This paper explores how, in the light of global economic downturn and rising student populations, new academic-industrial models for research collaboration based upon specific technological expertise and knowledge can be developed as potential mechanisms for preserving and extending central university research infrastructure. The paper explores two case studies that focus upon the new serious games sector: the UK-based Coventry University's Serious Games Institute - a hybrid model of applied research and business, and the Netherlands-based TU-Delft University's Serious Game Center - a networked model of semi-commercial funding and public-private co-operation between industry, public sector and research partners. To facilitate these kinds of academic-industrial collaborations, the paper introduces the Innovation Diffusion Model (IDM) which promotes innovation diffusion by bringing academic and industrial experts into close proximity. Overall, the benefits include: sustained intellectual property development and publication opportunities for academics, employment creation, accelerated development and real commercial benefits for industrial partners.
DOCUMENT
Re-structuring of a Dutch mono-industrial region; example of TwenteTable of contents of the chapter Introduction Geography and location of Twente Industrialization of Twente and development of the Textile Industry Decline of the Textile Industry Restructuring Twente: arguments for a regional innovation strategy Moving towards a more diversified economy Stronger co-operation between governments, universities, and industries The role of universities and the example of ‘Kennispark Twente’ Further regional and international co-operation Twente today
MULTIFILE
Within the profile Technical Information Technology (ICT Department) the most important specializations are Embedded Software and Industrial Automation. About half of the Technical Information curriculum consists of learning modules, the other half is organized in projects. The whole study lasts four years. After two-and-a-half year students choose a specialization. Before the choice is made students have several occasions in which they learn something about the possible fields of specialization. In the first and second year there are two modules about Industrial Automation. First there is a module on actuators, sensors and interfacing, later a module on production systems. Finally there is an Industrial Automation project. In this project groups of students get the assignment to develop the control for a scale model flexible automation cell or to develop a monitoring system for this cell. In the last year of their studies students participate in a larger Industrial Automation project, often with an assignment from Industry. Here also the possibility exists to join multidisciplinary projects (IPD; integrated product development).
DOCUMENT
An on-going investigation in the learning effects of IPD projects. In three subsequent semesters the students were asked how they rated their competencies at the start of the project as well as at the end of it. Also questionnaires were filled out and students were interviewed. A lot of students tended to give themselves lower ratings in the end than in the begin. It appeared that if they met any difficulties in for instance communication or co-operation during the project, that they interpreted this as a decrease in competencies. Finally the students were explicitly asked to mention an eventual increase in competencies and also a possible contribution for this effect. Only a few factors that actually contribute to the learning effects have been defined.
DOCUMENT
This paper describes a model for education in innovative engineering. The kernel of this model is, that students from different departments of the faculty of Applied Science and Technology are placed in industry for a period of eighteen months after two-and-a-half year of theoretical studies. During this period students work in multi-disciplinary projects on different themes. Students will grow to fully equal employees in industry. Therefore it is important that besides students, teachers and company employees will participate in the projects. Also the involvement of other level students (University and high school) is recommended. The most important characteristics of the model can be summarized in innovative, interdisciplinary and international orientation.
DOCUMENT
A description of our experiences with a model for education in innovative, interdisciplinary and international engineering. (Students from different (technical) disciplines in Higher Education are placed in industry for a period of eighteen months after completing two-and-a-half year of theoretical studies). They work in multi-disciplinary projects on different themes, in order to grow to fully equal employees in industry. Besides students, teachers and company employees participate in the projects. The involvement of other level students, both from University and from Vocational Education, is recommended. The experiments in practice give confidence in the succesful implementation of this model.
DOCUMENT
Our IPD-projects have changed: more international partners became involved and simultaneously we started to carry out real projects for real companies. This caused a number of problems. In order to be able to give full support to the projects and conclude them with a nice, formal symposium we need financial funds. Therefore companies were asked for additional sponsoring, which introduced new problems. How we dealt with all these problems is explained in this paper. Other ways of co-operating with different partners in the IPD-projects are also considered. A recent development is to create combinations with students from secondary technical education that already work in practice. First experiments have started in February 2004. First results and further plans on these combinations are reported here.
DOCUMENT
Much research effort is invested in developing enzymatic treatments of textiles by focusing on the performance of enzymes at the laboratory scale. Despite all of this work, upgrading these developments from the laboratory scale to an industrial scale has not been very successful.Nowadays,companies are confronted with rapid developments of markets, logistics, and social and environmental responsibilities. Moreover, these organizations have to supply an ever-increasing amount of information to the authorities, shareholders, lobbyists, and pressure groups. Companies have tried to fulfill all of these demands, but this has often led to the loss of focus on new products and process development. However, both theory and practices of breakthrough innovations have shown that those rightfully proud of previous successes are usually not the ones that led the introduction of new technology, as shown and excellently documented by Christensen [1]. The textile industry is no exception to this observation.With the lack of management impetus for new product and process developments, companies began to reduce investments in these activities.However, this results in a reduction of the size of the company or even closure. Besides the hesitation from the top management of textile companies to focus on new developments,middle management level is also reluctant to evaluate and implement developments in new products and processes. One of the reasons for this reluctance is that many processes in the textile industry are notfully explored or known. From this lack of knowledge, it is easy to explain that there is hesitation for change, since not all consequences of a change in processing or production can be predicted. Often new developments cannot be fully tested and evaluated on the laboratory- or pilot-scale level.This is caused by the impossibility of mimicking industrial-scale production in a laboratory.Additionally, pilot-scale equipment is very expensive and for many companies it is not realistic to invest in this type of equipment. Fortunately an increasing number of textile companies have realized that they have to invest in new products and processes for their future survival and prosperity. New developments are decisive for future successes. If such companies decide to invest in new developments, it is clear that with the scarcity of capital for product and process developments, the chance of failure should be minimized. For successful process and product development, it is necessary to organize the development process with external partners because it is clear that it is almost impossible for individual textile companies to control the process from idea generation to academic research, implementation research, and development and industrial testing. These issues are especially characteristic for small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). Herein, the collaboration has been organized on two research levels. The first research level is knowledge and know-how based. The universities and chemical suppliers worked closely together to investigate the new process.The aim was to explore the influence of process conditions and interactions of chemicals in sub-process steps as a result of the treatment.The second level is that of the industrial implementation of the new process. The universities and chemical suppliers worked closely together with different industries to implement the newly developed process. The focus in this part of the research was the interaction between the chemistry of the new process, equipment, and fabrics. A co-operation between the beneficiaries of the new process was established.The selection criterion for the co-peration was “who will earn something with the new process”. To answer this question, the value chain has been drawn as the simplified scheme shown in Fig. 1 [2].
MULTIFILE
A lot of research effort is put in developing enzymatic treatment of textiles by focusing on the performance of enzymes on lab-scale. Despite all this work upgrading of these developments from lab-scale to industrial scale has not been really successful. Companies are nowadays confronted with rapid developments of markets, logistics and social and environmental responsibilities. Moreover these organizations have to supply an evenincreasing amount of information to the authorities, shareholders, lobbyists and pressure groups. Companies have tried to fulfill all these demands, but this led often to the loss of focus on new product and process development. However, both theory and practices of breakthrough innovations has shown that those rightfully proud on previous successes in the past, are usually not the ones that lead the introduction of new technology, aswas shown and excellently documented by Harvard professor Clayton Christensen [Christenson, 2003]. The textile industry is no exception in this observation. With the lack of management impulses on new product and process developments companies began to reduce the investments in these activities. Finally, however, this will result in a reduction of the size of the company or even closing down. Besides the hesitation from the topmanagement of textile companies to focus on new developments it is also seen that the middle management level is reluctant to evaluate and implement developments in new products and processes. One of the reasons for this reluctance is that many processes in textile industry are not fully explored and known yet. From this lack of knowledge it is easy to explain that there is hesitation for changes, since not all consequences of a change inprocessing or production can be overseen. Often new developments cannot be fully tested and evaluated on labor pilot scale level. This is caused by the impossibility to mimic industrial scale production in a lab. Besides of that, pilot scale equipment is very expensive and for many companies it is not realistic to invest in this type of equipment.Fortunately an increasing number of textile companies realize that they have to invest in new products and processes for their future survival and prosperity. New developments are decisive for future successes. If such companies decide to invest in new developments it is obvious that with the scarcity of capital for product- and process developments, the chance of failures should be minimized. For successful process- and product development it is necessary to organize the development process with external partners, as it is clear that it is almost not possible for individual textile companies to control the process from idea generation, academic research, implementation research and development and industrial testing. These issues are specially characteristic for small and medium sized enterprises (SME’s). In the present work the collaboration has been organized on two research levels. The first research level is knowledge and know-how based. Here the universities and the chemical supplier worked closely together to investigate the new process. The aim was to explore the influence of process conditions and interaction of the chemicals in the sub process steps on the result of the treatment. The second level is that of the industrialimplementation of the new process. Here universities and chemical supplier worked closely together with different industries to implement the newly developed process. The focus in this part of the research was the interaction between the chemistry of the new process, equipment and fabrics.A co-operation between the beneficiaries of the new process has been established. The selection criterion for the co-operation was “who will earn something with the new process”. Paper from the Saxion Research Centre for Design and Technology for Proceedings of IPTB Conference, Milan, Italy, M
MULTIFILE
Despite changing attitudes towards animal testing and current legislation to protect experimental animals, the rate of animal experiments seems to have changed little in recent years. On May 15–16, 2013, the In Vitro Testing Industrial Platform (IVTIP) held an open meeting to discuss the state of the art in alternative methods, how companies have, can, and will need to adapt and what drives and hinders regulatory acceptance and use. Several key messages arose from the meeting. First, industry and regulatory bodies should not wait for complete suites of alternative tests to become available, but should begin working with methods available right now (e.g., mining of existing animal data to direct future studies, implementation of alternative tests wherever scientifically valid rather than continuing to rely on animal tests) in non-animal and animal integrated strategies to reduce the numbers of animals tested. Sharing of information (communication), harmonization and standardization (coordination), commitment and collaboration are all required to improve the quality and speed of validation, acceptance, and implementation of tests. Finally, we consider how alternative methods can be used in research and development before formal implementation in regulations. Here we present the conclusions on what can be done already and suggest some solutions and strategies for the future.
DOCUMENT
