Tips for successful research
Paul D. Ronney
Department of Aerospace and Mechanical
Engineering
University of Southern California
Los Angeles, CA 90089-1453
Copyright
© 2002 - 2009 by the author
Reproduction
by permission of the author only
Click here to view shortened, powerpoint-type
version
I. Building an experiment
1. Try the simplest thing first. If
you plan on using Coherent Anti-Stokes Raman Spectroscopy to measure flame
temperatures in a turbulent three-dimensional sooting flame, start with a Bic
lighter and a thermometer. Make
sure you can make a flame and measure something resembling a temperature. Then graduate to a Bunsen flame and a
thermocouple, using a volt meter to read the thermocouple voltage. Then graduate to a propane torch and an
interferometer, etc. Don't spend a
lot of time trying to build a complicated apparatus from the beginning, there
is a 100% chance that it won't work and a 200% chance that it won't be what you
really needed anyway, as you'll discover the first time you finally get it
working. Design something
simple, build quickly, test crudely, modify, improve, repeat. Ask yourself from the very beginning,
what is the absolutely positively SIMPLEST thing I can do to get some insight
into this phenomenon? Then do
something much simpler than that.
2. Never lose sight of the fact that any
measurement system consists of three basic parts
For
example, if you're measuring temperature using a thermometer, the transducer is
the mercury in the thermometer, the data acquistion system is your eye (to see
which line on the scale is at the same lever as the mercury) and the algorithm
is to count the lines between the numbers (e.g. 3rd line between 20ûC
and 25ûC corresponds to 23ûC.)
Another temperature measurement approach is to use a thermocouple to
transduce the temperature, an amplifier, analog to digital converter and
computer to acquire the data, and a polynomial fit of voltage vs. temperature
to process the data to determine temperature. All three parts of the measurement process must be based
on valid principles and working properly, otherwise the measurement is
guaranteed to be invalid. It is useful to define your measurements in terms
of these three parts, and make sure you understand (and trust) each part.
3. Do NOT use black
electrical tape for electrical connections. It leaves a terrible sticky dirty residue that gathers dirt,
and soon unravels anyway leaving bare wires exposed to shorting (or
electrocution). Use crimp-on type
or solder-type connectors with heat-shrink tubing to cover exposed wires.
4. Every piece of
electrical equipment that you build must have a fuse, must have a fuse, must
have a fuse that is of the proper
rating for the device (typically 150% of the maximum expected current draw).
5. For those of you that use air for
combustion experiments in PCE 209, DO NOT, DO NOT, DO NOT use the compressed air from the lines on the
wall. This air is FILTHY DIRTY with oil, water, dust and who knows what. This may be one of the reasons we have
so many problems with flow controllers.
Use either BOTTLED AIR or the line on the wall that comes from Prof.
Egolfopoulos's lab (but check with his group first of course to make sure the
compressor is on and that we aren't interfering with their experiments.) This line is in the southwest corner of
our lab.
6. Some chemicals that we use (for example
potassium hydrosulfite and ammonium persulfate) have limited shelf life,
particularly when you keep opening the bottle to take out a little, expose the
reactive material to air, then close the bottle again. For such chemicals you need to (1)
store the chemicals in the refrigerator, (2) rotate supplies, that is get new
chemicals every 6 to 12 months even if you haven't run out, (3) when you get a
new bottle of chemicals, put it into smaller (clean!) bottles and use those up
one at a time so you don't have to keep opening one storage bottle all the time
and constantly expose it to air.
7. We have a lot of
parts to be machined and the USC machine shops are always busy (Ewald is pretty
busy too). We have found a local
machine shop that seems to have reasonable prices and good service: Russel Co. Precision Machining, 4617
Jefferson Blvd, Los Angeles, CA
90016, phone (323) 732-7732.
II. Rules for experimentation
[The first 3 of these are from Prof. Don Coles of Caltech. I didn't really see the merit in these
rules when he first taught them to me, but I certainly do nowÉ]
1. Never trust any instrument. How do you know your measurement system is working? (Answer: you don't until it's verified.) Always assume that your instrument is wrong until proven
accurate by comparison with some independent measurement with another instrument.
The fact that the measurement system is expensive, was just used by a Nobel
laureate, was "guaranteed" by someone, is new, looks impressive, was
recently painted, etc. means nothing.
If two completely independent devices give nearly the same
result, you're probably ok. Also,
you can compare your measurement to known conditions. For example, if you're measuring temperature, see if your
system gives 100ûC in boiling water and 0ûC in ice water. If you're measuring pressure, make sure
you read zero with a vacuum and 1 atm at ambient pressure.
2. Turn only one knob at a time.
That is, if you want to measure the effect of x on y and z, keep z
constant while varying x, then measure y.
Then go to a different value of z, vary x, and measure y. Don't change x and z together, because
then you don't know whether x or z had the most effect on y.
3. Skip around.
Don't take measurements at x = 1, 2, 3, 4, É in that order.
Take measurements at x = 1, 4, 2, 3, 2.5, ... Otherwise, you can fool yourself into thinking there is a
trend when there is none, and bias your results accordingly. Also, people tend to take tiny steps to
find a limit condition (or other interesting condition.) For example, let's suppose some limit
in reality occurs at x = 12, but you took for first data point at x = 1. You'd probably go 2, 3, 4, É.up to 12,
which is a waste of time and effort.
You should have tried 1, 20, 10, 15, 13, 11, 12 instead to hone in on
the interesting condition and saved a lot of effort!
4. Plot as you go and choose your test
conditions widely. This way any unusual trends will appear
immediately and so you'll take more data where things are changing rapidly, and
less where they aren't. Often I
see plots like this:

This
plot leaves many unanswered questions.
For condition 1, is the point at adjusted quantity = 7 a real result (in
which case more points need to be taken between 5 and 7 to see where the drop
occurs) or an error in the measurement (in which case it needs to be repeated)
(and why was no data point taken at 6???)
Similarly, for condition 2, is the point at 4 a real spike in the data
or just a bad measurement? Find
out by taking more measurements around 4!
There is no necessity to take equally spaced data points. For condition 2 shown here, a lot of
time was wasted by doing so (taking data at 1, 2, 3 and 5, 6, 7 where nothing
was changing much) and still the potentially important behavior around 4 was
not tested.
Also,
many people take data at adjusted quantity = 1, 2, 3, É10 even though the
difference between 1 and 2 is huge (a factor of 2) whereas the difference
between 9 and 10 is tiny by comparison (only 11%). Determine the range of the adjusted quantity over which
you want to take data, then space the data evenly in a geometric sense, not a
linear sense. For example, if you want to take n
points over the range of adjusted quantity from x1 to x2,
a linear spacing would be x1, x1+(x2-x1)(1/n),
x1+(x2-x1)(2/n), x1+(x2-x1)(3/n),
É, x2 or 10 points over the range of adjusted quantity 1 to 10 would
be 1, 2, 3, É, 10. A geometric
spacing over this range would be x1(x2/x1)1/n,
x1(x2/x1)2/n, x1*(x2/x1)3/n,
É, x2. In this case 10
points over the range 1 to 10 would be 1.00, 1.26, 1.58, 2.00, 2.51, 3.16,
3.98, 5.01, 6.31, 7.94, 10.00. The
plot below shows how one can miss information by using equally spaced data
intervals. The solid line
correspond to the physical phenomenon of interest (in this example, I picked an
equation relevant to the effect of fuel concentration on flame speed in the
presence of heat losses.) The
circles correspond to data taken in equal intervals over the range 0.1, 0.2, É,
0.6. The triangles correspond to
data taken in geometric intervals over the same range. Since measured quantity = 0.1 was below
the flammability limit for this fuel, in neither case was data obtained at this
condition. With equal interval
data sampling, only at 0.2 was the next data point taken and all of the
important properties of near-limit flames was missed. With geometric intervals, the important near-limit
information was obtained.

Fun
fact: the standard
"well-tempered" musical scale consists of 12 geometrically-spaced
frequencies over one octave, each note 21/12 times higher frequency
than the previous one, for example:
|
A above middle C |
A# |
B |
C |
C# |
D |
D# |
E |
F |
F# |
G |
G# |
A |
|
440.00 |
466.16 |
493.88 |
523.25 |
554.37 |
587.33 |
622.25 |
659.26 |
698.46 |
739.99 |
783.99 |
830.61 |
880.00 |
Also,
use caution on fitting curves to data. Many times I have seen
the conclusion that a response is linear based on two data points (any two
points define a straight line), or has a "wiggle" based on four data
points with a cubic polynomial fit (any cubic polynomial has a wiggle in it) as
seen below. The "true"
shape of this data (solid red line) is one flat straight line from 1 to 3 and
another line with positive slope between 3 and 4. If you fit a high-order polynomial to this data (the maximum
possible being 3rd order with 4 data points), you'll always get
wiggles (dashed blue line) that are meaningless. Your plotting program doesn't know about the physics of your
problem and can't possibly determine that there is a wiggle based on just four
points. If it's important to know
for sure whether there's a wiggle or not, you need to take more data points!

5. Turn the knobs as far as you can (safely!) to the right and to the left. Don't just measure y for x = 2 to 3 if
there is no reason you can't do x = -7 to x = 12. The most interesting results are almost always at the
extreme conditions.
6. Check the repeatability of your
results. Do exactly the same experiment 10 times in a row
on the same day and see how much the results vary. You wouldn't believe how often I get data sets like the red
circle data set below:

and the conclusion is that the measured quantity
increases up to 8 then decreases.
After inherently trusting this data and basing a whole research project
on it, many months later a second data set (the blue squares) was taken and
shows a completely different trend.
Why? In this case I
generated both data sets using a random number generator; there is no pattern
at all to either data set.
Probably in an experiment this would have occurred because in both cases
the data cable was not properly connected to the computer and so the computer
was just reading noise. Also, do the
same experiment one day and then a week later and see how they compare. If any previous results (e.g. from a
previous student) are available, repeat exactly one of their conditions and see
if the results agree or not.
Otherwise, how do you know if your results are valid or not? Bottom line: check your results to see what are random variations and
what are systematic trends.
7. Writing programs to control
experiments. When writing a control program for an
experiment (say an engine control program), often students will have one
version for one test condition (say natural gas fuel at 1800 RPM), another one
for a different test condition (say gasoline fuel at 2400 RPM), etc. This usually results because the
program was originally written for only one fuel and one RPM, with all of the
relevant numbers hard-coded, then another version had to be generated each time
a new set of test conditions was needed.
It is impossible to keep all such versions of a program current, with
all the latest additions and bug fixes.
Have only one version of your program that is completely general and
doesn't use hard-coded numbers, and add functionality only to that one. Of course this is much more painful in the short run but infinitely
less painful in the long run.
8.
Know what your units are.
This sounds pretty elementary, but often I get results showing
measurements without any units. Is
the length is meters, cm, mm, µm or ???.
Or I get a result that "the gas flow rate was 7 volts." My response: "Volts is a unit of electrical potential, not flow
rate. 7 volts was your transducer
reading. For your transducer, how
many volts correspond to 1 liter per minute?" Reply:
"uuhhhhhÉ."
9. Keep a meticulous lab notebook.
There is no way you'll remember the test conditions without a notebook
(paper (ok) or electronic (better)).
It's hard to get your papers published when the key results are
scribbled on the back of scrap paper and can't be found when you need them to
verify results or add additional information about the test conditions.
10. Make a backup copy of your lab notebook
and data files - always ask yourself, "what would happen if I lost this
notebook or computer file right now?"
Bottom
line: ask yourself, "does
this result make sense? Can I trust it? Will I be able to interpret it? (even if I can't explain it.) Can I reproduce it?"
III. Purchasing stuff for your experiment
1. Use our USC Procurement Cards for
buying stuff whenever possible.
You can order things over the internet, quick and easy, with no need to
go through the USC purchasing department.
There are, however, some differences between procurement cards and
conventional credit cards – what you can and can't buy this way, what the
maximum individual purchase and monthly dollar limits are, etc. It may sound dumb, but you need to get
training on the use of procurement cards before you use them, otherwise if we
do things wrong, we'll have our procurement cards cancelled (and believe me,
using the cards is a LOT easier and INFINTELY faster than going through
purchasing). Training is obtained
through Cathy Ballard, 740-9793, cballard@busaff.usc.edu.
She's very helpful.
2. Monitor your consumables, and order
in advance. This sounds really basic, but it is
amazing how often I hear something like, "I ran out of xxx and it will
take 3 weeks to get more."
Monitor your consumption of chemicals, gases, test tubes, etc. and order
more before you run out, far enough in advance so you won't be shut down!
3. Buy what we need – don't wait
around because we don't have a screwdriver, a sheet of aluminum, a tubing
fitting, BUY IT! Your time costs a
lot more than thatÉ
IV. Scrutinizing your analysis
I often see analyses that I can tell within 5
seconds must be wrong. I have
three tests, which should be done in the order listed, for checking and
verifying results. These tests
will weed out 95% of all mistakes.
I call these the "smoke test," "function test," and
"performance test," by analogy with building electronic devices.
1. Smoke test. In
electronics, this corresponds to turning the power switch on and seeing if the
device smokes or not. In
analytical terms, this corresponds to checking the units. You
have no idea how many results people report to me that can't be correct because
the units are wrong (i.e. the result presented to me was 6 kilograms, but they
were trying to calculate the speed of something.) You will catch 90% of your mistakes if you just check the
units. For example, if I just derived the ideal gas law and
predicted Pv = R/T you can quickly see that the units are wrong. There are several additional rules that
must be followed:
2. Function test. In electronics, this corresponds to checking to see if the device
does what I designed it to do, e.g. that the red light blinks when I flip
switch on, the meter reading increases when I turn the knob to the right, the
bell rings when I push the button, etc. – assuming that was what I
intended that it do. In analytical
terms this corresponds to determining if the result gives sensible
predictions. Again, there are
several rules that must be followed:
At fixed v, as T increases then P increases
– reasonable
At fixed T, as v increases then P decreases
– reasonable
Etc.
![]()
note that for T2 = T1 and P2
= P1 (no change in state) then S2 – S1 =
0 or S2 = S1 as it must. Also, in the limit S2 = S1, the
allowable changes in state correspond to
![]()
which is the isentropic relation for an ideal gas
with constant specific heats.
3. Performance test. In electronics, this corresponds to determining how fast, how
accurate, etc. the device is. In
analytical terms this corresponds to determining how accurate the result
is. This means of course you have
to compare it to something else, i.e. an experiment, a more sophisticated
analysis, someone else's published result (no guarantee of course that their
result is correct just because it got published, but you need to check it
anyway.) For example, if I derived
the ideal gas law and predicted Pv = 7RT, it passes the smoke and function
tests with no problem, but it fails the performance test miserably (by a factor
of 7).
V. Scrutinizing your computations
Similar to analyses, I
often see computational results that I can tell within 5 seconds must be
wrong. It is notoriously easy
to be lulled into a sense of confidence in computed results, because the
computer always gives you some result, and that result always looks good when
plotted in a 3D shaded color orthographic projection. The
corresponding "smoke test," "function test," and
"performance test," are as follows:
1. Smoke test.
Start the computer program running, and see if it crashes or not. If it doesn't crash, you've passed the
smoke test, part (a). Part (b) of
the smoke test is to determine if the computed result passes the global
conservation test. The goal of any program is to satisfy
mass, momentum, energy and atom conservation at every point in the
computational domain subject to
certain constituitive relations (e.g., Newton's law of viscosity) and equations of state (e.g., the ideal gas law.) This is a hard problem, and it is even hard to verify that
the solution is correct once it is obtained. But it is easy to determine whether or not global
conservation is satisfied, that
is,
If not, you are 100% certain that your calculation is wrong. You would be amazed at how many results
are never "sanity checked" in this way, and in fact fail the sanity
check when, after months or years of wasted effort, someone finally gets around
to checking it.
2. Performance test. Comes before the function test in this case. For computational studies, a critical
performance test is to compare your result to a known analytical result
under simplified conditions. For example, if you're computing flow in
a pipe at high Reynolds numbers (where the flow is turbulent), with chemical
reaction, temperature-dependent transport properties, variable density, etc.,
first check your result against the textbook solution that assumes constant density, constant transport
properties, etc., by making all of the simplifying assumptions (in your model)
that the analytical solution employs.
If you don't do this, you really have no way of knowing if your model
is valid or not. You can also use previous computations
by yourself or others for testing, but of course there is no absolute guarantee
that those computations were correct.
3. Function test. Similar to function test for analyses.
VI.
Communicating
1. Use email to send files
electronically. It's much easier
for me (or anyone) to keep track of and retrieve electronic files than paper
files).
2. Give each file a name other than
"results1.dat" or 239480298520099875.xyz (you have no idea how many
files I get with names like thatÉ)
Use CH4Air1atmFlameSpeedVsPhi.xls or something like that will uniquely
identify what you're sending to me.
Make the filename less than 31 characters total so the Mac doesn't cut
off the end of the file name and that all-important extension. Make sure that
the extension is correct, and corresponds to some reasonable format (pure text
data, word, excel, powerpoint, kaleidagraph, etc.) Files of type.gif, .jpg, etc. picture formats are fine
for photographs, but if it's a plot, please send it in kaleidagraph or excel
format so I can change things! I
can't add, remove, extract or replot data from a picture file!
3. Often I get information like "the
mixture was 6.2 grams of x and 14.6 grams of y and 53.4 grams of z." This isn't very useful –tell me
the mass fractions or mole fractions of the chemicals in the mixture (and the
total mass of mixture if that is relevant).
4. Whenever we get a new piece of
equipment, the very first thing
to do is make a copy of the manual and give it to me.
Manuals have diffusion coefficients higher than hydrogen gas, leave the
lab almost instantly, and are never seen again, so my copy is essential. Please give me an electronic version of
the manual if it exists.
5. Short reports of results are always
appreciated, especially when the results are good. Give me instant gratification!
6. Having meetings.
Usually you're meeting with me, so I will enforce proper meeting
procedures, but if you're having a meeting with some other group, here are some
things you need to know. Every
meeting MUST have three things:
a) An agenda. What is it that needs to be discussed at the meeting? If it isn't written down, some items
will be forgotten or will get dropped as the meeting runs over its time limit,
so a written agenda is usually needed.
Sometimes everyone knows the agenda items (as in a weekly meeting, for
example), or the list of things to be discussed is very short, so a written
agenda isn't needed.
á Minutes.
What was said and what was
decided at the meeting? There definitely
needs to be a permanent record of this, because you WON'T remember a week later
what was said or what was decided.
(More likely, you will remember but your recollection will be different
from everyone else's.)
á Action items. Who will do what as a
result of the meeting? When is it
needed? What will people do
that is different than what they would have done without a meeting? Think about that last question – if no one is going to do
anything different as a result of the meeting, what was the purpose of the
meeting?
If you don't have all three of these items, then you have to ask
yourself, why did you meet? What
were you trying to accomplish by meeting?
Was it a meeting or just a party, seminar, etc.?
VII. Knowing what you're supposed to be doing
You should have three
working documents that make it clear (hopefully) what you're objectives are at
any given time and how you are supposed to accomplish those objectives: Refer back to these occasionally to see
if you've missed doing something important. Forgotten done!
1. This document
2. The files named
"abc.progress.doc" (abc = microFIRE, REEFS, EdgeFlames, etc.) which
is our working document of progress, problems and next steps.
3. In most cases, your research project is
based on a (successful) proposal to a funding agency. This proposal contains the overall objectives, proposed
methods for accomplishing those objectives, references to prior work, etc.
VIII. Giving oral presentations
1.
Use a laptop-based powerpoint presentation. Much easier to combine/split previous presentations, add
color, animations, sound effects, etc.
But the most valuable aspect is probably that it allows you make
last-minute changes. Also it is
useful because then you can email the presentation to interested people, or
post it on your website.
2. Do not use 5-point font! Reduce the amount of material presented
and use big fonts! Make sure
everything is legible. A good rule of thumb is that if the
slide is printed on standard 8.5" x 11" paper, you should be able to
put the page on the floor and read everything on the page while standing up and
looking down at the page.
3. When showing multiple plots of similar
results, use the same scales. For
example, if showing the burning velocities of methane-air and propane-air
mixtures as a function of fuel concentration on separate plots, use the same
scale for burning velocity on each unless they have drastically different
ranges.
4. Include movies. Why limit yourself to static
presentations when you have the power of a computer? A picture is worth a thousand words, and a movie is worth a
thousand pictures.
5. Address the audience. Say things like, "this plot shows you the effect of x on yÉ" rather than "this plot shows the
effect of x on yÉ"
6. Keep reminding the audience of your
nomenclature. That is, if you show
an equation
E = mc2
don't
say "this equation shows that eee equals emm cee squared," (the
audience can already see that).
Instead say, "this equation shows that the energy of a substance is
equal to its mass times the speed of light squared" (the audience has
forgotten your definitions of E, m and c that you gave 12 slides back).
Bottom
line: ask yourself, if I were
in the audience seeing this for the first time, would I understand this
presentation???
1. Safety goggles. MUST BE WORN AT ALL TIMES WHEN DOING EXPERIMENTS! In the lab we have several types of
hazardous materials: flammable,
explosive, toxic, corrosives, etc., all of which mandate the use of safety
goggles.
2. Gas cylinders. Close all gas cylinders AT THE BOTTLE, NOT JUST AT YOUR
EXPERIMENT when not in use (meaning:
at the very least when you go home). ALL BOTTLES MUST BE STRAPPED TO SOMETHING SO THEY CAN'T FALL OVER, BREAK THE REGULATOR
AND BECOME A LETHAL MISSILE!
3. Pressurized
gases
a) All gas lines must be tested for leaks using
non-flammable gases
b) All fittings must be connected properly - teflon
tape is used for tapered pipe threads, not Swagelok compression fittings!
c) All gas lines must be routed carefully so that
they are not pinched or stepped on
d) The lab ventilation system must be operating at
all times. Never turn it off!
e) Proper combustible gas sensors must be installed
and operating
4. Using oxygen. NEVER USE POLYETHLYENE PLASTIC TUBING FOR OXYGEN! ALWAYS USE COPPER OR TEFLON ONLY! Also,
USE ONLY (OIL-FREE) REGULATORS APPROVED FOR USE WITH OXYGEN. Both of these procedures are essential
to prevent possible explosions when using pure oxygen
5. Pressure
vessels. Compressed gas stores a lot of energy
and if your chamber breaks, that energy goes into kinetic energy of the pieces
of chamber - not good! All pressure
vessels must be hydrostatically tested AT LEAST ONCE PER YEAR AND WHENEVER
CHANGES ARE MADE TO THE VESSEL (e.g. new holes drilled, new windows, etc.) We have a hydraulic tester in the lab.
6. Laser. The argon-ion laser is entirely capable of burning a hole
in your retina. Wear the orange
laser goggles that block the blue, green and violet light from the laser. Also make sure that no one else in the
lab can be zapped by a misguided, reflected beam. Enclose your experiment in a box made of the orange
Plexiglas (that's what it's for – blocking argon ion laser light.) So then how can you look at your
experiment? Use a video camera and
a monitor! Better to blind a video
camera than your eye!
7. Gas detectors.
We have toxic gas detectors in the main lab and engine lab. We have to be sure they are working, so
they should be inspected every few months. If you don't know how to test them, find out! And of course treat all alarms
seriously!
8. Don't work
alone. It is SIMPLY NOT ACCEPTABLE
to do combustion experiments, work with high-voltage equipment, or do other
potentially hazardous activities while working alone in the lab, e.g. at night or on the weekends
when no one else is in the lab to call for help should there be a problem. (Doing homework, sending emails, etc.
or other "safe" activities is ok.)
9. Food and drink. No
food or drink is allowed in the lab except in designated areas where no
experiments, experiment buildup, chemicals, etc. are present. NO EXCEPTIONS!!! We
have designates the desk where the prometheus computer resides, and the area
around the video data processing equipment as "clean" areas where
food is allowed. Also, NO FOOD,
NO FOOD, NO FOOD IS ALLOWED IN THE REFRIGERATOR – WE STORE POISONOUS
CHEMICALS THERE!!!
10. Tripping hazards.
Wires or cords crossing the floor through the middle of the room need to
be covered, taped or removed to prevent tripping hazards.
11. Electrical shock hazards. Always disconnect electrical equipment from AC power before working
on it so there is no possibility to get a shock. If you must have it plugged in to test it, ALWAYS disconnect
AC power, attach test equipment (such as a multi-meter), then reconnect AC
power and DON'T TOUCH THE WIRES WHILE YOU'RE DOING THE TESTING. If you need to move the test equipment,
remove power and repeat the process.
12. Fire extinguisher. The
fire extinguisher must be mounted to the wall and unobstructed at all times.
13. Chemical
inventory
Whenever you bring a new substance into either lab please be sure to
record it in the black Chemical Inventory binder (located over by the Fume
Hood, on the gray bench). Alison
has overall responsibility for chemical inventory. If you are replacing a chemical that has been used up, please
cross out the old chemical listing and enter the replacement chemical with the
new information. If I find a
chemical that is not on the inventory list, Alison will assume that no one is
using it and Alison will have it disposed of.
Glass
jar/bottle/jug Plastic
jar/bottle/jug
Metal
Can Cylinder
Steel
Drum Plastic/non-metallic
drum
Fiber
Drum Box
or bag
14. Hazardous
waste. We generate some toxic and
semi-hazardous waste. Put it in VERY
SECURE bottles and store in a safe place (in or under the fume hood). This stuff cannot just be poured down
the sink. Period. When the bottles start to fill up and need to be
disposed, or if we have a chemical spill, dispose of waste properly. Information about hazardous waste
collection is available at this URL:
http://capsnet.usc.edu/EHS/ChemicalWaste.cfm
15. USC safety
personnel. Our contact with regard to chemical
safety is
Name: Bouziane, Alfred M.
Email: abouziane@caps.usc.edu
Title: Environmental, Health, & Safety Project Manager
Building: STO 101
Mail Code: 1143
Department: Environmental Health and Safety
Division: Career and Protective Services
Telephone: (213) 923-5079
FAX: (213) 740-0820
E-Mail: abouziane@busaff.usc.edu
He also deals with the chemical
inventory web site.
16. General note. If ever you're not sure about how to use a piece of
equipment or apparatus or whatever safely, don't use it until you've been able
to ask someone who knows. Also,
not using safety equipment (e.g. safety goggles) because it wasn't handy or was
inconvenient it is not a valid excuse.
If we don't have it, or it isn't usable, or you don't know how to use
it, get the right equipment and information before you start!
17. Keeping PDR informed. Any
time there is any safety problem in the lab, you must inform me immediately,
any time, day or night! You all have my cell phone number, itÕs
almost always on.
1. The usual organization of the paper is
A. Heading: title,
authors, affiliations
B.
Abstract: explains what was
done and what the main conclusions are.
Must be short (a few hundred words at most), no matter how long and how
complicated the paper is.
C.
Introduction:
i.
Explain what your problem is and why it is important.
ii.
State what is known about the subject.
iii.
Complain about what is lacking in the current state of knowledge
iv.
Explain what you will do that is better (may be in a separate Objectives section).
D.
Method: experimental
apparatus, numerical model, whatever
E.
Results: what you found and
how it compares with previous works
F.
Conclusions: what you
learned
G.
Future work
(optional)
2. Every symbol in the text
A. is
defined in a Nomenclature section (if used) or defined at its first appearance
in the text
3. Every equation that is set apart from
the text
A.
has a number
B.
has all of its symbols defined if not already or defined in a
Nomenclature section (if used)
4. Every word
A. is
spell-checked
B. is
defined the first time it is used if it is a "buzz word" or acronym
5.
Every figure
A. is assigned a number – "Figure 1,"
"Figure 2," etc.
B. is referred to in the text
C. is called "Figure x" if it appears at the
beginning of a sentence, otherwise it is called "Fig. x"
D.
has a sensible scale
on each axis (i.e. 0, 1, 2, 3; not -0.37, 0.15, 0.67)
E. Uses a logarithmic scale if a large numerical range of data
(more than one decade) is covered (otherwise all the data having low numerical
values are squashed together)
F. has the units defined on each axis
G. has a caption
H. has all relevant conditions (pressure, gravity level, the
time during the test when the data was taken.....) stated
I. has all plot symbols (squares, circles, filled or open, ...)
and curves (solid, dotted, dashed,..) defined either in a legend box within the
figure (preferred method) or in the caption
J. Does not have a lot of "white space"
K. if it is a picture, it has a scale on the picture or has a
statement in the caption such as "field of view is xxx cm by yyy cm"
L. must be readable - caution on pictures!!!


Terrible figure (same data)
What's
wrong with this figure? (and I've seen many like this) (this is my own doctored
figure; I don't mean to imply that Liu sent me a terrible figure like thisÉ)
á
The scales on each
axis are terrible – weird numbers, not 1, 2, 3, É
á
Units are not
defined on the vertical axis
á
The plot symbols are
defined using meaningless notation ("Condition 17" means nothing to
the reader.)
á
There is a
tremendous amount of "white space"
á
Most of the data
squashed together because a linear scale was used - the scale has to be large
enough to cover the large values of rise time in "Test –117",
which goes up to 300, but most of the data is in the 10 – 50 range
á
There are tick marks
inside, outside, all over the place (I prefer tick marks on the inside
only). Also, the major and minor
tick marks are the same length so it's hard to distinguish between them.
á
The plot symbols are
too small to see
á
The numbers are too
small to read
á
All of the grid lines
make it hard to read the data and legend.
(I don't like grids at all, they clutter the figure – if someone
really wants to pick points off your graph, they can draw their own grid lines
or ask you to email the data file to you.)
á There are ugly looking jagged lines connecting the
data points (rather than a smoothed curve)
á The axes and tick marks are too thin
A
big part of the problem is that most people just let their plotting program
make bad plots using all the default settings, and somehow try to rationalize
that still a good plot.
6. Every reference cited in the text
A.
appears in the reference section
B. is
a plain number (i.e. 11, 12, 13; not 11, 11a, 11b) or follow the Harvard system
(e.g. Smith and Jones, 1953) depending on the instructions to authors
C. if
a number, may be superscript or in [brackets] or (parenthesis) depending on the
instructions to authors
7. Every reference in the reference
section
A. is
called out in the text
B.
has the journal name or book title (journal titles may or may not be
abbreviated depending on the instructions to authors)
C.
has the page number (may be just the first page or inclusive pages
depending on the instructions to authors)
D.
has the journal issue number (if a journal article)
E.
has the publisher (if a book)
F.
has the year
G.
may or may not have the title of the article depending on the
instructions to authors
8. Items 2. and 3. from Oral Presentations
apply to written papers too.
Bottom
line: ask yourself, if I were
reading this paper for the first time, and I were not already aware of the
results, would I understand this paper???
Bottom
bottom line: think quality,
quality, quality if you expect to
be taken seriously by the research community. Be your own worst critic, unless you prefer that someone
else be your worst critic.