop new low-cost fabrication methods have

no parallel in the U.S. Clearly, even if new and significant industrial uses are not

realized, the Japanese aerospace industry would very likely benefit from such

improvements in C-C manufacturing methods.
102 Materials

HIGH-'rEMPERATUNE SUP_._NDUCTIVI'I'Y IN ]AP_

November 1989

Mildred S. Dresselhaus, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (Panel Chair)

Robert C. Dynes, AT&T Bell Laboratories

William J. Gallagher, IBM

Paul M. Horn, IBM

John K. Hulm, Westinghouse Corporation (retired)

M. Brian Maple, University of California, San Diego

Rod K. Quinn, Los Alamos National Laboratory

Richard W. Ralston, Los Alamos National Laboratory

SUMMAI_

To study and assess the state of the art of Japanese R&D in superconductivity, the

panel first prepared a preliminary assessment of the state of the art in the United

States. In ten days, the panel visited three university, eleven industrial, and seven

government laboratories. Panel members interacted with Japanese leaders in

superconductivity R&D and with many younger, active researchers. The panel then

prepared appraisals of Japan's basic superconductivity program, materials research,

large-scale applications, materials processing, and electronics applications, including

thin-film R&D.

The panel found that Japan has a deep, long-term commitment to superconductivity

R&D in industry, academia, and national laboratories. This commitment could be

seen in several factors -- such as the number of people involved in superconductivity

R&D, which was about the same as in the United States, although the Japanese

population was less than half that of the United States at the time of the panel's visit

in 1989. Several five- to ten-year superconductivity projects were in place,

sponsored by MITI, the Science and Technology Agency (STA), the Ministry of

Education (Monbusho), and Japanese Railway.

Because of its perceived scientific and technological importance, superconductivity

had been selected as a flagship to show the world that the Japanese could be

successful in fundamental scientific research. Although the Japanese had been
Program Summary 103

extremely successful in advanced technology and commercialization, they were

criticized for their lesser contributions to basic research. To answer this challenge,

the Japanese were taking bold steps to enhance their basic research effort in

superconductivity. This included increasing support to leading academic groups,

establishing MITI's International Superconductivity Technology Center (ISTEC),

strengthening their infrastructure for basic research, and promoting personnel

exchanges with foreign countries. The panel judged Japan and the U.S. to be

comparable in basic experimental studies and materials research, but the Japanese

were improving rapidly and competing strongly.

The Japanese identified superior materials as the key to success in high temperature

(lfigh-Tc) superconductivity research and technology. They were translating this

philosophy into a sustained, systematic approach to materials synthesis and

processing, including new materials research. Most of the outstanding achievements

of the Japanese in the field of superconductivity stemmed from this systematic

approach, which was reinforced by a top-down management structure and an

appreciation of the people who did materials synthesis, processing, and scale-up.

The Japanese were leading the United States in their ability to mount sustained,

systematic materials R&D programs, and they had a better trained work force to

implement such programs. However, although Japan's top-down management

system may be excellent for reinforcing sustained, systematic research, it could be

less conducive to creativity.

In basic science, interaction between groups in different Japanese organizations in

industry, university, and government laboratories was not as strong as in the United

States, although teamwork within an organization tended to be stronger. With

government leadership, the Japanese were taking steps to break down the

interorganizational barriers by funding large interuniversity programs, establishing

R&D consortia such as ISTEC, and encouraging strong project-related

interorganizational collaborations (which, however, tended to be in applied areas).

Examples of interorganizational efforts in applied areas were the Josephson Scientific

Computing System project and the Multi-Core Project in Superconductivity. The

latter was aimed at developing high-To superconductors to the point of

commercialization. The government had successfully encouraged technology

transfer from government laboratories to industry in the areas of large-scale

superconducting magnet projects and low-To Josephson junction electronics.

Japanese universities' facilities and infrastructure for superconductivity research had

steadily improved, so that the best Japanese universities were equipped nearly as

well as their U.S. counterparts. The equipment and facilities for superconductivity

R&D in Japanese industry and national laboratories were equal or superior to those

in the United States and were steadily improving. Research opportunities in Japan

had begun to attract foreign talent, despite the large social and language barriers.
104 Materials

The Japanese had developed a strong industrial base for the large-scale application

of low-To superconductivity. While U.S. consortia were being organized to enhance

technology transfer, the Japanese already had a ten-year history of successful

technology transfer in large-scale superconductivity applications. R&D personnel

at the national laboratories had worked coUaboratively through the R&D cycle with

electrical industries and with wire and cable companies. These collaborations had

produced an array of large magnet systems for magnetic fusion, high-energy physics,

magnetic levitation, power generation, and magnetic resonance imaging applications.

Japanese capabilities in superconducting wire for the next generation of magnets

(above 15 tesla) significantly exceeded U.S. capabilities, and the gap was widening.

Low-To Josephson digital capabilities at four Japanese laboratories far exceeded

those at any laboratory in the United States. One overwhelming achievement of the

M1TI superconducting electronics project was low-To digital chip technology, which

provided a model of technology development and transfer through a national

laboratory-industry collaboration. By 1989, Japan dominated digital Josephson

technology, and Japanese companies were well positioned for possible future

commercialization.

However, because the United States had greater analog superconducting device

expertise, U.S. efforts in these devices were well advanced over those in Japan.

Because early high-T_ electronics applications would very likely be in analog

devices, the United States was considered to be well positioned to lead in these

areas. U.S. leadership would be threatened, however, if superior low-To technology

remained the norm in Japan, and if the analog device expertise in Japan grew in

conjunction with expanded superconducting thin-film and electronics developments.

The Japanese were maintaining strong low-To electronics programs as a critical

component of their superconducting technology development effort.

Japan and the United States were both strong in superconductivity R&D. Thus they

would have many opportunities to work together and learn from each other.

Because the Japanese placed greater emphasis on sustained, systematic materials

research, they were offering the United States strong competition in research and

were developing the potential to pull ahead in commercial applications.
Program Sunmmry

]II. I_ANUFACTURING AND CONSTRUCTION

105

SEPARATION TECHNOLOGY IN JAPAN

March 1993

C. Judson If.rag, UC Berkeley (Panel Chair)

Edward L. Cussler, University of Minnesota

William Eykamp, Consultant

George E. Keller II, Union Carbide Corporation

H.S. Muralidhara, Cargill Research

Milton E. Wadsworth, University of Utah

_UND

The objective of this study was to survey technological activity in separations in

Japan, and to compare this activity with that in the United States. For this purpose,

the six-pemon panel and accompanying support personnel spent a week in Japan,

visiting one or more sites at seven corporations, five government laboratories, and

six universities.

The panel's full report describing our findings is organized as follows:

1. this Executive Summary;

2. an introduction and analysis of major issues (Chapter 1);

.

individual chapters delving into particular areas of separations -- separation

and purification of gases, water purification, separations of several other sons

involving liquids, hydrometallurgical separations, ion-exchange membrane

technology, dewatering and crystallization (Chapters 2-7); and

4. descriptions of the panel's various site visits (Appendices B-F).

A succinct presentation of the JTEC panel's conclusions regarding the relative status

and trends of Japanese and U.S. technology and support structure is given in
106 Manufacturing and Construction

Table 23. Japan is strong and highly competitive in several areas of separations.

For the most part, this position has not been achieved by invention or creative new

departures. Instead, it comes from careful selection of the most effective technology

available on the world market, followed by diligent implementation, evolutionary

advances, strong emphasis on management and control of quality, and effective use

of corporate experience. This thrust has been greatly aided by the fact that Japan

until recently, in contrast with the United States, has had a steadily expanding

economy and growing production, which have provided the opportunity for

installation of new capacity with the latest technology.

RELATIVE STATUS AND VECTORS

Table 23 is the JTEC panel's effort to categorize the relative strengths of separations

technology in Japan and the United States. The table is divided into various methods

of separation, and also by categories of research, development and implementation

for each method. Following the entries for various methods of separation, the panel

addresses certain cross-cutting aspects of research, development and

implementation (Table 24).

DISTINCTIVE CHARACTERISTICS OF JAPANESE SITUATION

The panel observed a number of distinctive characteristics of the Japanese situation

(Chapter 1 of the full report). Since it has essentially no indigenous energy

resources, Japan seeks avenues toward energy independence. Energy costs are

high, and there is a strong drive for energy conservation. Energy costs and

restricted land area both promote reuse and recycling. In many other areas Japan

seeks self-sufficiency; production of salt (NaCI) is an example. Cultural viewpoints

and the peculiar nature of the Japanese labor market sometimes bring about

specialized approaches. Thrusts in separations technology often support areas of

Japanese industrial strength, notably in the electronics industry. Conversely,

approaches to meeting separations needs often utilize Japanese strengths, such as

instrumentation and photovoltaic technology.

The drive for energy conservation has been particularly apparent in the Japanese

paper industry, as is presented and analyzed in more detail in Chapter 7 of the full

report. Environmental concerns are ascendant in Japan, and much is happening in

the area of pollution abatement. However, the issue appears to be addressed much

less through formal legal regulation, and more through government coordination and

influence upon industry, than is the case in the United States.
Program Summary

TASI, E _3

Japan Compared to U.S. by Types of Separation

(See Key, p. 44)

107

TOPIC RESEARCH DEVELOPMENT IMPLEMENTATION

stares mind status trend status trend

Gas Separations - <- - <- - <-

Hydrometallurgical 0 = + -> + ->

Separations

Adsorption - <- - = - <-

Ultrapure Water + -> + -> 0 ->

Reverse Osmosis - -> 0 = 0 =

& UltraMtration

Ion Exchange 0 = 0 -> - =

Membrane

Processes

Membrane - = 0 = - <-

Separations of

Organics

Extraction

Solvent - = 0 < - 0 < -

Ion Exchanging 0 = 0 <- 0 <-

Supercritical - = 0 -> 0 =

Fluid

Crystallization - = 0 -> 0 =

Ur_vemitiu

Japanese universities utilize the "koza" system, where for a particular area a professor

is assisted by junior faculty members. This structure enables organized and efficient

usage of resources, but would seemingly suppress the development of junior faculty

as independent investigators. Research in Japanese universities focuses on derivative

advances and supporting information, more than upon creativity and progress toward

new scientific understanding. Research facilities in Japanese universities tend to be

in very poor condition and crowded. There are major problems of safety and

housekeeping, in comparison with the norm in U.S. universities. Research

instrumentation is abundant and strong.
108 Manufacturing and Construction

TABLE 24

General Aspects

(See Key, p. 44)

status trend

_m

Creative Approaches

Development of Existing +

Approaches

Quality Control + ->

Support of Academic - =

Research

Support of Industrial R&D _ ->

Instrumentation Support + =

Relevance of University - <-

Research

University/Industry - <-

Synergy

University/Government - =

Synergy

Government/Industry + =

Synergy

Corporate activity seems to be relatively more diversified in Japan than in the United

States. An example is Kobe Steel, Ltd., which has followed a thread of high-pressure

technology that has led the company into a number of very different areas of

application.

1

Note: The panel did not gather sufficient in_nuation to rate the current status of support

Jor industrial R&D in Japan compared to that in the United States.
Program Sunmmur 109

NATIONAL THRUSTS

Sepa.,_a

Japan has national technological thrusts, involving government, industry, government

laboratories, and universities. The thrusts most closely connected with separations

have been the Aqua Renaissance Project, which deals with water purification, and

Project Sunshine and Project Moonlight, which deal with energy independence and

related issues. Membrane technologies have been emphasized in these thrusts.

Many of the membrane-based separations activities in Japan have come about

through these national initiatives. Membrane separation is an area of Japanese

strength, where Japan has about 25 percent of the world market. Membranes are

far more prominent among the mix of separation technologies in Japan than in the

rest of the world. Here again the Japanese position is not attained through entirely

new approaches, but through perceptive selection of available technology,

evolutionary improvements, and emphasis upon quality.

The emphasis upon membrane separation technologies in Japan seems to result in

large measure from definition of priorities at the government level. The panel can

only surmise about the reasons for choosing this emphasis. Synthetic membranes

are an area where Japan is already successful and derives considerable economic

benefit. Membrane separation may also be regarded as an area where the most

opportunities are available for advances. In that sense, the Japanese may regard

membrane separations as a less mature technology than do the United States and

the rest of the world. Membrane technologies do serve the needs of the strong

Japanese electronics industry. For example, membranes are useful in

ultrapurification of water (Chapter 3 of the full report); however, this is an area where

U.S. companies (e.g., Millipore) have most of the market. Membrane separations

may be regarded in Japan as an effective path for energy conservation and/or

technological independence. Developments in membrane technology can lead to

advances in technology for batteries, analytical instrumentations and medical

applications, notably diagnostics.

Global ]_wimzmwnt

Another interesting national thrust pertains to global environmental issues, notably

global warming and depletion of the stratospheric ozone layer. Japan has proposed

an international plan called "The New Earth 21 (Action Plan for the 21st Century)."

The large, main research facility for the Research Institute of Innovative Technology

for the Earth (RITE) will be completed in the Kansai Science City in the summer of

1993. One of the areas being given the most emphasis in this initiative is fixation and

utilization technology for carbon dioxide (CO2). As typically described, this involves

use of membrane separations to remove and recover CO2 from the flue gases of

fossil-fuel power plants, with conversion of the recovered carbon dioxide to large-
110 Manufacturing and Construction

scale chemical products such as methanol. This endeavor raises several very

fundamental issues concerning feasibility: (1) the very large volume of CO2 that

would have to be recovered to make a difference in the global environment; (2)

whether a CO2-benign source of hydrogen for conversion to chemicals can be

achieved; and, (3) whether the uses of recovered COs would themselves return COs

to the atmosphere. Therefore the true economic basis for the New Earth 21 initiative

is questionable.

SPECIFIC R&D COMPA.-_SONS

The following more detailed comparisons are drawn from the individual chapters of

the full report.

Separation and Puri_ation of Gases

Japanese development of technology in gas separations has in general trailed that

in other parts of the world, but the commercialized technology in a number of cases

may be roughly equivalent to that found elsewhere (Chapter 2). Membrane

technology for large-scale, selective recovery of carbon dioxide is receiving

attention in connection with the RITE global-warming initiative. However, there is

surprisingly little research on membrane technology for other gas separations,

especially when the overall Japanese emphasis on membrane separations

technology is taken into account. Several small-scale, specialized applications are

being developed in connection with the needs of the electronics industry.

Water Puflflcatia_

Membrane technology for water purification in Japan is largely conventional, but two

applications are pushing the limits of current technology -- water for the nuclear

industry and water for the production of microelectronic chips (Chapter 3).

Approximately 1,000 liters of ultrapurified water are used per wafer in the chip

manufacturing industry. The purity required is related to the minuscule dimensions

of features on the chips. Contaminants of concern include bacteria, particles,

organic matter and dissolved oxygen. Highly sequential purification trains are

utilized, with extensive and repeated use of membrane separations and ion

exchange. Interestingly, the needs of the Japanese electronics industry are met by

vendors of pre-packaged water-purification assemblies, while in the U.S. the

tendency is for individual chip manufacturers to assemble their own waterpurification plants. The two approaches seem to achieve roughly equivalent results.

The water-purification needs for next- and future-generation chips require substantial

advances beyond current technology.

Also related to water purification, but on a larger and coarser scale, the panel found

that there has apparently been a decision in Japan to replace chlorine with ozone
Program Summary 1 1 1

for municipal water treatment. The use of ozone is generally considered to be more

expensive and less proven for general use, but it does avoid the formation of trace

levels of chlorinated organics.

Sep,m ms with

Much of the research and development activity in Japan for other separations

involving liquids focuses on membranes (Chapter 4). Pervaporation, a method of

vaporizing a liquid mixture selectively through a membrane, is receiving attention for

ethanol-water separation, as it is elsewhere in the world. There is also attention to

use of this technique for separation of isopropanol and water (an electronics industry

need) and for separations of trace organics from water. There is also work on

absorption of nitrogen and sulfur oxides (NOx and SO,,) from power-plant flue gases

and on supercritical fluid extraction, largely for oils and other substances that serve

specific Japanese food and flavor needs. Finally, there are several efforts directed

toward "chiral" separations, that is, separations of mixtures of optically active

isomers.

HydronwtaUurgic_l _pm_iorm

There are numerous instances of metals refining and separations in Japan, with

substantial and diverse accompanying research (Chapter 5). Emphasis is on

smelting and refining, rather than recovery from the ore, since Japan imports most

of its metals as concentrates. As in other areas, processes are based upon

conventional technology, but a high degree of improvement has been achieved.

Equipment is more modem than in the U.S. because Japanese industry has been

able to add substantial capacity in recent years. Over the past four decades there

has been a major decline in U.S. zinc production. Meanwhile, Japan has become the

world's third largest producer of zinc.

There has been a significant amount of research on the fundamentals of leaching,

solvent extraction, ion exchange, and chemical and electrochemical reduction.

University research in this field is generally of high quality but mainly theoretical.

Ion-Exchange Membrane Technology

Japan has over forty years of experience in the development and manufacture of ionexchange membranes; much of the development has evolved in the context of

producing salt from seawater by means of electrodialysis (Chapter 6). Japan is a

world leader in this area, with a broad spectrum of membranes for sale and internal

use, with a main theme of environmental applications. Advances are being made in

spacer materials and adhesives for membrane modules. Other innovations are in

implementation of ion-exchange membranes in tubular geometries (ED CORE,

Tokuyama Soda -- see Chapter 6), replacing the conventional flat-sheet geometry,

and in bipolar, '_ater-splitting" membrane technology.
]. l _. Manufacturing and Construction

Dewamring _lp and Paper Industry)

Japan ranks second and third in world production of paper and pulp, respectively,

behind the U.S. in both cases. Over the past two decades Japan has achieved very

large reductions in the amount of purchased energy needed for the paper industry -

- about a factor of two for the industry as a whole (Chapter 7). For the most part,

these savings have not resulted from innovative technology, although the addition

of new capacity utilizing newer and more efficient technology has been one factor.

Other factors include extensive use of recycle, obtaining a higher concentration of

black liquid (separations) within the plants, use of high-pressure and therefore hightemperature boilers, and conversion to continuous digesters.

The most striking technological innovation that the panel found was Kobe Steel's

pressure-driven crystallizer, used for separations of organics (Chapter 7). This

advance follows from Kobe's practice over the years of using its high-pressure

expertise to branch into different areas of application. Increasing pressure, an

instantly transmitted thermodynamic parameter, to a great enough extent can bring

about solidification in a controlled way, and subsequent reduction and/or cycling of

pressure brings about controlled melting that can cause formation of more perfect,

and therefore purer and easily separable crystals.
PTogram Summary

MATERIAL HANDLING TECHNOLOGIES IN _%PAN

December ]992

113

Edward H. Frazelle, Georgia Institute of Technology (Panel Cochair)

Richard E. Ward, Material Handling Industry (Panel Cochair)

James M. Apple, Jr., Coopem & Lybrand

Thomas C. Day, Hanover Direct

Glenn J. Petrina, Defense Logistics Agency

Alvin R. Voss, IBM

Howard A. Zollinger, Zollinger Associates

SUMMARY

Material handling plays a vital role in all sectors of business and commerce, but

nowhere is it as important to an efficient operation as it is in manufacturing,

warehousing and distribution. Those who study this field and understand how

material handling methods, equipment and systems can be used to increase

productivity look on the material handling process and the technologies available

as strategic competitive factors. Cost reduction (capital and operating), increased

throughput, improved response times, work place safety, and total quality are

measures of performance that have strategic implications for a business. These

factors are all directly affected by how well an organization performs its material

handling functions.

These factors alone are enough to cause business leaders to want to study this field

and to research best practices and available technology worldwide. The strategic

advantages that many say Japan has in a wide variety of industries (e.g., automobiles

and consumer electronics) present a particular impetus for studying developments

in and applications of material handling in Japan. Japan's competitive position in

high technology manufacturing helped motivate the National Science Foundation and

the Department of Defense to commission an expert panel to conduct a study of

material handling in Japan that would include visits to Japanese suppliers and users

of material handling technologies.

This report synthesizes the findings from approximately sixty site visits, attendance

at major Japanese trade exhibitions, a review of current literature, and discussions
114 Manufacturing and Const_ction

with numerous Japanese experts in the field. Although much of the research was

conducted during the first five months of 1992, visits dating back to 1990 provided

additional valuable information. A summary of the conclusions drawn from this study

follows:

. Prior to 1960 Japan trailed the United States in industrial productivity and in

the application of modem production methods, especially in the use o[ stateof-the-art material handling technology. All that has changed.

In the late 1950s the Japanese Productivity Center sent a team to the U.S. to study

what was being done in material handling and to recommend measures for

implementation in Japan. The result was the licensing of U.S. material handling

technology for production and use in Japan. Today, we see spin-offs and derivations

of that early technology, which has improved vastly in several areas. Japan is not

only using its own material handling technology and equipment domestically, but

Japanese suppliers are selling them on a worldwide basis, including in the United

States. Japan is now a leader in several equipment/technology categories.

. Productivity improvement--and the strategic advantages that accompany such

improvement--have provided the rationale [or Japan's quest [or the best

production methods and technologies over the last thirty years. However,

that rationale today is being amplified manyfold by changing demograpl'u'c,

social, and business conditions in Japan. The result has been an acceleration

in the application of automated material handling systems that dwarfs what we

see occurz-ing in the United States.

The evidence is fairly clear that factors such as declining population, aging work

force, changes in work preferences, and the ever-present congestion and lack of

space are fueling the use of automation. The corollary in this case is that demand

(application and use of automated material handling technologies) fuels supply,

which translates into a rationale for ongoing research and product development. In

many cases, economies of scale in the production of material handling equipment

can also be associated with high demand levels.

. Automated material handling equipment and systems in Japan are not

deployed exclusively in large, complex integrated systems. The result is

many examples of simple, stand-alone installations.

This factor partially explains the extremely high Japanese material handling

equipment installation statistics in comparison to those in the United States. In the

United States such installations are often called "islands of automation," and are

generally viewed as less than desirable. In Japan, however, stand-alone installations

mean greater control and cost savings. Two business factors have contributed to

greater use of simple, stand-alone installations in Japan. One is the general Japanese

attitude that simple is best. The other is the availability of Japanese users willing to
ProgramSunuuary 115

make use of such systemswithout demanding often costly modifications and "bells

and whistles." A benefit of this phenomenon is that it has allowed Japanese suppliers

to concentrate on research and development that focuses more on issues such as

product reliability and maintainability.

1 The Japanese government has taken an active policy role in stimulating the

application of automated material handling systems.

The 1958 study team is perhaps the earliest, albeit an indirect, example of Japan's

active government policy. A more direct example has been the Japanese

government's policy of making funds available at attractive lending rates for capital

projects that address demographic changes in the Japanese work force. The

strategic significance of investments, coupled with a long-term view of their benefits

(versus short-term payback), has long been recognized as something that

differentiates Japanese attitudes about capital investments in business infrastructure

from attitudes in the United States. The added motivation of having access to capital

at attractive rates for the specific purposes stated above only compounds the

advantages enjoyed by Japanese manufacturers.

. Research and development in the field of material handling, though very

active, is apparently performed exclusively within the confines of private

industry.

This is no different from what takes place in the United States or elsewhere. In the

United States, however, there is evidence of greater academic interest in the field

of material handling. This has led to the direct incorporation of material handling

into U.S. college curricula, and to more independent research associated with the

operational design and control of material handling systems. This is not to be

confused with electro-mechanical design or testing. There is little to no work of this

type underway at U.S. or Japanese universities. Nevertheless, there is greater

evidence of industry sponsorship of college and university material handling

education and research in the U.S. than in Japan. There is somewhat of a dichotomy

here because the rate of investment in material handling automation in Japan far

exceeds that in the United States, regardless of what is done in or by universities.
116

6.

Manufacturing and Construction

Industrial productivity in Japan still lags behind the productivity of U.S.

industry, but the two have been converging rapidly.

Japan's material handling practices have contributed significantly to its gains in

productivity. The gains have been made possible by the enlightened attitude of

Japanese business managers, the types of products and systems that Japan's material

handling industry delivers to the market place, and the way that Japanese suppliers

and users work together to accomplish an objective.

, An assessment of whether Japan is ahead or behind in its material handling

technology depends on the technology being examined.

A broad spectrum of equipment categories is analyzed in Table 25.
Program Summary

TFd]I_ _

Japan Compared to U.S. in Ma_r_ Handling Technologies

(See Key, p. 44)

117

AS/RS - unit load

- mini load

AGV - unit

- small

AEM - unit

- small

CONVEYOR - transport

- sortation

SORTING TRANSFER

VEHICLE

DEPALLETIZING (for case pick)

CAROUSEL

ROTARY RACK

INTELLIGENT PICK CART

LIGHT-AIDED PICKING

CLEAN ROOM SYSTEMS

CONTROLS

radio frequency - machine cntrl.

- operator cntrl.

dock management

warehouse management systems

auto ID

EDI

IMPLEMENT. TIME & SMOOTH

STARTUP

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION

Status Trend Status Trend

0 -> + ->

+ -> + ->

0 = + ->

0 = + ->

0 -> + ->

+ -> + ->

0 -> 0 =

+ -> + ->

__

- <- - <-

+ -> 0 =

+ -> + ->

+ -> + ->

+ -> _ =

+ ->

+ ->

+ ->

-J- = + ----
118 Manufacturing and Construction

CONSTRUCTION TECHNOLOGIES IN _PAN

June 1991

Richard L. Tucker, Construction Industry Institute (Panel Chair)

John W. Fisher, Lehigh University

Daniel W. Halpin, Purdue University

Boyd C. Paulson, Jr., Stanford University

George H. Watson, Amoco Corporation

Richard N. Wright, National Institute of Standards and Technology

Reed W. Nielsen, Bechtel Corporation

SUMMARY

To evaluate the innovation and effectiveness of R&D in Japanese construction

technologies, the JTEC panelists focused on processes, materials, and systems.

They examined R&D; materials; field operations; and automated equipment, building

systems, and structural systems. They also examined management systems, safety,

environmental technologies, and public/private interactions.

The Japanese Ministry of Construction (MOC) assists industry; its efforts are

complemented by MITI, the Building Research Institute (BRI) and the Public Works

Research Institute (PWRI). MITI's construction focus is on housing-related matters.

The role of the MOC is to establish criteria for qualifying contractors to bid public

works projects, promote R&D through the BRI and PWRI, and maintain the national

building code. The U.S. has no such common code; many codes exist throughout

the nation.

In Japan, a private contract is usually negotiated and a government contract awarded

to the low bidder from a technologically prequalified group. Design-build

contracting is common in private work, but design-then-build dominates publicsector projects. Japanese construction companies are led by engineers and

architects who are familiar with the specific technology used on their projects. Like

their U.S. counterparts, they are concerned about productivity and safety. To attack

these problems, the large Japanese contractors conduct substantial R&D.
Program Summary 1 19

Research and Development

Of Japan's annual construction volume, 0.51 percent is spent on construction R&D,

compared with under 0.1 percent in the U.S. for comparable sectors. As a matter

of national policy, the Japanese see continued and increased R&D investments as

important to upgrading housing, renewing and expanding the public infrastructure,

and keeping their industrial capital base efficient and up to date. Industry,

government, and universities generally work independently, yet there is cooperation

in setting goals and working on certain priority areas.

Japanese construction companies have well-established in-house R&D programs,

generously funded mainly from their own internal sources; the programs have wellequipped laboratories on a level almost totally absent in U.S. construction

companies. Partly through application of their research findings, Japanese

construction companies have moved ahead of their U.S. counterparts in many areas,

including soft-ground tunneling, design and construction of intelligent buildings,

deep foundation construction, construction robotics, and long-span bridge

construction. They are likely to expand their lead rapidly in the future.

Government laboratories in both countries have good and approximately equal

capabilities for construction R&D. The U.S. appears to have an advantage only in

universities. In construction, Japanese universities seem isolated from industry and

government R&D; they have few if any counterparts to NSF-funded engineering

research centers and industry-supported centers at leading universities in the U.S.

lVI_erials

Japan's government, manufacturing industry, and engineering-construction industry

laboratories have given extensive, sustained, collaborative attention to the

improvement of construction materials. R&D elsewhere in the world is monitored

carefully and useful results licensed in Japan. Government research activities are

more extensive than those in U.S. government laboratories. The Japanese

manufacturing industry has increased R&D, but U.S. building materials manufacturers

have been abandoning product development research to cut expenditures. Japanese

engineering-construction firms have large-scale construction materials research

efforts that are generally unmatched by U.S. counterpart companies. University

professors and researchers collaborate in these efforts, but on a smaller scale than

their U.S. counterparts.

Thus Japan matches or leads the U.S. in implementation of state-of-the-art

construction materials technology and has growing leadership in research. Strong

research and implementation activities have given the Japanese steel industry clear

leadership in weldable and fire-resistant, high-strength structural steels. A major

cooperative government, industry, and university program for high-performance
120 Manufacturing and Construction

concrete research is likely to give Japan leadership in this internationally significant

area of construction technology.

Automated Equipment

Japanese companies have also invested heavily in developing automated equipment,

although they have produced very few practical pieces. Much of their motivation to

automate seems to stem from their desire to improve the image of the construction

industry among workers, make construction safer, and help sell both existing

customers and new prospects. Despite their push to automate construction

equipment Japanese companies do not use computers for schedule or cost control

as widely as U.S. companies do, relying instead on manual methods. However,

Japanese companies are actively exploring ways to transfer information from

computer-assisted design models to field equipment, and then manipulate that data

from the surrounding environment using artificial intelligence.

Infrastructure

Improving Japan's infrastructure has depended on efficient development and use of

space. The Japanese have sought new space by building up, building out, and

building down. They attack the construction of office and apartment buildings from

a new perspective: the building is a system and needs systems solutions. The

concept of the intelligent building is key to this strategy. One of the MOC's key

objectives for the 1990s is to achieve "good-quality housing and infrastructure that

suit the needs of the nation." The boom in office building and home construction

markets offers an excellent opportunity to apply high-technology concepts to

building construction to improve the working and living environment.

The quality of buildings and support systems in Japan equal that of new buildings

constructed in the U.S. Most of the systems are adaptations of existing technology,

which may lead to a fusion of technology. Emphasis on automation, robotics, and

new structural and construction systems to support super-high-rise buildings could

lead to new breakthrough technologies in building systems by 2000. A wide range

of structural systems are being systematically developed that focus on factory

automation and use of robots and intelligent tools. Extensive use is being made of

CAD/CAM systems for design, manufacture, and construction of structural systems.

Although the U.S. is ahead in R&D efforts in these areas, implementation is at least

equal, or even ahead, in Japan.

Sm_a-sl Systems

Development and availability of thermomechanical process control (TMPC) steels

in Japan place the Japanese well ahead of the U.S. in applying these special steels

to structural systems. The Japanese experience indicates that these materials make

steel structural systems more competitive for building and bridge applications.
Program Summary 121

Concrete structural systems in Japan seem on a par with those in the U.S. for precast

structural elements. In high-strength concrete for structures and high-rise

construction, Japan appears to be lagging behind the U.S. The panel found that

R&D efforts and trial implementation of active control damping systems for

earthquake and wind resistance far exceed U.S. efforts. Passive control damping

systems, such as base-isolated structures and special dampers, are being actively

studied, and trial implementations are under way.

C.,one.lu_iorm

The Japanese have one of the most advanced construction industries in the world.

Japan has long acknowledged the U.S. contribution to its technological and

managerial practices. The Japanese have blended these practices into their culture,

resulting in a robust construction industry that contributes significantly to the welfare

of Japanese society. The U.S. construction industry could use some of the lessons

learned by Japanese companies.
122 Manufacturing and Construction
Program Summary 123

AERONAUTICS,SPACE,AND OCEAN TECHNOLOGY

RESF_ARCH S_ AND UNDERSEK TECHNOLOGIES IN

FINLAND, FRKNCE, RUSSIA UKRKINE, AND THE UNITED KINGDOM

March 1994

Richard J. Seymour, Texas A&M University (Panel Chair)

D. Richard Blidberg, Northeastern University

Claude P. Brancart, Draper Laboratories

Larry L. Gentry, Lockheed Missiles & Space Co., Inc.

Algis N. Kalvaitis, NOAA

Michael J. Lee, Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute

Radm. John B. Mooney, Jr. (USN Ret.)

Don Walsh, International Maritime, Inc.

_U'ND

The World Technology Evaluation Center (WTEC) panel on Research Submersibles

and Undersea Technologies was formed to review the state of the art in this broad

field within the former Soviet Union (FSU) and in selected Western European

countries. The panel visited leading companies, academic research programs, and

government laboratories in Finland, France, Russia and the Ukraine, and the United

Kingdom. Because of the large geographic area and the breadth and technical

complexity of the subject, the study could not be comprehensive. However, by

carefully selecting the sites to be visited -- based upon the substantial prior

knowledge of many committee members -- it was possible to acquire a meaningful

evaluation. The end of the Cold War and the resulting efforts to commercialize some

of the military technology, plus the increased utilization of sophisticated equipment

in the exploration for and production of oil and gas in the North Sea, had led the

sponsors of this study to the belief that a review of subsea technology in this

geographical area would be productive. This was verified by the panel's findings.

Because much less was known a priori about the technologies in Russia and the

Ukraine, there were more new findings in those countries than in those Western
24 Aeronautics, Space, and Ocean Technology

European nations visited. Some general conclusions will be drawn based upon the

panel's overall experiences, and these will be followed by more specific conclusions

in each of the study's subject areas.

There is a pronounced emphasis in the United Kingdom on the development of

advanced sensors and affordable autonomous and remotely operated vehicles.

These vehicles are being developed for use in both the research community and the

offshore industry.

Research and development is being conducted in the United Kingdom and in France

on developing very great endurance (hundreds of kilometers to full ocean width) for

autonomous vehicles.

The European community is making substantial progress in cooperative and

coordinated research in subsea technology, including the development of standards.

No such cooperative research and development is underway in the United States,

which may have a significant impact on future competitiveness.

The economic stimulus for subsea technology development in Western Europe

appears to be largely to support fisheries management and offshore oil and gas

production.

All of the countries visited and all of the agencies interviewed see shrinking horizons

for research and development and for economic opportunities in this field.

Russia and the Ukraine have developed a highly educated and experienced

manpower pool, skilled in almost all phases of subsea technology, that is

substantially underutilized at this time. Russia and the Ukraine possess impressive,

and in some cases unique, facilities for physical testing. These assets are also

under-utilized and offer opportunities at very low cost for Western nations.

Researchers in Russia and the Ukraine have extremely limited computing facilities

compared to Western engineers in this field. As a result, Russian and Ukrainian

researchers take a strong theoretical or analytical approach to most problems, which

appears to be very valuable. It has also resulted in an ability to write extremely

efficient computer code to facilitate numerical analyses and signal processing on

limited computer platforms. Given the ready availability of large platforms in the West

and the greater difficulties in maintaining tightly-coded programs, it is not clear that

this capability represents a technological asset to the rest of the world.

Russia and the Ukraine possess extensive fleets of seagoing research vessels

capable of long voyages and possessing state-of-the-art facilities for conducting

oceanographic investigations. With the exception of those vessels under contract to

Western nations, these vessels are largely inactive at this time.
Program Summary 125

Russia and the Ukraine have adopted a philosophy of including human presence in

nearly all subsea geophysical and oceanographic investigations. They have

produced an impressive variety of manned research submersibles, again largely

unused at this time. The beginning of research on autonomous vehicles in Russia

means that country has, in effect, largely skipped the development of conventional

cable-controlled remotely operated vehicles.

The panel principally visited government entities in Russia. In a few cases, it was

possible to visit newly-formed commercial companies associated with such centers.

It became apparent that large numbers of companies with shared personnel and

objectives have been established surrounding many of the important "mother _'

research and development facilities, and that these companies form sources of

technology and commercial capability that were not adequately assessed by the

panel.

Many of the panel's observations can be assumed to represent only the general state

of the art in the research and development laboratories in that country. That is, there

are almost certainly more advanced technical investigations and facilities that the

panel was not able to visit.

SPECIFIC CONCLUSIONS

Deep ocean submersibles, such as the M/m and IVautile, continue to be effective

platforms for undersea work and research because of their extensive sensor,

instrumentation, and manipulative capability. The M/r submersibles are considered

to be the best equipped and most capable research tools for deep sea (6,000 m)

research by some scientists.

Although the FSU has developed limited remote sensing capability for ocean studies

using Lidar and acoustic Doppler current profilers, these designs are not unique and

are within the current international state of practice.

The FSU is marketing oceanographic instruments (such as conductivity, temperature,

and depth, or CTDs, and current meters). Their data quality is unknown, and

intercalibrations should be conducted to determine measurement capabilities. Other

factors, such as reliability, maintainability, and service must also be addressed.

Prices are currently quite low, but this may be a short-term situation that will

eventually change to correlate more closely to Western prices.

Several European countries outside of the FSU are actively developing research-type

remotely operated vehicles (ROVs) and autonomous underwater vehicles (AUVs).

The European Economic Community is supporting as major programs unmanned
126 Aeronautics, Space, and Ocean Technology

platforms for undersea and oceanographic research using enhanced sensors and

samplers. This is in marked contrast to the United States, where there is no major

focused thrust for developing scientific AUVs.

she.w, and Pro z ,ion

Energy. The WTEC teams did not see any particularly new concepts in energy

systems at any of the sites visited. However, at the same time, panelists were

impressed with the variety of sources being used, or designed for use, in underwater

vehicles. The spectrum ranged from small, simplified nuclear reactors (e.g., the

Russian Ocean Shuttle concept) to conventional lead-acid batteries (used in the

numerous Russian and Ukrainian manned submersibles). In Europe, the panel found

fuel cells, semi-fuel cells, Rankine Cycle engines, Sterling Cycle engines, and

hydrazine gas generators all presently at sea on board various vehicle platforms.

In Russia, the most impressive directions were nuclear power systems (first

developed for military submarines) and fuel cells (first developed for the space

program). While the fuel cells were of conventional design, several had been built

and many hours had been logged in spaceflight conditions.

In Europe there was a clear developmental trend towards high energy density

energy sources such as the Rankine, Sterling, and Hydrazine-powered engines. The

semi-fuel cells, such as Alupower's aluminum oxygen battery, offer long-duration

power supplies that can make AUVs true underwater satellites. As in Russia, there

was very little research and development work evident in storage battery

technologies. Most designers were using advanced concept batteries from the

automotive and aerospace sectors.

Hydrodynamics. Design of both relatively slow-speed manned submersibles and

remotely operated vehicles is less dependent on hydrodynamic considerations than

are high speed vehicles. For military submarines and torpedoes, speed is a military

virtue. For long-duration autonomous unmanned vehicles, on-board energy

conservation is critical to permit prolonged mission times.

As might be expected, the former Soviet Union has an extensive family of

organizations and institutions concerned with hydrodynamics. Having the largest

and most diverse submarine force in the world required a major technical support

base. While this was evident to the W'PEC teams, unfortunately, not much of this

work has direct relevance to deep submergence technologies, the primary subject

under investigation.

Propulsion. Efficient conversion of energy to propulsive force/thrust is critically

important to manned submersibles, remotely operated vehicles, and autonomous

unmanned vehicles. Here energy conservation and the resulting tradeoffs are key

concerns of the designer. However, with the exception of the work being done with
Program Summary 127

the AUTOSUB project in England, the panelists did not see much research and

development work in this area. At several of the sites in Russia, there was some

mention made of work they were doing in propulsion for high speed submarines, but

no documentation was provided.

On a much larger application scale, the Russians are doing work in

magneto-hydrodynamic propulsion (MHD), and in the Ukraine there is ongoing work

on mechanical emulation of fish swimming motions. But in both cases it is difficult

to see how these mega-technologies can be applied to deep submersible vehicles.

_d Subn_miblu

There is great interest among ocean engineers and ocean researchers in the former

Soviet Union in manned submersibles and tourist submarines. Previous interest in

manned submersibles in the United Kingdom has been replaced by remotely

operated vehicles and a growing effort in autonomous underwater vehicles.

IFREMER, in France, continues to support the notion of placing man in situ using

NautJJe.

The WTEC group was surprised by the variety and number of manned submersibles

built in the FSU, in operation now, and planned for the future. Several visited

activities, mostly those that have been either involved in manned submersibles or

military submarines in the past, now have tourist submarine plans on their drawing

boards. (Computer-Aided Design is essentially unavailable.)

The existing manned submersibles are fundamental, low cost, uncomplicated,

reliable, tested, and available. Ocean researchers are enthusiastic users who are

quite satisfied with the capabilities of these tools. The ability to use and fabricate

titanium in undersea vehicles in the FSU is advanced. The acceptability of Russian

Registry Certification by Western insurance companies needs to be examined

carefully before contracting for use of manned submersibles built in the FSU.

Academically, industrially and operationally, the existing manned submersible base

in the FSU is truly impressive and has great potential.

Unmanned Submandbl_

Great Britain andFrance. Slingsby Engineering Ltd. (SEL), located north of London,

is the major large ROV supplier in Great Britain. The company's only competition

is Perry Tri-Tech, a Florida-based company owned by a French company (Coflexip)

and International Submarine Engineering (ISE) of Port Coquitlan, B.C., Canada. SEL

identifies the customer needs and designs the hardware accordingly, as is the case

with its MRVROV. Where needed, SEL continues to improve the components. SEL

will remain a small organization because the customer market is small and because

more user/service companies are fabricating their own special purpose ROVs.
1 _.8 Aeronautics, Space, and Ocean Technology

The MobiI-FSSL project is a typical example of a major oil company starting with a

large working ROV (the SEL MRV) and adding specialty tools to undertake major

underwater tasks. This trend will continue.

Great Britain has a respectable position in scientific unmanned systems. The

Deacon Laboratory AUTOSUB is very ambitious but must walt at least five more

years to see final results. The Marconi ODASvehicle, based on torpedo technology,

could have a major impact on the scientific community because of its low cost.

The observed trend is for universities to undertake a more narrow view of

technology development because of funding constraints. Also there is a cooperative

nature for technology development, not just within Great Britain, but within the

European Community. A prime example of this is the European Community Marine

Science and Technology (MAST) research programs. A new MAST program aimed

at furthering autonomous underwater vehicles is the Advanced Research for

Unmanned Autonomous Underwater Vehicles. The contributors to this program are

Deacon Laboratory and DRA from Great Britain, IFREMER, ECA, and INRIA from

France, the National Technical University of Athens, Greece, and Institute

Hidrografico from Portugal. There may be something to learn from this type of

cooperative technology development, especially in a tight money environment.

Former Soviet Union. Russia's present position relative to the Western world is

difficult to establish. The country's low-cost ROVs are dated technology. However,

the operating techniques of Russia's 6,000 m ROV systems have much to offer.

There is nothing technologically exciting about their unmanned systems, primarily

because the nation's efforts have been concentrated on manned systems.

The observed trend is for members of universities and governmental agencies to

form private ventures in an effort to generate needed funds. There are many

ventures formed to develop tourist submarines. This is disappointing because the

world market for tourist submarines is already nearly saturated. Another trend is for

foreign firms to form teaming agreements with individuals and facilities to conduct

business on a world-wide basis. Intershelf demonstrates this trend. Russia must

overcome the credibility and logistic support gap before it can compete in the world

markets for underwater unmanned systems.

i =ou= zpit=eti= 

In Western Europe the technology developments are very similar to those efforts in

the United States. Some of Western Europe's sonar imaging systems are more

interesting than similar units manufactured in the United States due to price and

performance issues. In the FSU the situation is different. The following observations

relate mostly to what was seen in the FSU.
Program Summary 129

Understanding of Basic Theory. The researchers participating in the discussions

were very clearly aware of the basic principles of the technology with which they

were involved. Possibly the limitation of computer capability and the need for

efficient problem solving has forced this need for in-depth basic understanding. This

is clearly different in the United States, where computer capability and the cost of

people can force development to proceed along lines where an engineering solution

is more important than reaching a total understanding of all aspects of a problem to

be considered.

Application Ideas. There were several interesting discussions about new

applications under consideration by researchers in the FSU. Some of these ideas

were considered to be novel and had not been considered in the United States, at

least in circles represented by members of the WTEC team. It may well be that the

new freedom to consider research directions has allowed researchers to consider

novel applications of technology. It may also be that having to compete in a world

marketplace demands new and novel products and ideas.

Implementation Software and Hardware. As has been alluded to in other chapters,

there is a general agreement that the FSU research has been undertaken in an

environment with limited computer hardware capability. On the other hand this

limitation has most probably been the reason for the direction of software

development. The emphasis has been on efficient algorithms and highly capable

microprogramming in the Russian computer systems.

Matun'ty of Applications. There have been many applications of technology that are

both interesting and novel. It must be understood, however, that the actual maturity

of those applications is not clear. Many of the technological concepts discussed

were in their conceptual stages only. With limited financial resources, it is unclear

just how many of those applications will come to fruition.

/nfrastructure. The changes in the FSU have had a strong impact on the technology

infrastructure. Communications among various groups is unclear. Also, the method

for moving from concept to final prototype was controlled very completely in the

past, and the resources needed to accomplish a development effort were planned

and in place. It seems that this is no longer the case and it will be a while before

such an infrastructure evolves in this new environment.

Several factors affecting technology development in the FSU were apparent during

the visits and discussions. Although they are not necessarily related to technology

development, the following factors are among those that are important to the process

used to develop technology:

Publishing in professional journals

Acquiring better computer hardware

Establishing better communication channels
130 ABronautics, Space, and Ocean Technology

Better understanding of how to do business with the West

Better understanding of technology outside of the FSU

There were applications of acoustic technology that were both exciting to consider

and important to advancing the state of the art in this field. Due to limited time, it

was not possible to truly understand the technical accomplishments of the

technologists, yet their ideas were intriguing and their concepts novel. More should

be done to fully understand many of these efforts.

As mentioned previously, one of the factors that constantly surfaced was how far

specific applications had been taken. It was not clear, at times, whether a

discussion was of a concept not yet moved to hardware; a concept for which a

prototype had been developed; a concept that had been evaluated in a real world

setting; or a concept that had already advanced to a product.

It was also unclear, at times, what the future held for specific applications that were

discussed. With limited resources and a very dynamic environment, the future of an

idea is uncertain. Many of the applications discussed could well be moved into

viable products readily sought after in the world marketplace. Whether they will

reach that goal is not clear.

It was recognized by many members of the WTEC team that solutions to

technological problems had been implemented on computer hardware of limited

capability. Emphasis was placed on efficient algorithms and clearly understanding

the principles of the problem. Many can remember how their first efforts at applying

microcomputers to instrumentation forced the use of machine languages and

complex interface programming. This is not unlike what seems to be the norm in

the FSU. The benefit of this has been to develop unique solutions to complex

programming problems.

There is a genuine desire for cooperation and collaboration. On one hand this is

obvious since funding and equipment are lacking. More importantly, however, is the

perception that technologists in the FSU truly believe that cooperation and

collaboration will bring new insights and further advance their technological

interests. The individuals involved in the visits were very talented technical people.

Much would be gained by the synergism resulting from true cooperation.

An interesting factor recognized during many discussions was that the current

environment in the FSU is allowing technologists the freedom to choose their own

research directions. In addition, many technologists are starting small businesses

to privatize their talents and products. This has not been possible in the past since

funding and resources were directed at specific projects planned outside of the

various institutions. It is clear that this new freedom will allow researchers to

consider directions that were not available in the past.
Program Summary 131

The WTEC team agreed unanimously that the time available for the visits did not

allow for in-depth discussions. This was probably inevitable for this first series of

visits, but should be corrected during future visits. There is much to learn in the FSU

regarding acoustic applications. Learning is always a slow process that follows a

less than straight path. Future visits should allow time for technical discussions with

the actual professionals involved in moving applications from concept to reality.

S_mtem Enoineering

Europe. Underwater vehicles and marine technologies are very important to the

European countries visited. This is evidenced by government-funded programs,

such as the Marine Technology Directorate (MTD) program, sponsored by the

United Ifingdom's Science and Engineering Research Council (SERC) and France's

IFREMER program. Also, a European-wide focus is offered by the Marine Science

and Technology program. European marine technology and underwater vehicle

(UV) activities are well planned and focused, and funding, though never enough, is

adequate. The bottom line is that the Europeans are making good progress in

developing AUVs, and are moving toward some very useful national and regional

objectives in ocean research. Good work is also in progress toward development

of ROVs for the offshore oil industry.

The organizations involved in UV development and marine research are well

equipped for research, engineering, and overall system integration. The computer

equipment and test facilities are modern and as capable as any in the United States.

Former Soviet Union. Labor and materials are still cheap in the FSU, and the

availability of micro-electronics is limited. This has led in the past to an emphasis

on manned UVs rather than unmanned units. Manned UVs are easier to integrate

and maintain, and use low-cost labor to good effect. This trend will probably

continue into the near future, until the CIS industrial sector begins to mature and

costs drive it toward unmanned systems. In the West, the high cost of labor and the

risk of litigation and insurance penalties have driven scientists toward unmanned

solutions. However, the same cost of labor has made sophistcafion and high

technology expensive. The United States has improved performance and minimized

man-dependency, but in some cases has violated the basic rules of - "keep it simple"

and "sufficient is good enough." The United States is too often enamored of the

whiz-bang solution rather than the simplest one.

Fundamental science in the FSU is impressive and based on sound theory. Due to

lack of computational capabilities, there has been a focus on empirical validation

rather than in-depth analysis. This will continue during the process of economic,

political, and defense conversion.

FSU scientists and engineers have been very creative in applied research, and have

many accomplishments that equal or exceed those of the West. Some examples
132 Aeronautics, Space, and Ocean Technology

include manned submersibles, acoustic tomography, nonacoustic ASW, high-speed

underwater projectiles, and materials development for the marine environment.

The FSU's engineering is generally behind that of the West in sophistication but not

necessarily in results. Some of the FSU's engineering and integration achievements

include:

o Numerous and very good research test facilities.

o Short development spans based on a theory of build it, field it, and then improve

it.

o Avoidance of the analysis paralysis that slows progress in the West.

o Lack of preoccupation with aesthetics. They build systems stout to last and

simple for easy maintenance.

Navigation, Communication, Automation, and Control

There is limited technology in the former Soviet Union in the areas of automation in

underwater vehicle technology. The control technology is based primarily on

manual operation. Navigation and communication systems in the former Soviet

Union use technologies that are currently available worldwide. There are a large

number of well-trained engineers and scientists in the FSU who are underutilized

because of the current funding situation. There are several very nice designs, test,

and fabrication facilities in the former Soviet Union. The FSU would like to make

these facilities available in some form to be used in the world market. The engineers

said that access to computers, computer-aided design and simulation software, and

more reliable electronics, would make them more effective.

France is the leader in the field of underwater vehicle technology. French programs

in the integration of local sensor data for navigation and control have the potential

of opening up new capabilities for underwater vehicles.

The United IQngdom is leading a European Community effort in developing longo

range underwater vehicles. This program is pushing the limits in underwater vehicle

technology in automation, navigation, and control.
Program Summary

SPACE ROBOTICS IN I&PAN

January 1991

133

William "Red" Whittaker, Carnegie Mellon University (Panel Chair)

James W. Lowrie, Martin Marietta Astronautics Group

Harry McCain, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center

Antal Bejczy, Jet Propulsion Laboratory

Tom Sheridan, Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Takeo Kanade, Carnegie Mellon University

Peter Allen, Columbia University

SUMMAI_

Infr__ _d_

Japan has been one of the most successful countries in the world in the realm of

terrestrial robot applications, The panel found that Japan has in place a broad base

of robotics R&D, ranging from components to working systems for manufacturing,

construction, and human service industries. From this base, Japan looks to the use

of robotics in space applications, and has funded work in space robotics since the

mid-1980s. The Japanese are focusing on a clear image of what they hope to

achieve through three objectives for the 1990s: developing long-reach manipulation

for tending experiments on Space Station Freedom, capturing satellites using a freeflying manipulator, and surveying part of the moon with a mobile robot. This focus

and a sound robotics infrastructure is enabling the young Japanese space program

to develop relevant systems for extraterrestrial robotics applications.

Space robotics in Japan has involved government agencies, national research

laboratories, universities, and companies. The government agencies responsible for

space activities are the National Space Development Agency and the Institute of

Space and Aeronautical Science, and, to a lesser extent, MITI.

Japanese industry recognizes the future potential of space, and the larger Japanese

mechatronics companies engage in space robotics research. The panel found most

industry research to be strongly applications-oriented. Government contracts have

been let to companies with aerospace and industrial robotics experience; multiple
134 A_ronautics, Space, and Ocean Technology

contractors may take part in a major project. In the U.S., by contrast, one

corporation usually acts as the prime integrating contractor. Japanese universities

are also involved in space robotics research. Universities provide a stream of basic

research contributions, but have played only minor roles in large robotics projects.

Funding for Japanese space robotics research and projects has come from the

government, with cost sharing by corporations. Japanese procurement practices

appear to have engendered cooperation among Japanese corporations, and

companies have rotated contracts. Government contracts tend to be smaller and to

make up a smaller proportion of a company's business in Japan than in the U.S.

Less funding is apparently available in Japan than in the U.S., but major Japanese

space robotics programs and a diversity of smaller projects are supported.

lspsnese E_efimental Modulo

The Japanese Experimental Module (JEM) is Japan's contribution to the international

Space Station Freedom project. JEM is a space laboratory for experiments in areas

such as biology and crystal growth. When deployed, JEM will have a pressurized

module for researchers, an exposed facility for experiments, and a remote

manipulator system (RMS) to service experiments and maintain the exposed facility.

JEM's exposed facility portion is designed to be robot-friendly, eliminating the need

for astronauts to perform routine maintenance and repair functions. The JEM/RMS

has a large arm and small fine arm (SFA). The large arm is designed to conduct

overall assembly tasks and to transport the SFA; the SFA provides dexterity. JEM's

pressurized module includes an interior workstation for teleoperating the JEM

manipulators using a single joystick.

JEM's large arm is mounted on the pressurized module just above the airlock and

had 7 degrees of freedom (DOF). The manipulator is 9.7 m long and has a mass of

370 kg. It will maneuver a payload massing up to 7000 kg. Two cameras mounted

on the arm permit the operator at the workstation to view large arm actions. A

standard grappling mechanism is mounted on the end of the large arm to dock with

tools, payloads, or the SFA.

The SFA relies on the large ann for transport, positioning, and stabilization. The SFA

includes an interface with the large arm, an electronics module, camera assembly,

manipulator, and end effector. This arm is 1.6 m long, has 6 DOF, and features a 3-

DOF wrist. The SFA can move up to 10 cm/sec with a payload of up to 300 kg. A

stereo camera mounted at the base of the manipulator displays images on a video

monitor at the workstation.

In addition to the RMS, the Japanese have conceived the active compliance effector

(ACE), which is designed to be mounted on the end of the JEM/RMS arm. ACE

provides small motions that could be useful in compensating for inaccuracies of the
Program Summary 135

large arm. ACE was particularly interesting to the panel because the U.S. was

planning nothing like it for its long-reach space manipulation.

O_ O_mtiorm

Japan has identified orbiting space structures as a means to conduct space activities

in the future. In addition to the Space Station Freedom, the Japanese envision their

own robotic space laboratory, the Cosmo-Lab, and one corporation hopes one day

to operate an orbiting space hotel. To realize these scenarios, the Japanese foresee

free-flying robots that grab, dock, and manipulate while in orbit. Fixed-base systems,

such as those appended to shuttles or stations, have many limitations.

The Japanese are developing a free-flying manipulator with satellite capture

capabilities. Named the Autonomous Satellite Retrieval EXperiment (ASREX), it is a

scientifically motivated, special-purpose experimental robot for retrieving satellites.

A key technology required for the ASREX is coupled control of the free-flying vehicle

and manipulator. Movement of the manipulator will cause a reactive movement of

the satellite, which must be compensated for by position and attitude control. The

Japanese plan to accomplish satellite capture autonomously using feedback from

laser radar, which is being developed specifically for this project. In addition to the

ASREX, the Japanese are planning the ETS-7, an ASREX-Iike device that would be

controlled by a combination of autonomy and teleoperation and would be capable

of rendezvous and docking operations.

Japan's Space Flyer Unit (SFU) is a reusable satellite bus with onboard infrastructure, such as power, telemetry, and control, which could host free-floating

experiments. Scheduled to fly in the early 1990s, it was justified independent of its

relevance to space robotics, though it would enable scientific robotic experiments.

Japanese assembly and service robot concepts were still in the early planning stages

at the time of the panel's visit. The Orbital Service Vehicle (OSV) is envisioned as

a free-flying extra-vehicular activity (EVA) robot for inspecting, assessing, and

repairing satellites or space structures. It will include thrusters, a manipulator, visual

sensors, laser radar, a high-gain antenna, and a docking mechanism. Hope is

envisioned as an unmanned shuttle-type vehicle. Its long-reach manipulator will

transfer cargo, capture satellites, and aid in space assembly. As of 1990, the first

launch was planned for the mid-1990s.

Surface Exploration and ConsUuc'don

The Japanese are envisioning missions to the moon and to Mars, and speculate on

the use of robots for surface exploration. Extreme conditions on other planets,

including heat and cold, radiation, and rough terrain, require robots that are mobile;

have competent motion in hard or soft terrain; remain uptight or are self-fighting; and

that are physically self-contained, durable, and autonomous. In May 1990, the
136 Aeronautics, Space, and Ocean Technology

Japanese announced a three-part lunar survey mission projected for launch in 2000.

The unmanned Lunar Mobile Explorer (LME) is planned to investigate soil

characteristics, collect samples, and confirm the presence or absence of water

under the moon's permanent shadow.

The Japanese are also conducting research and development in mobile robots for

nonspace applications. They have developed several wheeled, tracked, and hybrid

mobile robots. They have also conducted research on legged robots that were

candidates for space applications. Although the Japanese have had no experience

in developing and testing mobile robots on planetary surfaces, they have a wealth

of experience in terrestrial analogs, particularly in nuclear and construction

applications. This will be a clear advantage for future surface operations.

Sup_Technologi_

The Japanese are performing basic research for future generations of robots. The

panel encountered a spectrum of supporting technology, including task control,

motion control, master-slave systems, novel mechanisms, actuators and devices, and

special-purpose robot integrations. Task control technologies were advancing

Japanese manipulation from teleoperation toward autonomy. The panel observed

outstanding Japanese motion control technologies: position and force control, hybrid

control, use of digital signal processors to successfully increase the response and

stability of control systems, and miniaturized actuators and components.

One notable system uses a series of head-mounted video displays to drive a slave

video camera. This system includes a master-manipulator, slave-manipulator, and

real-time graphic simulator. Human movements, including head and eyeball

movements, are measured in real time. The movements of the robot sensors are

controlled to follow the human operator, and images taken by the robot sensors are

displayed to the human operator's eyes. Other notable Japanese master-slave

systems include a 6-DOF bilateral teleoperator with a kinematically dissimilar master

and slave, a master-slave manipulation system with visual and force feedback, and

teleoperators enabling dynamic manipulation.

Japanese robotics researchers have developed a number of novel mechanisms,

actuators, and devices, including manipulators, serpentine mechanisms, and highperformance miniature actuators and controllers. One interesting flexible finger

system is controlled by pneumatic servos. Each finger is a hollow rubber cylinder

divided into three chambers that are pressurized independently. The fingers are

moved by varying the pressure in the chambers. Each finger is capable of fine,

controlled movement, e.g., threading a bolt into a plate.

Serpentine mechanisms have a great deal of potential for space applications

because gravity loads do not apply. Such systems, morphologically and functionally
Program S_'nmary 137

analogous to snakes, tentacles, or elephant trunks, are characterized by long reach,

narrow profile, and the ability to conform to complex shapes.

The panel noted that the Japanese have excelled in developing focused, specialpurpose systems, some of which could find applications in space: a ladder-climbing

robot; a teleoperated live-line maintenance robot; an inspection robot for

containment vessels; vacuum-compatible actuators and robots; bipedal walkers; a

plant tissue culture robot that can select, grasp, cut, and transport seedlings; and a

piano-playing robot that can read and play music.

l:_mpectivu

Vision and planning, coupled with a strong robotics research infrastructure, are

enabling the young Japanese space program to develop relevant systems for space.

Many successful Japanese development programs involve a stair-step approach, or

rapid prototyping of technology generations, rather than a continuous evolution or

one-time technological leap. The typical Japanese approach to robotics system

challenges has been, and will probably continue to be, to first develop and deploy

a baseline capability. System improvements can then take the form of distinct

incremental upgrades.

At the same time, the Japanese often display a minimalist approach to space robotics

technology. In some of their robots, they use technology adequate to getting the job

done, thus avoiding the major costs associated with concerns about future evolution.

To a marked degree, the Japanese tend to incorporate special-purpose electronics

and devices (digital signal processors, application-specific integrated circl.,_ts, very

large-scale integration, and special-purpose actuators) into their robotics. Overall,

Japanese robotics hardware is more notable than its associated software.

The panel concluded that the Japanese were significant participants in space

robotics with everything necessary to succeed: the technology, experience, and

commitment to reach their objective of competent space robots.
138 Aeronautics, Space, and Ocean Technology

SPACE AND TRANSATMOSPHERIC PROPULSION TECHNOLOGY

August 1990

Charles Merkle, Penn State University (Panel Chair)

Maynard L. (Joe) Stangeland, Rockwell International

James R. Brown, Pratt & Whitney

John P. McCarty, NASA Marshall Space Hight Center

Louis A. Povinelli, NASA Lewis Research Center

G. Burton Northam, NASA Langley Research Center

Edward E. Zukoski, California Institute of Technology

SUMMARY

This report focuses primarily on Japan's programs in liquid rocket propulsion and

propulsion for spaceplane and related transatmospheric areas. It refers briefly to

Japan's solid rocket programs and to new supersonic air-breathing propulsion efforts.

Japan's long-term plans for space activity and its generic paths for achieving these

plans were originally outlined in 1978 in the Fundamental Policy of Japan's Space

Development. This document was revised in 1984 and 1989, and was expected to

be updated periodically to keep Japan's policy consistent with advances in

technology and changing socioeconomic factors. It shows Japan's space program

to be a very aggressive and forward-looking one. This program emphasizes

development of internal resources for various domestic and international space

activities. Japan's domestic space interests encompass activities to exploit the

unique environmental conditions of space, prepare for civil space development, and

promote manned space activities. Plans for international collaborations include

cooperating with programs established by other countries, initiating collaborative

programs, and assisting developing countries.

Japan's space program is founded on two basic tenets: development of assured

access to space and use of space activities solely for peaceful purposes. Work

conducted by NASA with the U.S. Air Force might conflict with Japan's guideline

concerning peaceful uses of space. However, there should be ample room for

cooperative Japan-U.S. space endeavors. Japan's goals for the 1990s include plans

for continuing its already strong thrust in scientific space research, bringing its
Program Summary 139

satellite and launch technologies up to international standards, creating the

infrastructure for space station activities, and developing the basic technologies

required for manned space activities.

Space transportation systems are of primary importance in Japan's near-term space

plans. Near-term goals in space transportation are aimed at the development of an

expendable launch system for transporting materials to geostationary orbit,

technology for unmanned space-to-ground transportation, and fundamental R&D for

long-term manned space transportation capabilities. Current transportation plans for

expendable launch vehicles focus on developing and enhancing the H- and M-series

of liquid and solid rocket systems.

G_cAT., FINDINGS

Japan has several distinct space transportation efforts, including three expendable

rocket launch vehicle programs and three air-breathing hypersonic vehicle concepts.

The rocket launch vehicles include operational and developmental systems -- the Nseries, the H-series, and the M-series. Air-breathing hypersonic vehicles were in the

concept definition phase at the time of the panel's visit. The N-series of launch

vehicles is based on U.S. technology developed under license. H-I vehicles include

technology based in part on Japanese design and development and in part on

licensed U.S. technology. The H-II vehicle, scheduled for first use in 1993, is

completely Japanese in design, and positions Japan as a full-fledged member of the

world launch community. The M-series rockets, solid boosters of Japanese design,

are highly advanced and have proven capabilities for launching scientific satellites.

Japan's Tanegashima launch facilities are at nearly the same latitude as the U.S.

facilities at Kennedy Space Center. The size of the launch site at Tanegashima is

much smaller than that at Kennedy, and transportation facilities in the immediate area

are somewhat limited. But these facilities appear to be adequate for the H-II. An

agreement with local residents limits launch windows to a few weeks per year.

At the time of the panel's visit, engine development for Japan's space transportation

efforts was divided into eight programs in stages ranging from concept development

to operational: four cryogenic hydrogen-oxygen rocket engines and four advanced

air-breathing systems. In conjunction with the H-series expendable launch vehicle

program, the LE-5 cryogenic propulsion engine was operational, and propulsion

development was under way for the LE-5a and the LE-7 cryogenic engines. Also

under development were the HIPEX expander cycle engine, an additional new liquid

hydrogen-oxygen engine; the liquid air cycle engine (LACE), a generic propulsion

system oriented towards advanced air-breathing systems such as strap-on boosters

for upgraded versions of the H-II; and the ATREX engine, an air turboramjet system.

The remaining two propulsion systems were a scramjet engine concept intended for
140 Aeronautics, Space, and Ocean Technology

eventual hypersonic applications and a newly announced Mach 5 turbojet/

turboramjet engine being developed for high-speed commercial transportation.

The panel found the systems and performance of Japan's cryogenic liquid rocket

engines to be comparable to those of engines developed in the United States. The

Japanese made extensive use of U.S. data, procedures, and technology in their

designs; their engines also have similar specific impulse and vacuum thrust-to-weight

ratios. However, the new engines are decidedly Japanese designs, showing a

number of subtle but significant philosophical differences from U.S. systems.

Japanese engine development programs were composed of carefully planned steps

involving low-risk, well-characterized options. Japan's slightly more conservative

design approach may facilitate reliability and be particularly beneficial if the engines

or their derivatives are man-rated.

In the area of turbomachinery, Japanese turbopumps and turbines demonstrate

performance levels similar to those of U.S. products. The Japanese are behind the

United States in some areas of turbomachinery but ahead in others. In one instance

they chose a two-stage over a three-stage pump to avoid a technology development

program. Their cooperative efforts minimize duplication and maximize the rate of

advancement.

By 1989, the Japanese were beginning a study of spaceplane concepts that

emphasized such diverse topics as aerodynamics, structures, slush hydrogen fuel,

Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD), advanced propulsion, and system

development scenarios. The propulsive cycles under study included the turbojet,

the ramjet, the turboramjet, and the supersonic combustion ramjet (scramjet). The

propulsion systems of primary interest appeared to be those for the Mach 3 to Mach

6 range for the low-Mach-number portion of hypersonic cruise or SSTO vehicles,

strap-on booster augmentation engines for launch systems, or air-breathing engines

for a civilian SST. Efforts in higher Mach number propulsion systems were directed

more toward accumulating a database.

In engine development, the panel found two classes of engine in the prototype

phase: the LACE engine at Mitsubishi Heavy Industries and the ATREX air

turboramjet at Ishikawajima-Harima Heavy Industries. The LACE demonstrator

engine used the LH2 pump and combustor from the LE-5 engine, along with new

components for the air liquefier and the liquid air pump. The ATREX engine relied

on existing turbojet-turbofan production and design experience and on the expander

cycle technology developed in the HIPEX engine.

The Japanese program in scramjet applications was only in the concept definition

phase when the JTEC panel visited. Scramjet technology programs included

experimental studies of supersonic combustion, including ignition and diffusion flame

studies, and shock tube studies of elementary reaction kinetics of hydrogen. Highspeed inlet tests on a scale model were under way, as were university efforts in
Program Summary 141

hypersonic reacting flows and component technology for advanced propulsion

systems.

In advanced fuels development and on-plant construction for hydrogen production,

Japan had two high-density hydrocarbon fuels for rocket applications, and was

stepping up its hydrogen production capabilities to serve the H-II and advanced airbreathing propulsion systems. It was building a plant that made hydrogen as the byproduct of ethylene production and a pilot facility to produce hydrogen from coal.

Japan was using the latest U.S. and European advanced diagnostics systems, but

was leading in the development and manufacture of many of the basic lasers, optics,

and electro-optic components for these systems. Tunable diode lasers and a

surface-emitting diode laser with reduced beam divergence were developments in

advanced diagnostics implementations that offered possibilities for improved spatial

resolution.

CFD, important in all propulsion development, was seen to be an area of strength

in Japan. Japanese supercomputers were acknowledged to be among the best in

the world, and their availability had resulted in rapid progress in computational

areas. The Japanese routinely included real gas effects and complex reaction

kinetics in flow field analyses, and their codes were based on the latest algorithms.

Their visualization and postprocessing capabilities were also at the leading edge.

The Japanese had appropriate CFD capabilities to move rapidly in this aspect of

propulsion development.

CONCLUSIONS

The panel observed that the Japanese had a carefully thought-out plan, a broadbased program, and an ambitious but achievable schedule for propulsion activity.

Japan's overall propulsion program was behind that of the United States at the time

of this study, but the Japanese were gaining rapidly. The Japanese are at the

forefront in such key areas as advanced materials, enjoying a high level of project

continuity and funding. Japan's space program has been evolutionary in nature,

while the U.S. program has emphasized revolutionary advances. Projects have

typically been smaller in Japan than in the United States, focusing on incremental

advances in technology, with an excellent record of applying proven technology to

new projects. This evolutionary approach, coupled with an ability to take technology

off the shelf from other countries, has resulted in relatively low development costs,

rapid progress, and enhanced reliability. Clearly Japan is positioned to be a world

leader in space and transatmospheric propulsion technology by the year 2000.
142 Aeronautics, Space, and Ocean Technology
Program Summary 143

V. ..N'BRGT

COMPAPATIVE I_BESSMENTS OF NUCLEAR INS_&TION

AND CONTROLS IN THE UNITED STATES, CANADA, JAPAN

WESTERN EUROPE AND THE FORMER SOVIET UNION

February 1994

James D. White, Oak Ridge National Laboratory

BAG"mU-"ROUND

The subject of instrumentation and control (I&C) technologies for nuclear power

plants is of considerable interest to the nuclear industry throughout the world now.

This interest derives from two considerations. The first is that the I&C systems are

the windows into the status of the nuclear plant. Since the Three Mile Island

accident, the industry has been trying to improve the ability of the operators to grasp

the safety status of the plant, particularly during operational upsets. The advent of

computer-based monitoring and display systems has provided opportunities for

advancements which, hopefully, will improve the ability of the operators to

understand the plant status, and therefore, improve the operator's ability to make

the best decisions during the plant transients which might otherwise become

accidents.

The second consideration is that the nuclear industry is being driven toward

computer-based instrumentation and control systems. The driving forces are: (1)

decreases in reliability of aging analog-based I&C; (2) lack of spare parts because

the suppliers have moved on to digital hardware; (3) the promise of higher reliability

of digital technologies; and (4) the lure of expanded capabilities of software-based

systems.

Other industries have preceded the nuclear industry in the use of computer-based

I&C. The possible consequences of failure of safety systems in nuclear power plants

has resulted in a great deal of conservatism in the nuclear industry. Although this

conservatism affects the design and regulation of nuclear safety systems, it also

influences the design of control and information systems for nuclear power plants.

Because of this conservatism, the nuclear industry moves very slowly to make

changes in designs.

Other countries have many years of experience with digital systems in nuclear

plants, whereas the United States has relatively little experience. As the United

States embarks on the evolution from analog to digital I&C technologies, the
144 Energy

designers should take advantage of the best technologies and lessons learned

around the world. Also, the exportability of U.S. nuclear I&C technology will be

related to its status compared to that in competing countries.

Because of these considerations, the National Science Foundation and the

Department of Energy commissioned U.S. specialists to make assessments of

instrumentation and controls (I&C) technologies used in nuclear power plants in:

(1) Japan; (2) Western Europe and the former Soviet Union; and (3) Canada. These

studies included reviews of the literature from 1988 through 1991 on the subject,

followed by visits to some of the leading organizations in the field of nuclear I&C in

the countries of interest. These studies have been published by the National

Science Foundation.

The purpose of this summary is to provide a consolidated summary of the

conclusions of these studies. This will present a high level contrast of the most

advanced I&C technologies for nuclear power in the countries studied. Countries

visited by panelists include France, Germany, Russia, Czechoslovakia, Norway,

Canada and Japan. All of these countries are moving toward increasing use of

digital computers in information and control systems.

The author has combined results of previous assessments. The summary also

contains updates based on recent developments published in the literature (through

May 1993) and discussed in recent high level meetings and conferences. This

blending of earlier results with newer information required judgement by the author.

The results in this section, therefore, should be considered the conclusions of the

author alone, although the conclusions were reviewed by all of the panelists listed

on Page 153.

For the purposes of this report, I&C is defined as:

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

the instruments which interact with the processes in the plant

the cables carrying the signals from the instruments

the signal conditioning equipment which modifies the signals into forms useful

to the communication channels

the architecture supporting the transport of signals and data within the plant

the control room

the man-machine interfaces

the procedures

the control equipment

the control algorithms

the computer software used in the monitoring, control, safety, communication

and display systems

Safety systems in nuclear power plants require a level of qualification of I&C

substantially higher than in monitoring, control, communication and display systems.
Program Summary 145

Furthermore, the level of qualification of safety system I&C seems to be more

rigorous than in any type of process system known to the panelists participating in

these studies.

SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS

Western Europe, Japan and Canada are significantly ahead of the United States in

the research, development and implementation of new products in nuclear I&C.

Table 26 shows Western Europe to lead the rest of the world in the categories of:

Control Room Design; Transition to Computer-based Technology; Computer-based

Operator Support Systems; Control Strategies; and Standards & Tools. The Japanese

and Canadian nuclear industries generally are second and third, respectively, in the

development and use of new products in modern I&C. The differences in research

activities among the countries studied are not as dramatic as the differences in

product development and product implementation. In terms of Basic Research, the

United States is only slightly behind the world leaders. The reason Western Europe,

Japan and Canada lead in the use of modern I&C technology in nuclear plants may

be due to the fact that the nuclear programs in these areas of the world have had

many more years of funding stability than those in the United States.

The United States is beginning to accelerate its Advanced Development and Product

Implementation in the nuclear I&C area. For example, Westinghouse has recently

signed a contract to supply instrumentation and control systems to the two-unit

Temelin plant in the Czech Republic. Westinghouse also is performing a significant

amount of the I&C work at Sizewell B, the new (and only) Pressurized Water Reactor

(PWR) in the U.K. Another example where U.S. nuclear vendors are beginning to

move forward in I&C is the case of the Advanced Boiling Water Reactor (ABWR).

General Electric has been working with Toshiba and Hitachi in the design of the

modern I&C in the highly automated ABWRs under construction now in Japan at

Kashiwazaki-Kariwa. Upgrades to the I&C in existing U.S. plants are giving the U.S.

industry the chance to apply some modern digital I&C now. These real-life

experiences will help the United States move forward in the use of digital-based

modern I&C.

Even these efforts, however, will fall short of placing the U.S. industry on an even

level with the Western Europeans, Japanese and Canadians who continue to build

many more plants than the U.S. industry and, therefore, continue to have many more

opportunities to utilize advances in the I&C field.

The former Soviet Union was found to be strong analytically in I&C, but at a

disadvantage because of low availability of newer, more powerful computers and

computer chips. Especially in product development and implementation, the former

Soviet Union seemed to lag behind the other countries studied, as shown in

Table 26.
146 Energy

TABLE 26

Ranking of World I&G Technologies for Nuclear Power

Control Room Design

Basic Research

Advanced Development

Product Implementation

Analog-Digital Transition

Basic Research

Advanced Development

Product Implementation

Support Systems

Basic Research

Advanced Development

Product Implementation

Control Strategies

Basic Research

Advanced Development

Product Implementation

Architecture

Basic Research

Advanced Development

Product Implementation

Instrumentation

Basic Research

Advanced Development

Product Implementation

Standards & Tools

Basic Research

Advanced Development

Product Implementation

United

States

Western

Europe

1

1

1

3 1

4 1

4 2

4 1

3 1

4 1

5 1

5 1

5 2

1 2

1 2

4 1

t

4 1

4 1

4 1

Canada Japan

3

2

2

Former

Soviet Union

5

5

5

1 means most advanced, 5 means least advanced

* no significant difference
Program Summary 147

DETAILED FINDINGS

Control Room Design

Conventional nuclear power plant control rooms are normally large rectangular

rooms which have wall panels of dials, gauges, strip chart recorders, alarm lights

and switches. The operators normally are standing when they make control changes

in the plant, having to walk from panel to panel to read strip chart recorders and to

turn switches. During operational upsets, hundreds of alarms and lights alert the

operators about certain limits being exceeded. A great deal of training is necessary

for the operators to be able to discern what has happened and what should happen

next. For example, even though they had substantial training, the Three Mile Island

operators could not determine the nature of the notorious accident at their plant, and

made mistakes responding to the situation.

The advent of inexpensive, powerful computers with high resolution monitors has

allowed designers to consider control room concepts in which the wall panels are

replaced by computers. All countries studied, with the exception of Russia and

Czechoslovakia, are working on control room concepts which include a cockpit type

area for the operator(s). This type of control room is called cockpit-type because

it resembles, to some extent, the cockpit in an airplane. Computer-based

workstations surround the operator in such a manner that he does not have to move

from his seat to monitor and control any of the plant's major systems.

Because there is such a large quantity of information which the operator might need,

there is a concern that the operator might lose the big picture while searching

through the instruments and computer-based displays surrounding him in a cockpit

type control room. To avoid this, most new control room designs include a large

diagram of the plant on one of the control room walls to present to all observers the

status of the plant's major systems and alarms.

How these new control room design features will be used, and the definition of the

roles of the human operators in these newer, more automated plant designs has

been the subject of wide debate. In Japan and Germany, the trend is to use more

automation, whereas in France the emphasis in their newest designs is on computerdisplayed operating procedures to guide the plant operators. In U.S. and Soviet

plants, the emphasis is on using digital systems to help the operator identify

problems, decide on the appropriate corrective actions, and aid in the execution of

those actions. Most reviewers agree that each type of approach can produce

required safety and reliability goals, but which approach provides the best overall

safety and reliability is unknown. The field of cognitive engineering may provide

good insights into questions about the roles of operators in highly automated

systems and what types of support systems to give the operators to support these

roles. Japan, the United States, the former Soviet Union, and the Scandinavian
148 Energy

countries seem to be taking the lead in the application of cognitive engineering to

nuclear plant control room design and man-machine interfaces.

France is the undisputed leader in advanced control room design, with the new "N4"

plant control room being built at Chooz B considered the most advanced in the

world. Design work began in the early 1980s. France constructed a full-sized

simulator of this type of control room design and performed several years of tests

on it to validate the design concept. Framatome and Electricite de France led this

work. The OECD Halden Reactor Project in Norway is a leader in a lot of European

control room research and development, especially in the human factors area.

The Japanese government and nuclear industry have worked together on several

projects involving control room layouts and operator workload. The Japanese MITI

established the Institute of Human Factors in the Nuclear Power Engineering Test

Center in 1987 to study human factors and human reliability. Also in 1987, the

Japanese utilities' Central Research Institute for the Electric Power Industry

(CRIEPI) established a Human Factors Center to develop countermeasures for

reducing human errors in operation and maintenance of nuclear power plants.

In the design of its new CANDU plants, Atomic Energy of Canada Limited (AECL)

has performed important analyses of human performance factors.

The United States does not have national R&D programs on control room design,

although the Department of Energy programs on the Advanced Liquid Metal Reactor

(ALMR) and the Modular High Temperature Gas-cooled Reactor (MHTGR) have

done some high level conceptual designs of new control rooms.

Analog to Digital Transition

The designs of nuclear power plants operating today in the United States use 1960's

technology. This old technology uses analog type systems, which employ

continuous current, voltage or pneumatic signals. In a typical plant, there are more

than 100 such systems, making the plant difficult to maintain at times. In some older

plants, 70% of the I&C equipment is no longer supported by a vendor, because

today most I&C equipment is of a digital format. In this format, the analog signal is

converted to a binary form which is compatible with computer-based equipment.

All countries studied are moving toward more use of digital systems. France,

Canada and Japan have been using digital I&C in nuclear power plants for many

years. The French have applied digital technology extensively in upgrading their

900 and 1300 MWe plant control and protection systems. They have increased the

use of digital technology even more in their new 1500 MWe reactor concept, called

the N4. In the United States, the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), a private

research institute funded by a consortium of U.S. electric utilities, has undertaken an
Program Summary 149

initiative to perform the R&D necessary to support the replacement of old analogbased I&C with newer computer-based I&C.

The biggest problem facing the nuclear industry in the evolution toward digital

technologies is verification and validation (V&V) of digital-based, extremely high

reliability systems. No methods exist today to predict (or assure) software reliability

with the same confidence as with hardware systems. Several countries have

encountered costly delays in bringing new nuclear plants on line due to unexpected

problems in verification and validation (V&V) of digital-based systems.

In Canada, Ontario Hydro has had over 25 years of experience with various forms

of digital technology in CANDU nuclear plants. Each new plant has had a greater

scope of digital technology than the last. This evolution worked very well until

Ontario Hydro built its newest plant, Darlington. The reliability and performance

statistics of earlier reactors were outstanding, with most of their newest 8 units

included in the top 25 reactors in the world. But with Darlington, the Canadian

licensing authority, Atomic Energy Control Board (AECB), undertook a more

stringent review of the software engineering processes (mainly V&V) than on the

previous plants. As a result, operation of Darlington's first two units was delayed,

with a resulting economic burden on the utility.

In the U.K., Nuclear Electric (the British nuclear utility - government supported)

estimates that about 500 man-years of effort have gone into the design and V&V of

the 100,000 lines of computer code in the safety system of Sizewell B, which has the

U.K.'s first software-based primary protection system.

The Germans have the most automated plants in the world, with the most advanced

being the ISAR plant designed by Siemens. The Japanese nuclear plants have

implemented the most advanced computer-based control strategies.

Computeri_d Operator Support Systems for Fault Management

These systems include signal validation, fault detection, diagnosis and mitigation.

A significantly greater effort is being expended in Westem Europe, Japan and

Canada than in the United States to develop and deploy advanced fault management

systems. There are several technological advances in these countries already

available in software form that would be helpful to support operators in U.S. plants.

An example of problems with today's operator support systems is the case of

alarms:

. During any significant transient, there are hundreds of alarms sounding and

alarm lights lit in the first few minutes. Important indications of abnormal

conditions are masked by many less important alarms. This reduces the

ability of the operator to locate the most relevant alarms quickly.
150

2.

Energy

Alarms are frequently caused by the action of the operator, making it difficult

to understand which alarms are due to an important initiating event and which

are due to the operator action.

o Some alarms are due to out-of-service components undergoing maintenance,

rather than an unsafe operating condition.

. In today's systems, alarms generally are not received in a predictable order

during fault conditions. The first alarm seen by the operator may not be the

original fault, but only a secondary consequence of some event.

. To prevent spurious alarms, the tolerance bands are relatively broad. The

initiating event may be under way for some time before the alarm is activated.

There are important new developments in the integration of computerized operator

support systems designed to address problems. One of these is the Integrated

Surveillance and Diagnostic System (ISADS) under development and prototyping at

Halden, Norway under the sponsorship of the OECD. This system provides a

graphical interface for the user and a high-level manager for eight different

computerized operator support systems. In the GRADIENT project sponsored by

ESPRIT, there is an integrated framework for a set of expert systems under

development at the ABB Heidelberg Research Center. GRADIENT establishes a

communication framework for a set of expert systems that reason about the status

of the plant and advise the operator. There also is important R&D in this area In

Germany's government funded research laboratory Gesellschaft fur

Reaktorsicherheit and in France's government research laboratory Gentre d'Etudes

Nucleaires de Gadarache and the French utility Electn'cite de France laboratory

Directiones, Etudes, et Recherches.

con. and

The degree of automation is higher in European, Japanese and Canadian plants than

in present U.S. plants. The French generate 70 percent of their electricity with

nuclear power. Because of this, they have worked hard to make the plants able to

automatically match power output with power demand (load following). The French

PWR safety systems are very similar to the U.S. systems. Both France and the United

States have developed digital systems to improve safety system performance. The

French experience base with their digital safety system design, called SPIN, is much

larger than in the United States; the French use the SPIN system in 23 plants.

The Germans also have load-following capability. The panel concluded that the

German plants are the most automated in the world. The German KONVOI plants

have a unique "limitations" system, which takes automatic action to try to prevent

the plant from getting into a situation where the safety system would have to act.
Program Summary 151

This unique system almost always prevents the plant from ever reaching the trip

conditions.

Russian research into control theory is analytically advanced as compared to control

theory studies in other countries. The Russian safety system for the VVER-type

plants is designed to give very large margins between action limits and the true level

of safety concern. Although the technology of the control and safety system seems

to be of the older analog type, the strategy for limitation and protection systems

seems very robust and conservative.

In the case of I&C, the term "architecture" means the arrangement of control

components, sensors, display devices, networks, cables and communication devices.

It also includes the arrangement of information (or data) and software. The I&C

architecture is very important to the success of a nuclear power plant design. The

development and testing of a system's I&C architecture may be more expensive

than the cost of the I&C system.

There are many types of architecture, each of which has advantages and

disadvantages. The designer chooses the type of architecture best suited to meet

all of the requirements of the system. There are several types of issues which must

be addressed. In the United States, individual computing systems have been

dedicated to solving individual problems, resulting in "islands of computing" which

cannot communicate with other areas of the plant. In the French and Japanese

plants, these "islands" are much more integrated. As a result, the architectures of

these power plants usually consist of a combination of several types of simpler

architectures into a more complex, larger whole. U.S. designers are now dealing

with the problems of developing similar architectures.

France has had the most experience in architecture for digital I&C in nuclear plants.

However, the French recently have had significant project delays at their newest

plant, Chooz B, due to problems with their newest I&C system architecture. Even

with many years of experience with digital architectures, the original French designer

was unsuccessful in this latest project and was replaced. The same French designer

was under contract to supply part of the Sizewell B architecture, but was also

replaced on that contract. The problem seems to have been the increased amount

of functionality put into the I&C design, without proving first that the architecture

could handle the increased communication traffic.

Nuclear designers and researchers around the world have watched the French

experience carefully, and have started activities to avoid similar experiences. In the

United States, the EPRI has established a program to develop a plant

communications and computing architecture plan (PCCAP) methodology. This

methodology is planned to be implemented at the Calvert Cliffs Plant.
152 Energy

Activity in R&D, design and implementation of new I&C architectures is a little more

intense in Europe than in the United States, due to real-life problems being faced

there now.

Instnnrm_tation

The kinds of instrumentation addressed in the studies were:

0

0

0

0

0

nuclear detectors to measure neutrons, gamma and x-rays

temperature and pressure sensors

instrumentation systems to measure vibration, leakage and fatigue

systems to monitor for failed fuel elements

sensors to measure gas concentration (hydrogen concentration in

containments)

Overall, the instrumentation and instrumentation systems used in all countries visited

operate on the same principles. The requirements for plants in the countries studied

vary somewhat, leading to differences due to design tradeoffs rather than

technological breakthroughs. For this reason, Table 26 shows all countries at about

the same levels of research, development and product implementation.

Standazds end Tools

Standards are generally used by the engineering community to help assure quality

of the systems designed. Nuclear designers are employing more computer-based

systems I&C to ensure safe operation and economic performance. Standards for the

use of computer-based systems in nuclear power plants have been developed in the

international community to a greater degree than in the United States.

The West Europeans are leading the world in the development and use of standards

in the design of microprocessor-based safety systems. They adhere to the

International Electrotechnical Commission 0EC) Standard 880, SoRware for

computers in the safety systems of IVPP's, and IEC 987, Progrmmned dJ'gital

computers important to safety for IV"PP's. The U.S. nuclear industry does not have

a standard that is equivalent to IEC Standard 880 or the guidelines in Critical

Computer Systems 2. However, there is an effort to develop an equivalent standard.

This effort is the revision to ILNSI/IEEE/ANS 7-4.3.2-1982, "Application Criteria for

Programmable Digital Computer Systems in Nuclear Power Generating Stations."

The Canadians developed their own standards originally because there were no

sufficient standards when they first started application of digital technology in

nuclear plants.

Computer-Aided Software Engineering (CASE) tools reduce the potential for errors

in the final software because of the discipline provided by use of the tools.

Computer-aided software engineering tools are being used more in Western Europe
Program Summary 153

and Japan than in the United States for design, development and testing of software

for nuclear plants. The Europeans are ahead in research on the use of formal

design methods to design and qualify safety-critical software for nuclear plants.

PANELISTS WHO GOH'I'I_BUTSD 'ro

lo K.F. Hansen et al., JTEG Panel report on Nuclear Power in Japan, October

1990, available from National Technical Information Service, U.S. Dept. of

Commerce, NTIS Report # PB90-215724.

Panelists:

Kent F. Hansen

Ersel A. Evans

Wallace B. Behnke

Sheldon B. Cousin

James D. White

Victor H. Ransom

Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Battelle, Pacific Northwest Laboratory

Commonwealth Edison Co.

Stone & Webster

Oak Ridge National Laboratory

Idaho National Engineering Laboratory

. J.D. White et al., WTEG Panel Report on European Nuclear Instrumentation

and Controls, December 1991, available from National Technical Information

Service, U.S. Dept. of Commerce, NTIS Report # PB92-100197.

James D. White

David D. Lanning

Leo Beltracchi

Fred R. Best

James R. Easter

Lester C. Oakes

A. L. Sudduth

Oak Ridge National Laboratory

Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Texas A&M University

Westinghouse Energy Center

Private Consultant

Duke Power Company

3, R.E. Uhrig and R.J. Carter, WTEG Monograph on Instrumentation, Control and

Safety Systems of Canadian Nuclear Facilities, July 1993, available from

National Technical Information Service, U.S. Dept. of Commerce, NTIS Report

# PB93-218295.

Robert E. Uhrig University of Tennessee and

Oak Ridge National Laboratory

Richard J. Carter Oak Ridge National Laboratory

Executive summaries of these three reports follow.
154 Energy

INSTRUMENTATION, GONTROL, AND SAFETY SYSTEMS

OF CANADIAN NUCLEAR FACILITIES

July 1993

Robert E. Uhrig, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, The University of

Tennessee, Knoxville, TN

Richard J. Carter, Oak Ridge National Laboratory

SUMMAI_

This report updates a 1989-90 survey of advanced instrumentation and controls (I&C)

technologies and associated human factors issues in the U.S. and Canadian nuclear

industries carried out by a team from Oak Ridge National Laboratory (Carter and

Uhrig 1990). The authors found that the most advanced I&C systems are in the

Canadian CANDU plants, where the newest plant (Darlington) has digital systems

in almost 100% of its control systems and in over 70% of its plant protection system.

Increased emphasis on human factors and cognitive science in modem control

rooms has resulted in a reduced work load for the operators and the elimination of

many human errors. Automation implemented through digital instrumentation and

control is effectively changing the role of the operator to that of a systems manager.

The hypothesis that properly introducing digital systems increases safety is

supported by the Canadian experience. The performance of these digital systems

has been achieved using appropriate quality assurance programs for both hardware

and software development. Recent regulatory authority review of the development

of safety-critical software has resulted in the creation of isolated software modules

with well defined interfaces and more formal structure in the software generation.

The ability of digital systems to detect impending failures and initiate a fail-safe

action is a significant safety issue that should be of special interest to nuclear utilities

and regulatory authorities around the world.

_OUND

Throughout the world, the nuclear power industry is currently developing advanced

control and operator interface systems based on innovative applications of digital

computers. Significant changes in the operation of nuclear power plants can be

expected from the use of computers for automation and operator aids. Over the past

two decades, the Canadian nuclear power plant vendor AECL (Atomic Energy of

Canada, Ltd.) and utilities have demonstrated digital instrumentation and control

systems to be effective in monitoring and controlling the CANDU (.Canada
Program Summary 155

Deuterium-Uranium) nuclear power plants and in providing the degree of safety

margin needed to protect both the plant and the public. The Canadian experience

of improved performance and increased safety, while using commercial-grade

computers and components, has demonstrated a cost-effective approach to the

implementation of digital systems in both control and safety systems. The ability of

these digital systems to detect impending failures and initiate a fail-safe action is a

significant safety issue that should be of special interest to utilities and regulatory

authorities around the world.

C,ON_'-_USIOI_

Canada has by far the most experience in the world with advanced (digital)

instrumentation and control (I&C) systems for nuclear power plants. Darlington, the

newest CANDU plant, has digital systems in almost 100% of its control systems and

over 70% of its plant protection system. The control and plant protection systems

use commercial-grade digital components, qualified in much the same way analog

components are qualified, plus testing for electromagnetic interference and seismic

qualifications. AECL, in plants outside Ontario, has had 36 programmable logic

controllers (PLCs _) in operation in three CANDU plants since 1982 (over 300 system

years) with no incidents of spurious plant trips due to any kind of PLC malfunction

and no incidence of failure to trip when required. When a digital component or

system begins to degrade, the self-checking features immediately put the system in

trip mode and alert plant personnel, who in all cases have been able to identify and

replace the faulty component within two hours. This performance has been

achieved using a software quality assurance program that meets the IEEE and IEC

standards, but does not include extraordinary measures to prevent common mode

software design errors.

It is very difficult to compare the status of I&C systems in Canadian and U.S. nuclear

facilities, because they have developed under very different technical and regulatory

environments. The CANDU reactors are large because they use natural uranium.

Digital control systems are required to operate at the rated power levels, where

xenon has an influence on the neutron flux distribution and stability. U.S. nuclear

reactors use enriched uranium and are substantially smaller. As a result, the

influence of xenon on the spatial distribution of the neutron flux is limited, and analog

control systems are deemed to be adequate. Necessity and sound engineering have

made digital control systems acceptable in the CANDU reactors.

Extensive experience with digital systems in control of early CANDU reactors

demonstrated the inherent advantages (reliability, flexibility, stability, etc.). Hence,

it was a logical next step to introduce digital systems into safety systems. As a result

The terms "PLC' (programmable logic controller) and "PDC" (programmable digital controller)

are often used interchangeably, depending on the context.
156 Energy

of Canada's very favorable experience in using digital systems in both control and

safety systems, the percent of such systems using digital technology has grown

rapidly (see Figure 25). The ability to easily automate many test and calibration

functions, to the point of using every other cycle for testing in safety systems, has

resulted in significant advantages and safety improvements to the CANDU power

plants over plants using analog systems. Indeed, the Canadian use of digital safety

systems in nuclear power plants, without analog backup systems, is almost unique

in the world.

100

<

[-

0

DOUGLAS PICKERING BRUCE CANDU

POINT "A" "A" 600 DARLINGTON

° I #° I I I

1970 1980 1990

Figure 9.5. Trend Toward Digital Contxol and Protection in CANDU Pressurized Heavy Water l_actor

Nuclear Steam Supply Systems (PHWR NSSS). (Source: Atomic Energy of Canada, Ltd.)

In the United States, digital control was not originally deemed a necessity to operate

nuclear power plants safely, and vendors utilized traditional analog systems for both

control and safety. Once the overall design of power plants evolved to a certain

level, the rapid growth of the industry (over 100 plants in 25 years) often made

regulatory approval of changes difficult. By the time the advantages of digital

systems became apparent to U.S. vendors and utilities, they were a decade or more

behind the Canadians as far as experience with digital systems was concerned.

Although there are exceptions, most U.S. nuclear I&C vendors today utilize digital
ProgramSummary 157

systems that emulate the function of the analog systems they replace, and make the

units plug compatible, physically, electronically and functionally.

Table 27 compares I&C systems in U.S. and Canadian nuclear power plants. For

the reasons discussed above, the I&C systems in the Canadian plants are well ahead

of those in the United States in most categories. Furthermore, there is little

expectation that the situation will change significantly in the near future. (However,

a recent Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) initiative could change this

situation substantially by the end of the century.) A major contributing cause is that

there have been no new orders for nuclear power plants from U.S. utilities since the

accident at Three Mile Island. Nevertheless, there is considerable effort being

expended in the United States for I&C systems for the next generation of nuclear

power plants (SBWR, AP-600, ALWR, and MHTGR). Since many U.S. vendors are

associated with foreign vendors (Combustion Engineering is owned by ABB Atom,

B&W is 51% owned by Framatom, and General Electric has a very close association

with both Toshiba and Hitachi), it is expected that much of the European and

Japanese experience in advanced I&C could be available to U.S. vendors for the

next generation of nuclear power plants in the United States. Canadian I&C

technology is also available in the United States, and AECL is an active competitor

in bidding for digital I&C systems (e.g., digital feedwater control systems) in U.S.

nuclear plants. AECL has also submitted a letter of intent to the U.S. Nuclear

Regulatory Commission to submit the 450 MWe CANDU-3 design for standard design

certification under 10 CFR part 52.

The hypothesis that properly introducing digital systems increases safety has been

supported by the Canadian experience. The safety significance of the performance

of digital vs. analog systems is a critically important issue, and it undoubtedly will

become more important with aging and obsolescence of hardwired analog

components. The use of flexible digital systems permits reallocation of the testing

function to the computer, with an attendant increase in reliability and safety.

Mounting evidence of the superior performance of digital systems provides a basis

for all regulatory authorities to allow utilities worldwide to introduce digital-based

systems where it makes sense to do so. The most important step needed for such

action is a clear definition by regulatory authorities of the validation and verification

requirements and acceptance criteria for both digital hardware and software.
158 Energy

TABLE 27

Comparison of Canadian and U.S. Nuclear I&C Systems

(See Key, p. 44)

RESEARCH DEVELOPMENT IMPLEMENT.

S_tus Trs_t Stsl_ Trend S_,,tus 'rnmd

Digital Instrumentation 0

Man-Machine Int_ce

Advanced Control

Control Room _gn

Regulatory Acceptance

Artificial Intelligence

= _.

0 = • +

0 = 0

+ -_ -4-

+ -> +

0 = +

-> + ->

= + ->

-> + ->

-> + ->

-> + -->

--_> 4- --_>
ProgramSummary

EUROPEAN NU_ IN TRUMENTATION AND CONTROLS

December 1991

159

James D. White, Oak Ridge National Laboratory (Panel Cochair)

David D. Lanning, MIT (Panel Cochair)

Leo Beltracchi, Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Fred R. Best, Texas A&M University

James R. Easter, Westinghouse

Lester C. Oakes, EPRI

A.L. Sudduth, Duke Power Company

_UND

A panel of U.S. specialists conducted a study of instrumentation and controls (I&C)

technology used in nuclear power plants in Europe. These findings relate to the

countries visited and to pressurized water reactor (PWR) nuclear power plants. The

panel visited France, Germany, the Soviet Union, Czechoslovakia, and Norway.

SUMMAI_

The U.S. is behind in the application of advanced instrumentation and controls in

nuclear reactors. All European countries that operate nuclear power plants, as well

as Canada, Japan, and the U.S., are moving toward use of digital computers,

especially microprocessors, in information and control systems. The operator's role

varies by country. Japan and Germany are moving toward a high degree of

automation, whereas in France the emphasis is on computer-generated procedures

with the decision to enable being made by skilled operators. In U.S. and Soviet

plants, the emphasis is on using digital systems to help the operator identify

problems, decide on the appropriate corrective actions, and aid in the execution of

those actions.

The U.S. is behind in the development and experience of using digital systems in

nuclear plants, and in the use of fault diagnosis and signal validation systems. The

hardware for digital systems used in all countries comes mostly from U.S. computer

companies, but the lack of deployment of digital systems in U.S. nuclear plants has
160 Energy

kept the U.S. behind in developing experience in computer system architecture for

nuclear I&C systems. The Europeans are also ahead in the use of computer

assisted software engineering (CASE) tools and in the development of standards.

European instrumentation for nuclear power plants is similar to that in the U.S.,

although some special insmm_entation is being developed.

An advantage to being behind is that the U.S. can learn from the mistakes of those

ahead. The digital systems' programmability can entice the user to add complexities

that can evolve into problems. Efforts must be made to maintain simplicity.

Qualitative Comparisons

The panel made a qualitative comparison of the U.S. and Europe in instrumentation

and controls for nuclear power plants. Table 28 shows the standing of the countries

visited relative to the U.S.

TABLE 28

Europe Compared to the United States in Nuclear Power Plant I&C

(See Key, p. 44)

Control Room Design

Analog-Digital Trans.

Support Systems

Control Strategies

Architecture

Instrumentation

Standards & Tools

BASIC

RESEARCH

Status _ Status

+ = ÷

0 = +

-4- -_ -F

-4- = ÷

0 = 0

_- = .f.

ADVANCED PBODUCT

Dm,ZLoPsrm,r r u em'r.

Trend Status Tmawl

-_> ._ -_

-_. ÷ -_

-:> -4- -:>

-> + ->

= _ -_.

As shown in Table 28, Europe is ahead of the U.S. and moving ahead further in

implementation of products in all seven categories, with the possible exception of

instrumentation. In the area of advanced development, Europe is also ahead except

for architecture and instrumentation. In basic research, Europe is ahead in four of

the seven categories; however, for analog-to-digital transition and for instn.uuentation,
Pro_rsm Summary 161

the U.S. is about equal, and the U.S. is ahead in architecture. In other words, U.S.

computers are being purchased and utilized in all countries that the panel visited,

but the development and implementation of the computers for nuclear power plant

instrumentation and control is more advanced in Europe.

Evolution of Automation in Nuclear Power Plants

There is a move in every country designing nuclear power plants to improve the

plant's availability, safety, ease of operation and/or acceptability by the public and

regulators. The appropriate balance of automation and manual operation is the

subject of considerable debate in the U.S. and Europe today. Most researchers

agree that today's technology would support digital automation of all the major

systems in a power plant. One of the concerns, however, is how to verify and

validate the required software.

In the U.S., the transition from today's nuclear control systems to more automated

future designs is likely to occur in phases. One of the purposes of this study was

to determine where the European concepts were in terms of evolution of I&C. The

U.S. transition may be described in terms of four levels (see Fig. 26). The solid

diamonds represent a plant that is operational; empty diamonds represent plants that

are not yet operational.

S

Y

S

T

E

M

S

DEGREE OF AUTOMATION

Figure 26. Nuclear Plant I&C State of the Art
162 Energy

In level 1, some of today's analog controllers will be replaced with more reliable

digital controllers performing basic proportional-integral-differential (PID) control.

This phase of evolution is already under way in the U.S. Generally, digital

implementations of control systems on U.S. reactors have been one-for-one

replacements of the original analog systems and have not taken full advantage of

recent technological developments. As the chart shows, the panel thinks U.S. LWRs

are in the beginning of level 1. The French plant Bugey is a little further advanced

but also in level 1, while the Japanese Tokyo Electric Power Company's

Kashiwazaki-1 and -2 are at the interface with the next level.

Level 2 of the predicted transition will include automation of routine procedures like

plant start-up, shut-down, refueling, load changes, and certain emergency response

procedures. Significant assistance will be given to the operator through computerbased expert systems and control room displays of plant status. Control will be

implemented with digital technology. The newly completed Darlington plant in

Canada is at level 2, as are the U.S. Advanced Light Water Reactor (ALWR) and the

newest French plant (the N4 class). The German ISAR-II is between levels 2 and 3.

Level 3 is a significant advance toward automation with the operator interacting with

and monitoring an intelligent, adaptive supervisory control system. Smart sensors

will be expected to validate signals and communicate with fault-tolerant process

controllers. Control strategies will be adaptive, and very robust to off-normal

conditions. Advanced LMR (PRISM) concepts and MHTGR concepts being studied

by the U.S. DOE will have these capabilities. The newest Canadian concept, the

CANDU 3, is placed in this category, as is the Japanese Advanced Boiling Water

Reactor (ABWR).

Level 4 would be characterized as total automation of the plant, with an intelligent

control system aware of operational status and in interactive communication with the

operator to keep him apprised of any degraded conditions, likely consequences of

these conditions, and possible strategies for minimizing deleterious consequences.

At this point most plant functions will be automated and robotized including

maintenance and security surveillance.

The control and information system will be an integral part of not only the total plant

design, but also the national network of commercial power plants. The control

system computer will learn from the network relevant information concerning other

plants and component operational experience, and will alert the operator if that

experience is relevant to his plant. No U.S. design has gone this far in incorporating

advanced technology and automation. The Japanese Frontier Research Group on

Artificial Intelligence is working on conceptual definition of a plant of this type. In

the evolution of higher levels of automation, the designers will try to improve all

aspects of nuclear power plants, including safety and reliability. Progress in all

countries should build on successes and experiences in other countries.
Program Summary

NUCLEAR POWER IN JAPAN

October 1990

163

Kent F. Hansen, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (Panel Chair)

Wallace B. Behnke, Commonwealth Edison (retired)

Sheldon B. Cousin, Stone & Webster Engineering Corporation

Ersel A. Evans, Battelle Pacific Northwest Laboratory

Donald R. Olander, University of California at Berkeley

Victor H. Ransom, Purdue University

James D. White, Oak Ridge National Laboratory

SUMMARY

The JTEC panel on nuclear power in Japan examined the status and direction of

nuclear power-related research and development in Japan in six areas: the nuclear

fuel cycle, nuclear materials, instrumentation and control technology, CAD/CAM,

nuclear safety research, and nuclear plant construction. The panel based its report

on a review of literature and a one-week trip to Japan in January 1990 during which

panel members visited numerous Japanese laboratories and other nuclear facilities.

The panel found that the nuclear power industry in Japan was at an advanced state

of development; Japan had become technologically self-sufficient. Long-term goals

of the Japanese program included closure of the complete fuel cycle and pursuit of

the liquid metal fast breeder reactor as the future base system.

Conte_t of Nuclear Power in Japan

The panel found the Japanese program of nuclear power research and development

to be blessed with many benefits, including a strong, consistent federal commitment

to nuclear power; an adequate supply of R&D funds; a stable set of priorities for

R&D; a well-developed distribution of responsibilities between the public and private

sectors; and a highly capable group of agencies engaged in R&D. In 1955, Japanese

policymakers, recognizing that their nation lacked indigenous energy sources, made

a commitment to develop nuclear power as the most likely vehicle for achieving a

self-reliant electric energy supply system. This key decision has remained a

cornerstone of Japanese energy policy.
164 Energy

The structure in which the nuclear program evolved included a well-developed longrange plan, a clear distribution of obligations among plan participants, a strong utility

industry capable of constructing and operating plants and learning from its

experiences, a strong supply sector capable of designing plants and developing the

designs toward the ultimate goal, and a commitment to adequate funding for nuclear

R&D to ensure the quality and completeness of the effort. Other factors became

important, but none were displaced or downgraded. Public opinion grew negative

toward nuclear power, particularly after Chernobyl. Safety grew increasingly

important in Japan. The industry devoted considerable resources to ensuring safe

operations and conducting safety research. But this added emphasis came as an

addition to ongoing efforts, not as a replacement.

The Research and Development Focus

The Japanese nuclear research program is dominated by light-water reactor (LWR)

technology, the nuclear fuel cycle, and advanced reactors. These three areas

consumed about $1.5 billion in 1989 R&D funds. LWR technology is supported

mainly by the electric utilities and the vendors. Research focuses on improvements

in plant safety and in economics. They are working to develop improved, extended

burnup fuels for nuclear power plants. Another important area is controls and

instrumentation, including advanced control room design. Longer-range research

focuses on developing advanced LWRs of both the boiling water reactor (BWR) and

pressurized water reactor types.

Closure of the nuclear fuel cycle is a priority for the Japanese. They do not wish to

rely on external suppliers for enrichment services or reprocessing services. This

R&D is being done primarily at government research laboratories. Government

expenditures on the fuel cycle were $280 million in 1989, and the utility contribution

was $200 million. The largest expenditure, about $180 million, was for reprocessing.

The Japanese, foreseeing a need for plutonium in their future breeder economy, are

committed to having all of the reprocessing technology developed and in place in

advance of the widespread deployment of fast breeder reactors (FBRs). The longterm goal of the fuel cycle research is complete self-sufficiency, with the ability to

handle enrichment, fuel fabrication, reprocessing, and waste storage; the near-term

goal is to require only uranium ore and to be self-sufficient in all other aspects of the

cycle.

The largest nuclear R&D expenditures are for the advanced reactor program, which

accounted for $775 million in 1989. The FBR received $650 million, or nearly 85

percent of the total advanced reactor budget. The key project is the Monju reactor.

Similar in design to the Clinch River Breeder, the l_Ionju reactor is a 280 MWe liquid

metal fast breeder reactor. At the time of the panel visit, construction was about 80

percent complete, with initial criticality scheduled for 1992.
Program Summary 165

SPECIFIC _ COMPAI_SONS

Nuclear Fuel Cycle

Japan is committed to the complete fuel cycle -- uranium mining, conversion,

enrichment, irradiation, reprocessing, and waste disposal. Unlike the U.S., Japan

includes plutonium utilization and uranium recycling in its nuclear program as a

matter of national policy. As part of the effort to develop a complete fuel cycle, the

Japanese participate aggressively in international cooperative efforts. Such efforts

encompass university and national laboratory programs and cooperation with

government and industry organizations worldwide to achieve the best engineering

and most effective commercialization for all parts of the fuel cycle.

Nuclear

Japanese materials research began from a base that incorporated much initial U.S.

research. Japan's LWR plants have higher energy availability than U.S. plants for

several reasons, including improved materials. Because of their careful contrc_f

water chemistry and materials selection, the Japanese have had very few problems

with Intergranular Stress Corrosion Cracking in their BWRs or steam generator

problems in their PWRs. The Japanese are conducting research on extended-life

fuels for both the BWRs and PWRs with the objective of extending the operating

cycle to eighteen months without suffering fuel failures. Meeting this goal would

increase plant availabilities to over 80 percent. The Japanese also have

demonstrated interest in load following, and considerable effort is underway to

develop and test long-lived fuel that could be cycled in power. Advanced reactor

materials research is primarily directed toward breeder fuels and work related to UPu fuels for use in LWRs. A small amount of research is being done on hightemperature, gas-cooled reactor fuels.

Instrumentation and Controls

Application of improved instrumentation and controls (I&C) to nuclear power plants

appears to be much farther along in Japan than in the U.S. The panel attributed this

progress to Japan's long, productive R&D commitment and its healthy industry. The

Japanese have demonstrated particular interest in several specific technologies.

National labs, vendors, and universities have vigorously pursued work in artificial

intelligence and expert systems, with applications in component diagnostics and

operator support systems. Fiber optics are being used in some existing plants and

will be used in new plants. The subject of man-machine interfaces was receiving a

great deal of attention in Japan. Research was focusing on clarification of human

behavioral characteristics, systematic applications of behavioral information, and

organizational and systems aspects of human error experience.

ORIGINAL P._,GE IS

OF" POOR QUALITY
166 Energy

The panel found no evidence that Japan was ahead of the U.S. in basic research.

Indeed, the U.S. retains a lead in several areas, including information theory and

advanced computer languages.

CJ_/CAM 'Po_nolooy

CAD/CAM technology has reached comparable levels of development in Japan and

the United States. Both nations are using CAD/CAM to develop three-dimensional

models of conceptual designs of new plants. Common databases are being used

by different designers for technical areas such as reactor physics, thermal

hydraulics, and piping. The Japanese nuclear power program provides the

opportunity to incorporate application into the design and fabrication activities

because real plants are being developed and built.

The Japanese are actively pursuing further development of CAD/CAM systems.

Near-term goals include full 3-D design capability, common databases, and

interactive communication with designers. Longer-term goals include detailed

design, procurement documents, and manufacturing specifications. Databases would

be generated for the as-built system for use during plant operation. The panel felt

that the United States remained the leader in conceptualizing and developing

software, CAD/CAM systems, database management programs, system integration,

and nonnuclear-related applications. The tendency in Japan was to purchase

completed packages and adapt them for use in specific applications.

Nuclear Safety

Concern about nuclear plant safety has permeated the design and operation of

nuclear plants in both the U.S. and Japan. However, there are significant differences

between the two nations in safety R&D. In Japan, safety is seen as a matter of such

great importance that even minor events must be avoided. As a consequence, much

safety R&D in Japan focuses on operational issues. In the U.S., the key element of

safety research is severe accident scenarios.

Japan's government R&D is closely tied to support of regulatory activities. Largescale test facilities are maintained for research in thermal hydraulics, two-phase flow,

and seismic testing of components and systems. Results from the research are used

to validate computer models of systems behavior. In general, the panel found the

U.S. ahead of Japan in conceiving and developing such codes. However, the

Japanese enhance the codes more completely, using experimental data for

validation. The Japanese emphasize human factors in nuclear safety R&D. Vendors

use research results to improve control room design and support systems evaluation.

The Japanese have been slow to enter the field of probabilistic safety assessment

because of the view that, since severe accidents will not occur at their plants, they

have no need for Level 3 capability. Nevertheless, the issue was under active study
Program Summary 167

at the time of the panel's visit. In Japan much applied AI work is conducted by

federal labs, utilities, and vendors, though there is little coupling to academia.

Nuclear Power Plant Construction

Japan has been more successful than the U.S. in holding down the cost of

constructing nuclear power plants. Institutional, regulatory, and cultural differences

account for the higher cost of U.S. construction. Japan has also achieved effective

nuclear regulation with far less disruption and delay in construction and licensing

than has occurred in the United States. Japan's improvements in the construction

process include (a) shop fabrication of very large modules that are shipped to the

site and installed; (b) substantial completion of detailed engineering drawings before

start of construction; (c) fully computerized, comprehensive construction sequence

plans; and (d) comprehensive quality assurance programs with detailed inspection,

but performed to minimize interference with construction. Japan was at an early

stage in applying robotics to field construction at the time of the panel's visit.

Japan spends more on construction-related R&D than the U.S., and is more effective

at transferring new technology into construction. Japan's nuclear industry is applying

the latest design improvements and new technology from R&D to construction. The

only opportunities for U.S. manufacturers and A/E firms to apply developments have

been in overseas projects, such as those in Korea. Without new construction activity,

the U.S. could lose parity with Japan in construction-related R&D and associated

infrastructure. These trends could lead to higher electricity prices for U.S.

consumers and an increased competitive disadvantage for U.S. manufacturers in

global markets.
168 Energy
Pr_ s_ 169

BIOTECHNOLOGY

BIOPROCB_ ENGINEERING IN JAPAN

May 1992

Prtnclr_l Authom

Daniel I.C. Wang, MIT (Panel Chair)

Stephen W. Drew, Merck

Randolph T. Hatch, Aaston, Inc.

Arthur E. Humphrey, Lehigh University

Other Contributom

Duane F. Bmley, University of Maryland Baltimore County

Smart E. Builder, Genentech, Inc.

Marvin Cassman, National Institutes of Health

Alfred L. Goldberg, Harvard University

Nelson Goodman, U.S. Department of Agriculture

Frederick Heineken, National Science Foundation

Michael R. Ladisch, Purdue University

Oskar R. Zaborsky, National Research Council

_UND

The goals of the JTEC report on bioprocess engineering were to assess the status

of bioprocess engineering and biotechnology, as well as to compare trends in the

U.S. and Japan in areas relating to the biotechnological processes. The panel also

sought to assess major differences between the U.S. and Japan in bioprocess

engineering research and development.
170 Biotechnology

SUMMARY

In Japan, biotechnology activities occur primarily in large companies; few if any

small biotech start-ups are apparent. Many Japanese companies with major efforts

in biotechnology began in other fields of manufacturing. The product portfolio of the

present Japanese biotechnology market is similar to that in the United States. Total

sales increased 48 percent in 1990, to a total of $2.187 billion.

Molecular Biology

Japanese research in molecular biology and biological sciences is similar to that in

the U.S. Japanese research is directed towards both prokaryotic and eukaryotic

organisms. However, the panel did not notice any novel prokaryotic expression

system under development in Japanese laboratories. Systems used for protein

expression in prokaryotic organisms are similar to those employed in the United

States. There is a very noticeable emphasis in Japan on research using eukaryotes,

particularly in animal and mammalian cell systems. Lastly, the dominant opinion in

Japan is that, for human therapy, murine antibodies will not be the major targets.

Instead, humanized antibodies will be their choice.

Upstream Bioprocessing

Bioprocess engineering R&D philosophy in Japanese laboratories dealing with

upstream technologies, such as recombinant protein production in bacteria and

animal cells, differs from that in the U.S. The Japanese do not appear to emphasize

the use of basic engineering principles for process development or process scaleup. Instead, the emphasis is much more biological, including screening, selection,

and medium development. Also, automation in upstream technology is being

developed extensively to reduce the human interface. One observation concerning

Japan's upstream manufacturing technologies is the similarity to what they have

acquired or licensed from the U.S. In the long run, Japan could move ahead of the

U.S.

DownstreEu Bioprocessing

In downstream processing, the panel saw no new advances in product isolation and

purification. Chromatographic media and methodology development is being carried

out by Japanese companies that supply chemicals, biologicals, equipment and

process expertise to the biomanufacturing sectors. There is noticeably intense

activity in the area of in-vitro protein refolding. Many industrial laboratories have a

heavy focus on protein refolding, but the panel learned little about their progress.
Program Summary 171

Univemity _ and Education

Research training and education for biotechnology and bioprocess engineering in

Japanese universities is different from that in the U.S. Most Japanese research and

educational programs are not driven by engineering principles and are located in

other disciplines. Japanese university programs focus on applied research, which

contrasts with the basic orientation of U.S. efforts. Lastly, the involvement of

industrial and foreign investigators in Japanese university laboratories is extensive.

 procs 

Bioprocess engineering R&D by Japanese companies is not driven by genetic

engineering principles, a situation similar to that found at Japan's universities.

Process development activities are often performed directly at the manufacturing site

rather than within the company's R&D laboratories.

Many Japanese government agencies support and perform basic and applied

research in bioprocess engineering and biotechnology. The agencies help identify

directions for Japan's biotechnology R&D. Government support for R&D is often

long-range, with a typical planning horizon of ten years. The government has

fostered development of an international network in advancing Japan's biotechnology

program.

Future Trends

Japanese industry is focused on molecular biology efforts to use prokaryofic

organisms for producing therapeutic proteins. Japanese industry has targeted

recombinant products that the U.S. has already developed. It is evident that Japan

plans to be a world player in the use of prokaryotes to compete in the

pharmaceutical market.

The Japanese biotechnology industry has targeted animal cell cultures as vehicles

for the production of therapeutic proteins. Due to their acquisition of U.S. cell

culture processes, the Japanese are also in an excellent position to improve existing

manufacturing methods. Japan's bioprocess engineering efforts will be competitive

with and could even surpass those of the U.S. in the years to come.

There is a large research effort in Japan on protein engineering. However, the basic

principles, software, and hardware presently employed are mostly from abroad.

Japan has traditionally dominated many areas of bioprocess engineering and

biotechnology; there is no sign that they have decreased their efforts in these areas.

However, there is no counterpart when compared with the U.S. in the development

of those potentials in biotechnology manufacturing systems. The Japanese

biotechnology sector is rapidly entering into bioprocess manufacturing by using
172 Biotechnology

know-how either acquired or licensed from the U.S. This will reduce process

development time and costs significantly, and speed Japan's market entry.

(_udiuttive Comparison Between the U.S. and Japan

The JTEC panel prepared a qualitative comparison summarizing the present status

and future trends in the U.S. and Japan in various areas relating to biotechnological

processes (see Table 29).
Program Summary

TABLE 29 - Japan Compared to U.S. in Biotechnology Processes

(See Key, p. 44)

173

MOLECULAR BIOLOGY

product discovery - <-

genetics - < -

MICROBIOLOGY

screening + ->

strain development + ->

fermentation technology + ->

UPSTREAM BIOPROCESSING

process development

engineering science

monitor & control

bioreactor scale-up

DOWNSTREAM BIOPROCESSING

solid-liquid separation

cell disruption

membrane technology

affinity chromatography

ion exchange chromatography

size exclusion chromatography

HPLC

protein refoldJng

BIOCATALYSIS

enzyme discovery

enzyme science

enzyme engineering

industrial implementation

OTHER MANUFACTURING ISSUES

containment

cGMP

technology management

EDUCATIONAL STATUS

basic training

applied training

engineering vs. science

faculty biotech knowledge

UNIVERSITY/GOVERNMENT/INDUSTRY INTERACTION

univemity-industry

un/vemity--govenunent

government.industry

overall

+ ->

0 =

0 =

0 =

m

+ -->

+ -->

+ ->

- <_

+ ->

- <-

+ ->

+ ->

+ ->

+ ->

+ ->
174 Biotechnology
Appendices 175

APPENDICES

PROFESSIONAL BACKGROUND INFORMATION

]TEC/WTEC STAFF BIOGRAPHIES

The JTEC/WTEC staff at Loyola College includes: Dr. Michael DeHaemer, Principal

Investigator and Director; Dr. R.D. Shelton, Co-Principal Investigator and ITRI

Director; Mr. Geoff Holdridge, JTEC/WTEC Staff Director and Series Editor; Mr.

Bobby Williams, Assistant Director and JTEC/WTEC Comptroller, Ms. Aminah Batta,

Editorial Assistant, and Ms. Catrina Foley, Secretary. Biographies of the Loyola staff

are included below.

_dnah Batta

Aminah Batta is Editorial Assistant for JTEC/WTEC reports and other publications.

In this capacity, Ms. Batta compiles draft reports, implements editing changes,

assists in graphics layout, and acts as liaison between panel members and the

JTEC/WTEC office in matters pertaining to report preparation and publication. Prior

to holding this position, Ms. Batta worked for over two years as the JTEC/WTEC

Administrative Assistant, before resigning to continue her education.

Ms. Batta received her B.S. degree in African Cultural History and Computer Science

from the State University of New York at Brockport and her M.S. degree in African

History from Morgan State University in Baltimore, Maryland. She is currently

working towards her Doctorate in Latin American/Caribbean History at Howard

University in Washington, D.C.

Michul DeHumer

Michael J. DeHaemer is Principal Investigator and JTEC/WTEC Director. He has

been associated with the program since 1991, having joined as WTEC Director when

the scope of technology assessment expanded to Europe and Russia. On the faculty

of the Sellinger School of Business and Management at Loyola College, Dr.

DeHaemer is Chair of the Information Systems and Decision Sciences Department

and teaches Information Technology and Strategy, Expert Systems, and HumanComputer Interface Design. He is founder and Director of the Lattanze HumanComputer Interface Laboratory and is a research specialist in speech systems for

computer input and output. His research interests also include business applications

of artificial intelligence and technology assessments.
176 Professional Background Information

Dr. DeHaemer is a former Captain in the U.S. Navy and nuclear submarine

commander. He received a B.S. in Physics from the University of Notre Dame, M.S.

in Operations Research from the Naval Postgraduate School, and holds an M.B.A.,

an M.S. in Industrial Engineering and a Ph.D. in Management Information Systems

from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute.

Catrina Foley

Catrina Monique Foley presently holds the position of Secretary in the JTEC/WTEC

office. She has been part of the JTEC/WTEC team since 1991.

Ms. Foley graduated from Palmer Business School in Baltimore, Maryland in 1991,

where she received a certificate of achievement in Office Automation. In 1988 she

graduated from Robert D. Edgren High School of Misawa, Japan. Currently an

undergraduate student at Baltimore City Community College in Baltimore, MD, Ms.

Foley is planning to transfer to a four year college to obtain her B.A. degree in

Japanese Linguistics.

Holdridge

Geoffrey M. Holdridge, as JTEC/WTEC Staff Director, is in charge of the day-to-day

operation of the JTEC/WTEC program, including both the Loyola staff and

JTEC/WTEC's off-site contractors. As JTEC/WTEC Series Editor, Mr. Holdridge is

also responsible for final editing, review reconciliation, quality control, and

production of all JTEC/WTEC final reports. Mr. Holdridge has been managing JTEC

and WTEC operations at Loyola in various capacities since 1989. Prior to coming

to JTEC, Mr. Holdridge served as a special assistant to the Division Director for

Emerging Engineering Technologies (EET) at NSF, where he helped manage the

JTEC program at NSF. In an earlier assignment in the Division of Policy Research

and Analysis at NSF, Mr. Holdridge was responsible for researching and drahing

reports to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) on renewable energy and

energy conservation technologies. In a special assignment for the EET Division in

1987-88, Mr. Holdridge prepared a report on the long-term industrial consequences

of a loss of U.S. competitiveness in the commodity memory chip market as part of

NSF's contribution to an inter-agency study on the status of the U.S. semiconductor

industry. Mr. Holdridge has also worked as Staff Consultant for the National

Academy of Sciences' Panel on the Impact of National Security Export Controls in

International Technology Transfer (also known as the Allen Panel). Mr. Holdridge

holds a B.A. in History (specializing in 20th Century East Asia) from Yale University.

R.D. Shelton

Robert Duane Shelton has led international technology assessments since 1984, as

science policy analyst at NSF, and now as ITRI Director. He is also program

manager of the U.S. Department of Transportation contract funding the new ITRI
Appendices 177

Transportation Technology Evaluation Center (TTEC). His degrees are in electrical

engineering from Texas Tech (MCL), MIT (as NSF Fellow), and University of

Houston. Dr. Shelton worked at Texas Instruments, Inc. on electronics R&D, and at

NASA in performance analysis of the Apollo space communications system and of

TDRSS -- the system currently used for Shuttle communications. He was a professor

at the University of Houston, University of Louisville, Texas Tech University, and now

Loyola College. During this time, he has served as principal investigator on 35

grants, has written 58 technical papers and one book, and has chaired 57 M.S. and

3 Ph.D. thesis committees. He has chaired academic departments of applied

mathematics, computer science, and now the Department of Electrical Engineering

and Engineering Science at Loyola. His current research interest is science policy

analysis: international technology assessment, high-technology trade problems with

Japan, and national strategies for engineering education.

Bobby Willisms

Bobby A. Williams, JTEC/WTEC Assistant Director and Comptroller, joined the

JTEC/WTEC staff in early 1990. Prior to that, he worked in Washington as an

economist. He spent several years as a branch chief, responsible for research and

reporting on both industrial and macroeconomic developments in China.

Publications include an assessment of China's oil industry for the Joint Economic

Committee of Congress.

Mr. Williams holds B.A. and M.A. degrees from Berea College and Washington

University (St. Louis), respectively, where he was an all-but-dissertation Ph.D.

candidate in economics. His professional interests center on the Japanese and

Chinese economies. More generally, he is interested in economic history,

particularly the roles of technical and institutional change as agents of growth.

OTHER CONTRmUTORS/CONTRACTORS

In addition to the Loyola staff, ITRI depends on the services of a number of other

contributors to the program. These people provide assistance and advice to the

program through subcontracts.

Dr. George Gamota, Senior Advisor to JTEC/WTEC, is the Director of the Mitre

Institute, the Mitre Corporation. His experience includes senior R&D positions in

industry, academia and government. He was Director for Defense Research in the

Carter Administration. He has also served as Professor of Physics and Director of

the Institute of Science and Technology at the University of Michigan, and, prior to

that, as a Research Scientist at Bell Laboratories.

Mr. Cecil Uyehara of Uyehara International Associates and Mr. Gene Lim of SEAM

International provide advance work in Japan under contract to JTEC. Mr. Joseph
178 Pro_ional Background InJormation

Conn, Mr. John Mikula, and Mr. Henry Gillen of American Trade Initiatives, Inc.

provide advance services in Europe and the former Soviet Union. Finally, Amett

Holloway and Karen Hagerman are currently providing manuscript editing services.

LIST OF SPONSORS

Paul Herer, Senior Advisor for Planning and Technology Assessment in NSF's

Engineering Directorate, is in charge of the JTEC/WTEC program at NSF. The 15

JTEC and WTEC studies active in 1992 and 1993 also boasted sponsorship by

several other programs at NSF and by 11 other branches of the Federal Government.

The representatives of these agencies with whom we worked most closely, and who

assisted us in defining and organizing the 1992 and 1993 studies, are listed below.

Institutional affiliations listed are those that applied at the time of the studies.

Robert Billingsley, Defense Technical Information Center

Norman Caplan, NSF

Y.T. Chien, NSF

Ken Chong, NSF

Joseph Clark, NTIS

Jerry Covert, Wright Patterson Air Force Base

Steven Cross, ARPA

Andrew Crowson, Army Research Office

Ramon DePaula, NASA Headquarters

Christine E. Fisher, Department of Defense

Jillian Evans, NASA Goddard

John Evans, NASA Headquarters

Craig Fields, DARPA

Don Freebum, Dept. of Energy

Kaigham J. ("Ken") Gabriel, ARPA

Phyllis Genther-Yoshida, Dept. of Commerce

Lance Glasser, ARPA

Frederick Heineken, NSF

Frank Huband, NSF

George Jordy, Dept. of Energy

Tom Kusuda, Dept. of Commerce

Charles Lee, Air Force Office of Scientific Research

Marshall Lih, NSF

Louis Martin-Vega, NSF

Paul Maupin, Dept. of Energy

Henry McGee Jr., NSF

David McLaine, Wright Patterson Air Force Base

James McMichael, Air Force Office of Scientific Research

Howard Moraff, NSF

Nicholas Naclerio, ARPA

David Nelson, Dept. of Energy
Emily Rudin, NSF

Linton Salmon, NSF

David Slobodin, ARPA

Marko Slusarczuk, DARPA

Charles Smart, ARPA

Dick Urban, ARPA

Charles Wayne, DARPA

Gio Wiederhold, ARPA

Appendices 179

OTHER PARTICIPANTS

In addition to the funding sponsors listed above, JTEC and WTEC studies also

included non-funding participation by 10 other Federal agencies and private

institutions, as indicated in Table 30. The individuals named in the table participated

in foreign site visits for the listed studies, but were neither sponsors nor panel

members. Funding from their parent organizations was in most cases limited to

support for their travel with the panel. However, in many cases the participation of

these people was an invaluable addition to the study, both for their unique

institutional perspectives and for the many excellent site reports they contributed to

our final reports.

TABLE 30

Other Orgm_iom and Individuals Panicipa_g in JT /WTEC Studies

1992 end 1993

,,,,,, , ,, ,

Machine Translation Scan C2C, Inc. Tom Satoh

Bioprocess Engineering National Institutes of Health Marvin Cassman

Department of Agriculture Nelson Goodman

National Research Council Oscar Zaborsky

Database Office of Naval Research David Kahaner

Displays (Japan) Dept. of Commerce/ITA Heidi Hoffman

NASA-Ames Research Center James Latimer

Knowledge-Based Systems Of_e of Naval Research David Kahaner

Polymer Composites Army Research Laboratory Dana Granville

Manufacturing National Science Foundation Bruce Kramer

Research Submersibles Office of Naval Research James Sampson

Electronic Packaging Jet Propulsion Laboratory Phillip Barela

NIST George Harman

FSU Displays McDennell-Deuglas Aerospace Robert Rice
180 Professional Background InJormation

LIST OF JTEC/WTEC PANELISTS, 199_94

JTEC and WTEC panelists are also chosen for their unique backgrounds, with a view

to achieving a balance of institutional perspectives in the panel membership. The

following list of panelists from JTEC and WTEC studies active between 1992 and

February of 1994 demonstrates the extent to which we have achieved this balance

in the past two years.

rI'EC Pmnel on Ms_ine Tnmslsfion in Japan

Jaime CarboneU, Carnegie Mellon University (Co-Chair)

Elaine Rich, MCC (Co-Chair)

David E. Johnson, IBM Research

Masaru Tomita, Carnegie Mellon University

Yorick Wilks, New Mexico State University

Muriel Vasconcellos, Pan American Health Organization

]'rEC _ on _ Use and Technology in Japan

Gio Wiederhold, Stanford University (Chair)

Nick Farmer, Chemical Abstracts Service

Charles Bourne, Dialog

Sushil Jajodia, George Mason University

Toshimi Minoura, Oregon State University

Diane C.P. Smith, Xerox Corporation

John Miles Smith, Digital Equipment Corporation

David Beech, Oracle Corporation

JTEC Panel on Blolm:N:Nm_ Ez_;_lsering in Japan

Daniel Wang, MIT (Chair)

Arthur E. Humphrey, Lehigh University

Michael R. Ladisch, Purdue University

Stuart E. Builder, Genentech, Inc.

Stephen W. Drew, Merck & Co.

Alfred Goldberg, Harvard Medical School

Randolph Hatch, Aaston, Inc.

Duane F. Bruley, University of Maryland

J'rEc Par on Display Technoloo in Japan

Lawrence E. Tannas, Jr., Tannas Electronics (Co-Chair)

William E. Glenn, Florida Atlantic University (Co-Chair)

Malcolm Thompson, Xerox Corporation

Thomas Credelle, Apple Computer

William Doane, Kent State University

Arthur H. Firester, David Sarnoff Research Ctr.
Appendices 181

rrEC Panel on Material Handling in Japan

Edward H. Frazelle, Georgia Institute of Technology (Co-Chair)

Dick Ward, Material Handling Industry (Co-Chair)

James M. Apple Jr., Coopers & Lybrand

Alvin R. Voss, IBM

Glenn Petrina, Defense Logistics Agency

Howard A. Zollinger, Zollinger Associates, Inc.

rrEc Panel on Separation Tec, hnclc_u in Japan

C. Judson I_ng, University of California at Berkeley (Chair)

George E. Keller II, Union Carbide Corporation

H.S. Muralidhara, Cargill

Milton E. Wadsworth, University of Utah

William Eykamp, Consultant

Edward L. Cussler, University of Minnesota

J'rEc Panel on Knowledge-Based Sys_ns in Japan

Professor Edward Feigenbaum, Stanford University (Chair)

Penny Nii, Stanford University

Peter E. Friedland, NASA Ames Research Center

Herbert Schorr, University of Southern California

Howard Shrobe, MIT

Bruce B. Johnson, Andersen Consulting

Robert Engelmore, Stanford University (Editor)

Panel on ,_llit8 C.,c_m_unic_orm S_ter_ and Technology

Joseph N. Pelton, University of Colorado (Co-Chair)

Burton I. Edelson, George Washington University (Co-Chair)

Neil R. Helm, George Washington University

William T. Brandon, Mitre Corporation

Charles W. Bostian, Virginia Tech

Vincent W.S. Chan, MIT Lincoln Laboratory

E. Paul Hager, George Mason University

Christoph E. Mahle, COMSAT Laboratories

Edward F. Miller, NASA Lewis Research Center

A. Landis Riley, Jet Propulsion Laboratory

Robert K. Kwan, Jet Propulsion Laboratory

Raymond Jennings, National Telecommunications and Information Agency

WTEC Study on Irusmunentafion, Control, and Salty Systems of Canadian Nuclear

Factlitiea

Robert E. Uhrig, Oak Ridge National Laboratory & the University of Tennessee

Richard J. Carter, Oak Ridge National Laboratory
182 Professional Background Information

J'rEc Pm_ on Advanced Manufacturing Technology k_r Polymer Composite

in J,q n

Dick J. Wilkins, University of Delaware (Chair)

Moto Ashizawa, Ashizawa Associates Composites Engineering

Jon B. DeVault, ARPA

Vistasp M. Karbhari, University of Delaware

Joseph S. McDermott, Consultant

Dee R. Gill, McDonnell Aircraft

WTEC Panel on Research Submmdbl_ and U_8 Technologies in FL-dsnd,

_, Russia, Ukndno, and the United Kingdom

Richard J. Seymour, Texas A&M University (Chair)

D. Richard Blidberg, Northeastern University

Claude P. Brancart, Draper Laboratories

Larry L. Gentry, Lockheed Missiles & Space Co., Inc.

Algis N. Kalvaitis, NOAA

Michael J. Lee, Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute

John B. Mooney Jr., USN (Ret.)

Don Walsh, International Maritime, Inc.

Civil _ Ruoarch Fmmdaflon (CERF') 'l'uk Fmce on European

Constructed Civil Infr__ Systmns and R&D

 rEc Pe tuw oniy)

Richard L. Tucker, Construction Industry Institute (WTEC Chair)

John Fisher, Lehigh University

J. L. Harrison, Fluor Daniel, Inc.

Victor Li, University of Michigan

Tom Pasko, Federal Highway Administration

Michael Gaus, State University of New York at Buffalo

JTEC l:_mol on Micm-electm-mechanic_ Sys_ in Japan

Kensall Wise, University of Michigan (Chair)

Richard S. Muller, University of California at Berkeley

Henry Guckel, University of Wisconsin at Madison

Joseph M. Giachino, Ford Motor Company

G. Benjamin Hocker, Honeywell, Inc.

Stephen C. Jacobsen, University of Utah

JTEC Panel on Electronic Pr, knging in Japan

Michael J. Kelly, Georgia Institute of Technology (Chair)

William Boulton, Auburn University

John Kukowski, Rochester Institute of Technology

Gene Meieran, Intel Corporation

Michael Pecht, University of Maryland

John Peeples, NCR

Rao Tummala, Georgia Institute of Technology
Appendices 183

W'rEC Panel on &dvanced Display Technologies in Belanm, Russia, and Ukraine

William Doane, Kent State University (Chair)

Patricia Cladis, AT&T Bell Laboratories

Chris Curtin, Silicon Video, Inc.

James Latimer, NASA-Ames Research Center

Marko Slusarczuk, USP Holdings, Inc.

Jan Talbot, University of California at San Diego

Zvi Yaniv, Advanced Technology Incubator, Inc.

JTEC Panel on Optoelectronics in the United Stnms and Japan

Stephen Forrest, Princeton University (Chair)
184

B. BIBLIOGRAPHY

Bibliography

The following is a list of publications arising from or about JTEC and WTEC studies,

from 1984 to 1993 inclusive. They are listed in chronological order. A complete list

of JTEC and WTEC final reports from 1984 to the present is included on the inside

back cover.

. "A Preliminary Assessment of Federal Government Efforts in Development of

New Generation Computer Technologies," by R. D. Shelton, PRA Issue Paper

No. 84-7, NSF, Feb. 29, 1984. (For the NSF Assistant Director for STIA.)

. "Status of Computer Science and Technology in Japan," by R. D. Shelton, PRA

Issue Paper No. 85-2, NSF, November 21, 1984. (For Office of Science and

Technology Policy, Executive Office of the President.)

. "Japan Reaches Beyond Silicon," Trudy Bell, 1EEE Spectrum, October 1985,

pp. 46-52.

. "Effects of Loss of Capability of the U.S. Semiconductor Industry on Upstream

and Downstream Industries" by R. D. Shelton, et al., 1986 (For the National

Security Council)

. "Japan's Advances in Polymers Pose a Challenge," Chemical Week, April 23,

1986, p. 8.

. "Assessing Japan's Role in Telecommunications," IEEE Spectrum, June 1986,

pp. 47-52.

. Gaining Ground:Japan's StridesinScience and Technology, George Gamota

and Wendy Frieman, Ballinger,Cambridge, MA, 1988.

. "Progress in Japanese Research in Computer Science" by R.D. Shelton,

presented at the ACM Computer Science Conference in February 1989.

. "The New US-Japan Technological Competitive Position: Implications for

Technology Transfer," by R. D. Shelton, presented at the Annual Meeting of

the Academy of International Business, June 1989.

10. "Japan Shows its 'R&D Teeth' with Superconductivity Research Effort,"

Kimberly Dozier, New Technology Week, August 14, 1989, p. 6.

11. "JTECH Projects," Japanese Techm'cal Literature Bulletin, August 1989, p. 2.

12. "Keeping Up with the Jonezawas," Robert Pool, Science, August 1989, p. 594.
13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

Appendices 185

"Presentation by Richard J. Elkus, Jr. on Japanese HDTV," Japanese Technical

Literature Bulletin, January 1990, p. 3.

"Japan Now Ahead in Nuclear Power, Too," Matthew L. Wald, New York

Times, February 27, 1990, pp. D 1-13.

"Report on JTECH Workshop on Advanced Computing in Japan," Japanese

Technical Literature Bulletin, June 1990, p. 2.

"TRON," Japanese Techru'cal Literature Bulletin, July 1990, p. 2 [quotations

from Michael Harrison, JTEC Panel Chair].

''JTEC Reports: Nuclear Power Generation, Space and Transatmospheric

Propulsion Technology," Japanese Techru'cal Literature Bulletin, October 1990,

p. 2.

"Japan: X-Ray May Wait for IG DRAM," Jude Robertson, Electronic News,

February 25, 1991, p. 27.

''JTEC Study Mission on Machine Translation," Japanese Techru'cal Literature

Bulletin, February 1991, p. 1.

"Japanese Automated Storage, Retrieval, and Transport Systems," Japanese

Techru'calLiterature Bulletin, February 1991, p. 4 [article on Edward Frazelle's

pre-JTEC study on material handling technology in Japan].

"JTEC Workshop on Machine Translation," Japanese Technical Literature

Bulletin, May 1991, p. 2.

"JTEC Takes Measure of Japanese Biotechnology," William Maggs, New

Technology Week, May 28, 1991, pp. 14-15.

"U.S. Contractors Trail Japan in R&D," Jim Carlton, Wall Street Journal, August

6, 1991, p. A5

"Loyola Unlocking the Secret of Japan's High Technology," Baltimore Business

Journal, Sept. 13-19, 1991, p. 17.

"JTEC Workshop on Bioprocessing Engineering in Japan, May 21, 1991,"

Japanese Technical Literature Bulletin, September 1991, p. 3.

"JTEC Workshop on Database Systems in Japan," Japanese Technical

Literature Bulletin, September 1991, p. 4.

''JTEC Report on Construction Technologies in Japan," Japanese Technical

Literature Bulletin, September 1991, p. 5.
186 Bibliography

28. "Technology Assessment in the U.S. - Japan Context," George Gamota, paper

presented at the Gont'erence on Japan's Growing Technological Capability:

Implications for the U.S. Economy, National Academy of Sciences,

Washington, DC, October 23-24, 1991.

29. "Is the Race Ending to Commercialize Flat Panel Displays?" Mark Crawford,

New Technology Week, November 25, 1991, pp. 1-8.

30. "U.S. Researchers of Flat-Panel Screens See Opportunity to Match the

Japanese," Eduardo Lachica, Wall Street Journal, December 13, 1991, p. B6A.

31. "JTEC Workshop on Flat Panel Display Technology," Japanese Technical

Literature Bulletin, December 1991, p. 1.

32. "JTEC Report on X-Ray Lithography in Japan, Oct. 1991," Japanese Technical

Literature Bulletin, December 1991, p. 1.

33. "U.S. Assesses Japan's Fifth Generation Computer Project," Mark Crawford,

New Technology Week, June 29, 1992, p. 1.

34. "Amerikanen Studeren op Japanse Techniek," Henk Tolsma, Ingeneiurskrant,

June 1992, Koninklijk Instituut van Engenieurs en de Nederlandse

Ingenieursvereniging, Amsterdam.

35. ''JTEC Panel Reporting on Material Handling Technology in Japan, May 21,

1992 at NSF," Japanese Technical Literature Bulletin, June 1992, p. 1.

36. "JTEC Workshop on Knowledge-Based Systems in Japan on June 17, 1992,"

Japanese Techru'cal Literature Bulletin, June 1992, p. 1.

37. "Japanese Flat-Panel Displays: What JTEC Saw," Lawrence E. Tannas, Jr.,

Information Display, July/August 1992, p. 18.

38. "Flat Panel Displays," Japan Access Alert Bulletin, July-August 1992, p. 2

[announcement & synopsis of JTEC displays report].

39. "Biotechnology," Japan Access Alert Bulletin, July-August 1992, p. 4

[announcement & synopsis of JTEC bioprocess engineering report].

40. "Made in Japan," R.D. Shelton, Loyola Magazine, Summer 1992, p. 32.

41. "Techniques for Evaluation of Japanese Research and Development," paper

presented at Workshop on Japanese Information in Computers, Electronics,

& Semiconductors, Japanese Information Access Project, Washington, DC,

September 17, 1992.
Appendices 187

42. "JTEC Workshop on Separation Technology in Japan," Japanese Technical

Literature Bulletin, September 1992, p. 2.

43. "Japan Takes Display Technology Lead," George Leopold, Defense News,

October 5-11, 1992, p. 34.

4. 'IX-Ray Lithography R&D in Japan and the U.S.," Japan Techru'cal A_aim, Fall

1992, p. 38.

45. Draft Summary of U.S. Activities, JTEC Panel on Advanced Manufacturing

Technology for Polymer Composite Structures, December 1992.

46. Machine Translation Technology: A Potential Key to the Information Age,

FCCSET Committee on Industry and Technology, January 1993, U.S. Office

of Science and Technology Policy, Washington, DC [refers frequently to JTEC

MT report].

47. "Conferences and Meetings," Japan Access Alert Bulletin, January-February

1993, p. 5 [announcement of NASA/NSF Conference on Satellite

Communications in Europe, Russia, and Japan].

48. "Satellites: Another US Industry Faces Decline," Mark Crawford, New

Technology Week, February 8, 1993.

49. "Foreign Sats Lead U.S.," Washington Technology, February 11, 1993.

50. "Competitors Seek to Narrow U.S. Lead in Mobile Satellites," Satellite News,

February 15, 1993, p. 6.

51. "Japan Reaches Parity in the Manufacture of Advanced Polymers," Mark

Crawford, New Technology Week, February 22, 1993.

52. "Conferences and Meetings," Japan Access Alert Bulletin, February 1993

Special Supplement, p. 2 [announcement of JTEC Workshop on Advanced

Manufacturing Technology for Polymer Composite Structures in Japan].

53. "The Race is On," Joseph Pelton and Burton Edelson, Satellite

Gommunications, March 1993, p. 30.

54. "Let's Get Going!" Modem Materials Handling, March, 1993 (editorial).

55. "Elvis: Sun Micro Expected to Team with Russian Firm," San Francisco

Chronicle, March 10, 1993, p. D- 1.
188

56.

57.

58.

59.

60.

61.

62.

63.

64.

65.

66.

67.

68.

69.

70.

Bibliography

"JTEC Workshop on Advanced Manufacturing Technology for Polymer

Composite Structures," Japanese Technical Literature Bulletin, March 1993,

p. 2.

"Study: Japan May Catch US Satellite Firms," Space News, April 19-25, 1993,

p. 6.

"Japan: Rising Sun or Shooting Star?," Joseph N. Pelton and Burton Edelson,

Satellite Communications, April 1993, p. 41.

''Japan Drawing Bead on U.S. in Membranes?" Mark Crawford, New

Technology Week, May 10, 1993, p. 9.

"Satellite Scorecard Mixed as $30 Billion Prize Goes Begging," NASA A/utah/

League News, Vol. 4, No. 1, Winter/Spring 1993.

"Machine Translation in Japan and the U.S.," Japan Techm'cal Affairs, Spring

1993, p. 29.

''Japanese Display Technology," Japan Techru'cal AiTalrs, Spring 1993, p. 30.

"Bioprocess Engineering in Japan," Japan TechrdcalAffairs, Spring 1993, p. 33.

Draft Summary of' U.S. Activities, WTEC Panel on Undersea Technology, May

1993.

"Editor's Note," Scott Chase, Via Satellite, June 1993, p. 6 [editorial devoted

to NASA/NSF satellite communications study results].

''JTEC Report on Material Handling Technologies in Japan," Japanese

Technical Literature Bulletin, June 1993, p. 5.

"Dangerous Display Flat-Panel Floundering Holds Risks for US Industry," Eric

J. Savitz, Bah'on's, June 28, 1993, p. 8.

JTEC Workshop on Advanced Manufacturing Technology for Polymer

Gomposite Structures in Japan, National Technological University, Videotape

of Feb. 18, 1993 JTEC workshop, Broadcast by NTU July 6, 1993.

"Tracking Japan's Growing Strength in Development of High Technology,"

Tom Johnson, Warfield's, July 23, 1993, p. 13.

"US is said to Lag in Space Research," William J. Broad, New York Times, July

28, 1993, p. A14.
71.

72.

73.

74.

75.

76.

77.

78.

79.

80.

81.

82.

83.

84.

85.

Ap_n_cee 189

"American Sat Makers May Begin Hearing Footsteps of Foreign Rivals, Report

Says," Space Fax Daily, July 29, 1993.

"Polymer Composites Technology in Japan," Vistasp M. Karbhari & Diane S.

Kukich, Advanced Materials and Processes, August 1993, p. 26.

"Submersibles in Ex-USSR Eye Openers for Westerners," Mark Crawford, New

Technology Week, August 2, 1993, p. 1.

"Satellite Research 'Needs More Money'," Colin Macilwain, Nature, August 5,

1993, p. 470.

"US Slipping in Satellites, Report Says," George Leopold, Electronic

Engineering Times, August 16, 1993.

"U.S. Lags in Construction R&D," Paul D. Samuel, The Daffy Record, August

27, 1993.

"Automation," Japan Access Alert Bulletin, July-August 1993, p. 7

[announcement of JTEC material handling report].

"Separation Technologies," Japan Access Alert Bulletin, July-August 1993, p. 7

[announcement of JTEC separation technologies report].

"Expert Systems," Japan Access Alert Bulletin, July-August 1993, p. 5

[announcement of JTEC knowledge-based systems report].

"Material Handling Technologies in Japan," Japan Techru'ca/Aff'a/m, Vol. I., No.

3, Summer 1993, p. 32.

"Separation Technology in Japan," Japan Technica/Aft'a/m, Vol. I., No. 3,

Summer 1993, p. 35.

Collection and Dissemination of Japanese Information Can Be Improved,

General Accounting Office, GAO/NSIAD-93-251, September 30, 1993.

"JTEC Workshop on Constructed Civil Infrastructure Systems and

Technologies in Japan and Europe," Japanese Technica/Literature Bulletin,

September 1993, p. 2.

The Development of l_'croelectromechanical Systems: Activities in the United

States, JTEC Panel on MicroElectroMechanical Systems in Japan, September

1993 [drain].

"Editor's Note," Scott Chase, Via Satellite, October, 1993 [editorial devoted to

NASA/NSF satellite communications final report].
190 Bm_aphy

86. Information on U.S. Activities, WTEC Panel on Advanced Display

Technologies in Russia and Ukraine, October 1993 [draft].

87. "The Chart Page -- The Global Race in Satellite Technology," Tamar A.

Mehuron, A/r Force Magazine, November 1993, p. 9.

88. "The Flat Panel's Future," Kenneth I. Wemer, 1EEE Spectrum, November 1993,

p. 18.

89. "U.S. May Lag in Mobile Satellite Market, Study Warns," Space Fax Daily,

November 24, 1993.

90. "U.S., Japan Gear Up for Micromachines," Brian Santo, Electr'on/c Engineering

Times, November 29, 1993, p. 1.

91. "U.S. Risks Forfeiting Satellite Communications Science," Signal, December

1993, p. 29.

92. ']VIicromachines," Japan Access Alert Bulletin, November-December 1983, p.

4 [announcement of JTEC workshop on microelectromechanical systems in

Japan, 11/17/93].

93. "Electronic Packaging," Japan Access Alert Bulletin, November-December

1983, p. 5 [announcement of JTEC workshop on electronic packaging in

Japan, 1/12/94].