Why Not Prepare Chemistry Majors to Work in Industry? G. J. Beichl and W. A. Kriner St. Joseph's University, Philadelphia, PA 19131 One major function of a Chemistry Major curriculum is to train students to become problem solvers. The usual mechanism is in a course labeled "Undergraduate Research" d though problem solving is developed in all of the basic courses which are taken in the curriculum. I t is this course "Undergraduate Research" that could be modified so that chemistry graduates would he better prepared to perform their tasks effectively as industrial chemists. The course is a good preparation for teaching problem solvine to students ~ l a n n i n to e enter eraduate school. However, it is an inadequate preparation for students entering the chemical industry immediately upon graduation who often experience "culture shock" as they learn the basics of industrial chemistry from their more experienced co-workers. This often results in frustration to both parties and a desire on the part of the recent -eraduate t o find a iob where he or she can engage in "real" research. The reason for this dissatisfaction is easily found. Students exposed to undergraduate research may work on problems (usually related to their mentor's PhD thesis) that require synthesis and subsequent purification until they obtain a very pure compound. Or they may make physical measurements on verv - nure . comoounds until thev are able to obtain good curves when experimental results are plotted against some variable. In either case the student knows if the results are acceptable or not. Industrial problems usually involve other parameters. For example, the chemists may be working with mixtures of chemicals, instead of one pure substance. Furthermore, they are restricted in the chemicals that they can use. The literature may indicate that platinum is the optimum catalyst for a eiven reaction, but the resultant cost of the experiment would militate against the use of such expensive reagents. Energy costs must also be taken into consideration in an industrial context. These do not usually enter into solutions to academic problems. Another feature that distinmishes industrial research " from academic research is the time frame in which a solution must be obtained. In academic research there is no pressure to complete the research by a given date. In industry, deadlines have to be met. This means that better results might have been available if the research could have been extended t o a later date. Yet the chemist must submit asolution t o the problem by aspecific date, fully aware that this might not be the optimum solution. What can colleges do to make undergraduates familiar with these factors? Among the solutions proposed have been the following:
-
Industrial Chemistry Course, Industrial Sabbatical for Faculty, Plant Trips, and Undergraduate Research adapted to Industrial Canditions. 1) 2) 3) 4)
The last option seemed t o be the one most likelv . to -give studenrsa iaste of industrial chemistry. Totest this hypothesis we first needed thecooperation of acompany that would Presented at the Middle Atlantic Regional Meeting, at White Haven, PA, on April 8, 1983.
provide the problems and would also offer to evaluate our progress. We found such a company in Quaker Chemical Corporation which had R & D laboratories nearby, and whose R & D staff promised to provide industrial research problems for us and also promised to guide us in arriving a t solutions. The next step was to obtain funding for the program. A orooosal was submitted to the NSF CAUSE oroeram. Un?orknately, this proposal did not receive f u n d ~ u g ~ ~ l t h o u g h it had received the whole-hearted support of several members of the reviewing panel (especially from an industrial chemist). it was uerceived t o have weaknesses by other reviewers. o n e of -these was that it was "overli geared to conditions in an industrial environment" and although coordination with industry is a good idea, "sensitivity to that industry may be overdone". Since we knew that was the very area in which theacademic training of chemists was weak, we felt that such a proposal should a t least be tried. to determine if it would actuallv achieve the objectives it was designed to meet. We took monev that had been eiven t o the d e ~ a r t m e nin t educational grant; from the DUP& Company, Guaker~hemicalCorporation. and the Hohm di Haas C o m ~ n n vand used it to fund a summkr project, IRISH, ~ndustriaiResearch in the Summer on Hawk Hill. One of the authors (WK) assumed the responsibility of directing the project. First we met with the representatives of Quaker Chemical Corporation, headed by their Vice President of Research and Development, Donald Boswell. From the projects suggested by the Quaker Staff two were selected because they seemed challenging and because the instrumentation needed was readily available to us. Then we publicized the Project in the Department and selected four students. 2 iuniors and 2 sonhomores. The duration of Project IRISH was 10 weeks ;or which each student received 51225 or $3.50 an hour. The total hudeet for the project was $8093.47. The two problems selected were 1) An investigation of the esterification of natural product acids
with various synthetic alcohols.
2) Emulsification studies on commerciallyavailable fats and oils.
In the first project, commercial distilled "L. T." Red Oil, (primarily oleic acid) was to he esterified with neopentyl glycol, trimethylol propane, and pentaerythritol. The product yields were to be maximized (maximum acid number of 10). Products were to he evaluated as to viscosity, pour point, general appearance, and TGA. In the second project, emulsions of C20- C22 alcohols and water were made using a varietv of emulsifvine This . asents. .. introduced the s t u d e l k tu the HLR number (hydruphilir lipophilic balance). The students had all had experiences in the laboratory with eaterit'irariun-one alcohol reacting with one arid. Now thrv tried differrnt corntinations of a number of alcohols and acids with the objective of maximizing product yields, pour points, viscosity and other properties, while keeping the cost of the reagents and energy costs a t a minimum. Furthermore, they had been accustomed in the laboratory course t o working with a pure chemical from a reagent bottle. Now they had t o get accustomed to starting off with a
-
Volume 63 Number 8
August 1986
699
mixture of acids and using reagents and catalysts that were also mixtures. During this project students had occasion to become familiar with the following techniques: EsterHIcatlon 1) Evaluation of Starting Materials Methods of Evaluation-required some library work 1) Azeotropic distillation-to determine mL HzOIg polyol 2) Acid number (equivalent weight) 3) Iodine number (degree of unsaturmtion) 4) Gas chromatography 2) Reaction Procedures 1) Setupsfor constant stirring, Nz sweep or blanketing, tem-
perature readout, sampling and H20collection 2) Reaction progress followed by nonaqueous acid-base ti-
tration (oleic acid is insoluble in HzO) 3) Catalyst evaluation
3) Evaluation of Product 1) Final acid number 2) Iodine number 3) Viscosity 4) Visual properties 5) TGA 6 ) Pour Point
Emulslficatlon Concepts: HLB, surfadanerequired extensive library reading Procedure: mixing modes and temperature effects Evaluntion: stability (time and temperature),viscosity During the course of the project, two of the Group Leaders from Quaker Chemical Corporation maintained close contact with the work. On two occasions they made on-site visitations to check procedures and progress. A meeting held at the Quaker Chemical Labs in Conshohocken gave the students an opportunity to see industrial operations. The students were provided with the opportunity to give oral presentations. The first meeting, a rather stiff and formal one, came after the second week of the project. The students did not volunteer much information but confined their remarks to answering questions asked of them. They realized how little they knew about the project and were reluctant to make a statement. The subsequent meetings were a different matter. By that time the students had run many experiments and recognized how some of the factors affected the experiments. They also realized that thev knew more about the exneriments that they had conducted than their questioners since they could l of the recall the avuearance and other ~ h v s i c a oroverties chemicals Ad had recorded all of the-data in their notehooks that they brought to each meeting. Lab notebooks were
700
Journal of Chemical Education
signed by the student conducting the research and by a witness a t the end of each laboratory day. Each student had to submit interim reports of his or her work. These were scheduled just prior to meeting with the chemists from Quaker. This gave them not only self-confidence but also i t motivated them to learn moie about the systems on which they were working. More than that, they became enthusiastic about their research. Halfway through the project we asked the students to give us written replies to the following questions: 1) Is your concept of the nature of industrial research different from the way it was before you started? If so, in what way? 2) Do you like or dislike this kind of research? Give reasons pro and eon. 3) Do you think that this program should be retained? 4) What changes if anv would vou recommend for this oroeram? . .. Among the answers to the firit question were 11 a\ The students were givenmore rerpmribilitv than they had expected. h) Another imagined that all materials would he available for the project. She now realizes that materials are available anlv if ordered in advance. 2) In respmse tothequeitim whether thertudentslikeor dislike this kind
