Read Full Profile

“I am grateful to our faculty volunteers and student organizations like Kappa Delta Sorority and Society of Women Engineers (SWE) who work hard to make sure GEMS is a rewarding experience for the girls,” said Vicki Cooper, who coordinated the event. “They generously sacrifice their time to teach and inspire girls who could become future engineers.”

The girls began the day listening to former UK president Lee Todd share his story about developing a childhood interest in engineering as the result of a similar outreach program.  To emphasize his point, Todd displayed the project he created when he was a boy as he recounted his career.

Following the keynote address, the attendees participated in three interactive sessions led by College of Engineering faculty and graduate students. Challenged by event coordinators to present STEM education in ways that compel students to want to know more, faculty members Bruce Walcott, Debby Keen, Kimberly Ward Anderson, Nancy Miller, Chuck May, Christine Trinkle and Czarena Crofcheck engaged students through hands-on demonstrations, games and experiments. Walcott, who is involved with several such outreach programs, is encouraged by how programs like GEMS benefit Kentucky.

“It is critical to the economic future success of the Commonwealth of Kentucky that the UK College of Engineering continues to conduct outreach programs such as our Girls Enjoying Math and Science (GEMS) Day. This program promotes engineering and math and science to young women at a time when our State and Nation needs more women entering the engineering workforce. Our partnership with the Girls Scouts and Susan Miller makes an ideal platform to promote the importance of the STEM education disciplines to young women.”

“It is an honor to join my colleague and UK faculty member Dibakar Bhattacharyya as a Fellow of the AIChE. Our department has a very strong tradition of service to AIChE, and I have reaped many professional benefits from my involvement in the Institute,” said Kalika.

Kalika has been on the faculty of the UK College of Engineering since 1990 and chair of the Department of Chemical and Materials Engineering since 2009.

UK Paducah sophomore William Croft won 1st place in Environmental Science and Engineering II for his poster titled, “A Renewable Process for Producing Low-Cost Biofuel and Biochar for Rural West Africa.”

The Lexington UK AIChE student chapter had eight students participate in the undergraduate student poster session and competition, along with three students from the Paducah campus student chapter. The competition required students to present their research in poster format.  The specifics of the presentations are given below:

Landon Mills, “Microalgae Cultivation in Closed-Loop Photobioreactors: Biofilm Characterization, Prevention and Removal” (Dr. Crocker, research advisor)

Ashley McClean, “Protein Diffusion Through Oriented Thin Film Silica Membranes” (Drs. Knutson and Rankin, research advisors)

Jaime Shoup, “Conversion of Triglycerides and Fatty Acids to Hydrocarbons Using Supported Nickel Catalysts” (Dr. Crocker, research advisor)

Lindsay Gray, “An Improved in Vitro Model for the Study of Endothelial Cells Using Micropatterned Surfaces” (Drs. Anderson and  Eitel, research advisors)

David Spencer, “Multiple Macromer Hydrogels for Multiphase Drug Release” (Drs. Hilt and Puleo, research advisors)

Alex Tsoras, “The Development of Three-Dimensional Lung Multicellular Spheroids in Air and Liquid Interface Culture for the Evaluation of Anti-Cancer Therapeutics” (Drs. Anderson and Hilt, research advisors)

Adrianne Shearer, “Characterization of Liposomal Nanoparticles for in Vivo Conjugation to Adoptive Transferred T-Cells” (Dr. Irvine, research advisor from MIT REU Program)

Nick Winquist, “Light Sensitive Block Copolymer Cross Linked Nanoassemblies for Drug Delivery” (Dr. Bae, research advisor)

Maxwell Croft, “A Project Developing a Process for Sustainable Low Cost Biofuel and Biochar for Rural West Africa”(Dr. Seay, research advisor, Paducah program)

William Croft, “A Renewable Process for Producing Low-Cost Biofuel and Biochar for Rural West Africa” (Dr. Seay, research advisor, Paducah program)

Landon Mott, “Inductive Methods of Teaching Batch Distillation through Simulation” (Drs. Silverstein and Seay, research advisors, Paducah program)

Four Lexington students were recognized with prestigious poster awards:  Lindsay Gray, 1^st Place Poster Award for the Materials Engineering and Sciences Section;  Ashley McClean, 2^nd Place Poster Award for the Separations Section;  David Spencer, 3^rd Place Poster Award for the Materials Engineering and Sciences Section; and Alex Tsoras, 2^nd Place Poster Award for the Food, Pharmaceutical, and Biotechnology Section.

Two Paducah students were also recognized with poster awards: William Croft, 1^st Place Poster Award for the Sustainability Section; and Landon Mott, 3^rd Place Poster Award for the General Engineering and Engineering Education Section.

Both of the UK AIChE student chapters were honored as outstanding chapters. Each year, only about 10% of student chapters receive that designation.  The Lexington Chapter received special recognition for winning this national award for a record 25^th year in a row. The Paducah Chapter received this award for the 11^th consecutive year.

UK AIChE student chapter officers are: David Spencer, President; Adam Lyvers, Vice President; Adrianne Shearer, Secretary; and Jaime Shoup, Treasurer. Dr. Zach Hilt is the chapter advisor.

UK Paducah AIChE student chapter officers are: Landon Mott, President; Neil Trammell, Vice President; Amber Deming, Secretary; and Christina Willett, Treasurer. Dr. David Silverstein is the chapter advisor.

Read Full Article on UKNow

Read Full Article

Keynote speaker William Wagner, Director of the McGowan Institute for Regenerative Medicine at the University of Pittsburgh, lectured on his innovative work in cardiovascular engineering, such as the challenges of creating a patch that is mechanically able to replace or augment damaged heart tissue.

Students and postdoctoral scholars from six regional institutions gave oral or poster presentations on their research.

Martina Miteva, Vanderbilt University, received 2^nd place for her poster presentation, “A novel pH-responsive mixed micelle for siRNA delivery,” and Renay Su, Purdue University, earned 1^st place for her poster presentation on, “Characterization of Modular Resilin-based Proteins for Applications in Cartilage Engineering.”

In the oral presentations, Vanderbilt’s Shann Yu came in 2^nd place for his talk on, “Achieving Cancer Immunotherapy through RNA Interference in Tumor-Associated Macrophages via ‘Click,’ Mannosylated Polymeric Nanoparticles.” Samantha Meenach of the University of Kentucky won 1^st place with her discourse on, “Characterization and Optimization of Inhalable PEGylated Phospholipid Microparticles and Nanoparticles Containing Paclitaxel for Targeted Pulmonary Nanomedicine in Lung Cancer.”

Grant Boggess, Todd Montgomery and Samuel Potter each received phone calls from UK President Eli Capilouto congratulating them on their accomplishment. While the students had been accepted by institutions with prestigious names such as Johns Hopkins, Georgia Tech, etc., each chose to pursue their undergraduate engineering education at UK. Why? We’ll let them tell you in their own words.

Grant Boggess (undecided)

The biggest reason I chose UK was the money. UK offered a really good education for essentially free compared to over a quarter of a million dollars at some of the more prestigious out of state schools. Money aside, once I got on UK’s campus I absolutely loved it. Everyone on campus is so welcoming. UK bends over to everything in its power to make sure students exceed their own expectations—I am not just one more student in the crowd.

Todd Montgomery (mechanical engineering)

One of the biggest reasons I chose to come to UK was for the undergraduate research program. UK is very welcoming to students who want to take part in one of the many outlets for research. As a student in the MSTC (Math Science and Technology Center) program at my high school, I was allowed to conduct my own research through the Kentucky Young Researcher’s Program at UK during my junior and senior years in high school. That experience really showed me that UK had made a commitment to giving their undergraduate students every opportunity they need to succeed.

Samuel Potter (materials engineering)

I chose materials engineering because of my interest in medical implants. Today, most orthopedic implants are made of stainless steel or titanium. Although these materials do a decent job, they do have their drawbacks. Knowing what I want to do, I was able to determine that UK’s program would get me there. A lot of schools offer degrees in biomedical engineering, but the field is quite broad. Since my interests relate directly to implant materials, a degree in materials engineering seemed perfect.

Since joining UK, Dr. Dziubla has published 20 peer-reviewed papers, has two U.S. patents pending, graduated three Ph.D. students, mentored 12 graduate students and over 30 undergraduate students on research projects in his laboratory.  In addition, he has been active in mentoring high school students on research projects, having published two peer-reviewed papers that included high school students. Dr. Dziubla is highly involved in multidisciplinary efforts on campus, participating in the engineering bioactive interfaces NSF/IGERT and NSF/REU programs as well as the Cancer Nanotechnology Training Center funded by the NIH/NCI, where Dr. Dziubla serves as part of the Mentoring and Development Committee. Recently, collaborating with the College of Dentistry, Dr. Dziubla has begun looking into how existing biomaterials can aid existing patients with chronic oral pain not treatable by current clinical practices. 

Q: What are you researching and why does it matter?

T.D.: My area of research is biomaterials. A biomaterial is any physical material that comes in contact with the body or biological fluid, whether surgical tubing, dental implants, tissue engineering scaffolds or pharmaceutical pills—all are classified as biomaterials. The most important aspect of biomaterials is biocompatibility; we have to make sure they are beneficial and don’t cause harm to the body. Unfortunately, no material is perfect. Biomaterials can become cytotoxic, pro-inflammatory or carcinogenic. However, all of those reactions have a central underlying cause called oxidative stress—the generation of radical species that is highly reactive and can accumulate in the body.

So, if we know oxidative stress is implicated as the key mechanism for things like carcinogenesis, cytotoxicity and inflammation then, arguably, suppressing that process should be able to control or improve biocompatibility. One way to do that is to through antioxidants. The focus of my lab is taking natural antioxidants like green tea polyphenols and making them into degradable polymers. By their nature, those polymers would release antioxidants as they degrade. Rather than being inert, we are engineering the biomaterial to actually play an active role in improving biocompatibility.

Q: With what other faculty members, departments or colleges do you have opportunities to collaborate?

T.D.: UK is a vibrant center of collaboration. Within two weeks of arriving at UK in 2006, I got a knock on the door from David Puleo, director of the Center for Biomedical Engineering. We sat down and started talking about our respective research areas and, within a month, we had co-authored and submitted a grant together. It’s a very exciting environment. I get to collaborate with people in the College of Medicine, College of Pharmacy, College of Arts & Sciences as well as others within the College of Engineering. My lab develops new materials, so we are open to working with anyone who can take advantage of what we do.

Q: What is your involvement with the biopharmaceutical engineering track? What excites you about it?

T.D.: The biopharmaceutical engineering track takes advantage of one of the unique things about UK: a nationally renowned and top-tiered College of Pharmacy working in conjunction with a great engineering program. Through the biopharmaceutical engineering track, we can develop students who have a full chemical engineering degree but also understand the basics of pharmaceutics, drug manufacturing and delivery, and current issues in the pharmaceutical industry. When you tie all that together, we are able to release a workforce at the bachelor’s level that is very attractive to the pharmaceutical industry.

The pharmaceutical industry is in a state of flux right now. People hear about major pharmaceutical companies shrinking and laying off employees; what they don’t realize is that this is because of a shift in the way the pharmaceutical production is being handled. Large companies are not doing everything themselves anymore. They are subcontracting much of their work to contract manufacturers and that’s where the jobs are. As a result, Kentucky has attracted a lot of contracting manufacturers, such as Catalent in Winchester and Patheon in nearby Cincinnati, etc. The bottom line is that the pharmaceutical industry is both growing and remaining in the U.S.

Q: What do you wish all freshman students had in their toolboxes upon arrival?

T.D.: A sense of wonder that they don’t lose. If they come in interested and engaged, and maintain it, classes will be infinitely easier for them. The grade is a byproduct of what they should be getting, not the goal.

Q: How do you meaningfully involve undergraduate students in research?

T.D.: I was first exposed to the research process as an undergraduate at Purdue University. One day, I saw an intriguing poster done by a professor, Dr. Nicholas Peppas, and went in to talk with him. He was more than willing to let me work in his lab. As a result, I fell in love with the process. It was exciting to work on problems that had never been solved before; frustrating, too, because I learned why they still hadn’t been solved. When you’re on that edge, it gets addicting.

In my classes, I encourage that same exploration. If a student is interested, I will meet with them and help them figure out what they want to do. If it’s in my lab, that’s great; if it is in another area, I try to facilitate them getting involved elsewhere.

Our Research Experience for Undergraduates program, which brings students together from all universities across the country, is a great example of a collaborative research environment. A chemical engineering student can work with a faculty member in pharmaceutical sciences; or, a biomedical engineering student major might explore new areas with a chemist. It’s breadth of scope is what makes it great because, whatever a discipline’s formal definition may be, the barriers in science are artificial.

Q: How do you balance academic rigor with wanting students to succeed?

T.D.: I will start by saying, and my thermodynamics students can attest to this, that while I want them all to succeed, I do not decrease my expectations of them. I teach them at the level I think the material demands, not at a level that will give them easy answers. Sure, the material is challenging to digest but it is very important to our understanding of the world and worth the effort. I don’t believe in lowering bars; if students are challenged, they will rise to the challenge.

Now, how do I balance the rigor? I give as much of my time as possible to help them. I spend a lot of time with students who have questions or problems, in person and through email. I’m not unique, though; all of the chemical engineering faculty members are willing to go above and beyond to help the students succeed.

I also try to make sure flaws in my teaching aren’t hindering them from learning. Just as a grade is an assessment of a student’s performance, I provide ways for them to give feedback on my teaching performance. I will frequently give quizzes that are worth no points. Why? I want to measure their understanding and see if they are picking up material. Other times, I will send a questionnaire to ask what they like most about my class, what they like least and what they would change if they could. Their responses influence my teaching. I really want them to learn the material.

Q: Aside from the necessary classroom information, by the time students finish your class, what do you hope to have imparted to them?

T.D.: Critical thinking—more so than anything else. I tell my students often that knowledge is not compartmentalized. Science and engineering doesn’t begin and end in the classroom. What they learn in thermodynamics doesn’t just apply to what they are going to do in their jobs; it applies to what they are going to do in their lives. When we go through the laws of thermodynamics, I say, “Now that you know these laws, don’t just use them at work. Use them in life. If someone says something that doesn’t make scientific sense, call them on it. It’s your responsibility to protect from scams, charlatans and bad science.” Critical thinking is a big part of that.

Q: If you were starting a company, what would you pay a freshly graduated chemical engineer? Why—what are they able to do that make them worthy of that salary?

T.D.: (Laughs) Well, I am starting a company with Zach Hilt (W.T. Bryan Professorship in Engineering). We just formed a company based on our research, Bluegrass Advanced Materials, LLC., so that’s an interesting question. The starting salary for a chemical engineer is somewhere between $65,000-$75,000 annually. In order to get the best students, we would want to be competitive and, presuming the funds are there, we would probably pay around $70,000. I think that is appropriate for a process engineer fresh out of college.

As for what they can do, they are able to solve problems and avoid catastrophes. An investment in a good student is insurance against failures. A good chemical engineer has insight, is proactive in his/her thinking and isn’t going to simply cookbook it and retrofit a previous answer to a new problem. Rather, they will figure out exactly what the problem is, what the solution is and then apply the solution in the best possible way. To do that, you need a solid engineering foundation and critical thinking. A good engineering education provides both and makes graduates worthy of the money.

Q: If you could take a class from any of our other engineering professors, who would it be with and what would the subject be?

T.D.: One would be materials science professor John Balk on electromicroscopy and materials. I think he does outstanding work and would love to learn from him. I am also interested in the work being done by Fazleena Badurdeen and I.S. Jawahir in the Institute for Sustainable Manufacturing. Their work in the whole area of sustainable manufacturing and supply chains is becoming extremely important for manufacturing biomaterials. Eventually, I would like to incorporate some of their work into my research.

Q: Why do you teach at the University of Kentucky?

T.D.: It is very easy to fall in love with Kentucky—it’s a beautiful state. The city of Lexington is one of the most collegial environments I’ve studied or worked in, with a great community and a level of diversity that goes against a lot of stereotypes. At the state level, we’re doing a lot of things right to develop the students and grow industry, so I believe we have a bright future. I love the size of the university and the student body and, when you factor in the collaborative opportunities and ability to personally interact with the students, helping them when they need it, there are a lot of luxuries here at UK.

Thursday, August 2 marked the conclusion of a summer’s worth of research for students enrolled in the UK College of Engineering’s Research Experience for Undergraduates program in bioactive interfaces and devices. To concisely summarize their weeks of intense work, sponsored by the National Science Foundation, students designed research posters which were displayed in the Raymond Student Commons of the Ralph G. Anderson building. Judges and other interested guests engaged REU participants in discussions about their research, with the judges determining competition winners of various categories later in the program.

In the Poster Competition, David Spencer and Alexandra Tsoras tied for first place with Joshua Borrajo coming in second and Nkolika Egbukichi third. Additional awards handed out went to Lindsay Gray for Best Oral Presentation and Stella Shin for Best Blog Award. 

Prior to the award announcements, Carey Smith, CEO of Lexington-based Big Ass Fans, gave the keynote address to those in attendance. The awards were presented by REU program directors Kimberly Ward Anderson and Zach Hilt.

UK’s REU program brings students from all over the country to work with expert faculty covering several different disciplines. This year’s participants were:

Naveed Bakh (Vanderbilt University), Joshua Borrajo (University of California – Berkeley), Benjamin Brummel (University of South Carolina), Stefani Cleaver (DePauw University), Nkolika Egbukichi (Portland State Univerisity), Kiva Forsmark (University of Minnesota – Twin Cities), Lindsay Gray, Sarah Negaard, David Spencer, Alexandra Tsoras (all from the University of Kentucky), Casey Kukielski (Clemson University), Thao Ngo (Arizona State University), Pablo Palomino (University of Florida), Harrison Sapper (Vassar College), and Stella Shin (University of Arizona).

Faculty advisors included chemical engineering professors Tom Dziubla, Kimberly Ward Anderson, Steve Rankin, Dibakar Bhattacharyya, Brad Berron, Zach Hilt and Barbara Knutson; materials engineering professors Bruce Hinds and Rich Eitel; biomedical engineering professors David Puleo and Hainsworth Shin, pharmaceutical sciences professors Brad Anderson, Younsoo Bae, and Heidi Mansour and mechanical engineering professor Christine Trinkle.