The Struggle for Survival
While chemical engineers gained a formal education in 1888, this was
certainly no guarantee of success. Many prominent people saw no need
for this new profession. Additionally, it was unclear what role chemical
engineers would play in industry.
To survive, chemical engineers had to claim industrial territory by
defining themselves and demonstrating their uniqueness and worth. With this
goal in mind, the American Institute of Chemical Engineers (AIChE) was
formed in June of 1908. However, AIChE also faced difficult challenges in
defining its own territory. The old (since 1876) and powerful (5000 members)
American Chemical Society (ACS) had already laid claim to all realms of
American Chemistry, both pure and applied.
Just weeks after the formation of AIChE, the ACS would launch its own
"Division of Industrial Chemistry & Chemical Engineering" placing itself in
direct competition with AIChE for the hearts and minds of the new engineers.
The establishment of chemical engineering in America would involve a fierce
struggle for survival.
The Story: Establishing the American Chemical Engineer
German Chemical Engineers? "Just say 'Nein'!
With the rapid growth of the American chemical industry around
the turn of the century, the gap between laboratory processes and
full-scale industrial production needed to be bridged. To many
prominent chemists, educated at popular German universities, the approach to
accomplish this had already been tried and proven. Germany had experienced its
own rapid period of growth (on their way to becoming the world's greatest
chemical power) during the 19th Century. The German solution to
industrial scale up involved teaming research chemists and mechanical
engineers to take a reaction from the lab bench to the factory floor. They
believed this allowed the research chemist to remain creative by
not being tied down with the drudgery of engineering practice (whether or not
this belief is justified is a whole other topic). Because of their scale up
method the chemical engineer was entirely unneeded, being instead
replaced by a chemist and a mechanical engineer.
However, the American chemical industry was fundamentally different
from German's counterpart. Instead of specializing in fine chemicals or
complicated dyestuffs (often made in batch reactors, something all chemists are
familiar with), the American industries produced only a few simple but widely
used chemicals such as sulfuric acid and alkali (both made in continuous
reactors, something chemists have little experience with). These bulk chemicals
were produced using straightforward chemistry, but required complex
engineering set on vast scales. American chemical reactors were no longer
just big pots, instead they involved complex plumbing systems where chemistry
and engineering were inseparably tied together. Because of this, the
chemical and engineering aspects of production could not be easily divided; as
they were in Germany. The chemical engineer therefore found a role to play in
America despite their absence in the Germany until around 1960.
Strong Support for an American Chemical Engineer
The American chemical industry (initially following the German
example, and why not?) employed chemists and mechanical engineers to
perform the functions that would later be the chemical engineer's specialty.
However these chemists were of an entirely different nature. The prominent
research chemists employed in Germany were almost non-existent in
America until after World War I. Instead the American chemical industry
employed both analytical chemists (involved in materials testing and
quality control) and a smaller number of production chemists (consisting
of plant managers and chemical consultants engaged in engineering design,
construction, and troubleshooting). However, unlike the highly praised German
research chemists, these American counterparts were given very little respect
from the chemical industry which employed them. It was noted that "analytical
chemists were regarded as being of the same grade as machinists, draftsmen, and
cooks." This low status carried over to the weekly paycheck, where in 1905
American analytical chemists received only half the salary of skilled artisans
(R4).
Therefore at the turn of the Century, calling yourself a chemist did not
bring the immediate admiration of your audience. Because of this many
production chemists (people more closely engaged in management and
engineering than chemistry) wanted very dearly to shed the term
"chemist" from their title. While production chemists were still held in
higher regard than their analytical cousins (and also higher paid, funny how
that works) they still felt great anxiety over the falling status of chemists
as a whole. In short, how could they assure that the production chemist would
continue to keep their high status with manufacturers? This was a problem that
could hit them where it would hurt most, the paycheck! The need for action was
most imminent! As a solution, the production chemists began referring
to themselves as chemical engineers (for this is what they were in practice
if not in education), and engaged themselves in the formation of an institute
devoted to securing greater recognition for their profession.
An "AIChE Breaky" Beginning
The formation of a society of chemical engineers was originally proposed by
George Davis in 1880, a full ten years before the profession could boast
of a formal education The first serious proposal for an American Society
of Chemical Engineers was presented in a 1905 editorial by Richard K. Meade. He
argued that such a society could help secure greater recognition for the
chemical engineer, and also help convince the chemical industry that chemical
engineers instead of mechanical engineers should be designing and operating
their plants. The idea must have rung true, for in 1908 such an
organization was formed (however its published goals did not include stealing
jobs from mechanical engineers). Hence, the American Institute for Chemical
Engineers (AIChE) was born.
In 1908, the year AIChE was formed, the powerful and influential American
Chemical Society had already been around for 30 years and boasted nearly
5000 members. Additionally, this academic giant had recently committed
itself to preventing anymore splinter groups from succeeding from the
society. The ACS had been sensitized to the succession problem by the
electrochemists and leather chemists who had left the ACS in 1902 and 1904
respectively. Both groups had formed their own independent societies to the
dismay of the ACS. So when it seemed that the chemical engineers were also
preparing to jump ship (and possible take a lot of production chemists with
them, ) the ACS quickly reacted forming a "Division of Industrial Chemistry
and Chemical Engineering."
Avoiding Conflict by "Speaking Softly"
Faced with the possibility of direct conflict with the ACS, AIChE
decided on a course of action designed to minimize rivalry and remain
on as good of terms as possible. It accomplished this in three main ways:
1) Utilizing very restrictive membership criteria (through 1930) so as not
to pose a threat to ACS membership. Part of this exclusive criteria required
a full 10 years of industrial experience (5 years if you had a B.S.),
thereby excluding most chemists in academia from full membership. This selective
criteria made membership very attractive to those who could gain it and
many compared AIChE membership to belonging to an exclusive men's club.
2) Emphasizing a role in which AIChE membership would compliment, not
compete with, ACS membership. By requiring industrial experience, the first
wave of AIChE members included chemical manufactures, plant management, and
consultants (the group formerly called production chemists, ) . This
provided a distinct departure from the typical ACS member which
was more likely than not to be associated with academia.
3) Finally, AIChE avoided conflict by always approaching possible problems
with the utmost discretion. Whether it was membership criteria or the
societies political activities; AIChE always acted in a methodical and
conservative fashion. An example of this occurred in 1920, when the
Institute considered adding a new class a membership so analytical chemists
working in industry could also gain membership. However, it was recognized that
this action conflicted with a founding principle that the Institute should cover
a professional field not already represented by other societies. As usual,
slow sustained growth was recognized as the way to establish the
profession while not stepping on too many toes along the way.
The conservative course of action undertaken by AIChE may have
slowed membership growth, but it certainly helped bring chemical
engineers and chemists into a state of cooperation rather than
competition.
How To Define Professional Boundaries?
Another challenge facing chemical engineers involved defining who
they were and how they were unique? How the AIChE answered these
questions had a tremendous impact on the industrial territory chemical
engineers could lay claim to.
Certainly one way the profession could be defined was through the formal
education its members received. Because of this AIChE spent a lot of time
and effort evaluating and improving educational activities.
They strove to standardize the chemical engineering education which
was often erratic and inconsistent. But how exactly to improve education? In an
age when chemical engineers learned mountains of industrial chemistry; where
each chemical had its own long and varied history of production, what central
theme could chemical engineering education rally around?
The answer came in 1915, when in a letter to the President of MIT,
Arthur Little stressed the potential of "unit operations" to
distinguish chemical engineering from all other professions and also to give
chemical engineering programs a common focus.
Unit Operations, The "Big Stick" of Chemical Engineering
In transforming matter from inexpensive raw materials to
highly desired products, chemical engineers became very familiar with
the physical and chemical operations necessary in this metamorphosis.
Examples of this include: filtration, drying, distillation, crystallization,
grinding, sedimentation, combustion, catalysis, heat exchange, extrusion,
coating, and so on. These "unit operations" repeatedly find their way
into industrial chemical practice, and became a convenient manner of
organizing chemical engineering knowledge. Additionally, the knowledge
gained concerning a "unit operation" governing one set of materials can easily
be applied to others. Whether one is distilling alcohol for hard liquor or
petroleum for gasoline, the underlying principles are the same!
The "unit operations" concept had been latent in the chemical engineering
profession ever since George Davis had organized his original 12 lectures around
the topic. However, it was Arthur Little who first recognized the potential of
using "unit operations" to separate chemical engineering from other professions.
While mechanical engineers focused on machinery, and industrial
chemists concerned themselves with products, and applied chemists
studied individual reactions, no one, before chemical engineers,
had concentrated upon the underlying processes common to all chemical
products, reactions, and machinery. The chemical engineer, utilizing the
conceptual tool that was unit operations, could now claim to industrial
territory by showing his or her uniqueness and worth to the American
chemical manufacturer.
Educational Standardization & Accreditation
While the "unit operation" concept went a long way in standardizing
the chemical engineering curriculum, it did not solve the whole problem.
A 1922 AIChE report (headed by Arthur Little, the "originator" of the "unit
operation" concept) pointed out the continuing need for standardization due to
chronic divergence in nomenclature and inconsistencies in course
arrangement and worth. Again AIChE took action by making chemical
engineering the first profession to utilize accreditation in
assuring course consistency and quality. AIChE representatives traveled
across the country evaluating chemical engineering departments. In 1925 these
efforts culminated with a list of the first 14 schools to gain accreditation .
Such efforts were so effective in consolidating and improving chemical
engineering education that other engineering branches quickly joined the
effort, and in 1932 formed what would later become the Accreditation Board
for Engineering and Technology (ABET)
|
